text:
Memorial Tournament

The Memorial Tournament (branded as the Memorial Tournament presented by Workday for sponsorship reasons) is a PGA Tour golf tournament founded in 1976 by Jack Nicklaus. It is played on a Nicklaus-designed course at Muirfield Village Golf Club in Dublin, Ohio, a suburb north of Columbus. The golf course passes through a large neighborhood called Muirfield Village, which includes a 1999 bronze sculpture of Nicklaus mentoring a young golfer located in the wide median of Muirfield Drive.

History
The greater Columbus area is where Jack Nicklaus spent most of his early life. The golf course he designed at Muirfield Village, north of Columbus, was opened in May 1974, and two years later it hosted the first Memorial Tournament. The par-72 course was 7072 yd, a considerable length for the mid-1970s.

At the Masters Tournament in 1966, Nicklaus had spoken of his desire to create a tournament that, like The Masters, had a global interest, and was inspired by the history and traditions of the game of golf. He also wanted the tournament to give back in the form of charitable contributions to organizations benefiting needy adults and children throughout Columbus and Ohio. The primary charitable beneficiary of the tournament is Nationwide Children's Hospital.

One of the features of the tournament is a yearly induction ceremony honoring past golfers. A plaque for each honoree is installed near the clubhouse at Muirfield; Nicklaus himself was the 2000 honoree.

Invitational status
The Memorial Tournament is one of only five tournaments given "invitational" status by the PGA Tour, and consequently it has a reduced field of only 73 players in 2024 (as opposed to most full-field open tournaments with a field of 156 players). The other four tournaments with invitational status are the Arnold Palmer Invitational, the RBC Heritage, Charles Schwab Challenge, and the Genesis Invitational. Invitational tournaments have smaller fields (between 69 and 132 players), and have more freedom than full-field open tournaments in determining which players are eligible to participate in their event, as invitational tournaments are not required to fill their fields using the PGA Tour Priority Ranking System. Furthermore, unlike full-field open tournaments, invitational tournaments do not offer open qualifying (aka Monday qualifying).

In June 2014, the PGA Tour approved a resolution to grant the winner a three-year exemption, one more than other regular Tour events and on par with winners of the World Golf Championships, The Tour Championship and the Arnold Palmer Invitational.

Field
The field consists of 120 players invited using the following criteria:
 * 1) Memorial winners in the last five years or prior to 1997
 * 2) The Players Championship and major championship winners in the last five years
 * 3) The Tour Championship, World Golf Championships, and Arnold Palmer Invitational winners in the past three years
 * 4) Tournament winners in the past year
 * 5) Playing member of last named U.S. Ryder Cup team, European Ryder Cup team, U.S. Presidents Cup team, and International Presidents Cup team (non-PGA Tour members qualifying in this category count against unrestricted sponsor exemptions)
 * 6) Prior year U.S. Amateur winner
 * 7) Prior year British Amateur winner
 * 8) Up to four players selected by the tournament from among the money leaders from the other five Federation tours
 * 9) 14 sponsors exemptions – 2 from among graduates of the Korn Ferry Tour Finals, 6 members not otherwise exempt, and 6 unrestricted
 * 10) Top 50 Official World Golf Ranking as of the Friday before the tournament
 * 11) Top 70 from prior year's FedEx Cup points list
 * 12) PGA Tour members whose non-member FedEx Cup points the previous season (excluding WGCs) would have placed them in the top 70
 * 13) Top 70 from current year's FedEx Cup points list as of the Friday before the tournament
 * 14) Prior year college player of the year (Jack Nicklaus Award)
 * 15) Remaining positions filled alternating from current year's and prior year's FedEx Cup point lists

Tournament highlights

 * 1976: Roger Maltbie won the inaugural Memorial Tournament, defeating Hale Irwin in a four-hole aggregate playoff. On the third extra hole Maltbie's errant approach shot appeared headed for the gallery when it hit a post, causing the ball to bounce onto the green, where both parred to remain tied; Maltbie then birdied the 18th hole to win the playoff.
 * 1977: Poor weather resulted in a Monday finish for the tournament; host Jack Nicklaus won by two shots over Hubert Green.
 * 1980: David Graham birdied the 72nd hole to edge Tom Watson by one shot; Watson was bidding to become the first Memorial champion to defend his title.
 * 1984: Jack Nicklaus defeated Andy Bean in a sudden-death playoff to become the first two-time Memorial winner.
 * 1991: Kenny Perry won for the first time on the PGA Tour, defeating Irwin on the first hole of a sudden-death playoff.
 * 1993: Paul Azinger birdied the 72nd hole by holing out from a bunker to finish one shot ahead of Corey Pavin.
 * 1994: Tom Lehman shot a tournament record 268 (-20) for 72 holes on his way to a five-shot victory over Greg Norman.
 * 2000: Tiger Woods became the first Memorial winner to successfully defend his title, finishing five shots clear of Ernie Els.
 * 2001: Woods won for a third consecutive year, seven shots ahead of runners-up Paul Azinger and Sergio García.
 * 2005: Bart Bryant saved par from a hazard on the 72nd hole to win by one shot over Fred Couples.
 * 2007: K. J. Choi shot a final round 65 to win by one shot over Ryan Moore.
 * 2012: Woods birdied three of the last four holes, including a chip in on the 16th hole, to turn a two-shot deficit into a two-shot victory. The win was Woods' 73rd PGA Tour victory, which tied Jack Nicklaus for second most PGA Tour wins.
 * 2013: Defending champion Woods posted a third round back nine score of 44, the worst in his career. He finished 20 shots behind winner Matt Kuchar.
 * 2014: Hideki Matsuyama won in a playoff against Kevin Na; he was the first Japanese PGA Tour winner since 2008.
 * 2015: In the third round, Tiger Woods shot an 85, the worst round of his professional career. Three-time winner Kenny Perry played his last PGA Tour event.
 * 2016: William McGirt won for the first time on the PGA Tour after 165 starts.
 * 2020: Jon Rahm's win elevated him to the world number one ranking for the first time in his career.
 * 2021: Defending champion Jon Rahm held a six-stroke lead after 54 holes but was forced to withdraw after testing positive for COVID-19.
 * 2024: Scottie Scheffler wins the Memorial, becoming the first golfer with five PGA Tour wins before the U.S. Open in a season since Tom Watson in 1980.

Course layout
Muirfield Village Golf Club in 2016 Source:

Winners and honorees
Note: Green highlight indicates scoring records.

Source:

Multiple winners
Seven men have won the Memorial Tournament more than once through 2024:

 * 5 wins: Tiger Woods (1999, 2000, 2001, 2009, 2012)
 * 3 wins: Kenny Perry (1991, 2003, 2008)
 * 2 wins: Jack Nicklaus (1977, 1984), Hale Irwin (1983, 1985), Greg Norman (1990, 1995), Tom Watson: (1979, 1996), Patrick Cantlay (2019, 2021)

title: Memorial Tournament


text:
Talk:Arrifes

As far as i know Arrifes is in s.miguel, ponta delgada

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Arrifes. 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/20110521174146/http://www.igeo.pt/produtos/cadastro/caop/download/Areas_Freg_Mun_Dist_CAOP2010.zip to http://www.igeo.pt/produtos/cadastro/caop/download/Areas_Freg_Mun_Dist_CAOP2010.zip
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140906094624/http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/nuts_nomenclature/documents/PT-LAU.xls to http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/nuts_nomenclature/documents/PT-LAU.xls

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:24, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Churches
Some published descriptions pay little attention to the interior structures. We have to look for photos of the interior to discover aisles, and we have to examine satellite photos for the withs of the nave in relation to the chancel/main chapel/capela mor.--Ulamm (talk) 23:09, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Arrifes


text:
Romeo Crennel

Romeo Crennel (born June 18, 1947) is a former American football coach, who was the senior advisor for football performance for the Houston Texans of the National Football League (NFL). A former long-time coaching assistant to Bill Parcells, Crennel served as the head coach of the Cleveland Browns from 2005 to 2008 and the Kansas City Chiefs in 2012, as well an assistant coach for six NFL teams and four collegiate teams. He has over 50 years of coaching experience, which has included consistently being employed as a coach for all but two seasons since 1970, only taking the 2009 and 2013 seasons off following both of his tenures as a permanent head coach. He has five Super Bowl wins as assistant coach, two with the New York Giants and three with the New England Patriots.

From 2014 to 2021, Crennel has served as an assistant coach for the Houston Texans under head coaches Bill O'Brien and David Culley, and served as the team's interim head coach during the 2020 season after O'Brien was fired following an 0–4 start. At 73 years and 115 days of age at the time of his promotion to interim coach, Crennel is the oldest person in NFL history to serve as a head coach, a record previously held by former Chicago Bears head coach/owner and NFL co-founder George Halas, who was 72 years and 318 days old when he coached the final game of his career on December 17, 1967. Crennel was the first Black head coach in Texans franchise history; he was also the first Black noninterim head coach in Browns history.

Playing career
Crennel played baseball and football at Fort Knox High School in Kentucky and Amherst County (Va.) High School before committing to college football at Western Kentucky. Although he was a four-year starter as a defensive lineman, he became an offensive lineman during his senior season at the request of the coaching staff. He was named the team's most valuable player after the switch, but was not drafted and never played in the NFL. While the move may have hindered his draft chances, it increased his knowledge of the game, by experiencing the trenches from both the offensive and defensive side of the football. Crennel earned a bachelor's degree in physical education from Western Kentucky University, and then a master's degree while serving as a graduate assistant for the school in 1970.

Western Kentucky University
After one season as a graduate assistant with Western Kentucky (1970), Crennel served as the defensive line coach for three seasons (1971–1974).

Texas Tech
After four seasons at WKU, he became an assistant for defensive coordinator Bill Parcells and head coach Steve Sloan at Texas Tech for three seasons (1975–1977).

Ole Miss and Georgia Tech
Crennel finished his collegiate career with two seasons as the defensive ends coach for Ole Miss (1978–1979) and one season as the defensive line coach for Georgia Tech (1980).

New York Giants
After spending two seasons as an assistant with the New York Giants, Crennel became the special-teams coach for seven seasons (1983–1989) and the defensive line coach for three seasons (1990–1992). In 1983, he was reunited with Parcells as the head coach.

When Parcells stepped down as Giants head coach after Super Bowl XXV, Crennel stayed with the team under the two-year tenure of Ray Handley.

New England Patriots and New York Jets
Crennel left the Giants after the 1992 season and worked as the defensive line coach for the New England Patriots for four seasons (1993–1996) and for the New York Jets for three seasons (1997–1999) during the time that Parcells was the head coach in each franchise.

Cleveland Browns
Crennel was hired as the Cleveland Browns' defensive coordinator for the 2000 season.

Return to New England
After one season in Cleveland, he filled the same role with the Patriots for four seasons (2001–2004) under long-time friend Bill Belichick. Crennel and Belichick both served as assistant coaches for the New York Giants, Patriots, and New York Jets, all coached by Bill Parcells from 1981 to 1990 and 1996–1999. Crennel helped lead New England to three Super Bowl victories (XXXVI, XXXVIII, and XXXIX).

Before beginning the 2003 playoffs with the Patriots, Crennel interviewed for head-coaching positions with six teams in under 36 hours. He was not offered any jobs and was passed up by the New York Giants, Buffalo Bills, Arizona Cardinals, Chicago Bears, and Atlanta Falcons.

Return to Cleveland
Crennel was hired to replace Butch Davis as head coach of the Cleveland Browns. He went 24–40 in his tenure with the Browns. His team went 6–10 and 4–12 in his first two seasons with the Browns, finishing last or tied for last in the AFC North. The Browns finished the 2007 season with a 10–6 record, just falling short of making the playoffs–only the franchise's second winning season since its revival in 1999. Crennel's success in the 2007 season earned him a two-year contract extension in January 2008.

On December 29, 2008, following a disappointing 4–12 season, Crennel was fired by the Browns.

Kansas City Chiefs
On January 13, 2010, Crennel was hired as the Kansas City Chiefs defensive coordinator, reuniting him with offensive coordinator Charlie Weis and general manager Scott Pioli from their days with the Patriots.

Following Todd Haley's termination as the team's head coach after 13 games in the 2011 season, Crennel was named the team's interim head coach for the remaining three games of the season. Crennel won his first game as the interim head coach of the Chiefs on December 18, 2011, against the then undefeated Green Bay Packers 19–14, which was significant as Crennel snapped the Packers' 19-game winning streak and ended their hopes for a perfect season. Crennel finished his stint as interim head coach with a 2–1 record. However, in his tenure as a head coach for the Chiefs, Crennel would only win 2 more games finishing with a 4–15 overall record.

On January 9, 2012, Crennel was named the 11th full-time head coach in Chiefs history. Three days later, Crennel announced his intent to remain as defensive coordinator during his tenure as head coach.

On November 5, 2012, Crennel announced he would be stepping down as defensive coordinator and named linebackers coach Gary Gibbs to the vacant position, after a 1–7 start to the season.

On December 1, 2012, Crennel attempted to prevent the suicide of player Jovan Belcher by talking to him and witnessed his death by a self-inflicted gunshot wound to the head. The following day, Crennel coached his team to a 27–21 victory over the Carolina Panthers, the Chiefs' first home victory since defeating the Packers the previous season, and the only other home win during his tenure.

On December 31, 2012, Crennel was fired as head coach.

Houston Texans
On January 20, 2014, Crennel signed a 3-year deal with the NFL's Houston Texans becoming their new defensive coordinator under their new head coach Bill O'Brien. He was one of the highest paid defensive coordinators in the NFL for three seasons (2014–2016), earning roughly $1.8 million per year. Crennel finished the 2016 year with the NFL's #1 ranked defense and in January 2017 was promoted to assistant head coach. On January 20, 2018, he returned to his role as defensive coordinator for the Texans after Mike Vrabel left to become head coach of the Tennessee Titans.

Crennel was named the interim head coach for the Texans on October 5, 2020, after O'Brien was fired following an 0–4 start to begin the 2020 NFL season. In his first game as interim head coach, at the age of 73 years and 115 days, he became the oldest head coach in National Football League history, a game the Texans won 30–14 over the Jacksonville Jaguars. Crennel also became the Texans' first African American head coach in franchise history, albeit on an interim basis. Crennel was retained under new Texans head coach David Culley along with a new coaching staff in 2021, being given the title of senior advisor for football performance on March 10, 2021. Crennel's last game as an NFL coach was on January 9, 2022, a 25–28 loss to the Tennessee Titans, as he announced his retirement from coaching on June 6, 2022.

Head coaching record
* – Interim head coach

Personal life
Crennel had hip replacement surgery in early 2009 and decided to sit out the 2009 football season while recuperating.

title: Romeo Crennel


text: Talk:Princess Alice, Duchess of Gloucester


text: User talk:69.240.191.129

title: User talk:69.240.191.129


text:
Single-sex education

Single-sex education, also known as single-gender education and gender-isolated education, is the practice of conducting education with male and female students attending separate classes, perhaps in separate buildings or schools. The practice of single-sex schooling was common before the 20th century, particularly in secondary and higher education.

Single-sex education is practiced in many parts of the world based on tradition and religion; Single-sex education is most popular in English-speaking countries (regions) such as Singapore, Malaysia, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Hong Kong, South Africa and Australia; also in Chile, Israel, South Korea and in many Muslim majority countries. In the Western world, single-sex education is primarily associated with the private sector, with the public (state) sector being overwhelmingly mixed sex; while in the Muslim world public schools and private schools are sex-segregated.

Motivations for single-sex education range from religious ideas of sex segregation to beliefs that the sexes learn and behave differently. As such, they thrive in a single-sex environment. In the 19th century, in Western countries, single-sex girls' finishing schools, and women's colleges offered women a chance of education at a time when they were denied access to mainstream educational institutions. The former was especially common in Switzerland, the latter in the U.S. and the U.K., pioneers in women's education.

History
In Western Europe before the 19th century, the most common way for girls to access education was at home, through private tutoring, and not at school, due to the strong resistance to women's involvement in schools. This attitude began to change in the 17th and 18th centuries, when girls' schools were established in both Catholic Europe, where they were managed by nuns, as well as in Protestant Europe, where they were managed by governesses, philanthropists, and private entrepreneurs. The development was similar in the U.S., where early feminists also successfully established women's educational institutions. These were different from and considered inferior to men's institutions. However, they created some of the first opportunities to formalized higher education for women in the Western world. The Seven Sisters colleges offered unprecedented emancipation for women. The pioneer Salem College of Winston-Salem, North Carolina, was founded in 1772, originally as a primary school, later becoming an academy (high school) and finally a college. The New England Female Medical College (1848) and the Woman's Medical College of Pennsylvania (1850) were the first medical institutions in the world established to train women in medicine and offer them the M.D. degree.

During the 19th century, ideas about education started to change: modern ideas that defined education as a right, rather than as a privilege available only to a small elite, started to gain support in North America and Europe. Mass elementary education was introduced, and more and more coeducational schools opened. Together with mass education, coeducation became standard in many places. Increased secularization in the 20th century also contributed to the acceptance of mixed sex education. In 1917 coeducation was mandated in the Soviet Union. According to Cornelius Riordan, "By the end of the nineteenth century, coeducation was all but universal in American elementary and secondary public schools (see Kolesnick, 1969; Bureau of Education, 1883; Butler, 1910; Riordan, 1990). Furthermore, by the end of the 20th century, this was largely true across the world. In the U.K., Australia, and Ireland, the tradition of single-sex education remained quite strong until the 1960s. The 1960s and 1970s were a period of intense social changes. Many anti-discrimination laws were passed during that era, such as the 1972 Title IX. Wiseman (2008) shows that by 2003, only a few countries globally have greater than one or two percent single-sex schools. But there are exceptions where the percent of single-sex schools exceeds 10 percent: Belgium, Chile, Singapore, the United Kingdom, Hong Kong, Israel, New Zealand, Australia, South Korea, and most Muslim nations. Recently, however, there has been a resurgence of interest in single-sex schools in modern societies across the globe, both in the public and private sector (Riordan, 2002)."

Effects
The topic of single-sex education is controversial. Advocates argue that it aids student outcomes such as test scores, graduation rates, and solutions to behavioral difficulties. Opponents, however, argue that evidence for such effects is inflated or non-existent and instead argue that such segregation can increase sexism and impairs the development of interpersonal skills.

Advocates of single-sex education believe that there are persistent sex differences in how males and females learn and behave in educational settings and that such differences merit educating them separately. One version of this argument holds that male-female brain differences favor implementing sex-specific teaching methods, but such claims have not held up to rigorous scrutiny. In addition, supporters of single-sex education argue that by segregating sexes, students do not become distracted by another sex's actions in the classrooms. Supporters of single-sex education also argue that the culture of coeducational settings causes some students to focus more on socialization, rather than prioritizing academics. Single-sex education supporters blame this focus on socialization for causing problems in student participation, attendance levels, and disciplinary problems.

US 2005 systematic review and 2008 study
A systematic review published in 2005 covering 2221 studies was commissioned by the United States Department of Education entitled Single-sex versus coeducational schooling: A systematic review. The review, which had statistical controls for socio-economic status of the students and resources of the schools, etc., found that in the study on the effects of single-sex schooling:

 * "the results are equivocal. There is some support for the premise that single-sex schooling can be helpful, especially for certain outcomes related to academic achievement and more positive academic aspirations. For many outcomes, there is no evidence of either benefit or harm. There is limited support for the view that single-sex schooling may be harmful or that coeducational schooling is more beneficial for the student."

 * "In terms of outcomes that may be of most interest to the primary stakeholders (students and their parents), such as academic achievement, self-concept, and long-term indicators of success, there is a degree of support for [single-sex] schooling."

In general, most studies reported positive effects for single-sex schools on all-subject achievement tests, and the preponderance of studies in areas such as academic accomplishment (both concurrent and long term) and adaptation or socioemotional development (both concurrent and long term) yields results lending support to single-sex schooling.

The quantitative data itself "finds positive results are three to four times more likely to be found for single-sex schools than for coeducational schools in the same study for both academic achievement and socio-emotional development," said Cornelius Riordan, one of the directors of the research.

In 2008, the U.S. government sponsored another study, Early Implementation of Public Single-Sex Schools: Perceptions and Characteristics, which listed the benefits of single-sex schools: (1) Decreases distractions in learning, (2) Reduces student behavior problems, (3) Provides more leadership opportunities, (4) Promotes a sense of community among students and staff, (5) Improves student self-esteem, (6) Addresses unique learning styles and interests of males or females, (7) Decreases sex bias in teacher-student interactions, (8) Improves student achievement, (9) Decreases the academic problems of low achieving students, (10) Reduces sexual harassment among students, (11) Provides more positive student role models, (12) Allows for more opportunities to provide social and moral guidance, (13) Provides choice in public education.

Later studies
Australian researchers reported in 2009 that high school students' interpersonal relationships were positively associated with both academic and nonacademic achievement, although the interaction between boys and girls in a majority of cases resulted in less homework done, less enjoyment of school, and lower reading and math scores.

A UCLA report commissioned by the National Coalition of Girls' Schools used data from an extensive national survey of U.S. college freshmen and found stronger academic orientations among women who had attended all-girls, compared to coeducational high schools, but the effects were minor, and the authors concluded "that the marginal benefits do not justify the potential threats to gender equity brought on by academic sex segregation".

In September 2011, the journal Science published a study deeply critical of gender-segregated schooling, arguing that the movement towards single-sex education "is deeply misguided, and often justified by weak, cherry-picked, or misconstrued scientific claims rather than by valid scientific evidence". The study goes on to conclude that "there is no well-designed research showing that single-sex (SS) education improves students' academic performance, but there is evidence that sex segregation increases gender stereotyping and legitimizes institutional sexism."

Leonard Sax, the President of National Association for Single-sex Public Education or NASSPE, countered the Science article by saying that "ALL the studies cited in the SCIENCE article regarding 'negative impacts' were in fact studies involving a small number of PRE-SCHOOL students attending a COED pre-kindergarten" (capitalized letters in the original). He further said that "these authors provide no evidence for their substantive claim that 'gender divisions are made even more salient in SS settings.' In fact, this conjecture has been tested, and proven false, in multiple studies." Sax cited a study which said that "girls in the all-girls classroom were less aware of 'being a girl' and less aware of gender stereotypes regarding science, compared to girls who were randomly assigned to the coed classroom."

In January 2012, a study of the University of Pennsylvania, involving a randomized experiment, considered the experiment with the highest level of scientific evidence. The data comes from schools in South Korea, where a law was passed randomly assigning students to schools in their district. The study by Park, Berhman, and Choi titled Causal Effects of Single-Sex Schools on College Entrance Exams and College Attendance: Random Assignment in Seoul High Schools concluded that "Attending all-boys schools or all-girls schools rather than attending coeducational schools is significantly associated with higher average scores."

In 2014, E. Pahlke, J. S. Hyde, and C. M. Allison published a meta-analysis in Psychological Bulletin comparing achievement and attitudes in single-sex versus coeducational schools that included 1.6 million students in grades K-12. The study concluded that "there is little evidence of an advantage of SS schooling for girls or boys for any of the outcomes." In a 2015 review of this study, however Cornelius Riordan observed that the authors "employ a 0.2 effect-size threshold in drawing these conclusions about there being no advantage to single-sex schooling. Despite the above conclusion, the research found that, in a separate analysis of just the best studies (well controlled) conducted in America, the effect size in mathematics was 0.14 for both boys and girls. The verbal performance was 0.22 for girls and 0.13 for boys.... Educational research has shown that a standard effect size of 0.10 on gains from sophomore to senior year of high school is equivalent to one full year of learning by the average public school student in the United States." Thus, he says, that "Applying this standard, a difference of 0.10 (or greater) between students in single-sex and in coeducational schools would be substantially important." The analysis of the 21 other countries yielded much smaller effects, such as a 0.10 effect on mathematics for girls and a 0.06 effect for boys and science (0.06 for girls and 0.04 for boys). Most of the international effects, then, would fall within Riordan's stricter criterion for statistical significance.

In 2017, Christian Dustmann, Hyejin Ku, Do Won Kwak explained that "While teenage boys may be more likely to be distracted than girls by a mixed-gender school environment (Coleman 1961, Hill 2015), girls may suffer more because of, for instance, an increase in disruptive behaviour (as discussed by Figlio 2007), or a diversion of the teacher's attention to weaker students (as suggested by Lavy et al. 2012).

Australia
In Australia, most single sex schools are fee paying independent or Catholic schools. There are a small number of single sex government schools, while within the independent sector the proportion of pupils attending single sex schools has dropped from 31% in 1985 to 24% in 1995. Nevertheless, single sex education in Australia is much more popular than in the US. In 2001, after six years of study of more than 270,000 students in 53 academic subjects, the Australian Council for Educational Research showed that boys and girls from single-sex classrooms "scored on average 15 to 22 percentile ranks higher than did boys and girls in coeducational settings. The report also documented that boys and girls in single-sex schools were more likely to be better behaved and to find learning more enjoyable and the curriculum more relevant."

Bangladesh
In Bangladesh, a large number of government and non-government schools and colleges are single-sex institutions except for the universities. Notable all Cantonment schools (non-residential schools run directly by Military), Zilla Schools (run directly by Government [First starting in early colonial ages]), Cadet colleges (residential schools run directly by Military) are single-sex schools.

Conservative parents in Bangladesh tend to send their children to single-sex educational institutions.

Canada
Many single-sex schools exist in Canada, particularly Roman Catholic separate schools. Examples in the City of Toronto include: Notre Dame High School, Neil McNeil High School, Chaminade College School, St. Joseph's Morrow Park Catholic Secondary School, Madonna Catholic Secondary School, Brebeuf College School, St. Joseph's College School, Michael Power High School, St. Joseph's High School, Islington, St. Andrew's College, St. Michael's College School, Upper Canada College, Havergal College and Royal St. George's College.

France
As was customary in Catholic countries in Europe, girls were educated in convent schools for girls operated by nuns, such as Abbaye de Penthemont in Paris. A rare exception was Maison royale de Saint-Louis, founded by Madame de Maintenon in 1684. After the French Revolution, it became more common with girls' schools, often operated by governesses, a famous pioneer school being Jeanne-Louise-Henriette Campan.

France formally included girls in the state elementary education school system in 1836, but girls and boys were only integrated into the lower levels, while the secondary education of girls was entrusted to girls' schools managed by either nuns or governesses, both of whom lacked the necessary qualifications. When women were formally allowed to attend university in France in 1861, it was hard for them to qualify because of the bad quality of the secondary education. When the problem of unqualified female teachers in the girls' secondary education was addressed by a state teacher's seminary for women and state secondary education for girls, both of these were still gender-segregated. The French school system was not desegregated on the middle secondary education level until the 20th century.

Germany
Germany was a pioneer in the education of girls. Beginning in the 17th-century, schools for girls opened in both Roman Catholic Southern Germany and Protestant Northern Germany. In Catholic Germany, the Catholic Ursuline and Elisabeth sisters established first elementary education schools for poor children and orphans and eventually (before 1750), also a type of secondary education girls' schools for wealthy girls called "daughters institutes", which were essentially finishing schools. In Protestant Germany, the great Pietist school innovator August Hermann Francke of Halle founded Gynaeceum, the first girls school or 'Mädchenschule' in 1698. The Gynaeceum was followed by many Pietist girls' schools in Germany, notably the Magdalenenstift in Altenburg and Johann Julius Hecker's Royal Elisabeth School in Berlin in 1747.

In the 18th-century, it became common with so-called Töchterschule  ('daughter school') in German cities, supported by the merchant class who wished for their daughters to be given elementary schooling, as well as girls schools known as Mädchenpensionat, essentially finishing schools for upper-class daughters. In the early 19th-century, secondary education girls schools known as höhere Töchterschule ('Higher Daughter school') became common: these schools were given government support and became public in many German cities in the second half of the 19th-century and their education adjusted to become equivalents of the secondary education boys' schools. In 1908, women were allowed to attend university, and in the 20th-century, the public secondary education system was integrated.

India
Figures indicate that, as of 2002, 53% of girls in the Indian population actually attend schools. Some conservative parents may decide to withdraw their daughters at puberty onset because of fear of distraction. It is also believed that by having single-sex classrooms, the students will be able to focus more on their education, as they will not have the distraction of the other sex. The study argues that coeducation schools provide opportunities for students to interact with their peers, which de-stresses students and creates a friendlier, more relaxed environment.

Ireland
Ireland has significantly more pupils studying in single-sex schools than other western countries: more than one-third of second-level schools are single-sex. Single-sex education is less common at the primary level than at the secondary level: 17% of primary school children attend single-sex schools.

Middle East
In the Middle East, public schools in several countries are all gender-segregated.

Iran
In some countries, there are single-sex private schools as well. In Iran, single-sex public and private schools have been in place since the Islamic Revolution. Universities are mostly coeducational in Iran. University of Kosar (Bojnourd, Iran) and Narjes Rafsanjan University (Rafsanjan, Iran) are two examples of female-only universities.

Israel
In Israel, secular public schools are coeducational. Many, but not all, Orthodox public schools are single-sex; the private ultra-Orthodox schools are almost always gender-segregated, usually starting in elementary school.

Lebanon
In Lebanon, most schools are co-educational schools.

Saudi Arabia
All schools are sex segregated, there are only boy or girl schools. The first private formal school for girls, the Madrasat AlBanat AlAhliah, was established in 1941.

Syria
In Syria, private schools are coeducational, while public schools are mostly, but not exclusively, segregated. Universities are all coeducational.

United Arab Emirates
Private schools are coeducational in all Emirates but Sharjah, where segregated sex schooling is mandated for those grade 4 and above.

New Zealand
In New Zealand, almost all primary schools are coeducational (1,935 co-ed, 7 boys-only, 4 girls-only), while there are more examples of single-sex secondary schools. There are 45 boys-only secondary schools, 53 girls-only secondary schools and 274 mixed secondary schools.

During the mid-20th century, several state coeducational secondary schools split into two single-sex schools, with one school moving to a new site, to alleviate overcrowding. These included Hamilton (1955), Gisborne (1956), Hastings (1956), Tauranga (1958), Rotorua (1959), Westlake (1962), Kelston (1963), and Marlborough (1963).

Nigeria
In Nigeria, public opinion regarding sexes in schools is influenced most by religious and cultural beliefs rather than the idea that students learn better separated into sexes. Because of this, the attitude towards the separation/integration of sexes varies depending on the ethnic makeup of the region. People in northern Nigeria are primarily Muslim and, as a result, are more inclined to choose single-sex education over coeducation in line with their religious beliefs. However, country-wide, coeducation schools are more common than single-sex schools.

In contrast to the predominance of coeducation schools, many prestigious educational institutions only accept one sex; notable examples include King's College and Queen's College situated in Lagos. Although the sexes are not separated in the classroom at the university level, it is common practice to employ a single-sex housing policy on university campuses, e.g., Covenant University.

Pakistan
The education system in Pakistan is generally divided into six levels: preschool (for the age from 3 to 5 years), primary (grades one through five), middle (grades six through eight), high (grades nine and ten, leading to the Secondary School Certificate or SSC), intermediate (grades eleven and twelve, leading to a Higher Secondary School Certificate or HSSC), and university programs leading to undergraduate and graduate degrees. Most of the private schools in major cities like Karachi, Lahore, Faisalabad, Hyderabad, Islamabad and Rawalpindi have co-education systems but all public schools adhere single-sex education. In some cities, single-sex education is preferred, like Peshawar and Quetta, where many schools are single-sex educational. However, there are also schools in the urban areas which are coeducational. Most colleges are also single-sex education institutions till graduation, but many private and public sector universities have coeducation systems. There are some women's universities in Peshawar and Rawalpindi as well. However, most of the higher education in Pakistan is coeducation.

Sweden
Around 1800, girls' middle-secondary schools began to appear, and become more common during the 19th century. By the mid-1970s, most of them had been scrapped and replaced with coeducation.

By law from the 1570s (Swedish Church Ordinance 1571), girls, as well as boys, were expected to be given elementary schooling. The establishment for girls' schools was left to each city's authorities, and no school for girls was founded until the Rudbeckii flickskola in 1632, and that school was an isolated example. However, schools for boys did accept female students at the lowest levels and occasionally even at high levels: Ursula Agricola and Maria Jonae Palmgren were accepted at Visingsö Gymnasium in 1644 and 1645 respectively, and Aurora Liljenroth graduated from the same school in 1788.

During the 18th century, many girls' schools were established, referred to as Mamsellskola ('Mamsell school') or Franskpension ('French pension'). These schools could normally be classified as finishing schools, with only a shallow education of polite conversation in French, embroidery, piano playing, and other accomplishments, and the purpose was only to give the students a proper minimum education to be a lady, a wife, and a mother.

In the first half of the 19th century, growing discontent over the shallow education of women eventually resulted in the finishing schools being gradually replaced by girls' schools with a higher level of academic secondary education, called "Higher Girl Schools", in the mid-19th century. At the time of the introduction of the compulsory elementary school for both sexes in Sweden in 1842, only five schools in Sweden provided academic secondary education to females: the Societetsskolan (1786), Fruntimmersföreningens flickskola (1815) and Kjellbergska flickskolan (1833) in Gothenburg, Askersunds flickskola (1812) in Askersund, and Wallinska skolan (1831) in Stockholm.

During the second half of the 19th century, secondary education girl schools were in most Swedish cities. All of these were private, except the women's college Högre lärarinneseminariet in Stockholm from 1861, and its adjacent girls' school Statens normalskola för flickor. The Girls' School Committee of 1866 organized the regulation of girls' schools and female education in Sweden: from 1870, some girls' schools were given the right to offer the gymnasium (school) level to their students, and from 1874, those girls' schools which met the demands were given governmental support, and some were given the right to administer the school-leaving exam. This was necessary to make it possible for women to enroll at the universities, which had been opened to women in 1870, as female students were not accepted in the same middle schools as male students.

Between 1904 and 1909, girls were integrated with state boys' schools on the secondary levels, making it possible for girls to complete their elementary- and middle-level education in a state school instead of going to an expensive private girls' school. Finally, in 1927, all state secondary schools for boys were integrated, and the private girls' schools started to be transformed into coeducational schools, a process which was completed by 1970.

United Kingdom

While England has a very strong tradition of single-sex education, education in Scotland was largely mixed, and Wales introduced dual schools (a girls' side and a boys' side under one roof) in 1889. In England, most secondary education was single-sex until the 1970s.

Single-sex schooling was traditionally the norm for secondary schools in most parts of the United Kingdom, especially for private, grammar and secondary modern schools, but most UK schools are now coeducational. In the state sector of the U.K. education system very few single sex schools remain. The number of single-sex state schools has fallen from nearly 2,500 to just over 400 in 40 years. According to Alan Smithers, Professor of Education at Buckingham University, there was no evidence that single-sex schools were consistently superior.

A major longitudinal study of over 17,000 individuals examined whether single-sex schooling made a difference for a wide range of outcomes, including academic attainment, earnings, marriage, childbearing and divorce. The authors found that girls fared better in examinations at age 16 at single-sex schools, while boys achieved similar results at single-sex or co-educational schools.

Girls rated their abilities in maths and sciences higher if they went to a girls' school, and boys rated their abilities in English higher if they went to a boys' school, i.e. gender stereotyping was weaker in the single-sex sector. Later in life, women who had been to single-sex schools went on to earn higher wages than women who had been to co-educational schools.

United States

Until the 19th century, single-sex education was the norm in the United States, although this varied by region. In New England, there was more mixed-sex education than in the South, and girls in New England had more access to education in general. Mixed-sex education started to spread rapidly with the generalization of elementary education in the 19th century. According to Cornelius Riordan, "By the end of the nineteenth century, coeducation was all but universal in American elementary and secondary public schools (see Kolesnick, 1969; Bureau of Education, 1883; Butler, 1910; Riordan, 1990). However, higher education was usually single-sex, and men's colleges and women's colleges were common well into the 20th century. A form of education strongly associated with sex-segregation is Catholic schools, although many Catholic schools today are coeducational. The idea of educating students differently by sex, formally or informally, was common until the 1970s.

A controversy regarding single-sex education in the United States is its association with racist ideologies in the 1950s in the American South. After the Brown v. Board of Education (1954) ruled racial segregation in education unconstitutional, therefore paving the way to educating together black and white children, many conservatives reacted very negatively to the idea of black boys and white girls socializing together, potentially leading to interracial romantic couples. As such, segregation by sex in schools became quite common during that era across the Southern US, with many single-sex educational institutions being established.

A major event that affected single-sex schooling in the US was when the Title IX amendments of the Education Amendments of 1972 were passed. The Encyclopedia of Women and Gender explains Title IX as being "Founded on the premises of equal opportunity, equal access, and full integration, it focused on providing complete access to participation in all functions of schooling, regardless of gender" (Sex Segregation in Education, 2001). Many feminists fought for the passage of this law. The goal was to ban all sex discrimination in any education program which received financial aid from the government. It was stated specifically on the Department of Education website as, "No person in the US, on the basis of sex, can be excluded from the participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance".

The leading cause which led to the start of more public schools having single-sex classes or entire schools was when the reforms to the Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 were passed in 2006. Initially, Title IX had allowed the separation of males and females in certain areas in school before the new changes. For example, they were allowed to have single-gender classes for physical education when contact sports were involved and sex-education classes. Kasic (2008) indicates that the new regulations allow nonvocational public schools to receive funding if they offer single-sex classes or entire single-sex schools, but to start these programs, they have to have a governmental or educational objective. These programs must also be voluntary, so public schools cannot be required to offer these single-sex programs. If they do, they cannot force students to participate in them. Diana Schemo explains in a New York Times article, "Until now, public school districts that offered a school to one sex generally had to provide a comparable school for students of the other sex. However, the new rules say districts can offer such students the option to attend comparable coeducational schools" (Schemo, 2006, p. 2). Since these regulations were approved, the number of public schools offering single-sex programs has been steadily increasing because the rules are more flexible.

In the United States, the Supreme Court ruled on the constitutionality of single-sex public education in the 1996 case of United States v. Virginia. This ruling, written by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, concluded that single-sex education in the public sector is constitutional only if comparable courses, services, and facilities are made available to both sexes. The No Child Left Behind Act contains provisions (sections 5131.a.23. and 5131c, 20 U.S.C. section 7215(a)(23), and section 7215(c)) designed by their authors—senators Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX)—to facilitate single-sex education in public schools. These provisions led to the publication of new federal rules in October 2006 to allow districts to create single-sex schools and classes provided that 1) enrollment is voluntary and 2) comparable courses, services, and facilities are available to both sexes. The number of public schools offering single-sex classrooms rose from 4 in 1998 to 540 in 2010, according to the web site of the National Association for Single Sex Public Education.

Education Next and the Program on Education Policy and Governance at Harvard University sponsored a nationwide survey conducted by Knowledge Networks in early 2008. According to the survey, "more than one-third of Americans feel parents should have the option of sending their child to a single-sex school".

Gender segregation in American history
In the United States, gender segregation in schools was initially a product of an era when traditional gender roles categorically determined scholastic, professional, and social opportunities based on sex. For instance, leading experts supported gender segregation in higher education because they considered it "to be dangerous and inappropriate for women. Experts claimed that scientific evidence established that women were physically and temperamentally not suited to the rigors of the academy . ... Separate education for men and women paralleled the separate spheres that each was expected to occupy." Furthermore, colleges and universities did not consider female applicants until the second half of the nineteenth century, when the women's rights movement began advocating for gender equality. In response to social progression, "at the turn of the twentieth century, educators, particularly those in the South, fiercely resisted coeducation in elite all-male colleges, and most of the Ivy League institutions would drag their feet well into the twentieth century before becoming coeducational."

Importance of history and culture in single-sex education determinations
Girls and boys segregation in schools is definitive of a sex-based classification, and, thus, it must be supported by an "exceedingly persuasive justification" to pass constitutional muster. In light of this requisite standard, the legality of single-sex educational institutions depends on the accuracy of underlying assumptions and support. Accordingly, it is important to be aware that most research used to advocate the benefits of single-sex education is cloaked in uncertainty. Specifically, proponents "who want to build a case for single-sex education usually draw on ... uncontrolled studies, small samples, and anecdotal evidence; the positive findings are repeated but are not analyzed". Alternatively, opponents of single-sex education can gather tangible support from observable patterns of pervasive gender inequality in other social contexts.

The diversity of opinions that concurrently support gender segregation in education creates a complex and fragmented dynamic. The miscellany of proponents includes: conservatives emphasizing innate gender differences, traditionalists favoring rigid gender roles, democrats striving to remedy past discrimination, progressives promoting diversity in academic choices, and feminists championing exclusively female support systems. Because the coalition of proponents consists of parties with different interests, the body of "educational research regarding the efficacy of single-sex schools is mixed at best". Moreover, advocates tend to bolster their respective positions by emphasizing specific aspects of educational research without addressing the remaining "array of evidence regarding institutions, structures, and processes that construct views on gender and equality". Although educational research supporting gender segregation in schools is rife with ambiguity, "the social research is absolutely clear that separation on the basis of identity characteristics creates feelings of individual inadequacy and instills beliefs about group hierarchy".

Studies used to make policy or legal arguments in the current debate over single-sex education narrowly "look only at the slice of the social picture that schooling represents". An informed assessment regarding the appropriate role of gender segregation in contemporary and future education developments requires contemplation of potential implications beyond the direct, internal, and immediate influences that single-sex schools stand to exert on students. It is undeniable that gender inequality exists, consciously or not, in contemporary social, professional, and domestic hierarchies or relationships. Indeed, "[g]ender separatism is so pervasive that it is almost invisible. It is woven into the fabric of our daily social routines." Vestiges of past gender segregation and its connotations throughout American history validate questions concerning the likely effects of contemporary institutions of single-sex education on prevailing gender.

Impact on female citizens' civil rights
Assessing the current single-sex education debate through a broad lens realizes contextual factors that effectively constitute the crux of the issue. Most discussions regarding the potential effects of single-sex education characterize future students of such institutions as the sole beneficiaries of resulting impacts. However, an appropriate assessment considers contextual implications and realizes that female citizens as a class will be the true beneficiaries if single-sex education developments reach fruition.

If the multitude of diverging interests that influence the single-sex education dispute was distilled, the core concern of the discussion asks whether single-sex education will help remedy past gender discrimination or not. In sum, "[Gender] separatism originated in beliefs about innate differences between women and men in inclinations and abilities, sentiments that comported with 'widely held views about women's proper place.' The existence of segregated higher education was itself, for centuries, a critical factor in the limitation of women's professional opportunities."The implications of reviving single-sex education in America could further erode outdated sex stereotypes and, thereby, facilitate gender equality in other social contexts. Incorporating the national history of gender segregation allows all sides to balance the hypothetical benefits of future students against the potential regression of gender equality in America.

Other readings

 * Single-sex Schools for Girls and Gender Equality, UNESCO Brief, 2007
 * Single sex environments and gender differences in risk aversion

title: Single-sex education


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Edmonds

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 09:14, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Bob Edmonds
Vanity. CJCurrie 00:35, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC) This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Delete. "He was recently accepted into the Air Force Academy on early merits." Not notable enough. Zzyzx11 02:09, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Good luck with your career in the Air Force, Bob, and may you one day do something notable enough to deserve a Wikipedia article. Until then, delete. Alba 02:50, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable vanity article. But good luck in the Air Force, I have a lot of respect for people who join the military. --Deathphoenix 06:17, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Trilobite (Talk) 10:34, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ellsworth 23:26, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Sorry, I am Bob Edmonds, this article is actually about me, one of my buddies wrote it up as a joke without my knowledge. Please kindly delete it, sorry for the trouble. Oh and please don't consider it an abuse, I got a notice asking me not to "abuse" wikipedia in the future.  I didn't do this, I didn't write it, and I want it deleted.--CT1000AD 02:07, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable. Even Bob agrees. Carrp | Talk 06:38, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)


text:
God Is in the House (Hillsong Church album)

God Is in the House is the fifth album in the live praise and worship series of contemporary worship music by Hillsong Church. It is also the first Hillsong Album where Darlene Zschech was Worship Pastor. The album was recorded live at the Hills Entertainment Centre. The album reached No. 40 on the Billboard Top Contemporary Christian Albums Chart.

Track listing

 * 1) "God Is in the House" (Russell Fragar & Darlene Zschech) lead vocalist: Darlene Zschech
 * 2) "Joy in the Holy Ghost" (Fragar) lead vocalist: Lucy Fisher
 * 3) "Steppin' Out" (Steve McPherson) lead vocalist: Steve McPherson
 * 4) "My Heart Sings Praises" (Fragar) lead vocalist: Darlene Zschech
 * 5) "And That My Soul Knows Very Well" (Zschech & Fragar) lead vocalist: Darlene Zschech
 * 6) "Jesus, What a Beautiful Name" (Tanya Riches) lead vocalist: Lisa Young
 * 7) "Let the Peace of God Reign" (Zschech) lead vocalists: Rob Eastwood & Darlene Zschech
 * 8) "I Give You My Heart" (Reuben Morgan) lead vocalist: Steve McPherson
 * 9) "Walking in the Light" (Zschech) lead vocalist: Darlene Zschech
 * 10) "Your People Sing Praises" (Fragar) lead vocalist: Darlene Zschech
 * 11) "I Believe the Promise" (Fragar) lead vocalists: Erica Crocker & Darlene Zschech
 * 12) "Thank You, Lord" (Dennis Jernigan) lead vocalists: Darlene Zschech & Donia Gandjou
 * 13) "Lord of the Heavens" (Lucy Fisher) lead vocalist: Darlene Zschech
 * 14) "I Will Run to You" (Zschech) lead vocalist: Darlene Zschech
 * 15) "God Is in the House" (reprise) lead vocalist: Darlene Zschech

Band

 * Darlene Zschech - worship leader
 * Erica Crocker - vocals
 * Rob Eastwood - vocals
 * Lucy Fisher - vocals
 * Donia Gandjou - vocals
 * Craig Gower - keyboards, vocals
 * Scott Haslem - vocals
 * Steve McPherson - vocals, electric guitar
 * Lisa Young - vocals
 * Russell Fragar - music director, piano
 * David Moyse - electric guitar
 * Ian Fisher - bass guitar
 * Rick Peteriet - drums
 * Chris Milne - percussion
 * David Schenk - additional percussion
 * Paul Thompson - additional percussion
 * Raymond Floro - additional percussion
 * Karen Packer - tenor saxophone
 * Cathy Coluccio - alto saxophone
 * Megan Howard - alto saxophone
 * Renee Boland - alto saxophone
 * Cathy Coluccio - soprano saxophone
 * Mark Gregory - trumpet
 * Peter King - trumpet
 * Ruth Grant - Hillsong choir conductor
 * Julia Beaumont - Hillsong Kidz choir conductor
 * Amour Mah - Hillsong Kidz choir conductor


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Traditional diet

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was no consensus, so keep. --Deathphoenix 05:50, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Traditional diet
Merge into Dieting. Says little more than its title. (I am sure I saw an article slightly worse than this discussed on VfD recently - what was its fate?) -- RWH 00:35, 2005 Feb 17 (UTC)
 * Merge to dieting. GRider\talk 00:47, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete and don't merge. I believe this is a bad definition. Traditional diets are usually contrasted with modern diets, not weight control diets. Kappa 01:25, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I tend to agree with Kappa that this article gives the wrong definition of a traditional diet. Zzyzx11 02:06, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. A rather circular dicdef. Trilobite (Talk) 10:36, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Also see 'definition, circular'. Delete. Radiant! 12:51, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I believe RHaworth is referring to Natural hairstyle which also seems to be on its merry way to delete, perhaps even speedy. I also agree with Kappa ... it is not a good definition IMO. HyperZonktalk 17:03, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you, it was Natural hairstyle that I had in mind. RWH 18:00, 2005 Feb 17 (UTC)
 * Keep. Deletion doesn't seem entirely necessary; maybe some heavy editing and/or a merge.
 * You're right abou the research: I was in a bit of a hurry at the time and hoped that by giving an incomplete definition, I'd attract improvement. Weaselly, yes, but we all find ways.
 * Comment: I'm assuming the above is the originator of the article. Thank you for contributing to wikipedia, and I think we could have an article on this topic, but I don't think you did enough research first. If it gets deleted, maybe you could check out a few more google hits and then submit a new version (with references). Kappa 00:26, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect. -Sean Curtin 00:54, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article should be expanded. I have begun to do so. Burschik 15:25, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep (change of vote), expanded to usefulness. Kappa 16:11, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Looks relevant. 66.82.9.54 22:56, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep It seems relevant now, I will see if I can add any more.
 * Keep. Relevant enough to be encyclopedic. Carrp | Talk 06:42, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camilla Lyman

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep. Rossami (talk) 09:29, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Camilla Lyman
If google can only turn up 30 unique hits, is this late transvestite millionaire worthy of note and inclusion on Wikipedia? Does the value this brings to our readers ultimately outweigh the cost of disk space to our servers? GRider\talk 00:35, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable enough. Zzyzx11 02:07, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * maybe, see http://www.boston.com/news/daily/09/heiress.htm i don't really see any benefit to deleting this. Wolfman 05:07, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems notable enough, given that she was featured on Unsolved Mysteries. --Deathphoenix 06:20, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, and expand. Just scrapes in for notability for me. Megan1967 06:23, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment -- Just because she was on Unsolved Mysteries, does that make her notable enough? And going a step further: Does that mean that anybody who was on Unsolved Mysteries make them notable, and thus eligible to be in Wikipedia? Zzyzx11 06:26, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Okay, let me clarify. She's an unusual enough subject. The circumstances of her death is unusual enough. This is not a vanity article, and Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia, so we don't have to keep Wikipedia trimmed down to a small size. Hence, yes, I believe she is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia. Furthermore, if people are willing to write an article on anyone who was featured on Unsolved Mysteries, I say go ahead. As long as it's not a vanity piece, I have no problems with that. --Deathphoenix 06:53, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Being murdered under mysterious circumstances does not make you notable, not even if you are one of the few female-to-male transsexuals out there, and not even if your murder does get onto Unsolved Mysteries. --Angr 07:23, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Hmm I can vote keep on the basis of "does the value this brings to our readers ultimately outweigh the cost of disk space to our servers?". I like that argument, I can vote "keep" on almost everything verifiable with that. Kappa 09:34, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I disagree with Kappa. An argument that lets you keep almost everything verifiable, is not useful for determining encyclopedia entries. Delete as this person isn't notable. Radiant! 09:51, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Rats, I thought it sounded too good to be true. Kappa 11:00, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Trilobite (Talk) 10:35, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete.  The nominator's question is wrong, since VfD isn't a cost/benefit analysis.  Even if it were, disk space isn't the only cost.   If that were the analysis, we'd keep everything, including the vanity, since disk space costs are negligible.   I'm not sure GRider didn't nominate this to make a point, which would be "disrupting Wikipedia to make a point".    All that said, I agree with the previous voters who argued that being murdered does not make you encyclopdically notable, unsolved or otherwise; nor does being a transexual millionaire.  --BM 16:22, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't think this passes the notability bar. The poor victim's sexuality and wallet are tittilating, but don't really make her/him any more notable than any other victim profiled on Unsolved Mysteries, who are notable only for their untimely end, not for anything done during their lifetimes. Katefan0 20:14, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Spinboy 21:15, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Half keep. —RaD Man (talk) 21:54, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. -Sean Curtin 01:30, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. "Transsexual" and "millionaire" go together in so few sentences without the word "not" in between them that she seems almost (but not quite) noteworthy in her own right just for that.  Combined with the mysterious disappearance and its moderate publicity makes this just barely squeak the notability radar, IMO, but just barely. BenSamples 05:18, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * keep Yuckfoo 04:03, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. Wile E. Heresiarch 03:20, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable. Carrp | Talk 06:40, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, gruesome yet there's a possibility that she/he/it is notable. -- Riffsyphon1024 06:43, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep due to media coverage. And because it's so damn odd. Gamaliel
 * Keep — Linnwood 06:57, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - unless expanded greatly. Brookie 17:07, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but it does need expansion which I actually was going to work on Real Soon Now but my life (and wife) keep interfering with Wikiholic pursuits ;Bear 04:23, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable media coverage. JamesBurns 09:51, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text: Template:Yum!

title: Template:Yum!


text:
Talk:God Is in the House (Hillsong Church album)

Fair use rationale for Image:GIITH re release cover.jpg
Image:GIITH re release cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 05:17, 23 December 2007 (UTC)


text:
Gu Zhutong

Gu Zhutong ( or Wade-Giles Ku Chu-tung; 1893 – January 17, 1987), courtesy name Moshan (墨山), was a military general and administrator of the Republic of China.

Early life and career

Gu was born in Lianshui, Jiangsu province and attended army elementary academy at age 19, When the Chinese Revolution of 1911 broke out, he soon joined the Revolution. In 1912, he joined the Chinese Nationalist Party, and enrolled in Wuhan reserve officer candidate school, and then attend the Baoding Military Academy. In 1922, he went to Canton and became a staff officer of Second Cantonese Army. When Whampoa Military Academy was founded in 1924, he became one of the academy instructors. When the newly formed nationalist government launched a campaign against a local warlord, he became a battalion commander. During the Northern Expedition, Gu was promoted division commander and then corps commander. In the Central Plains War, he was the commander of the 16th route army. In 1931, he became garrison commander of Nanjing, the capital of the nationalist government. In 1933 he participated in the anti-communist Encirclement Campaigns. In 1935 he was promoted to general and put in charge of three southwestern provinces, meanwhile he was also the chairman of Jiangsu province. After the breakout of the second Sino-Japanese war, he was named commander-in-chief of the third war zone, during the New Fourth Army Incident in 1941 nationalist units under his command destroyed a large contingent of communist troops, and Chiang Kai-shek decorated him with the Order of Blue Sky and White Sun, one of the highest honors for a Chinese commander at the time.

Chinese Civil War
In 1946, he was named commander-in-chief of the nationalist army and pacification director of Zhengzhou, and was put in charge attack communist-controlled areas in Shandong province. In 1947, he lost the critical Menglianggu Campaign, in which the elite 74th independent enhanced division was wiped out by the communist forces. Chiang Kai-shek relieved him of command, and appointed him as Chief of Staff instead.

In Taiwan
In March 1950, he arrived in Taiwan and was appointed as defense minister, and in 1954 he was promoted to four-star general. In 1956, Gu was appointed as secretary general of the National Defense Council; in 1967 he was named as deputy head of the strategic advisory committee. In 1972, he became an advisor to Chiang Kai-shek and died on January 17, 1987.

Private life
His son was the artist Ku Fu-sheng.

title: Gu Zhutong


text:
Animegao kigurumi

Animegao kigurumi is a type of masked cosplay that has its origins in the official stage shows of various Japanese anime but has also been adapted by hobbyists. In Japan, most performers refer to this kind of cosplay as 'kigurumi' (着ぐるみ) instead of 'animegao' (アニメ顔, meaning "anime face"), which has been used overseas in order to differentiate the cosplay from the onesies sharing the same name. The term 'doller' had also been used when referring to kigurumi cosplayers, but today mainly refers to BJD-styled masked cosplays. Although kigurumi remains a minor part of Japan’s cosplay scene, it began attracting overseas attention in North America and Europe around 2005.

Practice of animegao kigurumi
As with other kinds of cosplay, many hobbyists have costumes of established characters from games or animations. The characters are usually female, and commonly human, although kigurumi characters of other species and genders do exist, including male (such as Kenshin Himura from Rurouni Kenshin), mechanical (such as Gundam Wing), elfin (such as Deedlit or Pirotess from Lodoss), and demonic (such as Inuyasha from the manga of the same name). Some kigurumi are original characters created by the performer. Wearing kigurumi is not restricted to one gender.

By wearing a body suit and mask, kigurumi cosplayers are able to closer resemble the characters with high accuracy, especially in the case of anime, anthro, or otherwise highly stylised characters. In kigurumi, the performers wear a plastic mask that was created by either molding or 3D printing and a matching flesh-coloured body suit (a zentai suit known as a hadatai). The body suit allows them less-detailed skin features, on the level of animated characters, and the mask allows a similar level of facial features.

Some hobbyists obtain masks from established hobbyist mask studios. As of 2018, there are six mask studios locations in Japan, as well as in Taiwan and the United States. Major production examples include a Japanese studio that takes orders for customized masks with wig and eye parts based on studio's original designs for over 130,000 yen (about US$1,182), and a Taiwanese studio that takes orders for fully customized masks for over 131,000 yen (about US$1,190). The average price of a mask produced by a mask studio is between 100,000 and 200,000 yen (about between US$910 and US$1,819).

Media coverage
While kigurumi is largely used in stage shows and by hobbyists, it has extended into the acts of other performers. DJ Minami Momochi performs in such an outfit, American photographer Laurie Simmons featured them in a photo series, and Japanese fashion model Lulu Hashimoto incorporates them in her outfits. Kigurumi cafes have also operated in Japan, where waitresses are dressed in costume. Some kigurumi performers were also featured in an Episode of a Netflix series "Midnight Asia". Kigurumi was also featured in the Porter Robinson song "Cheerleader" for it's music video and cover art.

title: Animegao kigurumi


text:
Hope Emerson

Hope Emerson (October 29, 1897 – April 24, 1960; ) was an American actress, vaudevillian, nightclub performer, and strongwoman. An imposing person physically, she weighed between 190 and 230 lb and stood 6 ft tall in her prime.

Career
Emerson made her Broadway debut in Lysistrata in 1930, when theatrical producer Norman Bel Geddes cast her for the role of Lamputo, an Amazon. She made her film début in Smiling Faces (1932) but then returned to the theater. In 1947, critic Brooks Atkinson praised her performance ("vastly entertaining as the garrulous old crone") in Street Scene. In the 1940s, Emerson was also known as the voice of "Elsie the Cow" in radio commercials for Borden Milk.

Some of Emerson's more memorable roles were as a circus strongwoman in the film Adam's Rib (1949), lifting actor Spencer Tracy up in the air; as a nefarious masseuse-conspirator in the noirish Cry of the City (1948); as a mail-order bride in Westward the Women (1952); and as a prospector in an episode of Death Valley Days ("Big Liz") (1958). Her most famous character, however, was the sadistic prison matron Evelyn Harper in Caged (1950), a role that garnered her an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actress.

On television, Emerson guest-starred in "Housekeeper", the final episode of the series It's a Great Life. In that episode she portrays a bossy housekeeper who temporarily takes charge while Amy Morgan, played by Frances Bavier, is away on vacation. In 1957, she guest-starred in "The Inheritance," an episode of the CBS situation comedy Mr. Adams and Eve. She had a regular role as Mother on the detective series Peter Gunn (1958–1961), for which she received an Emmy nomination. She left Peter Gunn after its first season and was succeeded in the same role by Minerva Urecal, who bore a strong resemblance to Emerson but was far (8 inches) shorter. Emerson left Peter Gunn for a starring role on the CBS sitcom The Dennis O'Keefe Show (1959–60). She appeared in every episode of its single season run but died 16 days before the final episode aired.

She had suffered from a lengthy liver ailment. She was well enough to drive from Phoenix to Hollywood by herself on April 17, 1960, but entered Hollywood Presbyterian Hospital on April 22 and died two days later.

title: Hope Emerson


text:
Santo André (disambiguation)

Santo André, São Paulo is a Brazilian municipality.

Santo André (Portuguese and Galician for Saint Andrew) may also refer to:

Places
Brazil:
 * Santo André, Paraíba, a city

Cape Verde:
 * Santo André (Porto Novo), a civil parish

Portugal:
 * Santo André (Santiago do Cacém), a city
 * Santo André, Póvoa de Varzim, a neighborhood
 * Cape Santo André

Spain:
 * Santo André de Teixido, a pilgrimage sanctuary in Cedeira, Galicia

Other

 * Esporte Clube Santo André, a Brazilian football (soccer) team
 * NRP Santo André, a Portuguese Navy ship 1962–1975, now the museum ship Rickmer Rickmers in Hamburg
 * Navio Museu Santo André, a museum ship in Gafanha da Nazaré, Ílhavo, Portugal

title: Santo André (disambiguation)


text:
Mary Tudor

Mary Tudor may refer to:

 * Mary Tudor, Queen of France (1496–1533), queen of France and princess of England; daughter of Henry VII, wife of Louis XII and then of Charles Brandon, Duke of Suffolk
 * Mary I of England (1516–1558), queen of England and Spain – daughter of Henry VIII and Catherine of Aragon
 * Lady Mary Tudor (1673–1726), daughter of Charles II and Moll Davis; wife of 2nd Earl of Derwentwater, Henry Graham and James Rooke
 * Mary Tudor, graduate student of Wendell Johnson, who conducted the Monster Study
 * Marie Tudor, an 1833 play by the French playwright, Victor Hugo, which was based on Mary I of England
 * Mary Tudor (1911 film), a film based on the play by Hugo
 * Mary Tudor (1920 film), a German silent historical film
 * Maria Tudor, an 1879 opera by the Brazilian composer Antônio Carlos Gomes based on the play by Hugo
 * Mary Tudor (play), a 1935 British play by Wilfrid Grantham
 * Mary Tudor (The Tudors), fictional depiction of Mary I of England

title: Mary Tudor


text:
Ricardo (footballer, born 1971)

Ricardo López Felipe (born 30 December 1971), known simply as Ricardo, is a Spanish retired professional footballer who played as a goalkeeper, currently a manager.

He played 279 La Liga matches over 15 seasons, starting his career at Atlético Madrid where he struggled to break through, then representing mostly Valladolid (four seasons) and Osasuna (eight). He also spent two years with Manchester United in the Premier League.

Ricardo won two international caps for Spain, and was part of the squad for the 2002 World Cup.

Atlético and Valladolid
Born in Madrid, Ricardo began his professional career at Atlético Madrid, working his way through the reserves and going on to represent the senior squad until 1998. Barred by José Francisco Molina, he only managed one first-team appearance which came during the 1996–97 season, in a 3–2 away win against Real Zaragoza on 2 June 1997.

Subsequently, Ricardo was transferred to Real Valladolid, also in La Liga. He spent four years at the club, becoming first-choice in the 2001–02 campaign (all 38 matches played) while also being selected as a member of the Spanish squad for the 2002 World Cup, though he did not play in the finals.

Manchester United
On 30 August 2002, Ricardo joined English club Manchester United in a three-year deal worth £1.5 million. Signed to provide cover for the injured Fabien Barthez and the inexperienced Roy Carroll, he found first-team opportunities rare, appearing in four UEFA Champions League matches and just once in the Premier League. He marked his only appearance in the latter competition, against Blackburn Rovers on 19 April 2003, by conceding a penalty with his first touch after he fouled Andy Cole, but saved David Dunn's attempt in an eventual 3–1 victory.

On 23 August 2003, Ricardo agreed to a loan transfer to Racing de Santander for 2003–04 season – the deal included an option to make transfer permanent the following June. On his return to Spain, Ricardo was quoted in the Spanish sports daily AS as saying:

"It's not a backward step. When I received the offer I was delighted to have the chance to return to Spain. I missed the Spanish league ... All I feel is gratitude toward Manchester. The club treated me very well. It was a lovely experience which was well worth it."

After helping Racing narrowly avoid top-flight relegation, Ricardo returned to Manchester United and proclaimed his ambition to take the number one jersey from Barthez. However, he was never again picked for the first team following the arrival of Tim Howard and Carroll's improvement.

Osasuna
Ricardo was eventually released by the club on a free transfer, at the end of 2004–05. Subsequently, he signed for CA Osasuna on a two-year deal, quickly becoming the Navarrese side's first-choice and totalling over 100 league appearances in his first three seasons; he also helped them reach the semi-finals of the UEFA Cup in his second year by contributing 12 matches, but lost his job midway through 2008–09 to newly signed Roberto.

Ricardo regained his first-choice status in the following top-division campaigns, rarely missing a game for Osasuna even though he was approaching his 40s. In the 2011–12 season, however, still under manager José Luis Mendilibar, he was demoted to as low as third-string.

Ricardo came out of retirement in January 2013 to rejoin Osasuna as an emergency signing, after backup goalkeeper Asier Riesgo suffered a foot injury. At 41, he was the second-oldest player in the history of the Spanish top flight, surpassed only by 48-year-old Harry Lowe of Real Sociedad in 1935. His only game of this spell was a 15-minute cameo in the final fixture, a 4–2 loss at Real Madrid in which he conceded the last goal.

Ricardo quit the game for good at the end of the campaign, stating "I don't quit football, football quits me".

Coaching
Recommended by head coach Juan Carlos Garrido, Ricardo joined Belgium's Club Brugge KV in June 2013 as a goalkeeping coach. Near the end of October, a player licence was sought out for him as both the second and third goalkeeper were unavailable due to injury; over three years and starting in July 2014, he worked in the same capacity with the Japan national team and Arsenal's academy in that Asian country.

On 2 January 2018, Ricardo was appointed head coach of Segunda División B side Racing de Ferrol. On 13 June 2019, he was named manager of former club Valladolid's under-19s.

Ricardo became manager of SD Ejea in the newly formed Segunda División RFEF on 21 October 2021. After ten matches and only one win, he was dismissed.

International career
Ricardo played twice for Spain, his debut coming on 14 November 2001 in a friendly with Mexico. In a testimonial match for Ferenc Puskás the following summer, during a 1–1 draw against Hungary in Budapest, he received his second and final cap; in both cases, he came on as a substitute for Iker Casillas.

Ricardo was selected for the 2002 FIFA World Cup in Japan and South Korea.

Honours
Atlético Madrid
 * Copa del Rey: 1995–96

title: Ricardo (footballer, born 1971)


text:
User talk:Winstonsmith

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --Sillydragon 00:42, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

If you disagree with something on a page, discuss it on the talk page, please don't simply blank the page. --Sillydragon 00:50, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Also please don't remove large amounts of the page. Discuss things you disagree with on the talk page. --Sillydragon 01:00, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism
Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. -- Nomen Nescio 08:59, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you were just trying to experiment, then use the sandbox instead. Thank you. -- Nomen Nescio 09:06, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. It is possible to explain on the talk page why you think these edits are legitimate.-- Nomen Nescio 09:11, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Do not delete Iraq and insert the US as Police state again. That clearly constitutes vandalism.-- Nomen Nescio 09:23, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Stop adding the US to the article, you know this is wanton distortion of facts.-- Nomen Nescio 09:31, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Here we go again
Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. -- Nomen Nescio 17:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. You have had your fun, cut it out.-- Nomen Nescio 17:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Please don't delete warnings against you; further attempts to do so will be considered vandalism as well. Now, because you haven't vandalized any other article since User:Nescio's last warning, I've chosen not blocking you yet. Please don't force me to change my mind. --Nlu (talk) 18:02, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

You have been temporarily blocked for violation of the three revert rule. Please feel free to return after the block expires, but also please make an effort to discuss your changes further in the future. --Nlu (talk) 18:17, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Despite this, I'm going to hope that you were trying to contribute in good faith, but please do read up on NPOV and Edit war. Your behavior was not at all productive.  If you want to argue that the United States is a police state, you should have discussed it with others instead of unilaterally imposing your viewpoint (particularly because you were deleting other countries from the list).  I am hoping that when the block expires you will contribute in a positive manner.  Discuss your changes (say, for example, on Talk:Police state).  I am hoping that I don't need to do this again.  --Nlu (talk) 18:20, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Winstonsmith


text:
User:Wattssw

Wattssw is an employee of BMC Software

title: User:Wattssw


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donkey punch

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was KEEP. —Korath (Talk) 07:18, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Donkey punch
Wikipedia is not a dictionary, or a usage or jargon guide --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:44, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Notable term with FOURTY-THREE-THOUSAND google matches  and enormous potential for expansion far beyond a dictdef.  GRider\talk 00:50, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete for the same reason Mr.Sidaway gave CiaraBeth 00:54, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete dictdef, maybe a weak transwiki to wiktionary; I see no potential for expansion. —Korath (Talk) 01:20, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Just a dicdef. Zzyzx11 01:45, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. This is a very well-known phrase/concept, and seems much more appropriate to Wikipedia than to Wiktionary to me.  The information there is already useful.  In fact, it was one of the first articles on Wikipedia that I was impressed by, simply because (perhaps needless to say) few of those Google results have very solid information.  The history of the phrase and the biological facts related to it give the article potential for expansion.  It is also worth mentioning that this is not a new phrase.  Donkey punches can be seen in films from the 1970s.  --LostLeviathan 03:17, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * keep Wolfman 03:58, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is much more than a simple definition. — J3ff 05:50, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, trivial, dictionary definition. Megan1967 06:25, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sick it may be, but it is more than a dicdef.  HowardB 07:28, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. That was surprisingly informative. Meelar (talk) 08:46, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Apart from the definition, this seems more like speculation than information. Kappa 09:37, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. Childish, trivial, dicdef. Trilobite (Talk) 10:37, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is informative, even if it's on a subject that many people do not want to be informed on. But it has a place in Wikipedia, in the appropriate categories. Concur with Leviathan. Radiant! 11:23, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete.  I wish we could get rid of this as a dicdef, but it isn't.  It is unencyclopedic, however.   I have a difficult time believing that people intent on making Wikipedia the online Encyclopedia of Sex Practices aren't trolling or trying to discredit the project.  Give me Digimon-cruft over sex-cruft like this.  --BM 16:12, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Interesting how strong people's opinions are about this; in any event, it is properly noted as being a possible urban legend and I can see no precedent or guideline that would call for deletion, as it does seem a bit broad for a dicdef. HyperZonktalk 16:58, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, proper article. Grue 19:34, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep if wikipedia is not a jargon guide, you need to delete about half of the wikipedia.  ALKIVAR ™[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 20:17, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks like they're doing a terrific job of that this week.  —RaD Man (talk) 18:36, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Oh come on, it is probably only about 20 percent. --BM 22:44, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, and, wow, that's sick. BenSamples 05:25, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * EXTREMELY STRONG DONKEY KEEP. Congratulations BM for openly pronouncing your bias towards "Digimon-cruft" over "sex-cruft".  How cute.  There is no doubt that people will refer to Wikipedia for this term.  Once again, welcome to puritan deletionism.   —RaD Man (talk) 18:36, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep — Linnwood 20:14, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * THE STRONGEST KEEP POSSIBLE - needs more info though! --Smooth Henry 21:31, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * I have found precedent: Votes_for_deletion/Teabagging --Smooth Henry 21:35, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete dicdef - or intrawiki to Wiktionary Trödel| talk 22:31, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It is, unfortunately, pretty well known and notable. Gamaliel 22:34, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Who would think of deleting an article on the infamous donkey punch?Everyking 06:07, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Eh, keep, however, does anyone really want to know this? -- Riffsyphon1024 06:09, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, hmmm, is there an article on the Clinton lip bite? I'm unfamiliar with what the slang terms might be.  I guess that's what I missed, not being a frat boy.--Silverback 17:19, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Neologisms and slang should be presented very well and be clearly encyclopedic.  This one may or may not be an urban legend, and has no convincing etymology.  The topic might be 'notable' enough to eventually have its own article, but this one isn't it, and doesn't look fixable.  Ditto for the other two "sex moves" linked at the end of the article.  Delete and merge with an overview such as sexual slang.  +sj  +  00:11, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * slang-collections like sexual slang should probably be transwikied to wiktionary, in any case...
 * Keep. I'm fed up with the attempts to "sanitize" Wikipedia so that it's only useful to schoolchildren.  RickK 00:51, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a well-written and obviously researched article that is relevant. I also agree with RickK. Yalbik 01:39, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. As RickK said. --Carnildo 05:35, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't understand why anyone would consider this unencyclopedic.  Eric Herboso  22:06, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. Well-written and informative article. No reason to get rid of it. If nothing else, "Donkey Punch" should be in Wikipedia because people use it.  DavidMendoza 22:17, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Jonathunder 22:32, 2005 Feb 20 (UTC)
 * Keep. Perfectly legitimate article. Not a dictdef. "Not worksafe" is not a valid reason for deletion.   — Gwalla | Talk 00:34, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment.  I hope people voting to keep this realize that far from being a mere "sex move", this is a form of extreme abuse that potentially could seriously harm the female partner.   It is NOT PLEASURABLE IN THE LEAST for the woman.   The so-called move probably does not really exist except as a kind of sick Howard Stern-type joke.   It is far too dangerous.    Someone reading this article is going to think that it is OK to try it and someonr else is going to get seriously injured, and it might well be Wikipedia's fault.  People have such a chip on their shoulders about censorship, prudishness, etc, that they lose all sense of responsibility. --BM 02:11, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I added a warning to the entry in bold type. Does this fix this particular concern?  Eric Herboso  02:34, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with BM about the undesirability of practicing this "move", but I disagree strongly about applying self-censorship in encyclopedia entries just because we don't want people trying what is described. I mean, where do we start and stop?  How about suicide, hari-kiri, mass murder, or Russian roulette. I am sure these are well written articles, but probably started out as brief descriptions of the activity.  Should they have been deleted because they represent undesirable social behaviour? I think not.  HowardB 15:31, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * BM is totally right! We lose so many people to Donkey Punches each year, I think it'll be on the cover of Time Magazine by the end of summer. Along that same line, I'd like to warn people about the Vietnam War. Far from being a mere event in history, it is NOT PLEASURABLE IN THE LEAST for a country to be invaded and used as a battleground. Same with Fencing. All sorts of paragraphs about the history of this urban legend, but not a single BM-approved warning about how dangerous and NOT PLEASURABLE IN THE LEAST it is for someone to get poked in the eye. That shit hurts, yo. HowardB, I think you and I have our work cut out for us. --Jscott 17:08, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Your sarcastic non-sequitur notwithstanding, the fact remains that in this article we have a description as a real "sex move" something, which if it actually were performed, would very likely injure someone, and would be extreme abuse, not to mention criminal battery.  We are talking about the person on top punching his partner in the back of the head as hard as he can -- so hard that the anus or vagina muscles strongly contract.    And, apparently, Wikipedia editors think it is fine to describe this as a "sex move" and make jokes about "Tony Danza".  --BM 18:40, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep. Disturbing, but notable. Carrp | Talk 06:44, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. Interesting article - yes, a definition, but also explanation and description.  As are all encyclopedia entries. Kirkbroadhurst 23.52, 21 Feb 2005 (AEST)
 * Keep. It's puerile misogyny, but it's verifiable and notable puerile misogyny. —Charles P. (Mirv) 21:51, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Christiaan 16:46, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It explains in a responsible way a phenomenon many will already have heard of in less responsible contexts.--Nectarflowed 21:23, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: when can we remove the deletion notice? --Smooth Henry 21:29, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * As nominator, as far as I'm concerned it can be lifted. This is a very strong keep. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 01:12, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, sex cruft. JamesBurns 09:54, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Viceroy of Kush

The former Kingdom of Kerma in Nubia, was a province of ancient Egypt from the 16th century BCE to eleventh century BCE. During this period, the polity was ruled by a viceroy who reported directly to the Egyptian Pharaoh.

The 'King's Son of Kush' ruled the area north of the Third Cataract. The area was divided into Wawat in the north, centered at Aniba, and Kush in the south, centered at Soleb during the Eighteenth Dynasty of Egypt and then Amara West. The title lapsed under Paiankh. Pinedjem II named one of his wives 'Superintendent of Southern Foreign Lands and Viceroy Kush'.

List of Viceroys
Below is a list of viceroys mainly based on a list assembled by George Reisner.

title: Viceroy of Kush