text:
Kenneth Hare

Fredrick Kenneth Hare, (February 5, 1919 – September 3, 2002) was a Canadian climatologist and academic, who researched atmospheric carbon dioxide, climate change, drought, and arid zone climates and was a strong advocate for preserving the natural environment.

Biography
Born in Wiltshire, England, he received a Bachelor of Science in 1939 from King's College London. During World War II, he was a meteorologist with the UK Air Ministry, and joined McGill University as an assistant professor after the war. In 1950, he received a PhD in Geography from the Université de Montréal.

Scientific career
Hare was Dean of Arts and Science at McGill starting 1962 before returning to England in 1964. He was Master of Birkbeck College from 1966 to 1968, during which he served as president of the Royal Meteorological Society.

In 1968, he accepted the position as fifth president of the University of British Columbia, which he served until he resigned on January 31, 1969. He joined the University of Toronto (U of T) becoming a Professor of geography and physics in 1974. From 1974 to 1979 he was director of the Institute for Environmental Studies at the U of T. From 1979 until 1986 he was Provost of Trinity College. From 1988 to 1995 he was the sixth Chancellor of Trent University. From 1992 until his death in 2002, he chaired Canada's national Climate Program Planning Board.

Research interests and advocacy
Hare's research interests included atmospheric carbon dioxide, climate change, drought, and arid zone climates. He was a strong advocate of protecting the natural environment and served on a wide variety of commissions and committees on subjects that included acid rain, desertification, heavy metals, nuclear reactors (and their waste products), ozone, greenhouse gases and climate change. He was on the Research and Development Advisory Panel of Atomic Energy of Canada and conducted studies on nuclear waste management in Sweden and France.

Hare considered that the most pressing environmental challenge facing Canada is climate change caused by excessive use of fossil fuels. He advocated effectively managed nuclear power as a viable alternative. Throughout his life Hare was a tireless public speaker and writer about these issues.

Awards and honours
Hare received the Massey Medal in 1974. In 1978 he was made an Officer of the Order of Canada and was promoted to Companion in 1987.

In 1987, he was presented with the Sir John William Dawson Medal, for important contributions of knowledge in multiple domains, from the Royal Society of Canada in which he was a Fellow. The same year, he was awarded the Cullum Geographical Medal by the American Geographical Society.

In 1989, he received the Order of Ontario and the International Meteorological Organization Prize from the World Meteorological Organization. He was awarded honorary degrees by 11 universities.

title: Kenneth Hare


text:
Talk:Stable distribution

Stable?
Nice article...

Are these the same as stable distributions? Clearly, they have the addition property, but are all "stable" distributions also "Levy skew alpha" stable d's? If so, material of stable distributions could be included - as an easy intro --J heisenberg 11:01, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hello - Yes, all stable distributions are included in what is being called here "Levy skew alpha" stable distributions. Some authors call them just stable distributions and call the case for alpha=3/2 the Levy distribution. Check out Nolan's web page. We need to get some plots of the skew distributions here too. Paul Reiser 14:22, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I've included the stuff from the article above. Feel free to edit--J heisenberg 19:18, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

"yielding a distribution symmetric about c" <-- surely "...about mu"? -- Right. Its fixed, thanks. PAR 02:04, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

"Why if μ is the mode of the distribution, in the plot named 'Skewed centered Lévy distributions with unit scale factor' the x=0 is not the maximum?" dsalas

 * Good question - I fixed it. PAR 17:08, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

 * I've now redirected stable distributions to the singular, i.e. to this article. It is absurd to have that page redirecting to somewhere other than here. Michael Hardy (talk) 00:20, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Merge

 * In probability theory, a stable distribution has the property of stability: If a number of independent identically distributed random variables have a stable distribution ...

Sigh, classic Wikipedia lead sentence ... let's start by getting rid of the "stability" article, shall we? --99.245.206.188 (talk) 02:16, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

 * agreed 160.83.73.25 (talk) 16:40, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

 * agree PAR (talk) 23:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

 * agree TomyDuby (talk) 02:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

 * I have removed the merge template for reasons stated at Talk:Stability (probability). If we have to discuss merging, then let's do it in one place and in the context of the present versions. Melcombe (talk) 12:49, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

sign?
Can someone please explain to me what sign(t) means in the expresion for $$\varphi (t)$$ Thanks in Advance.

 * Its just the sign of t, +1 for positive, -1 for negative, 0 for 0. I fixed it so it links to the sign function. PAR 20:19, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Skewness
The skewing factor is indeed $$\beta tg({\pi \over 2}\alpha)$$, so the skewness is limited through $$\alpha$$, even if $$\beta$$ is always in the range [0,1]. I am not sure if this deserves an other plot ($$\beta$$=const>0, $$\alpha$$=1->2), but perhaps it should be noted explicitely. al

Cumulative function
Is there an expression for the cumulative function when beta=0? The sidebar says that it usually isn't analytically expressible, see the text; but it isn't discussed in the text. Bubba73 (talk), 22:21, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I think that was referring to the special cases when the distribution becomes a normal distribution (β has no effect) and the Cauchy distribution (β =0). PAR 10:36, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

Some problems of the regression of Levy distribution
I've learnt about some skills of regressing the Levy tail distribution. They are powerlaw fit (double log fit), Hill estimator(and its variations), and empirical function approximation. I wonder if there is any else method, and which one is better, why? Is there any idea about this issue? Thanks.

Confusion
OK, I've taken probability classes at MIT no less, and I'm unable to figure out what a Levy distribution is after reading this article. I could probably do so after reading it a few more times, but this seems to be an indication that it is not well written for a broad technical audience. The introduction is particularly opaque. It uses α without giving a formula in which α is used, or any definition of what it might mean. "have the same distribution as the original." is a confusing phrase. What is "the original"? Is this saying that X1 and X2 are the same, and that the linear sum of the two is the same as both X1 and X2? The Y equations seem to indicate that the sum is merely of the same form. Or is that the same thing after normalizing to a zero-to-one scale? The graphics are also a little confusing, perhaps because the formula has not yet been given (reading the article top to bottom generally). At first I thought this was an example of multiple distributions being added, but I infer now it's just a bunch of sample functions that satisfy the distribution formula. It would help moving these lower so they appear after the forumla is given, but it would likely help even more showing sample X1 and X2 probability functions - one set that satisfies the additive constraint, and perhaps one that does not? -- Beland 02:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Well, I took a try at fixing it. Is this an improvement? PAR 06:49, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

the range of alpha
in the text, it says [0,2], in the table it says (0,2). Is it very trivial, or some correction is needed? Jackzhp 02:04, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't see where it says [0,2], but please change it if it does. It should be (0,2]. The distribution becomes a normal distribution when α=2 and in the limit of α=0 it becomes a Dirac delta function, which is undefined at t=0. PAR 03:50, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Series representation of the pdf
As far as I can see the formula for the series representation only makes sense when $$\alpha\neq 1$$, otherwise, the $$\Phi$$ term contains the variable $$t$$, so the integration would not produce the formula stated. Am I missing something? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.193.245.16 (talk) 19:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
 * As far as I can see, you can't be missing something! The variable of integration — $$dt$$ — for a definite integral can't possibly be a variable — $$t$$ — in the result! Especially as it's singular at one end of the range of integration.
 * Adding to the confusion: it seems the $$dt$$ got dropped from the integral when the Taylor series was introduced:
 * $$f(x;\alpha,\beta,c,\mu)=\frac{1}{\pi}\Re\left[\int_0^\infty e^{it(x-\mu)}\sum_{n=0}^\infty\frac{(-qt^\alpha)^n}{n!}\right]dt\Leftarrow (missing\ dt)$$
 * While it's not all that unclear, we should be consistent in using proper notation.
 * Bob Kerns (talk) 12:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

In fact it is incorrect (even with $$\beta = 0$$, which avoids the problem described above) if $$\alpha > 1$$ as the series does not converge. If $$\alpha = 1$$ then it only converges for $$x$$ sufficiently large. $$|x-\mu| > |q|^{1/\alpha}$$, I think. Daren Cline (talk) 22:30, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

The solution given further down still has $$q$$, which is a function of $$t$$. So, the final series makes no sense. 104.187.53.82 (talk) 01:41, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

Improving the plots
Suggestion: It would be easier to grasp the paired plots, if the one curve in common between each pair, $$\alpha = 0.5,\mbox{ }\beta = 0.0$$, shared the same color. I'd suggest reversing the color sequence in the second plot, because the red tends to stand out best, (at least to those of us who are not color-blind). Making that one heavier would also help, and make it more accessible to those with red-green color-blindness.

Basically, the second plot takes the one curve from the first plot, and skews it. But to detect this, you have to search the curves for one of the same shape in both, and then verify your discovery by checking the key.

Ideally, the only color in common would be the curve in common. Perhaps differentiate the skew curves by decreasing saturation or brightness with increasing skew (i.e. fade to gray or black). Bob Kerns (talk) 11:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Characteristic function error
Found and corrected an error in the characteristic function, the (|ct|2) term needed to be (|ct|2)/2; see history -> Nowaket. However, the symmetric probability density plots (upper right corner) were generated by the Fourier transform of the incorrect characteristic function. Clearly the apex of a zero mean, variance 1, Gaussian (α = 2) PDF should be ~0.4 not <0.3. Making this change corrects the PDF's.

Nowaket (talk) 13:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

 * No - please read the article before editing it. For c=1, the variance is $$\sigma^2=2c^2$$ and so the peak is at $$1/\sigma\sqrt{2\pi}$$=0.28... Also, please leave comments at the bottom of the talk page, not the top. PAR (talk) 18:12, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Special Cases
Hi all, I found in the 'special cases' section that somebody (2006-08-15 10:18:02 IP: 163.156.240.17) states that: "...any symmetric alpha-stable distribution to be viewed in this way (with the alpha parameter of the mixture distribution equal to twice the alpha parameter of the mixing distribution—and the beta parameter of the mixing distribution always equal to unity)." As the IP address seems to belong to "AXA Technology Services UK Ltd.", I have no real way of contacting the author of this comment, but I have been able to prove the result myself (using a similar approach as Lee, Hopcraft and Jakeman here)

Does anybody know where the author of this got this from? I'm in the process of writing a paper which will contain this result using my proof, and it'd be nice to have the 'original' proof in there.

(edit) I've also got (and have verified using numerical methods such as Nolan's program) ten closed-form expressions for the densities of stable distributions, in terms of Whittaker functions, Fresnel integrals, modified Bessel functions, hypergeometric functions and Lommel functions. Is it okay to put these on the main page (perhaps in a closed-form expansions section or something), or should these be left off? I don't really want to make the page too complicated, but I think it'd be nice for researchers such as myself to have somewhere that they're written down explicitly. Thanks all! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wainson (talk • contribs) 21:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Wainson - yes please, do post those. Sounds very interesting.  Perhaps here in talk for a look-over, then move to main page?  Thanks!! ObsidianOrder (talk) 16:49, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I post all distributions with scale factor 1, and location parameter 0, as it is easy to transform the expressions for arbitrary values of those parameters:

$$ f\biggl(x;\frac{1}{3},0,1,0\biggr) = Re\biggl(   \frac{2 \exp(- i \pi /4)}{3 \sqrt{3} \pi}    x^{-3/2}    S_{0,1/3} \Bigl(\frac{2 \exp(i \pi /4)}{3 \sqrt{3}} x^{-1/2} \Bigr) \biggr) $$

where $$S_{\mu,\nu}(z)$$ is a Lommel function

Source: T. M. Garoni, N. E. Frankel, "Lévy flights: Exact results and asymptotics beyond all orders", Journal of Mathematical Physics 43 #5, 2670-2689 (2002)

$$f\biggl(x;\frac{1}{2},0,1,0\biggr) = \frac{\vert x \vert^{-3/2}}\Biggl(\sin\left(\frac{1}{4\vert x \vert}\right)\Biggl[\frac{1}{2}-S\biggl(\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\pi\vert x \vert}}\biggr)\Biggr]+\cos\left(\frac{1}{4\vert x \vert}\right)\Biggl[\frac{1}{2}-C\biggl(\sqrt{\frac{1}{2\pi\vert x \vert}}\biggr)\Biggr]\Biggr)$$

where $$S(x)$$ and $$C(x)$$ are Fresnel Integrals.

Source: K. I. Hopcraft, E. Jakeman, R. M. J. Tanner, "Lévy random walks with fluctuating step number and multiscale behavior", Physical Review E 60 #5, 5327-5343 (1999)

$$f\biggl(x;\frac{2}{3},0,1,0\biggr) = \frac{1}{2\sqrt{3\pi}}\vert x \vert ^ {-1} \exp\biggl(\frac{2}{27}x^{-2}\biggr) W_{-1/2,1/6}\biggl(\frac{4}{27}x^{-2}\biggr)$$

where $$W_{k,\mu}(z)$$ is a Whittaker function.

Source: V. V. Uchaikin, V. M. Zolotarev, "Chance And Stability - Stable Distributions And Their Applications" - VSP, Utrecht, Netherlands (1999)

$$ f\biggl(x;\frac{4}{3},0,1,0\biggr) = \frac{3^{5/4}}{4 \sqrt{2 \pi}} \frac{\Gamma (7/12) \Gamma (11/12)}{\Gamma (6/12) \Gamma (8/12)} \,_2F_2 \biggl( \frac{7}{12}, \frac{11}{12}; \frac{6}{12}, \frac{8}{12}; \frac{3^3 x^4}{4^4} \biggr) - \frac{3^{11/4}x^3}{4^3 \sqrt{2 \pi}} \frac{\Gamma (13/12) \Gamma (17/12)}{\Gamma (18/12) \Gamma (15/12)} \,_2F_2 \biggl( \frac{13}{12}, \frac{17}{12}; \frac{18}{12}, \frac{15}{12}; \frac{3^3 x^4}{4^4} \biggr) $$
 * Something look awry here. Alpha=4/3, beta=0 should by symmetric, yet there is an x^3 term. I am also unable to numerically confirm the value at zero.  104.187.53.82 (talk) 23:49, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Source: T. M. Garoni, N. E. Frankel, "Lévy flights: Exact results and asymptotics beyond all orders", Journal of Mathematical Physics 43 #5, 2670-2689 (2002)

$$ f\biggl(x;\frac{3}{2},0,1,0\biggr) = \frac{1}{\pi} \Gamma (5/3) \,_2F_3 \biggl( \frac{5}{12}, \frac{11}{12}; \frac{1}{3}, \frac{1}{2}, \frac{5}{6}; - \frac{2^2 x^6}{3^6} \biggr) - \frac{x^2}{3 \pi} \,_3F_4 \biggl( \frac{3}{4}, 1, \frac{5}{4}; \frac{2}{3}, \frac{5}{6}, \frac{7}{6}, \frac{4}{3}; - \frac{2^2 x^6}{3^6} \biggr) + \frac{7 x^4}{3^4 \pi ^ 2} \Gamma (4/3) \,_2F_3 \biggl( \frac{13}{12}, \frac{19}{12}; \frac{7}{6}, \frac{3}{2}, \frac{5}{3}; - \frac{2^2 x^6}{3^6} \biggr) $$

Source: T. M. Garoni, N. E. Frankel, "Lévy flights: Exact results and asymptotics beyond all orders", Journal of Mathematical Physics 43 #5, 2670-2689 (2002) --Wainson (talk) 14:35, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The following are asymmetric distributions (specifically, where $$\beta = 1$$).

$$f\biggl(x;\frac{1}{3},1,1,0\biggr) = \frac{1}{\pi} \frac{2\sqrt{2}}{3^{7/4}}x^{-3/2}K_{1/3}\Biggl(\frac{4\sqrt{2}}{3^{9/4}}x^{-1/2}\Biggr)$$

where $$K_v(x)$$ is a modified Bessel function of the second kind.

Source: K. I. Hopcraft, E. Jakeman, R. M. J. Tanner, "Lévy random walks with fluctuating step number and multiscale behavior", Physical Review E 60 #5, 5327-5343 (1999)

$$f\biggl(x;\frac{2}{3},1,1,0\biggr) = \frac{\sqrt{3}}{\sqrt{\pi}}\vert x \vert ^ {-1} \exp\biggl(-\frac{16}{27}x^{-2}\biggr) W_{1/2,1/6}\biggl(\frac{32}{27}x^{-2}\biggr)$$

Source: V. M. Zolotarev, "Expression of the density of a stable distribution with exponent alpha greater than one by means of a frequency with exponent 1/alpha", In Selected Translations in Mathematical Statistics and Probability 1, 163-167 (1961). Translated from the Russian article: Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR. 98, 735-738 (1954)

$$f\biggl(x;\frac{3}{2},1,1,0\biggr) = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \frac{\sqrt{3}}{\sqrt{\pi}}\vert x \vert ^ {-1} \exp\biggl(\frac{1}{27}x^3\biggr) W_{1/2,1/6}\biggl(- \frac{2}{27}x^3\biggr) & x<0\\ \frac{1}{2\sqrt{3\pi}}\vert x \vert ^ {-1} \exp\biggl(\frac{1}{27}x^3\biggr) W_{-1/2,1/6}\biggl(\frac{2}{27}x^3\biggr) & x \geq 0 \end{array} \right.$$

Source: I. V. Zaliapin, Y. Y. Kagan, F. P. Schoenberg, "Approximating the Distribution of Pareto Sums", Pure and Applied Geophysics 162 #6, 1187-1228 (2005) --Wainson (talk) 00:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The remaining three distributions are $$f\biggl(x;1,0,1,0\biggr)$$ (the Cauchy), $$f\biggl(x;\frac{1}{2},1,1,0\biggr)$$ (the Lévy) and $$f\biggl(x;2,0,1,0\biggr)$$ (the Gaussian).

Turns out I know of eleven. :) --Wainson (talk) 12:25, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

More symmetric distributions The symmetric distributions for which $$\alpha=p/q$$ and $$p>q$$ can be derived from a result in:

T. M. Garoni, N. E. Frankel, "Lévy flights: Exact results and asymptotics beyond all orders", Journal of Mathematical Physics 43 #5, 2670-2689 (2002)

--Wainson (talk) 12:16, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone feel that these special cases are worthy of inclusion in the main article? PAR (talk) 21:06, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

 * I think so (and actually $$f\biggl(x;\frac{3}{2},0,1,0\biggr)$$ is mentioned in this article and has its own article). But I am concerned that adding lots of formulae with non-elementary functions might overwhelm the article with information of limited interest to most readers.  So it may be better to have a short section noting that there are other closed form density functions that use non-elementary functions with a link to a new article listing the circumstances and their densities and any other relevant information. Rlendog (talk) 21:27, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Series representation does not converge
I ran into a problem with the formula given in "Series representation". It does not converge, pretty much ever? For an explanation of why, consider $$\Gamma(n+1) = n!$$, ergo if alpha=1 for example $$\frac{\Gamma(\alpha n+1)}{n!}$$ is always equal to 1, and if alpha > 1 then it grows with increasing n. On top of that if x - mu < 1, then as n gets larger, $$\left(\frac{i}{x-\mu}\right)^{\alpha n+1}$$ also gets arbitrarily large. I'm not sure what is causing it or what the problem with the derivation is. Anyone? ObsidianOrder (talk) 16:37, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure, but it might be an asymptotic expansion, which will never converge, but will come close (sometimes VERY close) to the functional value given. PAR (talk) 01:20, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

 * There is indeed a problem. If we follow "Chance and Stability, Stable Distributions and their Applications" by Uchaikin and Zolotarev (MR1745764), from pages 106, 108, and 109 we can recover different series expansions for when $$\alpha <1 $$, $$\alpha >1 $$ and $$\alpha =1 $$ respectively. This does solve the issue of non-convergent series.JorgeIGC (talk) 10:18, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

 * That's not the only problem. See "Series Representation" further up this talk page. If $$\beta \ne 0$$ then the expression does not even make sense as $$q$$ depends on the $$t$$ that supposedly was integrated out. Daren Cline (talk) 22:55, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

 * In fact, although the series converges if $$\alpha<1$$, Fubini's theorem still does not apply so "reversing the order of integration and summation" is inappropriate in any case. An accurate and responsible result is needed here, with citation. Daren Cline (talk) 12:38, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Entropy
The infobox states 'see text' and there's nothing in the text about entropy. Solar Apex (talk) 01:35, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Move to "Lévy Distribution"
It appears the article on "Lévy skew alpha-stable distribution" was moved by the user Ptrf to the Lévy distribution article on 20 Feb 2009, yet there is no discussion of the move. The move expunged a great deal of useful information which isn't available in the "Lévy Distribution" article. The history doesn't allow an undo. I am curious why it was moved, or at least why it was moved without incorporating the information present in the "alpha-stable" article into the "Lévy Distribution" one. Can anyone advise and suggest where to find the old "Lévy skew alpha-stable distribution" (other than through Google Cache) so that we may at the very least restore it. Imlepid (talk) 06:47, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

 * For the record: "Levy skew alpha-stable distribution" was moved to "stable distribution" (and not "Levy distribution"). I think there was a confusion in terminology that arose after a merge in 2005. Now, I believe the titles correspond to the content and, more importantly, to what is stated in (Nolan 2005) or NolanWeb1 pdf. You're welcome to check it. In general, moving pages results in no loss of information, it's possible, however, that some further adjustments might be needed (you're welcome to go for it). No page was lost as you seem to imply, just renamed. I hope this addresses your concerns. ptrf (talk) 10:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Degenerate distribution
Can the degenerate distribution be considered an example of a stable distribution albeit a trivial one? Maybe I am missing something, but it seems to satisfy the condition. Also, its characteristic function seems almost, though not quite, identical to what a stable distribution characteristic function would be for alpha equal to zero, and would require only a minor tweak to the definition of the stable characteristic function (basically using a zero in the exponent when you have zero to zero power) to make it work. Rlendog (talk) 16:35, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Range of c
c only enters as an absolute value in the characteristic function, so it makes no sense to limit c to the interval $$[0,\infty)$$. Either c should be so limited and the absolute value removed, or put c in the interval $$(-\infty,\infty)$$ and keep the absolute value. The latter is standard, and there are reasons for this (see for example McCullagh's parametrization of the Cauchy distributions).

(Allowing negative c adds no value and makes no physical sense. What is a negative scale factor? It might make sense if -c lead to change of sign of beta, but it doesn't. I vote for removal of the absolute-values. 104.187.53.82 (talk) 06:43, 25 July 2023 (UTC))

Relation to elliptical distributions
I'd like to see something about the relation of stable distributions to elliptical distributions. I know that a linear combination of jointly elliptical variables is elliptically distributed--this seems very similar to the definition of a stable variable. See

Chamberlain, G. 1983."A characterization of the distributions that imply mean-variance utility functions", Journal of Economic Theory 29, 185-201.

and

Owen, J., and Rabinovitch, R. 1983. "On the class of elliptical distributions and their applications to the theory of portfolio choice", Journal of Finance38, 745-752. Duoduoduo (talk) 20:15, 11 March 2010 (UTC)

 * The property that you're taking about is infinite divisibility, where any probability distribution can be formed as the sum of N distributions of the same class (where N is any strictly positive integer). Other such infinitely divisible distributions are the Poisson, Gaussian (Normal) and Gamma distributions, and of course, the stable distributions. Wainson (talk) 16:11, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

 * Wainson, that's incorrect. It is not about infinite divisibility. For example a linear combination of poisson variables isn't poisson, even though the poisson is infinitely divisible. The confusion here is that linear combination of *jointly* elliptical variables is elliptically distributed, while a linear combination of *independent* stable variables is stable distributed. The key thing to note here is that jointly elliptical variables are only independent in the case of the multivariate normal with diagonal covariance matrix. Finally, note that stable variables with a skewness parameter of 0 are also elliptical. Merudo (talk) 22:24, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

Limit of power tail distributions
The following statement seems incomplete or incorrect: "A generalization due to Gnedenko and Kolmogorov states that the sum of a number of random variables with power-law tail distributions decreasing as 1 / | x | α + 1 where 0 < α < 2 (and therefore having infinite variance) will tend to a stable distribution f(x;α,0,c,0) as the number of variables grows. (Voit 2003, § 5.4.3)" For example, sum of random variables from a Cauchy distribution with a non-zero median will tend to a Cauchy distribution with a non-zero median, not to a zero median. Similarly, I am not sure a sum of random variables from an asymmetric distribution will necessarily tend to a symmetric stable distribution - a Levy distribution at least should not. Rlendog (talk) 17:34, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

(Continuous) stable distributions and (discrete) stable distributions
I was looking for information on the discrete-stable distributions when I was doing research for my thesis, but there was no page.

I'm in the process of writing one (see my draft), but don't know how best to link the articles together.

I'm thinking the best way might be to have a 'stable distributions' page which talks about general properties (e.g. limits of sums of iid random variables, being infinitely divisible, etc. then linking to the existing 'stable distributions' page (which will be renamed to 'continuous-stable distributions') and to my draft, 'discrete-stable distributions' from the general page.

How does that sound? Wainson (talk) 11:00, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

 * I think it's a great idea. PAR (talk) 10:59, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

Paul Levy
Mandelbrot claimed the name stable distribution comes from Paul Levy work:

''"...The purpose of this paper will be to present and test such a new model of price behavior in speculative markets. The principal feature of this model is that starting from the Bachelier process as applied to log,Z(t) instead of Z(t), I shall replace the Gaussian distributions throughout by another family of probability laws, to be referred to as "stable Paretian," which were first described in Paul Levy's classic Calcul des probabilites (1925). In a somewhat complex way, the Gaussian is a limiting case of this new family, so the new model is actually a generalization of that of Bachelier." ''

http://www.webofstories.com/play/benoit.mandelbrot/49

I can't read french, can someone confirm this?Lbertolotti (talk) 18:32, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

Levy used the term "stable lois" Lbertolotti (talk) 00:10, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Copies versus data
This article uses the word "copies" in place of "data", as in realizations from a distribution. Is this a standard synonym in probability speak? Isambard Kingdom (talk) 01:42, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

 * A copy of a random variable seems to be another random variable with the same distribution (not data). That's the first time I see copy used in this way. Still, it may be "lingo". I have tried to improve the first sentence in the article and in doing so eliminated "copy". --Herbmuell (talk) 02:59, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Merge proposal 2016
It has been a long time since the various merge and deletion proposals, and Stability (probability) still seems redundant, and relatively unsourced compared to Stable distribution. Is there any reason to keep the former? Dicklyon (talk) 06:01, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Oppose - This article is about a family of probability distributions, the other article is about a property that this family exhibits. But since the former article also covers topics such as geometric stability, which this family of distributions does not exhibit (that would be the Geometric stable distribution), and max stability (and there are other forms of stability that could be covered in the stability article which are not appropriate to these stable distributions), I don't think a merge would be a good idea. Rlendog (talk) 15:16, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Mellin transform and simulation
I think a section dedicated to stable distributions' Mellin transforms and the simulation algorithm derived from it is relevant. My main reference for what I'm about to write is "Simulation and Properties of Stable Law" by Devroye and James (MR3233961). Here is a quick overview of how it can be done: We explain that "stable distribution" is often known as "weakly stable distribution" whereas the "strongly stable distribution" has no shift or scaling (for which I prefer Zolotarev's (C) form parametrization since it makes everything much easier here and is a continuous parametrization of $$\varphi$$ (see Remark 1 and 2 in the cited article above). Here we may even make a distinction of when "linear shift" (when $$\alpha \neq 1$$) and a "logarithm shift" (when $$\alpha=1$$).

Now I will only talk about the case of strongly stable distributions (any $$\alpha \in (0,2]$$). The weakly stable cases follow by doing a linear transformation when $$\alpha\neq1$$ or with other procedures (also available in the article) when $$\alpha=1$$.

We then rewrite the characteristic function as:

$$\varphi(t;\alpha,\beta)=\exp\left( -|t|^\alpha \exp\left( -i\sgn(t)\frac{\alpha\theta\pi}{2}\right)\right)$$

where $$\theta = \beta \left(\frac{\alpha-2}{\alpha}1_{\alpha>1}+1_{\alpha\leq1}\right)$$. Next, if we put $$\rho=\frac{1+\theta}{2}$$ and let $$X$$ be a stable random variable with that characteristic function, then for any $$s\in\mathbb{C}$$ with $$-1<\Re s<\alpha $$:

$$E\left[X^s1_{X>0}\right]= \rho\frac{\Gamma(1+s)\Gamma(1-s/\alpha)}{\Gamma(1+s\rho)\Gamma(1-s\rho)}$$

In particular $$P(X>0)=\rho$$ and if $$\alpha>1$$ and $$\beta=-1$$ ("spectrally negative" case) this yields the previous formula valid for any $$s\in\mathbb{C}$$ with $$-1<\Re s $$. In that case, the distribution even has a moment generating function (wich can be expressed as a power series using this formula and we might add it for completeness).

Using the last relationship (the Mellin transform), then we deduce that $$X|X>0 $$ has the same distribution as $$\left(\frac{Y_1}{Y_2}\right)^{\rho} $$ where $$Y_1 $$ and $$Y_2 $$ are independent stable random variables with parameters $$(\alpha\rho,1) $$ and $$(\rho,1) $$ respectively. These random variables are easily simulated using the formula given in Devroye and James' article page 2.JorgeIGC (talk) 11:18, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Original research in the generalization section
Everything after the first two paragraphs seems to be either original research or poorly cited. Given the content, I think it's the former, and a WP:NOR case; regardless, this section needs to be better set-out. I would delete the entire section, but I don't want my first major edit to be removing a large chunk of a page to fix an issue that could be solved with one or two citations. 124.171.219.139 (talk) 03:52, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

The majority of the GCLT section should be tossed. Why is there some random proof of another theorem here??? GLCT was proven (published) in 1937 by Levy and the statement and proof there is what is relevant. 137.79.234.22 (talk) 18:57, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

 * I added a new GCLT section with full references and a statement. I didn't blast the old section; I will leave that up to someone bolder. I did replace the nonsense over on the CLT page, though. Skewray (talk) 00:05, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

 * Section removed Skewray (talk) 16:04, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

Singular or plural?
The first sentence of the article is as follows:

"The stable distribution family is also sometimes referred to as the Lévy alpha-stable distribution, after Paul Lévy, the first mathematician to have studied it."

Question: Is it correct to refer to the family of stable distributions as "the Lévy-stable distribution" (singular) ???

This would be most unusual.

Perhaps it should be the "Lévy-stable distribution family" ???

I hope someone knowledgeable about this subject can fix this apparent problem. 2601:200:C000:1A0:4C93:30C6:6EBC:CB9C (talk) 20:56, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

A Generalized Central Limit Theorem Isn't
The section on A Generalized Central Limit Theorem is only on an early and related proof. The GCLT says that all distributions when summed converge (in some sense) to Stable Distributions, and this isn't it. See Nolan's book.

104.187.53.82 (talk) 15:45, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

 * I added a new The GCLT section with full references and a statement. I didn't blast the old section; I will leave that up to someone bolder. I did replace the nonsense over on the CLT page, though. Skewray (talk) 00:06, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

 * Section removed Skewray (talk) 16:04, 19 May 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Stable distribution


text:
Talk:American folk music

Untitled
To do : Link in American folk music revival

Relationship
I can't see the relationship with some of the stuff in the sidebar. Hiphop? Ozz fest? These are roots music?? Nurg 11:02, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * That's the Music of the United States infobox. There is no roots music box, though there is a footer at the bottom of the page. Tuf-Kat 02:23, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)

This ought to be at either American folk music or United States folk music. I think folk is a more common term. Tuf-Kat 01:38, Jun 22, 2005 (UTC)

about the move from american roots music to american folk music
The article is still written as if it was titled "American roots music". The wording should be changed so as to properly reflect it current title. The term "American roots music" as an alternitive term and why it's called that should then be discussed within. --Cab88 23:17, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

I did a baby step, changing the lead so as to not exclude other types of american folk music. North8000 (talk) 13:06, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

I also added a section that helped a little in that respect. North8000 (talk) 20:14, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Folk Musicians
Do "folk-pop" musicians like Joni Mitchell and Bob Dylan count as part of American folk music? Is there reason that there's not much mention of popular "folk music" apart from traditional, community sung songs? FireWorks 10:39, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * That type certainly should.  But Joni is Canadian. North8000 (talk) 10:30, 1 July 2010 (UTC)
 * And is Canada not part of America? Blackbird5555 (talk) 05:53, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * No, the common meaning of "America" by itself is the USA. North8000 (talk) 23:49, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Modern Roots Musicians
I removed the section " More recent musicians who occasionally or consistently play roots music include Keb' Mo', Ralph Stanley, Pete Seeger, Iron & Wine, and Ricky Skaggs. Additionally, the soundtrack to the 2000 comedy film O Brother, Where Art Thou? is exclusively roots music, performed by Alison Krauss, The Fairfield Four, Emmylou Harris, Norman Blake and others.  The 2003 film A Mighty Wind is a tribute to (and parody of) the folk-pop musicians of the early 1960s." because it is unorganized and needs to be rewritten. Ralph Stanley is now an elderly man and has been recording for at least half a century, and doesn't fit in the same category as Iron and Wine. A reexamination of "contemporary" is needed. hi i an bob
 * whether you offer an explanation or not, you still can't just go and delete things like this unless you're going to rewrite them yourself. put a cleanup tag on it or something, don't remove information. Gordonjay 14:19, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
 * He's right that Ralph Stanley doesn't fit the category of "more recent musicians who occasionally or consistently play roots music," though. Although Ralph Stanley is still performing and cranking out albums, he and The Stanley Bothers go way back, and are among the originators of Bluegrass and fathers of old timey recording. ColmCille 09:43, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Radio
Didn't radio play a big role in the spread? Kdammers (talk) 11:30, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Great content, but the lead limits scope too much for the subject/title
I think that subject of the article, as defined by it's title, is broader than what the lead says. Much American folk music is excluded. North8000 (talk) 03:03, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

 * I tweaked the lead a little so to not exclude other types of American Folk Music. Of course, this begs the question of coverage of the other types, but that just means that this is just step one. North8000 (talk) 13:08, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

 * At the other general folk music we decided to sort of split folk music into contemporary folk music and traditional music. Someday we can get all of those organized.  As baby steps in that direction I plan to divide this article along those lines.  If you prefer otherwise I'll revert myself (or feel free to revert me) while we discuss.  Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 19:57, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Something is seriously wrong in this page
Why is the bulk of the content of this page taken up with roots music when, as stated in the article, many roots musicians don't consider themselves folk musicians? Why are those actually considered folk, like Pete Seeger, Woody Guthrie, The Weavers placed under "Other American folk music" as if they are peripheral to American folk music, when they are central to the genre? Something is seriously askew in this page, the emphasis is completely wrong. Hzh (talk) 11:13, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

 * Mostly agree with you. The section which you are indicating underplays those musicians did not even exist until I added a few months ago.  I made that title up as a quick initial effort; please feel free to change it.
 * There are a lot of top-level terminology issues with folk/roots/traditional/world music articles, and also a lot of duplication between top level articles in that area. (and also between this article and the American folk music revival article which others have gotten into excellent shape.) I may be the one doing the most work in this overall area, and I have put 95% of my efforts into the Folk music article, and only a few spotty efforts into the other ones. The real answer may to be to consolidate the top level articles, and to organize and expand the sub articles. But my head spins when I start thinking about that, (and we had a false start, thinking that the term "traditional music" was gaining traction more than it actually was) and so I have mostly just focused on trying to build a substantial (and hopefully good) Folk music article.   North8000 (talk) 11:26, 8 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Update on my last post......what I was referring to as the "Folk music" article has been split into two articles, the other being Contemporary folk music.North8000 (talk) 20:42, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm starting to change my thinking a bit. Possibly this article should focus on styles that are particularly / uniquely American rather than "worldwide" folk musicians/ music where the artists just happen(ed) to live in the USA. North8000 (talk) 17:07, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Historical Research Methods
— Assignment last updated by Nicolefrones (talk) 16:48, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Etymology
I thought about adding a section defining folk music, and the distinction between the terms folk, Americana, roots, old-time, and country, for example. This could also be a part of the opening paragraph. Nicolefrones (talk) 22:15, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Blues
Although "blues" is mentioned several times in the article, starting with the lede, there seems to be no discussion of the subject in the article. So I added a more or less empty "Blues" section, but on more serious reflection am inclined to change that to something like "African-American folk music" so that a large amount of black pre-blues stuff could be added. How does this seem to you? Carptrash (talk) 18:23, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * It could be an interesting angle if there is coverage as such. If not, then names are what this is about and IMO Blues are Blues. North8000 (talk) 22:12, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'd love to be able to sit down and discuss exactly what "Blues are Blues" means but in place of that I have Eileen Southern's book The Music of Black Americans in which a large variety of slave songs are discussed. These can only be termed "folk music" and include religious or spiritual songs, work songs, including boat songs, cotton songs, corn husking songs, roustabout (gonna have to look that one up) songs, woodcutters songs, then dance songs, play songs, story songs, satirical songs, and field & street cries (think the beginning of Porgy & Bess).  And these are just the slave songs.  It is a long way, no doubt filled with music, from emancipation until the blues show up.  We'll see where, if anywhere, this goes but I don't want to spend a lot, or even a little effort on this just to have it caboshed. Carptrash (talk) 22:56, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Cool. I didn't mean anything heavy duty about IMO "Blues are Blues", it was just a matter of what name is applied to it.  I think that it's a pretty cool and interesting concept to consider what you described as folk music.  But you're really going to need a source that explores it as such, you and I can't just make up the concept and write about it.  If you have a source that does that I'd a support putting it in here and then I think it would be pretty safe from getting caboshed. if not, not.  Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 00:55, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I rarely go out of my own library for sources, so we'll see what i can dig up, I not sure if Southern uses the term "folk music" or not, but if blues are considered to be folk music I don't see why field hollers would not be since they are a precursor to the blues. Anyway I am not expecting to see anything happen too quickly, but it is on my mind, so . . . . ..... Carptrash (talk) 06:29, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

Do these belong here?
The sentence, ""Sixteen Tons" was written in 1946 by Merle Travis about the plight of coal miners and life in company towns. Travis also penned "Dark as a Dungeon," which was most notably performed by Johnny Cash". is really (opinion) not about folk songs so does t belong in the article? Carptrash (talk) 20:21, 3 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:American folk music


text:
Talk:Paschal Triduum

Untitled
Does anyone fancy working on WikiProject Christian liturgical year? Gareth Hughes 11:02, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup completed
I've updated and standardized the article on its bullet points, noted certain practices in Roman Catholicism regarding RCIA (having participated in and observed this directly, confirming with notes from official sources), and expanded on links and relevant data, hopefully not repeating additional data found on alternate links. I have removed the cleanup tag, but if there is something specific that isn't up to sniff, please note it here and return the cleanup tag. --Spencerian 15:54, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Pascal Triduum
I believe the main title of this article should be Paschal Triduum. More Christians refer to this as Paschal Triduum than any other name, including Easter Triduum. ludahai 魯大海 14:48, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

unveiling of statues and images
In this article, I have found:

"If statues and images have been veiled during the last two weeks of Lent, they are unveiled, without ceremony, before the Easter Vigil service begins."

There is a reference provided, and when I went to it I found (after the reference to unveiling of crucifixes):

"All other images are unveiled shortly before the Mass of the Easter Vigil."

I do not understand the meaning of this. In the pre-1970 Roman Catholic missal, this unveiling takes place during the singing of "Gloria in Excelsis" at the Easter Vigil Mass; at the same time, the bells are rung and the organ played (after they had fallen silent when the "Gloria in Excelsis" ended on Holy Thursday).

(As for crucifixes: Yes, a crucifix is ceremoniously unveiled during the Good Friday services, and after the service, other crucifixes are unveiled without ceremony; this is part of "housekeeping", which includes dismantling the repository.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.63.16.82 (talk) 15:22, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I see no contradiction between "All other images are unveiled shortly before the Mass of the Easter Vigil" (when read in the context that veiling is no longer obligatory) and "If statues and images have been veiled during the last two weeks of Lent, they are unveiled, without ceremony, before the Easter Vigil service begins." The present Roman Missal says, under "Fifth Sunday of Lent": "The practice of covering crosses and images throughout the church from this Sunday may be observed, if the Conference of Bishops so decides. Crosses remain covered until the end of the celebration of the Lord's Passion on Good Friday, but images remain covered until the beginning of the Easter Vigil."
 * To be more precise, unveiling during the Gloria was the rule only in the 1955-1969 Roman Missal. In edititions earlier than 1955 there was no such rule.  Esoglou (talk) 15:53, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Black Saturday
"Also called Black Saturday, is a vigil service that is held after nightfall on Holy Saturday ...." I've never heard the phrase "Black Saturday". I'll take your word, and the reference, that it has been used for Holy Saturday. But is it used for the vigil service? i think those are two different things.--Richardson mcphillips (talk) 15:08, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

Paschal Triddum
Paschal Triddum 72.132.72.133 (talk) 19:57, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Yiv 2001:56A:789E:F00:E5F8:8B7:E8FE:F11E (talk) 23:12, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Paschal Triduum


text:
List of Serbian folk songs

List of Serbian folk songs:

 * 'Ajd' d' idemo, Rado
 * 'Ajde Jano
 * 'Ajde Kato
 * Četir' konja debela
 * Čuješ, seko
 * 'Ej, čija frula
 * Igrale se delije
 * Imam jednu želju
 * Mila Majko
 * Moj Milane
 * Na te mislim
 * Ne vredi plakati
 * Oj, Jelo, Jelo
 * Oj, Moravo
 * Oj Srbijo mati
 * Oj Srbijo, mila mati
 * Pred Senkinom kućom
 * Stani, stani Ibar vodo
 * Tamo daleko
 * U ranu zoru
 * Već odavno spremam svog mrkova
 * Višnjičića
 * Volem Diku
 * Vidovdan
 * Vranjanka
 * Bojerka
 * Goranine ćafanine
 * Himna kosovskih junaka
 * Gora ječi
 * Gusta mi magla padnala
 * Marijo, bela kumrijo
 * Kreće se lađa francuska
 * More izgrejala
 * Moj golube
 * Nebo
 * Niko nema što Srbin imade
 * Oblak se vije
 * Odvoji se grojze od lojze
 * Otvori mi belo lenče
 * Preleteše ptice
 * Rasti, rasti
 * Čubro Marko

title: List of Serbian folk songs


text:
Hagecius (crater)

Hagecius is a lunar impact crater in the southeastern part of the Moon's near side. It was named after 16th century Czech naturalist Tadeáš Hájek (Latinized as Thaddaeus Hagecius). This crater forms a triangular formation with the craters Rosenberger to the north-northwest and Nearch to the west-northwest. Like both of these craters, Hagecius has undergone erosion from subsequent impacts, and its outer rim is worn and irregular. The southeastern rim in particular is overlaid by three smaller craters designated Hagecius C, B, and G. The interior floor of Hagecius is a level plain with no significant rises. There is a small craterlet to the northwest of the midpoint, and a few tiny craterlets marking the southeastern half of the floor. About a third of the interior floor on this side is also overlaid by the outer ramparts of the three satellite craters mentioned above.

To the northeast of Hagecius is the crater Biela, a younger formation with more distinctive features.

Satellite craters
By convention these features are identified on lunar maps by placing the letter on the side of the crater midpoint that is closest to Hagecius.

title: Hagecius (crater)


text:
Luna Park, Melbourne

Luna Park Melbourne is a historic amusement park located on the foreshore of Port Phillip Bay in St Kilda, Melbourne, Victoria. It opened on 13 December 1912, with a formal opening a week later, and has been operating almost continuously ever since.

History
Luna Park was built by American showman J.D. Williams, together with the Phillips brothers Harold, Leon and Herman. Not much is known of their background, but they were involved in the building of picture theatres in Spokane, Washington and Vancouver before coming to Sydney in 1909 and quickly establishing a chain of luxury cinemas in that city and then Melbourne.

They then took the lease of the Dreamland site, a failed amusement park on the St Kilda foreshore, and reputedly brought out experts directly from the birthplace of the amusement park, Coney Island in New York, to build an up to date attraction. It was to be named Luna Park, perhaps after the first park of that name, the 1903 Luna Park on Coney Island, or Luna Park, Seattle, opened in 1906. Melbourne's Luna Park opened on 13 December 1912, to huge crowds and was an immediate success.

It is not clear exactly who designed the famous mouth entrance; T.S. Eslick is credited with the design of the park in the opening day brochure, and as the 'engineer-in-chief' in contemporary newspaper reports, while Vernon Churchill was described as the scenic artist "in whose fertile brain the various attractions have been arranged".

In the years before World War I, the park was a great success, with attractions such as the Scenic Railway, Palais de Folies (later Giggle Palace), River Caves of the World, Penny Arcade, a Whitney Bros 'while-u-wait' photo booth, the American Bowl Slide, as well as live performances in the Palace of Illusions and on a permanent high-wire. Williams returned to the US around 1913, and helped found First National Films which subsequently became Warner Brothers. The Phillips brothers stayed on and ran the park until their deaths in the 1950s.

Luna Park closed for the war, although the Scenic Railway continued to operate, and the park itself was still used for "patriotic or fund-raising events". It did not re-open until an extensive overhaul in 1923 added new and improved attractions, such as the Big Dipper roller coaster, a water chute, a Noah's Ark, and a four-row carousel made in 1913 by the Philadelphia Toboggan Company (that had previously been at White City in Sydney).

Between the wars, a number of new attractions were made, including dodgem cars in 1926–7, and in 1934, a ghost train. In the 1950s, the park was refurbished, including the addition of The Rotor in 1951. The park remained popular throughout the 1950s, 1960s and into the late 1970s, when some of the earlier attractions began to be replaced by modern mechanical rides. A fire in 1981 destroyed the Giggle Palace, and in the same year the River Caves were declared unsafe, and demolished. In 1989, the Big Dipper was demolished in anticipation of a new large roller coaster which never eventuated. The ride was also demolished due to safety concerns with its age, following a major derailment, that injured 20 people, on the older rollercoaster, the Scenic Railway.

The main historic features of the park to remain include the iconic "Mr Moon" face entry and flanking towers (1912, restored 1999), the Scenic Railway (1912), which is the oldest continuously operating roller coaster in the world, and the carousel (1913 restored 2000). Other historic attractions include the ghost train (1934), and the fairytale-castle-style dodgems building constructed to house the newly patented ride in 1927 (the ride itself was relocated from the first floor of this building to the ground level in the late 1990s).

The park also includes many modern attractions such as the Coney Drop, the Spider, a ferris wheel, and other mechanical thrill-rides. The park remains popular with children and their parents who have fond memories of the park from their youth.

The remaining 28 years of a 50 years lease for Luna Park was sold in 1998, when two superannuation funds represented by BCR Asset Management bought it for $3 million. They spent $10 million on extensive refurbishments, upgrading the services and safety for the first time in decades, upgrading existing rides and installing new ones, whilst retaining the fun-fair, fantasy themes. The Scenic Railway was overhauled, the face rebuilt, with a new fibreglass version placed over the remnants of the original plaster one, and the towers repainted in their traditional primary colours. The carousel was also restored, returning the horses and the painted decoration to their original 1913 appearance.

A consortium headed by Melbourne transport magnate Lindsay Fox bought Luna Park in early 2005, pledging to restore it to the glory he remembers from his 1940s youth, spent in nearby Windsor. As of 2021, none of these plans have come to fruition, but the Scenic Railway Station was given a facelift. Between December 2007 and June 2008, a major section of the Scenic Railway underwent major repairs and in 2010 the Coney Island Top Drop (a replica of Coney Tower at Coney Island's Luna Park) was purchased directly from Zamperla.

The park's triangular beachfront site is on government land, bounded by the O'Donnell Gardens on one side and Cavell Street on the other. Across this street is a larger triangle of foreshore crown land known as the 'Triangle Site', occupied by the grand 1920s Palais Theatre, the 1970s Palace nightclub (burned down in 2007), and car parking. The City of Port Phillip, in consultation with the Victorian State Government, ran a tender process in 2007 to restore the Palais Theatre and redevelop the remainder of the site. Lindsay Fox was part of a consortium that submitted a proposal which was unsuccessful.

The remaining heritage features of the park are listed on the National Trust of Australia, and the face and towers and Scenic Railway, and the carousel and its canopy, are listed on the Victorian Heritage Register.

On 13 December 2012, the park celebrated its centenary. In August 2013, it was announced that a new permanent thrill ride would be installed in the coming months. The ride replaced the G-Force and was revealed to be a permanent installation of the Power Surge, which had previously been a seasonal ride.

In 2014–15 the 'House of Carnivale' was built in the site that had once been the Jack'n'Jill, and later the Pinball Arcade, with food venues on the ground level and a function room upstairs. This was the first permanent building on the Luna Park site since the ghost train in 1936.

Other Luna Parks
Luna Park in St Kilda spawned three other Luna Parks that were eventually built or planned around Australia, and there were another two places that used the name.

In 1930 the Phillips brothers branched out and built a second Luna Park in the Adelaide seaside suburb of Glenelg, managed by David Atkins. The Glenelg park had an exact clone of Melbourne's Big Dipper that operated at Sydney until 1979. In the face of Council's refusal to lower the rental, and local opposition, when a site in Sydney became available in Milsons Point Sydney, they dismantled the rides and relocated the venture. With a new face entrance and a version of the Giggle Palace called Coney Island, Luna Park Sydney was an immediate success, and still operates, albeit with the loss of most original rides.

In 1938 T. S. Eslick reappeared in Australia and built the Cloudland Ballroom which was originally called Luna Park, and had a few rides clustered around it. World War II intervened, and the park was soon closed, with the ballroom reopening in 1942 to become a popular part of the Brisbane entertainment scene until its shock demolition in 1982.

In 1944 a small cluster of amusements on the foreshore of the seaside Brisbane suburb of Redcliffe adopted the name Luna Park, and operated until the last ride closed in the late 1960s.

Another collection of rides, complete with a much-simplified version of the mouth entrance, opened in the Perth seaside suburb of Scarborough, Western Australia in 1939. It lasted 33 years before being demolished in 1972 for a shopping centre.

Current rides

 * Speedy Beetle – Spinning children's roller coaster manufactured by SBF Visa Group. Opened in 2019. Replaced the aging Silly Serpent ride.
 * Moon Balloons – Enjoy the smooth glide to the top as your balloon lifts up to the skies! Small version of the classic Ferris wheel.
 * The Great Scenic Railway – opened in December 1912, the Scenic Railway is the oldest continually operating roller coaster in the world, and one of only three roller coasters (the others being in Great Yarmouth, UK, and Copenhagen, Denmark) that require a brakeman to stand in the middle of the train. For these reasons, it is regarded as an ACE Coaster Classic.
 * Sky Rider ferris wheel – Built 1971
 * Twin Dragon – A Japanese-built Pirate ship type ride
 * Supernova – Built and installed in 2019. Take to the skies for a 360° spin on this giant tower that will make you want to scream with joy!
 * Red Baron – Built 2001
 * The Ghost Train – A ghost train which retains its 1934 tracks.
 * Dodgems – Built 2000 – a Dodgem cars pavilion
 * The Enterprise – built 1979 - popular HUSS Enterprise ride
 * Coney Drop – Built 2010, by Zamperla. The exact same ride is also installed at Luna Park, Coney Island, under the name Coney Tower.
 * Arabian Merry
 * Luna Park Carousel – a heritage Carousel built in 1913 by the renowned Philadelphia Toboggan Company in the United States. This is one of the few examples of their work outside the USA and as with the Scenic Railway of heritage value to the culture of theme parks in the United States as well as in Australia
 * Spider – Built 1983
 * Pharaoh's Curse – a Japanese made Kamikaze-style double-arm ranger (Scissors)
 * The Power Surge – Permanently installed in 2013. Previously a seasonally operated ride.
 * The Road Runner – Built 2017, rotary slide ride.
 * Betty Choo Choo – Trackless train. The little Lunies love to ride around the park alongside their grown-ups.
 * Happy Swing – Built in 2020, a Zamperla Happy Swing.

Past attractions

 * Giggle Palace (Palais de Folies) (1912-1981), (destroyed by fire)
 * River Caves (1912–1981, demolished)
 * Jack'n'Jill (Water Chute) (1928 – c. 1970, demolished)
 * Noah's Ark (1923 – c. 1978, demolished)
 * Big Dipper (Rollercoaster) (1923–1989, demolished)
 * Whip (1923 – c. 1981 demolished)
 * Rotor (1951–1977, demolished)
 * UFO (1977–1983)
 * Hurricane (1982–1986)
 * Gravitron (1983–2001)
 * Zipper (1989–1995)
 * Ranger (1991–1992)
 * Polyps Octopus (1991–1993)
 * Ferrari 500 go kart (1984–1989)
 * Scat (1978-1984, 1993-2001)
 * Here Comes Haley Holloway! (1988–1999)
 * Prison Break: Live! (Temporary Attraction)
 * Lara Croft – Tomb Raider Anniversary: Live! (Temporary Attraction)
 * Shock Drop (2001–2010) – Was replaced by the more advanced Coney Island Drop.
 * Metropolis (Rollercoaster) (1993–2012, dismantled)
 * G-Force / Disco Swing (1986–2013)
 * Mirror Maze – The mirror maze was made up of 75 individual mirrors. (2005-2021)
 * Freak Out (2015)
 * Body Rock
 * Pirates Revenge (2017)
 * Silly Serpent / Dragon (1989–2019, Dismantled) Powered-train Zamperla children's coaster on a looping 540ft track, was replaced by SBF Visa's own more advanced Speedy Beetle spinning coaster in 2018.
 * Holodeck – A Motion Simulator ride, this was Sega World Sydney's former Sega AS-1 motion simulator model.

title: Luna Park, Melbourne


text:
User talk:Goatman~enwiki

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. -- 11:05, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

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

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 00:13, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 13:21, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Goatman~enwiki


text:
Talk:Paul Lévy (mathematician)

Lévy dragon curve
(Discussion copied from User talk:Solkoll and User talk:Gandalf61)

Saw your changes to Lévy C curve and Paul Pierre Lévy. Can you explain what your definition of the Lévy dragon curve is, and how it differs from the Lévy C curve ? The only references I can find to the Lévy dragon curve are actually about the Lévy C curve (see here for example). When people refer to a dragon curve without qualification, they always seem to mean the Harter-Heighway dragon curve, which I think has nothing to do with Paul Lévy. I don't mind removing the phrase "also known as the Lévy dragon curve" from the C curve article, but, as far as I know, there is not a separate curve called the Lévy dragon curve. Gandalf61 11:01, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)

Hello Gandalf! About the Lévy curves: I'm not really sure where I read about the curves, (and maybe the source was wrong), it was some years ago now. But as far as I know there are three diffrent, closly related curves. At the moment I'm uploading images of IFS fractals I'm creating to "Commons". There I uploaded these three images the recent day or so, (doing this I also made some changes to the wikipedia articles about the curves, as you know =) Here you can see the diffrence between the "Harter-Heighways dragon curve" and the "Lévy dragon curve". Using IFS (random game), the construction of these curves are almost the same.

Lévy C curve:
 * two points in a plane, (two "rules")
 * scale factor; 1:sqrt(2) for both rules
 * rotation angles; rule [0] = 45º, rule[1] = -45º

Lévy dragon curve:
 * two points in a plane
 * scale factor; 1:sqrt(2) for both rules
 * rotation angle; 45º for both rules

Harter-Heighways dragon curve: I'm not 100% sure I got it all correct, but it's close =)
 * two points in a plane
 * scale factors; rule [0] = 1:sqrt(2), rule [1] = -1:sqrt(2)
 * rotation angles; rule [0] = 45º, rule[1] = -45º

I hope this helped you a bit? If I can find some kind of source for this information, then I get back to you. // Solkoll 17:09, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your response on my talk page, and for the illustrations. I have re-read Lévy's original paper "Plane or Space Curves and Surfaces Consisting of Parts Similar to the Whole", and I cannot find any mention of the curve that you are calling the Lévy dragon curve. Lévy presents various general results that apply to any self-similar curve, but the only two 2-D curves that he discusses in detail are the Koch curve and the curve that he refers to as $$C_0$$, which we call the Lévy C curve. All his figures show the Lévy C curve. In the copy I have, which is in Gerald Edgar's anthology "Classics on Fractals", Edgar adds commentary in which he refers to Lévy's $$C_0$$ curve as the Lévy dragon curve, which is another reason why I thought this was just another name for the Lévy C curve. Can you provide any reference that links your Lévy dragon curve to Lévy, or that calls it the Lévy dragon curve ? Gandalf61 11:07, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)

 * In the absence of any evidence that Solkoll's Lévy dragon curve has any link to Paul Lévy, I have removed the reference to it from the article. Gandalf61 11:09, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Paul Lévy (mathematician)


text:
Scouthal Burn

Scouthal Burn, a continuation of Burn of Acharole has its source in the Flow Country of Caithness, in the Highland area of Scotland, at a height of around 50 metres, at the confluence of the Burn of Achorole and Alt Feithe Buidhe and about three kilometres south/southwest of the village of Watten.

Scouthal Burn meanders generally north/north-westward, across a distance of about two kilometres, with the Moss of Badarclay to its east, to join Strath Burn and so form the source of the Wick River, at around 25 metres and about one kilometre south of Watten.

title: Scouthal Burn


text:
Talk:Great feasts in the Eastern Orthodox Church

[Untitled]
Does anyone fancy working on WikiProject Christian liturgical year? Gareth Hughes 11:07, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Great Lent

Liturgical year

 * Does anyone fancy working on WikiProject Christian liturgical year? Gareth Hughes 11:08, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Do we need two seperate articles?
Does there really need to be two seperate listing for Western Lent and Orthodox Lent? Zach82 02:34, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As someone who has belonged to both traditions, the nature of the seasons has diverged considerably; they are observed differently and have different dates. Wsbhopkin 13:55, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, there is only one page for Easter Wsbhopkin 13:56, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * This is true: but I think the same reconing applies: the two celebrations are so manifestly different that to do them both justice they should be treated seperately. The article on Orthodox Easter should be titled "Pascha" (with perhaps a brief discussion and a link to it in the [Western] Easter article). MishaPan 19:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I don't know. In my experience converts tend to exaggerate the differences based more on the convert’s own ignorance of the beliefs and practices of his previous sect.  The article mentions differences of habit and ceremony, but it doesn't have anything to say on the difference of significance or underlying theology.  If you could, perhaps, provide any genuine differences outside of "Golly, out Lent is a couple weeks longer!" then perhaps it might justify a seperate article. Zach82 17:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

 * If I may be so bold, speaking as someone who studied western liturgics before becoming Orthodox myself and beginning the study of eastern liturgics (23 years ago), the difference is quite a lot more than simply the length of the Fast (which, by the way, is not the case; both traditions fast for 40 days, the difference is how they count the 40 days). In addition to that rather minor difference, the entire structure, theory, and theological approach is different between the two traditions. In some cases, diametrical opposites exist (West: no "Alleluias"; East: more "Alleluias" than normal. West: Ash Wednesday [with the Imposition of Ashes]; East: Clean Monday [with the admonition not to mark one's face, but to wash one's face], etc.). Great Lent, in fact, provides one of the most interesting formats for studying the differences between the two traditions. Orthodox Great Lent is such a rich subject, it could occupy numerous pages, and really deserves a separate treatment--and a much more detailed one than this page currently provides. MishaPan 01:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Pray go ahead and propose changes to this article then. You are the expert after all.  As the article stands Great Lent and Lent aren't sounding all that different- when you really get down to it they are both seasons of penitential preparation for Easter, sectarianism aside.Zach82 04:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Gentlemen, you're both right. They are the same concept - a season of penitential preparation for Easter, but there's so much to say that it might be overloading one page to put the practices of East and West in a single page.InfernoXV 06:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

The two articles should be merged. The "considerable differences" between Eastern and Western Christianity are incredibly exaggerated, especially when Roman Catholics and Anglicans have more in common with Eastern Orthodox than with Baptists. Some folks here claim that they "converted" from "Western Christianity" to Eastern (or vice versa), but they fail to mention which Western denomination they came from. If you're coming from, say, Pentecostalism, then yes you'll encounter considerable differences when you approach Orthodoxy. And it also depends on which Eastern denomination you're "converting" to (Chalcedonian Eastern Orthodox? or non-Chaldedonian Oriental Orthodox?) If you're going from Catholicism or Anglicanism to Chalcedonian Eastern Orthodox, you'll encounter minimal differences. In fact, some Orthodox Christian denominations in parts of Romania and western Ukraine recognize the Roman Pope as their Christian primate. These denominations are called "Greek Catholic", and they operate as a semi-autonomous branch of the Roman Catholic Church (the Roman Catholic Church is hoping to incorporate all Eastern Orthodox Christians into the Catholic Church under the same model, and was also going to take in some of the more conservative Anglican denominations under the same model).

But the fact that Orthodox Christians are under-represented in Anglo countries contributes to the perception within the English-speaking world (and as a result, English-language Wikipedia) that Eastern Christians are "mystic", "exotic", and "different". This is especially true for the United States (not so much for Britain) which geographically far from predominantly Orthodox countries, and where Evangelicalism dominates.

As for the word "Pascha", it is just the literal Greek-language translation of the word "Easter", and -like the French word Paques or the Italian word Pasqua or the Castilian word Pasqua- is derived from the Hebrew word Pesach. I really don't understand why Wikipedia insists on calling Orthodox Easter "Pascha" when Pascha is just the Greek word for Easter. Skyduster (talk) 04:22, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

 * More like Easter is the english word of Pascha... :P Besides, who wants to use Easter it just calls for all the detractors to bring up pagan roots. "Easter is from ester!" or whatever. Anyway, Pascha is what it is called by most Orthodox, not Easter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.114.111 (talk) 22:12, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

 * Well in French, Italian, Spanish, Catalan, Portuguese, Dutch, and Danish, the word for Easter is similar to the Greek one, with the pak- root, which was taken from the Hebrew Pesach. Only English and German are different.  Just another example of how semantics are misinterpreted by English speakers to create false differences between Eastern and Western Christianity.  I mean, how fucking stupid is this that we have a separate articles for "Lent" and "Great Lent".  Skyduster (talk) 17:27, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * On the other hand, the English translation "Passover" is really congenial. :-) --131.159.0.47 (talk) 13:52, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

No. The articles should be merged. Vincent J. Lipsio (talk) 13:45, 6 May 2015 (UTC)

Calendar or chart needed
I am confused by when Meatfare Sunday and Cheesefare Sunday are in relation to Great Lent (is Cheesefare Sunday the day before the Monday on which Great Lent starts?). Also, I had understood that fasting WAS permitted in the Orthodox tradition on Saturdays (but not Sundays), and that that was why Saturdays (but not Sundays) were included in the count of forty days. So it would be good to have some kind of calendar or chart showing the two mentioned Sundays before the start of Great Lent (or was it three?), the special meanings of the Sundays within Great Lent, and perhaps coloring or shading the days of Great Lent itself. Thank you. Ifdef 16:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Meatfare Sunday (also called the Sunday of the Last Judgement) falls two weeks before the beginning of Great Lent. It derives its name from the fact that it is the last day on which the laity may eat meat (Orthodox monastics never eat meat). The week that follows Meatfare Sunday (i.e., the week before Great Lent) is called Cheesefare Week, because even though no meat may be eaten, dairy products may be consumed any day of the week (including Wednesday and Friday, when they would normally be forbidden). Cheesefare Week ends with Cheesefare Sunday, the day before the beginning of the Great Fast (Cheesefare Sunday is also known as Forgiveness Sunday, because on this day everyone begs forgiveness of his neighbor in order to begin the Fast in peace). MishaPan 19:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

 * With regard to fasting on Saturdays, in the early Church there were different practices in different places: In Rome they fasted on Saturdays (as shown by a letter of Pope Innocent I to Decentius, 416 AD); at Constantinople, as in the East generally, Saturday--with the sole exception of Holy Saturday--was never to be a fast day (in the strict sense). The practice of the Orthodox Church was unified at the Council in Trullo, Canon LV (692 AD), confirming the practice of Constantinople. In effect, this means that the Lenten fast is lessened on Saturdays, but not abrogated entirely. MishaPan 19:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

 * With regard to counting the Forty Days, this also is a difference between East and West. At Rome, Sundays were excluded from the count. So Lent consisted of six weeks of six fasting days each (beginning the count on Ash Wednesday). But in order to make up the requisite forty, the remainder of Holy Week (including Holy Saturday) must be included in the count. In the East, they count consecutively, beginning on Clean Monday (the first day of Great Lent) and continue without interruption (including Sundays) through the Friday of the Sixth Week, a total of forty days. The next day (Lazarus Saturday) and Palm Sunday are days on which the Fast is relaxed, though not abrogated, and Holy Week itelf is considered to be a seperate fast from the Great Forty Days. MishaPan 19:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

 * Thank you. That's a good explanation.  With that explanation, I re-read the article, and I guess it does actually say all of those things, though perhaps you made it more clear here.  I was thinking that it might be good to have this in the article itself, perhaps in this format (I don't know how to make tables in HTML, but I hope you understand what I mean):

Sunday      Monday     Tuesday     Wednesday     Thursday     Friday    Saturday

(some ordinary    Sunday, not     -- -- -- -- -- (first week of preparation for Lent) -- -- -- -- --    part of pre-Lent    period)

Zaccheus Sunday       -- -- -- -- -- (second week of preparation for Lent) -- -- -- -- --

Publican and Pharisee     -- -- -- -- -- (third week of preparation for Lent) -- -- -- -- -- Sunday

Prodigal Son Sunday   -- -- -- -- -- (fourth week of preparation for Lent) -- -- -- -- --

Meatfare Sunday (Sunday of   -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Cheesefare Week -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --     the Last                   (fifth week of preparation for Lent)     Judgement)

Cheesefare Clean Sunday     Monday (Forgiveness day         day          day          day            day      (Saturday -- Sunday)      1            2             3            4             5      lessened fast)

Feast of    day          day          day          day            day      (Saturday --     Orthodoxy     6            7             8            9             10     lessened fast)

Gregory     day          day          day          day            day      (Saturday --     Palamas      11            12           13           14             15     lessened fast)

Veneration  day          day          day          day            day      (Saturday --     of the Cross  16           17           18           19             20     lessened fast)

John        day          day          day          day            day      (Saturday --     Climacus      21           22           23           24             25     lessened fast)

Mary of     day          day          day          day            day      (Saturday --     Egypt         26           26           28           29             30     lessened fast)

Sixth        day          day          day          day            day      (Saturday --     Sunday        31           32           33           34             35     lessened fast) of Lent

Seventh     day          day          day          day            day      Lazarus Sunday       36           37           38           39             40      Saturday of Lent

<-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Holy Week -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -> Palm           (Holy Week fast, not part of Great Lent)           Good       Holy Sunday                                                            Friday     Saturday

Easter Sunday

 * Or, just from making up this chart, I noticed that it might make more sense to call Monday the first day of the week, such that each week ENDS with a Sunday. But then, that would make Saturday into the SIXTH day of the week, rather than the seventh, and so that would make the Sabbath (the seventh day) fall on Sunday, which wouldn't make too much sense.Ifdef 16:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

 * MishaPan, I just re-read your explanation and realized that my chart is incorrect (which is EXACTLY why I think a chart is necessary!) Following is an updated version.  Is that one correct now? Ifdef 19:52, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Sunday      Monday     Tuesday     Wednesday     Thursday     Friday    Saturday

(some ordinary    Sunday, not     -- -- -- -- -- (first week of preparation for Lent) -- -- -- -- --    part of pre-Lent    period)

Zaccheus Sunday       -- -- -- -- -- (second week of preparation for Lent) -- -- -- -- --

Publican and Pharisee     -- -- -- -- -- (third week of preparation for Lent) -- -- -- -- -- Sunday

Prodigal Son Sunday   -- -- -- -- -- (fourth week of preparation for Lent) -- -- -- -- --

Meatfare Sunday (Sunday of   -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Cheesefare Week -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --     the Last                   (fifth week of preparation for Lent)     Judgement)

Cheesefare Clean Sunday     Monday (Forgiveness day         day          day          day            day      day     Sunday)       1            2             3            4             5        6

Feast of    day          day          day          day            day      day Orthodoxy    8            9            10           11             12       13 (day 7)

Gregory     day          day          day          day            day      day Palamas     15            16           17           18             19       20 (day 14)

Veneration  day          day          day          day            day      day of the Cross 22           23           24           25             26       27 (day 21)

John        day          day          day          day            day      day Climacus     29           30           31           32             33       34 (day 28)

Mary of     day          day          day          day            day      Lazarus Egypt        36           37           38           39             40      Saturday (day 35)

<-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Holy Week -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -> Palm           (Holy Week fast, not part of Great Lent)           Good       Holy Sunday                                                            Friday     Saturday

Easter Sunday

 * Your first entry "(some ordinary Sunday, not part of pre-Lent period)" is technically correct; though there is one sole Pre-Lenten feature: the Gospel reading on that day is always the account of Zacchaeus from, for which reason this Sunday is referred to as "Zacchaeus Sunday." MishaPan (talk) 18:38, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Actually, on taking a closer look at your calendar, it seems you should lop off the first week, and make the week following Zacchaeus Sunday the "first week of preparation for Lent", the week following Sun. of Pubican and Pharisee the second week, and so forth. MishaPan (talk) 22:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Noinclude?
When I began editing the article today, it had the tags at the beginning and end of the article. Looking at WP:noinclude, I couldn't see any reason why they should be in this article, so I removed them. But I thought I should mention it here in case there was a relevant reason for them being where they were. MishaPan (talk) 18:22, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Lenten calendar
I will be experimenting here on constructing the calendar for Great Lent suggested above. It may take me some time, so I'm doing the experimenting here rather than on the article's main page.

I haven't yet figured out how to display each day as a seperate cell and still have text like "First Week of Great Lent" span more than one cell, so I can't number each day as I'd like. MishaPan (talk) 22:21, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

The Great Fast and the use of the word Holy
I would like to address a concern of mine that has cropped up occasionally concerning language. If one studies the history of the Church one finds that terminology can be a crucial issue theologically. The use of the wrong word can ultimately lead to misunderstanding somewhere down the line, perhaps even hundreds of years later. I have always proposed that Orthodox writers must be exceedingly careful in their terminology when writing in English. Words must have the correct “Meaning” behind them to preserve the theology. Unfortunately, sometimes this comes across as nit-picking. The difficulty often lies in translating from different source languages (Russian as opposed to Greek) and the fact that both can claim strong traditions going back centuries. Never-the-less I think we should always examine the ramifications of the English text we use rather than simple translate from one language to another, otherwise we will end up as the protestants who often base their theological differences on the English texts of scripture while disregarding the Greek texts entirely.

That having been said, I would specifically like to address the usage of the term “Holy” when referring to chronology. In English we often use the terms: Holy Week, Holy Monday, Holy Tuesday, etc. or, as a combination such as “Holy and Great etc.”. But correctly there is nothing “Holy” about the days themselves. Originally these days are called “Great” to signify their high importance. Yes, I know that the Russians use the term “Holy” and that it has become common in English as well. Never-the-less I think we have the opportunity to correct what may ultimately lead to an error of theology. I propose referring to them as “Great” and nothing more. Also, we might consider referring to “Lent” as “The Great Fast” since lent is a Germanic word meaning Spring or Long.--Phiddipus (talk) 19:10, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

 * For myself, I would have no problem with saying simply "Great Week" or "Great Tuesday", etc.; it is certainly less cumbersome. Though, since the additional word "Holy" is used in the Slavic tradition, I'm not sure exactly where the difficulty lies. Orthodoxy is not the sole purview of the Greeks. Is a variation in translation--so long as it is in no way opposed to Orthodox teaching--which has been sanctified by centuries of use, necessarily "wrong"? Orthodoxy is not monolithic, and the Local Churches are free to develop traditions and usages of their own, provided they are not opposed to Sacred Tradition (the "Catholic Consciousness" of the universal Church). We are, of course, not referring here to doctrinally essential terms like homoousion, and I don't really see how the addition of the word "Holy" can ultimately lead to an error of theology. I am curious about one of Phiddipus' statements regarding Great Week, where he says that, "correctly there is nothing “Holy” about the days themselves." I was wondering if he could explain what he means by this. They certainly seem to be holy days. No other commemoration is permitted on those days, the Octoechos is completely set aside, and from Great Thursday onwards not even memorial services for the departed are permitted. The text of the Triodion itself states, at Matins on Great Monday:

"The first fruits of the Lord's Passion fill this present day with light. Come then, all who love to keep the feasts, and let us welcome it with songs...." (Sessional Hymn for the third Kathisma.)
 * As for the term "Great Fast", that is certainly a more direct translation from both the Greek and Slavonic, and removing the Germanic ("Frankish") implications is certainly preferable. A personal pet-peeve of mine is hearing Orthodox Christians use the term "Easter" (named after a pagan deity) instead of "Pascha" (referring to the Lord's Passover). "Great Lent" is, however used in a number of English-language publications, and is linked in so many places throughout Wikipedia, that I would suggest using both terms in the intro, perhaps explaining that "Great Fast" is the more literal translation. When I made my own edits to the article, I chose in general to follow the terminology used by Bishop Kallistos (Ware) and Mother Mary in their translation of The Lenten Triodion (the full title of the work goes on to say, "translated from the original Greek", though they used Slavonic sources also). One tricky aspect of this is that we are not writing to an Eastern Christian audience and so the terms we use would have to be explained in a language that the average reader can understand. And there's the rub: providing accurate information in an understandable format. How far do we sacrifice comprehensiveness for comprehensibility? MishaPan (talk) 15:20, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

What do we mean when we say “Holy” and what can be “Holy”. We have, for instance, Holy Water which has been sanctified by God or rather, has been restored to its original properties before the fall of mankind. Crosses and Icons can be Holy, People can be Holy, in other words “Things” can be holy. God works through material means – water, oil, wine, bread, in order to touch us physically in a manner we can relate to because we are material ourselves. “Days”, on the other hand are not things, per se, but rather are abstract concepts with no reality in and of themselves. Tuesday comes and goes, it comes and goes differently for where you are than for where I am. In fact, Tuesday and the other days are mere perceptions, abstract concepts having nothing to do with reality itself. So, how can they be holy? Thus we might celebrate significant events on a particular day…which makes the day very important or Great, but holy, no. Besides, we celebrate significant events in the Church on Every day of the year, we celebrate the lives of millions of saints on every day. I guess it’s a matter of precision. It would be like imagining one color to be more Holy than another, once again colors are abstract concepts, actually even more substantial than “days” and yet to imagine a color being called holy would be silly. This is the basis for what I said. Perhaps Wikipedia is not the venue where we should be concerned for such things, but I am always careful, very careful. We might not see right away what theological errors may crop up in the future because of our choice of words but remember, many heresies centered around one word – theandric, filioque, etc, and such words took hundreds of years to do their damage.--Phiddipus (talk) 14:10, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Phiddipus: Thanks again for your interesting comments. I must say, however, that I have never, ever read any Holy Father or Orthodox teacher who propounds the idea that you propose: that a day, because it is an abstract thing, cannot be blessed, and cannot be holy. It is, in fact contrary both to Scripture and the writings of the Fathers. God specifically blessed the Sabbath and declared it to be holy (,, etc.). The festivals of the Mosaic Law were holy (, etc.). Even a particular year, the Jubilee, was declared to be holy . As far as abstract things go: God's name is holy (, —I'm using the Masoretic numbering here, because I can't find links to the Septuagint); conversation can be holy , God's Commandments are holy , and our Faith and our calling as Christians are also holy . You are correct that every day is a holy day—all of creation has been sanctified by the Incarnation, Death and Resurrection of Christ—but how do we extrapolate from that that no day can be called holy? On the contrary, according to the Holy Fathers, days and seasons can be blessed and are holy. At the Indiction (church new year) we pray to our Lord "…bless Thou the crown of the year…" (Menaion, Sep. 1, Apolytikion). St. John Damascene, in his Paschal Canon, says the following about the holy day of Pascha: "This is the chosen and holy day, first of sabbaths, king and lord of days, the feast of feasts, holy day of holy days. On this day we bless Christ forevermore." (Pentecostarion, Paschal Canon, Irmos Ode 8).  I agree that precision is necesarry when speaking on matters of faith, but we have to be careful about "straining at gnats". Heresy can indeed center around one word, but so can schism. MishaPan (talk) 16:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we should avoid interpreting meanings per 2 reasons: the theological one above (carefulness in choosing words), and the goal of WP (which is only describing things); excepting when there are sources interpreting/explaining. About great/holy, we should count the usage in distinct language families. My input is: in Romanian, which is a Romance language, the Paschal Lent is called the "Great Lent" (Postul Mare), the Holy Week is the "Great Week" (Săptămâna Mare), while the Bright Week is the "Bright/Lighted Week" (Săptămâna Luminată). This, of course, if we cannot find reliable EO English sources, eg.. Compare also official Ru translations: great lent, holy lent, great fast, holy fast. adriatikus |  talk  18:22, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Regarding the Romanian Postul Mare, I was wondering if Postul should actually be translated literally as "Fast" rather than "Lent", like the Russian Post. MishaPan (talk) 21:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Great Lent. 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/20030301104732/http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8420.asp to http://www.goarch.org/en/ourfaith/articles/article8420.asp

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:41, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:52, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Torcellomosaic.jpg

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 05:00, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Priest reciting Prayer of Saint Ephraim the Syrian.jpg

Accuracy
I can't tell about the russian tradition, but the Good Friday section for the greek tradition is wrong. The Descent from the Cross and the removal of the soma are part of Royal Hours service in the morning (not the afternoon), and so is the placement of the Epitaphios inside the decorate catafalque at the centre of the church. C messier (talk) 08:04, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

 * So why not find a source that says so and then correct it? (But if you would prefer to put a draft here for comment, before moving to the main article, please do.) 𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 14:27, 19 March 2023 (UTC)
 * , I found a source mentioning it is during the morning, but it isn't as detailed as the unsourced description here. C messier (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Almost by definition, any reasonably credible source has far greater standing than an unsourced assertion, so definitely go ahead and replace it. If anybody has better evidence, let them produce it. Thank you for digging out this source, that is always the hard part (but, IMO, the most interesting part) of building a credible article. Once found, anybody can make the citation look pretty – for example like this:  (Translation by Google Translate so possibly can be improved?) Any probs, feel free to give me another ping. --𝕁𝕄𝔽 (talk) 16:33, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

This article contradicts itself
The opening paragraphs of this article contain a contradiction. They say that Great Lent is forty days before Pascha, and, unlike in the Western Christian tradition, the Sundays are included. Later, they say that Great Lent begins on Clean Monday, and that this is seven weeks before Pascha. If it is seven weeks before Pascha and the Sundays are included, this would make it forty-nine days. YTKJ (talk) 20:28, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

 * You are correct! The article internally confounds the distinction betwixt the "Great 40 Days" and the "Great Fast". I'll endevor to dis-entagle that mess.
 * I thank you for noticing!
 * PS Actually, the fast is 48 days, not 49, since it commences on a Monday and ends on a Saturday. Vincent J. Lipsio (talk) 22:10, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
 * PS Actually, the fast is 48 days, not 49, since it commences on a Monday and ends on a Saturday. Vincent J. Lipsio (talk) 22:10, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Great Lent


text:
Balkan folk music

Balkan folk music is the traditional folk music within Balkan region. In South Slavic languages, it is known as narodna muzika (народна музика) or folk muzika (фолк музика) in Bulgarian, Macedonian, and Serbo-Croatian, and alternatively narodna glazba in standard Croatian, and narodna glasba in Slovene.

For more information regarding individual nations' folk music see:

 * Bosnian folk music
 * Bulgarian folk music
 * Croatian folk music
 * Macedonian folk music
 * Montenegrin folk music
 * Serbian folk music
 * Slovenian folk music

title: Balkan folk music


text:
Rigaud River

The Rigaud River is a river in eastern Ontario and western Quebec. It rises south of Vankleek Hill, Ontario and flows east, entering the province of Quebec. It joins with the East Rigaud River which rises to the south of it and flows north to empty into the Ottawa River at Rigaud, Quebec.

The river was named after Pierre François de Rigaud, Marquis de Vaudreuil-Cavagnal, the last governor of New France.

title: Rigaud River


text:
Strath Burn (Wick River tributary)

Strath Burn is a stream which has its source in the Flow Country of Caithness, Scotland, at a height above sea level of around 70 metres, at the confluence of Kensary Burn, and Rowens Burn, and about five kilometres south of the village of Watten.

Strath Burn meanders generally northward across a distance of about four kilometres, with the Moss of Badarclay to its west, to join Scouthal Burn and so form the source of the Wick River, at around 25 metres and about one kilometre south of Watten.

title: Strath Burn (Wick River tributary)