text:
Naftali Hertz ben Yaakov Elchanan

Naftali Hertz ben Yaakov Elchanan (Bacharach) (17th century) was a German rabbi, born in Frankfurt, author of the controversial work Emeq HaMelekh (Valley of the King, 1648, Amsterdam) on the subject of the Lurianic Kabbalah.

Works
His most well-known work, Emeq HaMelekh, was based mainly on Israel Sarug's Limmudei Azilut (published 1897), incorporating large portions of that text. It seems very likely that Bacharach borrowed heavily from many sources (including Sarug, Joseph Solomon Delmedigo, and Shabbetai Horowitz) without acknowledging the debt (Scholem 1974). The book had a major impact on later kabbalah as it was regarded among many, including the Chabad Hasidim and the followers of the Vilna Gaon, as an authoritative statement of Luria's kabbala. Its influence is also evident in Ramchal's system. The book indicates that, prior to the conquest of Jerusalem and the Babylonian captivity, the prophet Jeremiah hid the treasures of Solomon's Temple, with the assistance of five others.

Although Emeq HaMelekh contained approbations from well-respected scholars, it also met with substantial disapproval from contemporary kabbalists such as Chaim Joseph David Azulai, Berechiah Berak, and Moses Hagiz. The book Emeq HaMelekh is the source for the famous story about the historic Avraham Avinu synagogue in Hebron. According to the introduction, a stranger appeared on the evening of Yom Kippur to serve as the 10th man of the minyan and thus complete the required number of people for a prayer service. After Yom Kippur, the rest of the congregation couldn't find him. That night, the hazzan of the synagogue dreamed that the man was speaking to him and told him that he was Avraham Avinu, the Patriarch of the Jewish people who is buried nearby in the Cave of Machpela. The full text of this story and the original cover of the book today hang on a plaque in the Avraham Avinu synagogue.

The second part of this work, under the title Gan HaMelekh, is a commentary on passages of the Zohar. It is still in manuscript.

Translations
The first two "Gates" of Sefer Emeq HaMelekh were translated into English.

title: Naftali Hertz ben Yaakov Elchanan


text:
Church of All Hallows, Allerton

The Church of All Hallows is in Allerton, Liverpool, England. It is recorded in the National Heritage List for England as a designated Grade I listed building, and is an active Anglican parish church in the diocese of Liverpool, the archdeaconry of Liverpool and the deanery of Liverpool South – Childwall.

History
The church was built at the expense of John Bibby of the Bibby Line in memory of his first wife, at a cost of £20,000 (equivalent to £0 in ). It was designed by G. E. Grayson. The foundation stone was laid on 31 October 1872, and the church was consecrated on 10 August 1876 by the Bishop of Chester. During the Second World War the stained glass was removed to Slaidburn for safety and replaced by plain glass. This was destroyed in an air raid and the stained glass was returned in 1946.

Exterior
The church is built with red sandstone on its exterior and white stone from Storeton on the interior. The chancel is lined with square of red and green jasper, and the chancel steps and the base of the pulpit are in black Vaulsort marble. Its architectural style is Gothic Revival, with a mixture of Decorated and Perpendicular styles. The tower is described as being a "mighty Perpendicular tower of the Somerset type".

Interior
The finest feature of the church is its stained glass. Of the 15 windows, 14 were designed by Edward Burne-Jones, with some input from William Morris, and were made by Morris & Co. Pollard and Pevsner consider that the west and east windows are the best. The east window was made in 1875–86 and depicts the Adoration of the Lamb. Burne-Jones also claimed that this was his finest piece of work. The west window depicts the Four Evangelists. The window in the south transept was built in 1879 and depicts four holy men; Noah, Moses, Daniel and St Paul. In the north transept dating from 1880 are four holy women: Mary, the sister of Aaron, Ruth the Moabitess, Queen Esther and the Blessed Virgin. The north chancel windows followed in 1881; they depict angels and are memorials windows to John Bibby's children. The eight windows in the aisles were made between 1882 and 1886 and depict incidents from the life of Jesus. The other window is at the east end of the north transept and was made by Heaton, Butler and Bayne.

Also in the church are memorials to members of the Bibby family. One represents an earlier John Bibby who died in 1811. It is by William Spence and contains a standing figure of Hope. This memorial was moved from St Thomas' Church, Seaforth in 1978. Another memorial is to Mrs Bibby by Frederigo Fabiani.

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

title: Church of All Hallows, Allerton


text:
Leptonetidae

Leptonetidae is a family of small spiders adapted to live in dark and moist places such as caves. The family is relatively primitive having diverged around the Middle Jurassic period. They were first described by Eugène Simon in 1890.

Distinguishing characteristics
Leptonetids are small, with most falling between 2 and 5mm in total length. They are generally pale in color and feature a greenish or bluish shine due to microscopic texture on the cuticle of their exoskeleton. Those species which have retained their eyes, have 6 eyes set in a distinctive pattern, with posterior pair set back from the others. If a spider from this family looses a leg, it usually separates between the patella and tibia rather than at the coxa/trochanter joint.

Habitat
Many live in caves or in leaf litter around the Mediterranean, and in Eurasia, Japan and southern North America.

Genera
, the World Spider Catalog accepted the following genera:

 * Appaleptoneta Platnick, 1986 — United States
 * Barusia Kratochvíl, 1978 — Montenegro, Croatia, Greece
 * Calileptoneta Platnick, 1986 — United States
 * Cataleptoneta Denis, 1955 — Asia, Europe
 * Chisoneta Ledford & Griswold, 2011 — United States, Mexico
 * Falcileptoneta Komatsu, 1970 — Japan, Korea
 * Jingneta Wang & Li, 2020
 * Leptoneta Simon, 1872 — Europe, Asia, Algeria
 * Leptonetela Kratochvíl, 1978 — Greece, Asia
 * Longileptoneta Seo, 2015 — Korea
 * Masirana Kishida, 1942 — Japan, Korea
 * Montanineta Ledford & Griswold, 2011 — United States
 * Neoleptoneta Brignoli, 1972 — Mexico
 * Ozarkia Ledford & Griswold, 2011 — United States
 * Paraleptoneta Fage, 1913 — Algeria, Italy
 * Protoleptoneta Deltshev, 1972 — Europe
 * Rhyssoleptoneta Tong & Li, 2007 — China
 * Sulcia Kratochvíl, 1938 — Europe
 * Tayshaneta Ledford & Griswold, 2011 — United States
 * Teloleptoneta Ribera, 1988 — Portugal
 * Yueleptoneta Tong, 2022

Two genera have been moved to the family Archoleptonetidae:
 * Archoleptoneta Gertsch, 1974 — United States
 * Darkoneta Ledford & Griswold, 2010 — North America, Central America

title: Leptonetidae


text: Template:Europe-geo-stub

title: Template:Europe-geo-stub


text:
Talk:Alexander Tcherepnin

Untitled
There are at least four different ways to spell this composer's name in Roman letters. These are the most common, followed by total of Google results.

Alexander Tcherepnin ~39600 Aleksander Tcherepnin 775 Alexander Tcherepnine 733 Aleksander Tcherepnine 64

I've made redirects for the second and third most common. Volunteer Sibelius Salesman 17:51, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

The spellings used by the composer himself on his published scores were as follows. In Germany: Alexander Tscherepnin; in France: Alexander Tchérepnine; in England and the U. S. A.: Alexander Tcherepnin.

Small birthdate discrepancy
The Grove gives his birthdate as 8/21 Jan 1899, with the 8 being the Old Style date. But the 21 is one day off from the date given in the article. Volunteer Sibelius Salesman 18:30, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

The Tcherepnin society confirms the 21st

 * Grove's "8/21 Jan" is fundamentally flawed. That suggests a 13-day difference between the calendars, but in the 19th century, they were only 12 days apart, not 13.  So it was either 8/20 Jan or 9/21 Jan.  If we can trust the Tcherepnin Society, then it was 9/21 January.  --  JackofOz (talk) 22:34, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alexander Tcherepnin. 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/20100127130549/http://delta-omicron.org/index00.html to http://delta-omicron.org/index00.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) 02:38, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Alexander Tcherepnin


text:
Talk:Piglet

Requested move 24 June 2016

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

The result of the move request was: not moved because consensus is against the move. SST flyer  11:51, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Piglet → Piglet (disambiguation) – Piglet should be a WP:PRIMARYREDIRECT into Domesticated pig Prisencolin (talk) 23:39, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Either that or just pig, the reason why I thought domesticated pig might be better is because piglet (animal) redirects into it for some reason.--Prisencolin (talk) 21:50, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment I have changed the target of the move request, as I believe that this is what you intended (moving the disambiguation page out of the way for a primary redirect). If this is not correct, please adjust as needed. (I don't know if the RM bot will notice this change so that WP:RM is updated...) -Niceguyedc Go Huskies! 07:28, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * - changes to RM targets need to be made in two places. wbm1058 (talk) 16:16, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

 * Yes, that's what I intended, thanks.--Prisencolin (talk) 21:49, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose: not sure that most people wanting to find out about piglets won't just already search for pig. It certainly shouldn't be redirected to 'domesticated pig', domesticated or not a piglet is a piglet. However I actually think that if anything was going to be the primary redirect it would be the Winnie-the-Pooh character. Ebonelm (talk) 16:26, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose – This dab page looks necessary, at least to distinguish Suckling pig from Piglet (animal) and indeed Piglet (Winnie-the-Pooh). — JFG talk 07:31, 2 July 2016 (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.

title: Talk:Piglet


text:
Talk:Ernst Toch

Compositions
I'm going to complete the list of works sections bit by bit.--Roivas (talk) 16:41, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Sort of confused regarding where to put the reference number. Maybe it's not needed.--Roivas (talk) 16:44, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I have a book that has what may be, if not truly complete (but maybe it is), a very thorough works list, and added all the information in there except arrangements of other composers’ works. The book is cited. I included publishing dates because sometimes they are much later than composition date (and in at least one case make opus numbers non-chronological) but this is not conventional I don’t think, on Wikipedia, so feel free to remove them if it seems unhelpful/trivial. Some of these works have German titles that are not always listed in this book I think... since they are likely to be known by German names as well, if anyone knows what they are...

I’m hoping someone more qualified will write articles on some his most noteworthy works, they certainly are deserving topics.

--NikeForHindmost (talk) 14:25, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm using the Dover book, which is probably more thorough. I haven't finished typing it all out. The grouping of the works is a little different. String quartets are in their own section...etc. We'll figure it out. At least we now have some sources that aren't from the Internet.--Roivas (talk) 18:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Awesome, Roivas. Personally I prefer it to be in more sections, and string quartets would make a logical/sizable one. It makes it more immediately readable as a list. I didn’t use the sections presented in the Diane Peacock Jezic book, which were more generalized (for example, chamber music, wind ensemble music, and solo instrumental non-keyboard music were one section, and there was a vocal section but it didn’t distinguish choral works from songs/other stuff). I don’t know if it’s considered wikipedia-appropriate, but it would be great if we could reference recordings whereever one or more is known. As far as I can tell so far, Toch is not very extensively recorded, and information on what is (was) available is scarce. The Jezic book does include a discography, but since it’s from 1989 I don’t know how helpful it will be. It seems doubtful that many of these ever made it to CD. --NikeForHindmost (talk) 07:02, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ernst Toch. 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/20091220214833/http://unitproj.library.ucla.edu/music/mlsc/collection.cfm?id=1&f=x to http://unitproj.library.ucla.edu/music/mlsc/collection.cfm?id=1&f=x

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) 06:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ernst Toch. 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://archive.is/20130416053829/http://www.weta.org/node/450363 to http://www.weta.org/node/450363

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) 21:50, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Op.15 quartet published by Doblinger??
There is one Worldcat record of a Doblinger-published score of the quartet op.15 that mentions a publisher and doesn't contain the indication "manuscript copy" in some language. However, it's at UCLA along with Toch's other papers, so I agree it's likely the work was not published. A little more looking-into may be indicated to be sure, of course. ELSchissel (talk) 14:35, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Toch regarded as one of the great avant-garde composers pre-WWII?
Source? ELSchissel (talk) 16:07, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

About sonata op.21
i think there is after all a publication of it, so not "unpublished" - - at least, this does not seem to be the later violin sonata op.44, whose full score has only half as many pages. ELSchissel (talk) 16:09, 2 October 2022 (UTC)

"Between 1950 and 1964, he wrote..."
7 symphonies reverting back to his earlier late-Romantic style ---? I deleted the second half of the sentence because there is little to nothing "late Romantic" about especially the first three (and arguably the last three; I don't know no.4) of his 7 symphonies. They are more modern than his late string quartets, the last two of which are somewhat like Zemlinsky's last quartet (with in Toch's case at least 12-tone sections, perhaps)- which is also not Romantic in style (late or not). 23:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC) ELSchissel (talk) 23:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ernst Toch


text: User talk:68.43.28.20

title: User talk:68.43.28.20


text:
Henry Ware Lawton

Henry Ware Lawton (March 17, 1843 – December 19, 1899) was a U.S. Army officer who served with distinction in the Civil War, the Apache Wars, and the Spanish–American War. He received the Medal of Honor for heroism during the American Civil War. He was the only U.S. general officer to be killed during the Philippine–American War and the first general officer of the United States killed in overseas action. The city of Lawton, Oklahoma, takes its name from General Lawton, as does a borough in the city of Havana, Cuba. Liwasang Bonifacio (Bonifacio Square) in downtown Manila was formerly named Plaza Lawton in his honor.

Early life
Lawton was born on March 17, 1843, in Maumee, Ohio. He was the son of millwright George W. Lawton and Catherine (née Daley) who had been married in December 1836. Henry had two brothers, George S. and Manley Chapin.

In 1843, Lawton's father moved to Fort Wayne, Indiana, to work on a mill. The family followed him the same year. George went to California in 1850 to build shakers for the gold miners. He returned to Ft. Wayne later in 1853 and shortly after, on January 21, 1854, his wife Catherine died. She had been living with family members in or near Birmingham and Sandusky, Ohio, during George's absence. According to accounts given years later by Andrew J. Barney, a resident of the area and family friend, Henry attended public school in Florence Township, Ohio, from 1850 to 1854. Barney married the sister of Henry's mother in 1856 and for a time, Henry lived with the Barney family, and with his aunt, Marie Lawton, of Sandusky. He traveled with his father to Iowa and Missouri in 1857, returning to Fort Wayne in 1858. He enrolled at the Methodist Episcopal College in 1858 and was studying there when the American Civil War began.

Civil War
Lawton was among the first to respond to President Abraham Lincoln's call for three-month volunteers. He enlisted in Company E of the 9th Indiana Volunteers, and was mustered into service on April 24, 1861, as one of the four company sergeants. He saw action at Philippi, Laurel Hill, and Corrick's Ford, in what is now West Virginia. He was mustered out on July 29, 1861, and returned home. Colonel Sion S. Bass was then organizing the 30th Indiana Infantry, and Lawton re-enlisted.

The 30th Indiana Infantry mustered into service on August 20, 1861. Lawton was his company's first sergeant but was promoted to 1st lieutenant on August 20. The 30th joined the Army of the Ohio, under General Don Carlos Buell in Kentucky and remained there for a brief period. The army moved on to Tennessee early in 1862. Its first major engagement was at the Battle of Shiloh, where Lawton's regiment suffered heavy losses. Lawton had experienced one of the bloodiest battles of the Civil War. His unit moved on and fought at the Siege of Corinth in Mississippi.

Lawton's unit also fought at Iuka while attached to Buell's forces. At the age of nineteen, on May 7, 1862, outside of Corinth, he was promoted to the rank of captain.

He fought at the battles of Stones River and Chickamauga and saw action in over 22 major engagements. He received the Medal of Honor years later for his bravery at the Atlanta campaign. He was a brevet colonel at the end of the war.

After the war, Lawton became a companion of the Military Order of the Loyal Legion of the United States.

Indian Wars
After the Civil War he studied at Harvard Law School, graduating in 1866, before returning to the army. Lawton wanted a Captain's commission in the Army but did not receive it. Generals William Tecumseh Sherman and Philip Sheridan wrote recommendations supporting Lawton's efforts to rejoin the Army.

Sheridan strongly urged Lawton to accept a 2nd lieutenant's commission, which he did, joining the 41st Infantry Regiment under the command of Colonel Ranald S. Mackenzie on July 28, 1866. Lawton served for many years under Mackenzie, mainly as quartermaster, and also as a close confidant. He developed a reputation as a fierce and determined fighter as well as one of the most organized quartermasters in the service. Lawton served with Mackenzie in most of the major Indian campaigns in the southwest, including the Fourth Cavalry's victory at the Battle of Palo Duro Canyon.

While earning a reputation as a fierce and tenacious fighter, Lawton was also regarded as having compassion for the Indians. Among those who respected Lawton was Wooden Leg, a Northern Cheyenne who was in a group of Cheyenne escorted by then Lieutenant Lawton to a southern reservation. Lawton also served as an advocate for the Indians on the reservation when he learned that the local Indian agency was short-changing the Indians on their food allotments.

On March 20, 1879, Lawton was promoted to the rank of captain in the regular army.

In 1883, Lawton and Major William F. Tucker claimed 800 acres overlapping a traditional farming village near the Zuni Indian Reservation. The area, now desired for cattle ranching, was omitted from reservation borders in 1877. Lawton and Tucker were opposed by anthropologist Frank Hamilton Cushing, Chicago Inter-Ocean editor William Eleroy Curtis, and Boston Herald reporter Sylvester Baxter. In May 1883, US President Chester A. Arthur responded to the controversy with an executive order, expanding the reservation to include the contested village.

In 1886, he was in command of B Troop, 4th Cavalry, at Fort Huachuca and was selected by Nelson Miles to lead the expedition that captured Geronimo. Stories abound as to who actually captured Geronimo, or to whom he surrendered. For Lawton's part, he was given orders to lead actions south of the U.S.-Mexico boundary where it was thought Geronimo and a small band of his followers would take refuge from U.S. authorities. Lawton was to pursue, subdue, and return Geronimo to the U.S., dead or alive.

Lawton's official report dated September 9, 1886, sums up the actions of his unit and gives credit to a number of his troopers for their efforts. At the same time, in his typical fashion, Lawton takes no credit for himself. Geronimo himself gave credit to Lawton's tenacity for wearing the Apaches down with constant pursuit. Geronimo and his followers had little or no time to rest or stay in one place. Completely worn out, the little band of Apaches returned to the U.S. with Lawton and officially surrendered to General Nelson A. Miles on September 4, 1886. While debate continues as to whom Geronimo surrendered, Native Americans rarely "surrendered" to junior officers. They usually surrendered to general officers.

At various times after the campaign, Lawton was questioned by friends about the campaign. He remained tightlipped and stated that his unit simply pursued Geronimo and brought him back.

On September 17, 1888, Lawton was promoted to major, inspector general of the Army. On February 12, 1889, he was promoted to lieutenant colonel, inspector general. His duties provided him with many opportunities to develop improvements in organization and equipment for the Army and he worked in this capacity for most of the time up until the Spanish–American War.

Spanish–American War
In May 1898, Lawton was appointed brigadier general of volunteers and assumed command of the 2nd Division, Fifth Army Corps, serving under General William Rufus Shafter. His unit was sent to Cuba, where it spearheaded the invasion of Cuba at Daiquiri, a shallow beach area 18 mi east of Santiago. The landing of American forces took place on June 22, 1898.

Lawton's force of 6,000 troops moved inland as Spanish forces retreated and he reached Siboney on June 23. General Joseph Wheeler took it upon himself to jump ahead of plan and found himself in a fierce fire fight with the Spanish at the Battle of Las Guasimas. Wheeler elected to send word back to Lawton for help and Lawton's unit rushed forward to help Wheeler from his difficulties but the battle was over by the time Lawton's lead regiments arrived and they took no part in the fighting. The fact that the Spanish did not put up a prolonged resistance gave the Americans the impression they would be easy to defeat. This resulted in some miscalculations regarding the Spanish capabilities in planning future engagements.

Lawton's division was sent to take the Spanish fortress at El Caney. Preparation for the Cuban campaign had been helter-skelter and Shafter failed to disembark his siege guns. Moreover, he did not have mounted cavalry, necessary for a thorough reconnaissance of the terrain prior to engaging the Spanish forces. Generals Chaffee, Kent, and Wheeler all did independent recon prior to the El Caney and San Juan hill engagements but they provided an overly optimistic assessment of the difficulties ahead. Chaffee submitted his battle plan to Lawton who read and signed it without change. In the pre-battle meeting, Shafter and his generals agreed that El Caney would require no more than two hours to take.

In the following Battle of El Caney, Lawton's division suffered heavy casualties but eventually took the city and linked up with the rest of the U.S. forces on San Juan Hill for the Siege of Santiago. Once Santiago had fallen, Lawton wanted to be returned to the U.S. along with General Shafter and Fifth Corps; however, the War Department selected him as military governor of Santiago de Cuba province, a position he held from early August to early October 1898.

A number of problems faced Lawton and Leonard Wood. One major problem involved the health of the American troops and the priority of returning many of them home for medical treatment. The problem of sanitation in the city of Santiago itself also had to be addressed. Many of the residents were under nourished, ill, and in need of medical attention. Civil order had to be restored and unruly Cuban soldiers, still bearing arms, were ordered to remain outside the city. Conflicts with the police occurred because they were holdovers from the Spanish regime and continued to treat the citizens in an oppressive fashion. Bars and saloons were closed for a period of time and basic law enforcement became one of the duties of Lawton and his men. Lawton had a penchant for hands-on involvement alongside his troops and was personally engaged in the day-to-day post war activity. There are news reports of Lawton personally removing insurgent flags from public buildings and working alongside his troops to maintain order.

Lawton immediately tackled the problem of law enforcement, ridding the police of its Spanish officers and replacing them with Cubans. By the end of summer, he had re-established a mounted police unit made up of Cubans to maintain order in Santiago. Eventually, taverns were re-opened and the locals were once again allowed to pursue their social pastimes.

Lawton also re-established commerce in the city and outlying areas, all the way to Havana. He worked with the Customs Bureau to create an equitable system of collections and was praised by the bureau head in Cuba for his work in raising and protecting a substantial amount of money. Disgruntled Cuban generals who early had taken their troops into the interior and posed a threat to the U.S. presence were invited by Lawton to participate in local government and in fact, became quite instrumental in establishing and protecting the peace.

Lawton suffered from a fever, possibly malaria, on and off between July and October. This fact was detected by only a few correspondents. For his part, Lawton did not make light of the illness except to a few close friends with whom he corresponded. His real condition may have been "recurring" malarial fever since he had been diagnosed with the illness, as well as dysentery in 1876. According to National Archive records, the army surgeon who diagnosed his condition at that time recommended a six-month leave in a different climate from the one in which he was stationed. His illness forced him to take a medical leave of absence on October 6, 1898. He returned to the U.S. on October 13 and shortly thereafter, began his preparation for the assignment that would take him to the Philippines.

It has been speculated that Lawton may have been relieved due to drinking, yet, no evidence has surfaced to confirm that rumor. One source for the information was a 'phantom' (unnamed) correspondent for the New York Evening Sun and the second was Leonard Wood, a "moralistically intolerant" person who was later believed by many in the Army to have stabbed his friend Lawton in the back. Considering the number of correspondents in Santiago on the prowl for news, or possibly a scoop, any misbehavior on the part of a senior American general would have been detected and reported. Not one irregularity showed up about Lawton over the course of three months and hundreds of news reports.

Private letters to close personal friends in the U.S. from Lawton revealed that he was concerned with the number of his troops suffering from disease, and that he was experiencing a fever, perhaps malaria, and did not like being assigned to a desk job. He was already looking ahead to a role in the Philippine campaign.

Whatever reason for his return to the states, he came back as a major-general of volunteers, having been promoted within a week or so of his landing in Cuba. When Lawton returned, he joined General Shafter for a short period of time and then went on to Washington, D.C., where he was in conference with President William McKinley, Adjutant General Henry C. Corbin, and Secretary of War Russell A. Alger concerning conditions in Cuba. He also testified before the commission investigating the Santiago campaign and was given temporary command of the Fourth Army Corps in Huntsville on December 22. On December 29, Secretary Alger announced to the press that Lawton was being placed in command of the Army field forces in the Philippines and would be reporting to General Elwell Stephen Otis, the military governor, within a short time. Lawton also toured the country with President McKinley, and other dignitaries during the Peace Jubilee.

Philippine–American War

With the fighting against the Spanish over, Lawton was transferred to the Philippines to command the 1st Division of Eighth Army Corps during the Philippine–American War. There, he played a significant part in the military victories during the first part of the war, scoring victories at Santa Cruz and Zapote Bridge. He was able to inspire troops by his personal leadership and successfully incorporated tactics learned while fighting Indians in the American West.

His competency and military achievements made for bad relations between him and the Eighth Corps commander, Otis. Despite this, Lawton was very popular among his men and the general public and was so respected by the colonial Americans in the Philippines that his image appeared on Filipino currency issued during the American colonial period in the 1920s. A major plaza in downtown Manila was named Lawton Plaza, which was later renamed in 1963 to Liwasang Bonifacio. After the Battle of San Isidro, a letter arrived at the Eighth Corps headquarters with the message: "Otis. Manila: Convey to General Law[ton] and the gallant men of his command congratulations on the successful operations during the past month, resulting in the capture this morning of San Isidro." The letter was signed by President William McKinley.

Lawton continued to experience personal attacks on his reputation. General Charles King, upon returning to the U.S. had dinner with General Shafter. Shafter informed King that someone high in the chain of command in Manila was spreading rumors about Lawton being on drinking sprees in Manila which King emphatically denied. King wrote Lawton about his meeting with Shafter, who in turn wrote adjutant general Corbin. Apparently the rumors caused Otis to write to the Adjutant General on July 11, 1899. Corbin in turn wrote McKinley's personal secretary who had inquired about the rumors and labeled the whole affair as "mischievous gossip." (The letters are located in the McKinley Papers, Vol. 36, reel 7 of the Library of Congress.)

General Emilio Aguinaldo, first President of the Philippines, referred to Lawton as "The General of the Night." When asked why he used that reference, Aguinaldo replied that Lawton was a night general and had attacked him (Aguinaldo) so often at night, he never knew when Lawton was coming.

During the Battle of San Mateo, Lawton was, as usual, in the midst of the fighting and was killed by a Filipino sharpshooter, coincidentally under the command of a general named Licerio Gerónimo who possibly had Native American descent himself as Indians (Native Americans), Mestizos, and Criollos were once sent by Spain to serve as soldiers in the Philippines. He was the highest ranking American officer to fall in battle in either the Spanish–American or Philippine–American Wars. A vacancy had existed for a brigadier general in the Regular Army, and rumors had circulated for months as to whom the President would promote. The final tribute of recognition from the President and army had already been paid in the form of the promotion for Lawton on the day of his death. The adjutant general's office was processing the promotion when word was received in the White House of Lawton's death.

Lawton laid in repose at the chapel in Paco Cemetery Manila. His body left the Philippines on board the U.S. Army Transport Thomas on December 30, 1899. The Thomas reached the shores of San Francisco on Tuesday, January 30, 1900. Lawton was laid to rest at Arlington National Cemetery on February 3, 1900.

Tributes
Nine years after his death in the Philippines a statue was commissioned by Indianapolis city leaders and erected on the grounds of the Marion County Courthouse. The statue itself was created in 1906 and won a prize for heroic statuary at the Paris Salon competition in that year, a first for an American entry into that competition. The dedication ceremony for the statue was presided over by President Theodore Roosevelt and Vice President Charles W. Fairbanks, a fellow Hoosier. The Hoosier Poet, James Whitcomb Riley, composed a poem to commemorate the event, which was one of few appearances he made in the last years of his life as he suffered lingering complications from a stroke. In 1917 the monument was moved to Indianapolis's Garfield Park and rededicated.

In Fort Wayne, Indiana, where he was raised, Northside Park was renamed in his honor in 1900 and a bronze statue of him was erected in the town's Lakeside Park in 1921. In Lawton Park, a memorial featuring a cannon from his time in the Philippines is on display on a limestone base.

In Manila, the plaza fronting the Manila Central Post Office building was named "Plaza Lawton" before it was renamed in 1963 as Liwasang Bonifacio after the Philippine hero Andrés Bonifacio. Today, the name Lawton is used to refer to the area in between the post office building (including Liwasang Bonifacio and the Manila Metropolitan Theater) all the way up to the Park n' Ride in Padre Burgos. In addition, the main road leading to the Manila American Cemetery was named Lawton Avenue in his honor. In 1899, the Army named a fort after Lawton. Fort Lawton was located just northwest of downtown Seattle, near the residential neighborhood of Lawton Wood. While Fort Lawton was a quiet outpost prior to World War II, it became the second largest port of embarkation of soldiers and materials to the Pacific Theater during World War II. The fort was closed by the Army in 1971, and today the bulk of the land makes up the city of Seattle's Discovery Park.

In 1899, the Lawton Glacier in Alaska was named for him. For unknown reasons, the spelling was subsequently changed to Laughton Glacier. Lawton, Oklahoma is named after the general, as is San Francisco's Lawton Street.

He is portrayed in the 1997 miniseries Rough Riders by actor John S. Davies.

Awards

 * Medal of Honor
 * Civil War Campaign Medal
 * Indian Campaign Medal
 * Spanish Campaign Medal
 * Army of Cuban Occupation Medal
 * Philippine Campaign Medal

Note – with the exception of the Medal of Honor, all the awards listed above were established after General Lawton's death.

Medal of Honor citation
Rank and organization: Captain, Company A, 30th Indiana Infantry. Place and date: At Atlanta, Ga., August 3, 1864. Entered service at: Ft. Wayne, Allen County, Ind. Birth: Ohio. Date of issue: May 22, 1893.

Citation:

"Led a charge of skirmishers against the enemy's rifle pits and stubbornly and successfully resisted 2 determined attacks of the enemy to retake the works."

title: Henry Ware Lawton


text:
Kingwood (album)

Kingwood is the sixth album by Swedish punk rock band Millencolin, released on 30 March 2005 in Sweden and 12 April 2005 in North America. The song "Farewell My Hell" originated as an idea for singer Nikola Šarčević's first solo album, but was used for Kingwood instead. "Farewell My Hell" was played prominently in the Swedish vampire comedy horror film Frostbite.

Release
On 26 January 2005, Kingwood was announced for release in two months' time. On 1 March 2005, "Biftek Supernova" was posted online for free download. The music video for "Ray" was posted online on 8 March 2005; the track was released as the album's lead single eight days later. Kingwood was released in Europe on 28 March 2005, and in the United States on 14 April 2005. They went a tour of Europe with Street Dogs and the Lawrence Arms in April 2005, which was followed by on a West Coast US tour the following month with Boys Night Out and Roses Are Red. Between mid June and mid August, the group went on the 2005 edition of Warped Tour. Two singles from the album were released: "Ray" and "Shut You Out".

Track listing
All songs written by Nikola Šarčević and Mathias Färm, except where noted.
 * 1) "Farewell My Hell" (Sarcevic) - 2:52
 * 2) "Birdie" - 2:32
 * 3) "Cash or Clash" (Sarcevic) - 2:40
 * 4) "Shut You Out" - 3:39
 * 5) "Biftek Supernova" (Sarcevic) - 2:18
 * 6) "My Name is Golden" - 3:08
 * 7) "Ray" - 2:52
 * 8) "Novo" - 2:58
 * 9) "Simple Twist of Hate" - 1:29
 * 10) "Stalemate" - 3:18
 * 11) "Mooseman's Jukebox" - 2:12
 * 12) "Hard Times" (Sarcevic) - 4:09
 * 13) "Phony Tony" (Japanese release only) - 2:59

Millencolin

 * Nikola Šarčević - lead vocals, bass
 * Erik Ohlsson - guitar
 * Mathias Färm - guitar
 * Fredrik Larzon - drums

title: Kingwood (album)


text:
Talk:Kingwood (album)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kingwood (album). 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/20080506104509/http://www.punkbands.com/reviews/457/ to http://www.punkbands.com/reviews/457/

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) 22:05, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kingwood (album)


text:
Talk:Ara Parseghian

Article class rating
I rated the article as a class "C" because it has only one reference. I'm sure there are others. Pknkly (talk) 07:36, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Ara's genealogy
Jared Parasghian is not Ara's son, but his great-nephew. Additionally, the factiod isn't really relevant to the article. If it were, we'd also have to mention that Ara's son Mike played for Notre Dame. But I don't think we really need a football genealogy of the Parseghian family. Maybe I'm wrong about that?

Lifted article
The entirety of this page is lifted here: http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Ara-Parseghian I assume that the wiki page was copied, but not sure what to do about things like this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.34.6.178 (talk) 00:04, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

 * The lift probably went from Wiki to NationMaster. Pknkly (talk) 07:36, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

 * Agree, but at some earlier point than now. I've made some reverts and edits to this article that do not appear in NationMaster, especially in the discussion of the end of the 1966 season. Sensei48 (talk) 09:21, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

June Edits, 2013
Before reverting the passage in dispute - specific mention of the Fertig to Sherman pass that won the 1964 USC-ND game for the Trojans and likely spoiled a chance for a NC for Notre Dame - I would refer both to my previous edit summary and to the article overall. As far as the latter goes, Parseghian's career overall and especially at Notre Dame is woefully under-recounted here; the limited highlights do not accurately reflect his notability beyond stub status, and I believe that several other editors and I can make improvements there. My particular objections to the Fertig-Sherman clause are that a) it adds nothing whatsoever to understanding AP or his notability; no other specific game-winning play either by or against ND appears in the article mentioning players Irish or opponent by name, and c) Parseghian coached in at least eight or ten far more significant contests, several of which featured plays equally or more dramatic that had greater impact on the coach's career (the Tom Clements-Robin-Webber pass that essentially won the Dec 1973 Sugar Bowl for the Irish and secured the national championship for example, or the James Street-Cotton Speyrer pass by Texas in the '70 Cotton Bowl that kept the Longhorns' 20 [eventually 30] game winning streak alive, to name two of many). The Fertig-Sherman mention would be appropriate to an article about that particular game, but it fails the notability test even for the narrow scope of the ND-USC rivalry as discussed here. Should Anthony Davis's 6 TDs in the '72 game be mentioned in THIS article? Purdue's Mike Phipps, three consecutive victories over Parseghian's teams? Terry Hanratty's and Joe Theisman's total offense and passing records at Notre Dame, or the fact that Hanratty broke the legendary George Gipp's total offense record under Ara's tutelage?

This is an article about Parseghian, not about specific players and plays during his tenure. Even if the article is expanded to include those, it's doubtful that Fertig-Sherman would make the cut; the coach's notability grows from what his players did, not from what two opponent players did in one contest out of the 116 Ara coached at ND. Sensei48 (talk) 23:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

 * Good points of course, and wherever we end up I'm okay either way--it's a great article in my opinion. To me, adding the additional clause about the last-play loss adds to the drama of the moment and to the emotion of the life of his coaching and career.  For me, it makes the article better.--Paul McDonald (talk) 01:34, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 5 external links on Ara Parseghian. 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 http://www.webcitation.org/6HxjjiwuY?url=http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/bigten/northwestern/1955-1959_yearly_results.php to http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/bigten/northwestern/1955-1959_yearly_results.php
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6HxkJ84yd?url=http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/bigten/northwestern/1960-1964_yearly_results.php to http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/bigten/northwestern/1960-1964_yearly_results.php
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130926115156/http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/independents/notre_dame/1960-1964_yearly_results.php to http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/independents/notre_dame/1960-1964_yearly_results.php
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6I4reK39a?url=http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/independents/notre_dame/1965-1969_yearly_results.php to http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/independents/notre_dame/1965-1969_yearly_results.php
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6I51CqPLK?url=http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/independents/notre_dame/1970-1974_yearly_results.php to http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/independents/notre_dame/1970-1974_yearly_results.php

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) 07:23, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Re Parsegian recalled his fathers dislike of Catholics citation needed.
In "A Shameful Act: The Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility" By Taner Akcam, Roman Catholic Armenians were also deported. see page 176. Only 25 percent of the prewar Catholic population survived. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.162.188.250 (talk) 17:17, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ara Parseghian


text:
Fey (singer)

María Fernanda Blázquez Gil (born 21 July 1973), known mononymously as Fey, is a Mexican singer and songwriter. She rose to fame with her first three studio albums, which established her as a teen idol and fashion icon of the 1990s in Mexico and Latin America.

In 1995, Fey debuted with her self-titled album, which went platinum in Mexico. Following this success, she released Tierna la Noche in 1996, which reached the tenth position on the Billboard Top Latin Albums and the sixth spot on the Latin Pop Albums chart in the U.S. Additionally, it received a platinum record in Mexico, and earned her the Female Pop Album of the Year at the Billboard Latin Music Awards. In 1998, she released El Color de los Sueños, which attained a double gold record in Mexico. Notably, many of her songs, such as "Ni tú ni nadie," "Subidón," "Las lágrimas de mi almohada," "Muévelo," and "Azúcar amargo," reached the top 20 on both Billboard's Hot Latin Tracks and Latin Pop Airplay charts.

During the 2000s, Fey released her albums Vértigo (2002), La Fuerza del Destino (2004), Faltan Lunas (2006), and Dulce Tentación (2009). With the second receiving a Latin Grammy Award nomination for Best Female Pop Vocal Album. With more than 10 million records sold worldwide, she is one of the best-selling Latin music artists, and holds the record of being the first female soloist to achieve more than 95,000 attendances in 10 performances at the National Auditorium.

1990s
Fey released her first album, titled Fey, in 1995, through Sony Music (Mexico). Within a couple of months of the album's release, Fey had scored several hits in her native Mexico, and had reached #1 with "Media naranja", "Gatos en el balcon", "Me enamoro de ti" and "La noche se mueve". Fey toured Mexico, including consecutive concerts in the Teatro Metropolitan, and all of Latin America, and reached Gold status sales by the end of the year. In 1996 Fey released Tierna la Noche. "Azucar Amargo", the CD's first single, stayed in the Billboard chart for more than 30 weeks. Her tour, Tierna la noche, was also successful. Overall the tour consisted of more than 40 presentations in Mexico, the U.S. and Latin America, as well as some presentations in Europe. At the 9th Lo Nuestro Awards, Fey received a nomination for Pop New Artist.

In 1998, and after more than 8 months of absence, Fey released her third album El color de los sueños, which itself was different from the preceding two in that the album was a mix of different rhythms and styles. "Ni tu ni nadie", the album's first single, instantly reached number one in the Latin charts; "Diselo con flores", "Canela" and "Cielo Liquido" soon followed. Although the record did very well in sales, it did not compare to the over-the-top success of Tierna la noche. In the overall period of the three first albums, Fey's amazing popularity and promotion caused all but 4 of the singles released to hit #1 in Mexico, with the most important being "Azucar Amargo", "Media Naranja", "Ni tu Ni Nadie", "Muevelo" and "Te Pertenezco", all of them spending more than a month in the top position in Mexico. After almost a year of promotion, Fey announced, at a 1999 charity concert, that: "everything has a cycle, and this is the end of mine".

Vertigo (fourth studio album)
Vertigo is the long awaited 4th album, which the singer prepared from 2000 to 2002, with several producers, including herself as such, in most of the songs. The album was released in CD and Cassette format, worldwide the album was released in Spanish with 11 and 12 tracks, depending on the country, in Mexico was released a deluxe edition that included a second CD with all the songs in English, plus 3 bonus tracks, included only in that album. The first single was titled "Se lo que vendrá / The Other Side", the song was a resounding success in Mexico, reaching the top of the charts, and the song in English was played on channels such as MTV, where it even made it to the top 100 most requested videos on MTV, as well as being awarded with a prize next to Nick Carter of the Backstreets boys at the MTV Video Music Awards LA.

The promotion consisted of several performances on TV and at the EXA 02 festival, but the album was not promoted outside of Mexico and the United States, which caused the Latin American public to quickly forget the album. To finalize the promotion and after releasing some promotional songs like "Dime" and "Loca por amarte", the single "Noche Ideal / Dressing to kill" was released in CD format, without any kind of radio promotion, and was accompanied by a strictly limited edition with a slipcase with an alternative cover.

It was published in a double edition with one album in English and one in Spanish. The album at the time went gold for its sales, but it is estimated to have surpassed one million copies worldwide. The promotion of Vertigo ended abruptly in December 2002, cancelling the world tour.

La Fuerza del Destino (fifth studio album)
In 2005, Fey, now a married woman, relaunched her career with La Fuerza del Destino, a tribute to the Spanish group Mecano. This album was successful; it contained three top-ten singles: "La Fuerza Del Destino", "Barco A Venus" and "Me Cuesta Tanto Olvidarte". A radio-only single, "Un Año Más", was released for the holiday season in Mexico.

Fey toured in support of this album at the Viña del Mar festival 2005, the Selena Vive! festival, and many local clubs across the United States and Latin America. The record excelled sales-wise, and it gave Fey her very first Latin Grammy nomination for "Best Pop Female Vocal Album". She also received 4 nominations for Premios Orgullosamente Latino 2005 & 2006-Ritmoson Latino and a Premio Oye nomination. She was recognized by the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) in Miami in 2006 for supporting gay human rights.

Faltan Lunas (sixth studio album)
After the success of her fifth album, Fey released a sixth one, Faltan Lunas and was produced by Carlos Jean. It was slated for an August 1, 2006, release, but was released on July 21, Fey's birthday. It features a pop/dance sound along with acoustic elements. The first single released was "Y Aquí Estoy". It was announced by Fey herself that the second single would be "Me Has Vuelto Loca", but it was changed to "Como Un Ángel". The album was only released in a few Latin American countries, and sold around 10,000 copies worldwide, making it her lowest selling album ever. "Como Un Ángel" was released in January 2007, but it failed to make an impact on the charts.

Dulce Tentación & Sweet Temptation (seventh studio album)
Dulce Tentación was released April 28, 2009, and the English version called "Sweet Temptation" was set to be released over the next months. The album was produced by Sam 'FISH' Fisher, who also co-wrote more than half of the songs on the record and will be distributed internationally by Universal Music. One track, "Cicatrices" ["Monsters"] was available for download Fey's official site at the end of 2008. More than 170,000 downloads were registered while the track was available.

The first official single was "Lentamente" (Let Me Show You), a song that put Fey back in the top of the charts in México. The album was an unexpected success, winning a gold status for over 50.000 copies sold in less than one month in México. The second single Provócame (Games That you Play) was released in July 2009, however, a conflict between Fey and her new record label Mi Rey Music over promotion differences and the concept of the new video led Fey to part ways with the record label. Fey decided to create her own record label by buying the rights to her music and to Elephant Music from Mi Rey Music.

Late August 2009 Fey announced on her website that she was now in complete control of Elephant Music and continued to promote "Provócame", however, she suspended promotion of the single due to laryngitis. The video debuted on September 21, 2009; she also announced that she was to go on tour at the National Auditorium and record a live DVD. Fey toured clubs in the United States and Mexico.

The last single from the album was "Adicto A Mi Cuerpo". Initial plans for a music video were scrapped due to Fey deciding to move on and record a new album, making the single a radio-only release. However, it did chart on several online radio stations. "Sweet Temptation" was shelved as Fey decided to record a new album.

Family, return to Sony Music, Primera Fila (2012 - 2014)
During April 2010, it was announced via a press conference that Fey was in the studio recording her eighth studio album, with a lead single tentatively called "Te Amo A Mi Manera" previewed at the conference. The project went to hiatus because of her marriage to Alonso Orozco in September 2010. Fey gave birth to her first child, Isabella, in January, 2011.

On March 8, 2012, it was confirmed via Sony Music Mexico that Fey would be returning to the record company, after almost ten years since the release of Vértigo, and three years after the release of Dulce Tentación/Sweet Temptation, her last studio album. She had announced that her eighth album would be a Primera Fila, an album composed entirely of live renditions of her past hits and a few new songs. It was recorded in June, and it was released in October 2012. The first single, "Frío", was released on July, 21st during Fey's 39th birthday celebration. The album was certified gold just three weeks after its release, marking it a success in Fey's career. She began her "Todo Lo Que Soy" (All That I Am) tour in February 2013 in Mexico's National Auditorium, where she had set a record years before for most sold-out performances by a female artist, to positive reviews. In March 2013, Premios Oye announced Fey as the official image and spokesperson for that year's ceremony, where she also performed. On August 15, 2013, Fey performed "Azucar Amargo" at Premios Texas where she also won the "Best Pop/Rock Artist" award. In January 2014, Fey announced her divorce from Orozco.

Fey confirmed in April 2014 that she will be a judge for the 2014 season of the dance competition show, "Bailando Por Un Sueño" (Dancing for a Dream). On December 11, 2014, Fey announced the release date of her Todo Lo Que Soy live CD & DVD package to be released on December 17 physically and December 24 digitally of the same year.

'90s Pop, Desnuda, Eternas Tours, New music and USA Tour (2016 - onwards)
In February 2016, Fey officially released the single "No Me Acostumbro" alongside Cuban singer/actor Lenny de la Rosa, whom she had met as a judge on "Bailando Por Un Sueño" when he was a contestant. In the spring of 2016, Fey began promoting an upcoming tour called "Fey: 9.0 American Tour" which had a preview date in June 2016 in Mexico City's National Auditorium, home to Fey's own attendance record for a female recording artist. In September 2016, Fey released the digital single entitled "Amo", which was accompanied by a Fifty Shades of Grey inspired video.

In 2017, Fey joined the line-up of the '90s Pop Tour, joining artists Aleks Syntek, OV7, Erik Rubin, Beto Cuevas, JNS, and others. The tour had many dates during the spring and summer of 2017 across Mexico and the US. After this tour, Fey announced plans to start her own tour in wanting to record a live CD & DVD.

In 2018, Fey released two new singles, "Comiendote Tu Besos," and "No Te Necesito" along with the announcement of a new tour called "Desnuda Tour" (Nude Tour), an entirely different show from what the 9.0 American Tour was set to be. The tour began in October 2018 in Mexico with rave reviews its opening night as she performed songs from each of her previous albums.

On September 25, 2020, to celebrate the 25th anniversary of her career, Fey launched the English-language electronic single, "The Perfect Song" featuring Paul Oakenfold. In November 2020, Fey launched the recorded version of her "Desnuda Tour" via Cinepolis during a stream to raise funds for World Vision, a charity she is the ambassador for.

In February 2023, Fey announced that she and Alejandra Guzman will embark in a joint show called the "Eternas Tour" (Eternals Tour). The tour was cancelled shortly after its announcement due to management conflicts. In August 2023, Fey released a new single, "Veneno" with an accompanying music video and announced a tour would follow across the US and Mexico in the fall.

In August 2023, she released the song "Veneno", a song authored by the singer and produced by the famous Demo Casanova, a producer recognized for his work with artists such as; Rihanna, Madonna, Justin Timberlake, Nelly Furtado, among many more. The song is a Guaracha, very electronic, quite moving and with a message, the singer explained that beyond what it seems, it is about removing the poison from within with the antidote, healing and continuing to love despite the setbacks. The song failed to be successful in sales, Fey's first single that did not reach the top of iTunes, which it has achieved throughout the 2010s. The video was not very innovative and apparently low-budget, with a concept unclear, although highlighting how spectacular the singer looks in it, which saves the production.

In December 2023, Fey announces her long-awaited tour of the United States with the giant Live Nation, with which she will be touring the country for much of 2024.

In January 2024, she releases her song "Disparándole A La Nada", the song that supports the tour and that against all odds debuted in the top # 5 of iTunes, in position # 4. With this song Fey begins her promotional tour of the United States, leaving great expectations for this new show! her first solo tour in that country in more than 10 years.

Studio albums

 * Fey (1995)
 * Tierna la Noche (1996)
 * El Color de los Sueños (1998)
 * Vértigo (2002)
 * La Fuerza Del Destino (2004)
 * Faltan Lunas (2006)
 * Dulce Tentación (2009)
 * Fey: Primera Fila (2012)
 * Todo lo Que Soy – En Vivo (2014)

title: Fey (singer)


text:
Talk:Corporate Airlines Flight 5966

Untitled
The NTSB report link may need to be updated as the report is updated... NTSB links tend to move when they update. Joblio 01:25, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion: You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:23, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 * N875JX American Connection Jetstream 32.jpg

title: Talk:Corporate Airlines Flight 5966


text: User talk:205.247.164.52

title: User talk:205.247.164.52


text:
Talk:Anton Webern

Richard Taruskin
I have removed some material regarding musicologist Richard Taruskin's assessment of Webern's possible Nazi sympathies on the grounds that this material is blatantly and crudely POV. It's perfectly fine for the article to quote opinions contrary to those of Taruskin, but they must absolutely be attributed to specific persons WITHIN the body of the article itself (rather than merely in footnote citation), otherwise the article is effectively taking the position that these contrary opinions are true and that the foottnote citations prove it. The article has no purview with which to take this position. It can say, "Taruskin writes this, but X, to the contrary, writes that." It cannot (reasonably) say, "Taruskin mistakenly, due to his deep prejudices, writes this, but the contrary is so (see citation of X)". I don't claim to have fully fixed the problem just yet: the section in question still needs more work, but at least it's not quite as outrageously POV now as when I first encountered it. TheScotch (talk) 08:05, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

 * Let's parse this:
 * I wrote:
 * Musicologist Richard Taruskin describes Webern accurately if vaguely as a pan-German nationalist but then goes much further in claiming specifically that Webern joyfully welcomed the Nazis with the 1938 Anschluss, at best extrapolating from the account of his cited source Krasner and at worst exaggerating or distorting it, as well as describing it sardonically as "heart-breaking".
 * You removed "accurately if vaguely." Why? Webern is accurately described by Taruskin as a pan-German nationalist. However, this is a vague claim; therefore, he goes further, specifying that Webern joyfully welcomed the Nazis. So, Taruskin "accurately if vaguely" describes Webern as a pan-German nationalist. The claim is vague precisely because it is not tantamount to claiming that Webern is a Nazi, but Taruskin's implication is nonetheless clear. So I don't see why you would remove "accurately if vaguely."
 * Taruskin's claim that Webern "joyfully welcomed the Nazis" does at best extrapolate from Krasner's account, and it does at worst exaggerate or distort it, because Krasner himself does not make this claim. To wit, Taruskin writes: "Webern welcomed the Nazis to Vienna with joy. (A heartbreaking interview with the violinist Louis Krasner in a recent issue of Fanfare magazine tells the whole story.)" There is simply no evidence for this claim in the Krasner interview. This entire section of the Webern Wikipedia artlce is about trying to approach the story by using a multitude of contradictory sources and commentators, whereas Taruskin claims that one source tells the whole story, when, in fact, if I remember correctly, Krasner specifically purports not to tell the "whole story" and is ambivalent, acknowledging his limited knowledge. I understand that this becomes a point-of-view issue precisely because the article should show, rather than tell, how Taruskin's second-hand account compares and contrasts with the Krasner interview. Of course, the article already does this just before the Taruskin paragraph. You removed "it does at worst exaggerate or distort it." So be it. This is splitting hairs. "Extrapolate" is perhaps too charitable here. Krasner simply does not say that Webern "joyfully welcomed the Nazis" in this interview.
 * Now, Taruskin's tone may not be readily apparent as sardonic. You removed "sardonically." I think the removal decontextualizes Taruskin's description for the unfamiliar reader, but I understand. I doubt we will find a commentator who specifically addresses Taruskin's tone in this specific instance. I would suggest that this is an unnecessary detail.
 * Next, I wrote:
 * Taruskin's authority on this delicate issue must be credited, if at all, then only with the significant limitations that he has been polemical in general and hostile in particular to the Second Viennese School, of whom Webern is often considered the most extreme and difficult (i.e., the least accessible).
 * You removed this wholesale instead of applying the remedy you suggest ("[i]t can say, 'Taruskin writes this, but X, to the contrary, writes that'"), which I will apply in revision:
 * Taruskin has been described polemical in general and hostile in particular to the Second Viennese School, of whom Webern is often considered the most extreme and difficult (i.e., the least accessible).
 * So, I would suggest that the passage in question read:
 * Musicologist Richard Taruskin describes Webern accurately if vaguely as a pan-German nationalist before specifically claiming that Webern joyfully welcomed the Nazis with the 1938 Anschluss, referring to the aforementioned interview of Krasner. However, Krasner told Fanfare Magazine that Webern "packed [him] off quickly" as soon he turned on the radio and heard the news break. Krasner explained: "I'm sure it was for my safety. But perhaps it was also to avoid the embarrassment which my presence would have caused had his family arrived, or friends celebrating the Nazi entry into Austria." Taruskin's authority on this matter is not without controversy: he has been described as polemical in general and hostile in particular to the Second Viennese School, of whom Webern is often considered the most extreme and difficult (i.e., the least accessible). New Complexity composer and performer Franklin Cox not only faults Taruskin as an inaccurate and unreliable historian but also critiques Taruskin as an "ideologist of tonal restoration" (musicologist Martin Kaltenecker similarly refers to the "Restoration of the 1980s," but he also describes a paradigm shift from structure to perception). Taruskin's "reactionary historicist" project, Cox argues, stands in opposition to that of the Second Viennese School, viz. the "progressivist historicist" emancipation of the dissonance. Taruskin himself admits to having acquired a "dubious reputation" on the Second Viennese School and notes that he has been described in his work on Webern as "coming, like Shakespeare's Marc Anthony, 'to bury Webern, not to praise him'".
 * I agree that this is not perfect, but it would be better than simply removing the material wholesale. I revisited the Krasner interview. It is no longer available on the Arnold Schoenberg Center's web site. It is available for purchase in the Fanfare Archives (https://fanfarearchive.com/articles/atop/11_2/1124160.aa_Some_Memories_Anton_Webern.html).
 * The cited passage from this interview reads, in greater context:
 * The Stockholm concert took place on April 20, 1938, about five weeks after the Anschluss. I want to skip back in time now to the months just preceding the Anschluss, which were troubled, turbulent times in Vienna. A desperate political struggle was going on between the Austrian Nazi party and Schuschnigg's government, with the latter losing ground gradually but inevitably. Every day, it seemed, there was another big demonstration—thousands and thousands of people against Schuschnigg and pro-Nazi. On one occasion, I walked into such a mob. I was unafraid going in, but when I saw how violent they were becoming, I got frightened and backed off very quickly. If they had recognized me as a Jew, the crowd would have torn me to pieces right there. There were no policemen around, nothing to restrain them—and these were the thugs of the city.
 * One memory from those times, in particular, haunts me—I mention it here in hopes that some historian will take it up and explore it further—and that is the puzzling case of Cardinal Innitzer. Austria, you see, was devoutly Catholic, and the Schuschnigg government also ardently religious in its manifestations. Cardinal Innitzer was the spiritual head who towered above everyone in Austria in power and political influence. The government looked to him for support, but apparently received little encouragement. The newspapers speculated about this daily. Finally, it was announced that the Cardinal had been called to Rome for consultation. Everyone on the pro-government side was reassured, feeling that now the Catholic Austrian government would be saved. The Cardinal's return to Vienna, however, brought only shock and disappointment. The hoped-for statement of support for the legal government was not forthcoming. I've never known quite what to make of that. Were certain members of the Catholic hierarchy, including possibly even the Pope himself, pro-Nazi? Or just naive? Or did they feel that Germany was now too powerful to brook opposition and that lives would be saved by acquiescence?
 * My last in-person contacts with Webern date from that period. After our collaboration in London, our friendship continued. I often visited him when I was in Vienna. In fact, I was out at his apartment in Mòdling at the time of the German invasion on March 12, 1938. We were talking about the Schocnberg violin concerto that afternoon. The piece had not yet been premiered, but I had a copy, and I played it for him. He was delighted. Wc came to a little place in 3/8 time, and he said, “Play it again. You know, that's like a Schubert waltz.“ He said that! About a difficult piece like the Schoenberg concerto!
 * We were talking, getting along fine, when suddenly, clutching my arm, he asked, “What time is it?“ I looked: just 4 o'clock. He rushed to the radio and opened it. Then we heard the voice of Schuschnigg saying, “German troops have just crossed the Austrian frontier, and I have told the Austrian soldiers to withdraw in order to avoid brother fighting brother. “
 * Webern caught hold of me, and exclaimed, “Krasner, here's your coat—run—go home!“ He opened the window and looked out. Nazi flags were already flying, and a crowd of people was celebrating and shouting. “Go quickly!“ Webern said. “Down two streets in the back—find a taxi!“ On the way, I passed small groups of young people, and after I'd gone by, they began to yell after me in a threatening way. They recognized me as a Jew. Of course, I didn't turn around. Finally, two blocks later, I found a taxi and jumped in. “High time that you get into a cab!“ said the driver, and he took me back to Vienna. It's a long cab ride.
 * I've always wondered about this incident. How did Webern know that 4 o'clock was the hour when the Nazis would cross the frontier and Schuschnigg would capitulate? Who knows what kind of people might have come to the Webern home after I left? He packed me off quickly. I'm sure it was for my safety. But perhaps it was also to avoid the embarrassment which my presence would have caused had his family arrived, or friends celebrating the Nazi entry into Austria.
 * After the taxi dropped me off where I was staying, you would think I'd have stayed indoors where it was most secure. But, being young, adventurous and curious, I went out again to see what was happening. Afterward, it was said that along the entire route of the Nazi motor transports, the commercial service stations had been stocked with a fully supply of gasoline so that the Nazi columns could refuel and proceed toward Vienna at full speed. And they were not long in coining. I was in front of the Imperial Hotel on the Ringstrasse as the first Nazi vehicles arrived. And soon there appeared, standing in an open car with his outstretched arm in motionless salute, Adolf Hitler himself. This happened within two or three hours after I had heard the Schuschnigg announcement on Webern's radio. There were very few people on the street at the time, and little in the way of cheering or other welcoming sound.
 * All that evening, I roamed the streets and saw the motorized forces parked along the outer Vienna “Cartel. “ And there was deathly silence everywhere.
 * The following morning, the papers brought joyous announcements of Hitler's impending arrival. Whereupon, there was a new entrance, this time well prepared with hundreds of thousands of cheering supporters. I've never seen it mentioned anywhere that there were actually two Hitler entries into Vienna. The first was so precipitous that it found the city in shock and with empty streets; the second was typically orchestrated by the propaganda machine. Immediately afterward, the tyranny began. MONTENSEM (talk) 09:39, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
 * In fact, the sentence, "Taruskin's authority on this matter is not without controversy: he has been described as polemical in general and hostile in particular to the Second Viennese School, of whom Webern is often considered the most extreme and difficult (i.e., the least accessible)," with all its citations, is rather central here, and should be restored. There are those, maybe Ian Pace, Franklin Cox, or Larson Powell, who have gone so far as to say that Taruskin's History should be called just that, and not styled as an encyclopedic reference in the manner of its "Oxford History," precisely in light of these kinds of discrepancies and biases (although, to be sure, this discrepancy between Taruskin and his cited source is from another of Taruskin's works). Recently Pace has written in remembrance, "I came to realise that Taruskin was not however someone with whose work I would associate a balanced examination of evidence and a measured conclusion. The very possibility of moderate conclusions also appeared to elude him. Both of these things are very significant flaws in a scholar, I believe, but also characteristic of a polarised scholarly world. Taruskin was highly critical of others for drawing wide conclusions from fragmentary information, but was far from averse from doing the same himself to ram home points." Certainly, contemporary and recent US scholars in particular are or have been polarized in their writings on Schoenberg, Webern, and the Second Viennese School more generally. MONTENSEM (talk) 19:46, 18 September 2022 (UTC)
 * (Indeed, as David Gutman reviewed it in The Independent: "Richard Taruskin, the most authoritative controversialist in modern musicology, has written an Oxford History of Western Music to rival Gibbon's Decline and Fall in ambition, literary distinction and sheer bulk." This is not exactly full-throated praise: "authoritative controversialist"; the comparison to Gibbons, as widely criticized as consulted; "ambition ... and sheer bulk.") MONTENSEM (talk) 05:49, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Webern's sociocultural milieu
There was a long footnote I'd added as follows, partly to facilitate additions and revisions to the article, and partly because almost all of these figures could be worked in variously in important and relevant (if not always well known) ways, if not always within this main article, then in articles on specific Webern works; though Aza24 "promise[s] this note is not needed," I would like to see it restored for those reasons. Certainly it could be better organized other than alphabetically. It might also be worked into the article on the Second Viennese School.

>> The broader circle of the Second Viennese School included, among others, Oskar Adler, Theodor W. Adorno, Hans Erich Apostel, Robert Gerhard, Norbert von Hannenheim, Heinrich Jalowetz, Hanns Jelinek, Sándor Jemnitz, Otto Jokl, Rudolf Kolisch of the Kolisch Quartet, Ernst Krenek, Rita Kurzmann-Leuchter, Erwin Leuchter, Olga Novakovic, Paul Pisk, Rudolf Ploderer, Josef Polnauer, Willi Reich, Josef Rufer, Peter Schacht, Julius Schloss, Nikos Skalkottas, Erwin Stein, Eduard Steuermann, Viktor Ullmann, Rudolf Weirich, Adolph Weiss, Egon Wellesz, Alexander Zemlinsky, and Winfried Zillig. Contemporaneous performers, friends, admirers, and supporters of the circle at various times included figures as diverse as Guido Adler, David Josef Bach, Ernst Bachrich, Imre [Emerich] Balabán and Béla Bartók of the New Hungarian Music Society, Julius Bittner, Artur Bodanzky, Richard Buhlig, Edward Clark, Henry Cowell, Herbert Eimert, Gottfried Feist, Marya Freund, Felix Galimir of the Galimir Quartet, George Gershwin, Richard Gerstl, Walter Gropius, Marie Gutheil-Schoder, Alois Hába, Emil Hertzka, Jascha Horenstein, Felicie Hüni-Mihacsek, Erich Itor Kahn, Wassily Kandinsky, Hans Keller, Erich Kleiber, Gustav Klimt, Wilhelm Klitsch, Erich Wolfgang Korngold, Louis Krasner, Józef Koffler, Oskar Kokoschka, René Leibowitz, Erich Leinsdorf, Adolf Loos, Darius Milhaud and Francis Poulenc of Les Six, Elisabeth Lutyens, Gustav and Alma Mahler, Frank Martin, Dimitri Mitropoulos, Soma Morgenstern, Johanna Müller-Hermann, Dika Newlin, Will Ogdon, Max Oppenheimer, Otakar Ostrčil, Maurice Ravel, Rudolph Reti, Arnold Rosé et al. of the Rosé Quartet, Hans Rosbaud, Nikolai Roslavets et al. of the Association for Contemporary Music, Hermann Scherchen, Egon Schiele, Alfredo Sangiorgi, Alfred Schlee, Franz Schreker, Erwin Schulhoff, Rudolf Serkin, Roger Sessions, Peter Stadlen, Erika Stiedry-Wagner, Igor Stravinsky, Georg Trakl, Edgard Varèse et al. of the International Composers Guild, Imre Waldbauer et al. of the Waldbauer-Kerpely Quartet, Franz Werfel, Arnold Zweig, and Jung-Wien writers Peter Altenberg, Hermann Bahr, Karl Kraus, and Arthur Schnitzler. MONTENSEM (talk) 01:34, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

 * I want to point out the level of detail in Fine and Mellow, which this footnote would facilitate here and in other Webern articles (and which a narrow view of the SVS as isolated or detached from this milieu would not). MONTENSEM (talk) 06:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

 * MONTENSEM, I believe you are fundamentally misunderstanding the purpose of the lead. A lead is chiefly a means of summarizing the article's content, it is not a place for introducing new content, which is what this note would be doing. This is a biographical article about Webern, not the SVS, and a listing of ~100 members of a composition school is highly off-topic in a tertiary overview article about a single member.
 * The lead in general, needs to adjust more to WP:Summary style; the current mentions of ~20+ composers who were influenced is hugely Undue especially when they fail to appear in the actual article text (where they should be in the first place). I highly recommend looking at the leads for Featured composer articles such as Debussy, Josquin and Mahler. You'll see they are considerably more concise, occasionally mentioning only a few figures who were influenced, even if they allude to a lot more.
 * If I sound harsh or accusatory, it is not intentional. I simply do not know how else to explain this without being direct. There are similar issue with the vast about of Notes in the article. I attempted to bring this up on your talk page a while back but did not receive a response.  Aza24  (talk)   10:59, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The lead is somewhat ambitious here, as I alluded to at the outset, and may be pared down with more work on the article itself (and others like it), as I have been carrying out. This is a process: "perfection is not required." You suggest the solution yourself: "especially when they fail to appear in the actual article text (where they should be in the first place)." Rather than come knocking at my door vaguely to make suggestions as to what I might do to improve it further at your behest as though I owe you a prompt response and then removing material (footnoted—temporarily but better than not at all—to establish the sociocultural milieu of the SVS almost as a heuristic for work on them generally and Webern in particular), you should carry out what you well know and what I already know should be done (in time I may do the same). I have tried to limit myself to focusing on this article in part hoping that others would help build on it and even relocate, disperse, and weave in material rather than simply to delete it, which is absurd and woeful. I do not always have time to dig into this, much less on command or to order; I have worked on it over years, and the time has helped, in part because scholarship takes time to catch up to more contemporary perspectives.
 * "Rather than remove imperfect content outright, fix problems if you can, tag or excise them if you can't. [...] Instead of removing content from an article or reverting a new contribution, consider: [...] *Merging or moving the content to a more relevant existing article, or splitting the content to an entirely new article [...] Otherwise, if you think the content could provide the seed of a new sub-article, or if you are just unsure about removing it from the English Wikipedia entirely, consider copying the information to the article's talk page for further discussion. If you think the content might find a better home elsewhere, consider moving the content to a talk page of any article you think might be more relevant, so that editors there can decide how it might be properly included in our encyclopedia."
 * Moreover, it is not "20+" but 20, and Webern is perhaps somewhat unique canonically in that his reputation rests so heavily on his vast posthumous influence rather than on repertoire as such. One could easily knock that down by half by summarizing the (mostly) postwar Europeans as "Darmstadt," except that it wouldn't work accurately and functions almost epithetically, or by footnoting them. They may all be worked into the article; many of them are. Otherwise, I don't think that the length of the lede is much more than than of Debussy's.
 * I may try more this year; this is a hobby and an interest. It is easier when there's insightful help, not formalistic undoing. MONTENSEM (talk) 12:20, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * In fact, part of what makes Webern so difficult to work on is that although his work was prewar, its reception and reputation was so recent that the maturity of the scholarship has lagged and in the US has especially been subject to ideological currents. MONTENSEM (talk) 12:25, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Much of the best, most reliable scholarship, especially on the mostly postwar Europeans, is not available in English or is only nascently so in dissertations. MONTENSEM (talk) 12:28, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I find your effort in this article quite admirable. I am more than happy to try and adjust things myself, but as a matter of courtesy I wanted to approach you first, since you are the author of so much of it. I can certainly understand the trouble of having to write about and find sources on relatively recent composers, having written Ned Rorem's article myself.
 * I largely align with your philosophy of moving content rather than deleting, but at the same time there must be a balance of conciseness and informativeness in an encyclopedic article such as this.  Aza24  (talk)   12:32, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The footnote is a sufficient balance IMO. MONTENSEM (talk) 12:37, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * At least, unless someone wants to use it to work to revise the article on the SVS. Part of the problem with these composers is that they were so intricately connected. MONTENSEM (talk) 12:39, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * In general, this is heuristic, framework-like information. It can be dispersed, it can enrich; it can act as a framework and as a heuristic for future direction of material. Deleting it is a mistake. The balance, if you find that it must be struck, should be achieved by dispersal of that material, not deletion. MONTENSEM (talk) 12:43, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Or more provisionally, simply by relocating it to the SVS article with some work. Actual dispersal would take tons of time and effort. MONTENSEM (talk) 12:45, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Likewise, the Wozzeck footnote could be relocated to the Wozzeck article and summarized here. In time I will get to these things. I would love for someone else to do them rather than simply to erase them. MONTENSEM (talk) 12:46, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I can only do so many things at once on this article. I am loathe to take on its satellites, as it were, although I realize that that is where the footnotes are headed. Berg especially needs work. Right now my current preoccupation is reworking the deleted material on the Symphony in the section on performance style. I believed I've assembled enough sources and embedded them to be able to begin to do the prior material better justice with significant revisions, just as I expanded and reworked much of the article in response to the criticism about the material on Taruskin amid his death. There are publications with expert opinion for reference on approaches to the Symphony almost as the Piano Variations have been taken on by N Cook and others, except that the Symphony is a much more useful example precisely because of the genre. MONTENSEM (talk) 13:00, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Montensem, it is terribly hard to follow you when you're writing so many responses. I'm not really sure what we're talking about at this point.  Aza24  (talk)   13:04, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The footnoted material should be relocated to the SVS article rather than being deleted. MONTENSEM (talk) 13:09, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I've just now done so, although I should note that many of the names remain uncited.  Aza24  (talk)   13:43, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I may approach it in time and hope that others work on it. I have done some of what you'd probably like. I will be busy for some time to come. We will see what I get done. It is easier to work when valuable material doesn't just disappear. MONTENSEM (talk) 02:06, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Text boxes
The long Krasner text box strikes me as UNDUE and possibly a copyright violation. It's interesting, but the substance should be adequately paraphrased or summarized in the article text. Also the box with the letter to Berg about his mother does not give the date, so it is impossible to tell whether that refers to everything he ever wrote afterward or just what he wrote for a brief period between her death and the time of the letter. SPECIFICO talk 00:18, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

 * Re: Webern's music, Johnson makes a case (drawing on the Moldenhauers and others) for something of both. Ideally two quotes might better convey this and be located in the first section of the biography, but I'm not sure how to do that or if that would be the best thing to do.
 * Re: Krasner, he is fairly central (especially here) to the question of why Webern lived the 1930s onward as he did. Most biographies and even surveys subsequent this interview draw on it for the biographical and cultural details. I pared it down extensively for now. It's probably one of the most concise statements on this topic. I'm not so sure there's a good way to paraphrase or summarize it or that it would be appropriate to do so. MONTENSEM (talk) 05:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * (I didn't mention it, but I did edit per your comment about the letter to Berg, too.) MONTENSEM (talk) 06:02, 25 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Re: Krasner text box, replaced with more concise, direct, and hopefully sufficiently old (1943) material (probably one of the first US journal articles on Webern) ref also in the Moldenhauers MONTENSEM (talk) 07:24, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

"Standard repertoire"
@MONTENSEM, do you have a source for this assertion: "...his complete works as well as establish them in the standard repertoire". I don't see the words "standard repertoire" anywhere in the body.

This feels like quite a bit of a stretch. Both Webern's place in music history and influence on composers is certainly secure, but is he really performed that much? I mostly see him ignored by ensembles and performers today. Obviously my observations are not evidence, but we will need a scholar to make the declaration of "standard repertoire", which I don't currently see.  Aza24  (talk)   22:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

 * Yeah, off the cuff, I feel you. It's difficult to put a point on it. Maybe give me some time. The assertion could be sourced as-is. Of course, then there are others against it, which tend to be more tendentious in making overly fine distinctions imho or frankly dated precisely by their noting of conductors/performers programming then new Webern, now old, well recorded, and performed in the US less frequently but in Europe often enough (see https://bachtrack.com/composer/webern). I think this could be finessed with better phrasing, qualification (e.g., "the expanded repertoire," "the repertoire of 20th c music"), or by keeping the phrasing but adding a footnote with some emphasis on "established" and maybe some fleshing out of the performance side of Webern's reception, which I've been meaning to get to after chipping away at ce/revisions. Some eg Ian Pace have speculated that Webern's place is not as secure as, say, Schoenberg's (I would argue Berg's), and I think I approached this but was even more cautious at one point in some prior formulation. But I thought that didn't quite get it right in light of the profusion of performances in the latter half of the 20th c, including even festivals in Webern's name, and I think you have to call a spade a spade and say that his works have been "established" in the repertoire by performers/conductors even if the perception remains that they aren't popular with audiences. Certainly Opp. 1, 6, 10, and 21, are performed regularly enough. A large part of it is simply that Webern didn't write for orchestra that often, but the "standard repertoire" isn't limited to orchestras, and certainly he is regularly programmed. Some eg Taruskin distinguish between a "canon" and a "standard repertoire," but I personally think this is more Taruskin than fact (a repertoire means performances, regardless of the ensemble) and maybe Americanized to boot (eg the preponderance of European relative to US performances at Schoenberg150.at). MONTENSEM (talk) 23:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Applied a possible solution, lmk thoughts MONTENSEM (talk) 00:38, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I think your change is an improvement, but perhaps still not ideal. I'd agree with Pace re Schoenberg, and agree with you re Berg, but perhaps this distinction isn't so pertinent for Webern's lead. Maybe something along the lines of "establish them as respected and sophisticated works" would be a safer bet, or perhaps "solidify his canonic status in 20th-century classical musical" which seems to balance influence and performance better? I think one of the current issues remains that the text is linking his "complete works" to repertoire, where the reality is its just a handful (as you've mentioned). So either its toned down, or shifted to not emphasize the performance reception (which is perhaps not necessary since mentioning the recordings earlier already touches that) –  Aza24  (talk)   03:36, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I think your change with "not widely embraced" works. Although it rather made me chuckle :)  Aza24  (talk)   01:58, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * There is too much Original Research going on here. Does the NPOV WEIGHT of sources frame this in terms of a canonical standard repertoire? Like much of this article, it feels like a tenuous collation select references to publish an essay in the style of a graduate term paper rather than an encylopedic summary of the central narratives of reliable sources. The process has been the reverse of what we try to do - survey the sources, write article text, summarize the most essential points in the lead. SPECIFICO talk 15:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Schoenberg, Berg, and Webern (the SVS) figure in maybe every basic survey of Western art music usually alongside Stravinsky and then Bartok and Debussy/Ravel. They are still the subject of many polemics, many of which involved questions about what repertoire initially and later canon should be (what the survey should cover), complicated partly by their own sense of history. Webern in particular can be difficult to write about because he has a fairly unique (and recently revised) reception history initially more in relation to mid-century composers. The relatively recent work of Johnson, Bailey Puffett, and Shreffler follow directly from the vast work and estate of the Moldenhauers being transferred to Sacher and made accessible in the 80s, as DH Miller has noted. The bulk of the article thus rests on these sources. MONTENSEM (talk) 16:10, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * That's an example of what I tried to identify as wp:OR extrapolation. Do musicians adhere to a canonical repertiore, or is it just an academic projection. There is no doubt that recordings and performances in post-WW2 bolstered public and musicians' awareness and interest, but the recent and current text misrepresent that and reply it, IMO. SPECIFICO talk 17:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't understand what you're saying. Are you able to rephrase? If you would like to suggest an edit, please do. Conductors and performers played a role in Webern's reception, not just composers, and not just on recordings. MONTENSEM (talk) 17:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, please be specific about what exactly in my response constituted original research. MONTENSEM (talk) 17:41, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I am disputing that there is a canonical repertoire, or at least not one that extends past the topmost frequently performed works of, roughly 1700-1910. What musicians choose to perform is, ex post, what was performed. That changes day to day and "canon" is a different concept that would be misleading to many readers of this article. SPECIFICO talk 17:52, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Terms like "canonic repertoire" (less frequently) and "standard repertoire" (more frequently) are both used in literature like studies and surveys (not only historical or of performance styles, but also for practicing musicians), their senses sometimes explicitly distinguished or even merged. For example, the former term appears in The Cambridge History of Musical Performance several times, and the latter more so but often in more specified ways (as "standard repeating repertoire"). I think most readers are capable of engaging with these ideas. I was simply trying to be simple and concise while working toward including conductors, performers, and singers in the reception section as I looked ahead to making what is presently there more simple and concise. Do you have a better suggestion? MONTENSEM (talk) 18:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * It is irrelevant whether this or that term is used in unspecified studies and surveys. This is the issue that I have raised several times on this page. Much of your interesting work on this page is what as Wikipedia editors we call Oringal Research. It is not our role to weave together plausible narratives that are generally consistent with a select variety of publications. You need to present Reliable Sources that have explicitly stated "Webern....Canon". You are working backward. You have formed a personal view, which - regardless of whether it's valid - is not found in the sources. Parts of it might plausibly be consistent with various sources, but what's needed is RS refernces that directly show that your text is the mainstream view of the matter. You appear to be working backward, from your personal synthesis to finding sources that appear to be consistent with your conclusions. SPECIFICO talk 22:01, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Initially in editing/revising this section I wanted to link "repertoire", so I went with standard repertoire. That was criticized, so I suggested "canonic", which I would've thought something of a commonplace, given the SVS's persistence in surveys, anthologies, records, and yes, even on programs. I suppose the matter is still controversial. I have asked for suggestions, because the real issue here is not about whose text this is (I am less committed to any one view than you seem to think) and is not merely about citing it, but rather the precise wording or characterization of a general, common idea on which we should have consensus. Rather than going back and forth over citing it, I propose "modernist" or "canonic modernist" instead of "though not widely embraced ... canonic", since you indicated you would exclude post-1910 modernism from the canon at large.
 * As to other concerns, I have asked you repeatedly to please be more specific. MONTENSEM (talk) 23:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Split "Reception" etc
Not sure if I'll get to carry this out (emphatically), but given Webern's historical stature and (contentious?) reception history, I propose to split the present article there (perhaps title the new article "Reception of Anton Webern's work")

Mostly to facilitate editing of the other parts of the main article, esp the music (just lost an edit re: the 1905 qt via d/t article length), which eventually could expand into separate articles as well (besides those at present) MONTENSEM (talk) 05:13, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

 * Not a bad idea; there is precedent with Reception of Johann Sebastian Bach's music.
 * Two things, well the article is actually that long overall; its at 7,000 words, which is nicely below the recommended max of 10,000. That being said, the reception section itself is nearly 2500 words, which may seem like a lot when compared to other articles. For instance, the reception section I wrote for Josquin is 1147 words. So it seems a split is justifiable (and notability-wise, it is certainly is), but certainly not necessary.
 * In any case, I must applaud you for a very interesting and thorough treatment of the topic; nice to see so many contemporary figures threaded in seamlessly.  Aza24  (talk)   05:39, 3 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Anton Webern