text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smiler

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 13:40, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Smiler
Article does not establish notability. RickK 01:03, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. —Mar·ka·ci: 2005-02-9 01:07 Z
 * Delete, article does not establish notability, possible vanity or prank. Megan1967 02:10, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable. Rje 03:22, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Googling for "smiler" + "filton" gives no evidence of this. JoaoRicardo 04:34, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. vanity. The Jacobin 05:44, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. ugen 64 05:45, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Delete Successful attempts at drawing attention encourage further attempts. Why was this not speedy deletion? --Wetman 05:55, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Because Anthony di Pierro would have listed it on VfU if I had. RickK 06:17, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pure garbage. — Brim 09:26, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete my guess is it's some minor-league tagger. Not notable enough anyway. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 14:33, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, for pity's sake. Deb 18:03, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The name is most notable as a Rod Stewart album from the mid-1970's.Capitalistroadster 23:29, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable. Carrp | Talk 03:44, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete--User:Boothy443 | comhrÚ 05:47, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smiler


text:
User talk:Mathx314/sig

→mathx314(talk)(email)

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

title: User talk:Mathx314/sig


text:
Howard Swanson

Howard Swanson (August 18, 1907 – November 12, 1978) was an American composer. Swanson studied at the Cleveland Institute of Music and was then taught by Nadia Boulanger in Paris. He received fellowships, awards and prizes. His preference was for linear construction and lyrical works with subtle tonal centers. He was born in Atlanta, Georgia and died in New York City.

Particularly praised are the songs of Howard Swanson. William Flanagan, reviewing three songs of Swanson, said, "They are authentic and in the best tradition of the song-writing art--sensitive, intimate, and evocative." Virgil Thomson said, "Howard Swanson is a composer whose work singers (and pianists, too) should look into. It is refined, sophisticated of line and harmony in a way not at all common among American music writers. His songs have an acute elaboration of thought and an intensity for feeling that recall Fauré." Swanson's friendship with poet Langston Hughes and his subsequent setting of Hughes poetry gives insight not only to the music of the African-American community, but also gives an intimate view to the psyche of the poet. Swanson consulted the poet with regularity while setting his poetry. His compositions are considered by many to be the definitive interpretations of the poet's work. His individual song settings of the poems "Joy," "In Time of Silver Rain," "Night Song," "Pierrot," and "The Negro Speaks of Rivers" (performed by Helen Thigpen and David Allen in 1950) reflect his intimate acquaintance with the inner workings of Hughes poetry.

title: Howard Swanson


text:
Talk:Abortion/Archive 4

Start of discussion: Talk:Abortion/Archive 1 Talk:Abortion/Archive 2 Talk:Abortion/Archive 3 Talk:Abortion/Archive 4

Postabortion depression copyvio
Large section of text added by User:68.229.216.75 appears to be copied from and other places. User:68.229.216.75, if you can provide a pedigree for the text including evidence of GFDL compatible licensing then I might support its use to start a new article about "postabortion depression controversy" or some such, but I don't think it belongs in the overview article. Saucepan 18:26, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

links erased
I'm still new at this but someone erased all the links on the page including the one's to abortion by country...i assume since one can see the past version there is a way to retrieve it...could you tell me how you do it so next time i can just fix it myself?--Marcie 01:42, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Done - I overlooked that part when I reverted some of the changes by an IP. You can retrieve deleted text from the history by copy and paste.--Fenice 13:00, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Abortion and Cancer
Hi, this is the text for abortion and cancer:

"Breast cancer: a meta-analysis of 53 epidemological studies undertaken in 16 countries did not find evidence of a relationship between abortion and breast cancer (Breast cancer and abortion. The Lancet, 2004;363;pg 1007). This is a highly political issue with obvious implications for the abortion debate."

I thought this is a discussion about abortion and not about the moral, ethical, or political consequences. I think that the association between breast cancer and abortion is a medical one and NOT a political one. I think we should erase this statement. I am not sure how much an internet search help. There are studies who support the links and there are studies that do not support the link. Each studies relies on statistics and on assumptions and is on first glance questionable. Science just does not know if there is an association or not.

Finally, abortion as it is has nothi

 * I agree. First of the study seems to be of the pill and abortion, which are two very different things. Also most of the stuff i've seen that links cancer (almost always breast cancer) to abortion has to do with not having children...lesbians who have no abortions are also at a higher risk of breast cancer if they have no children...and that link has been studied--Marcie 13:50, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * The parity (number & age of children) of a women is taken into consideration as a confounding factor for most Abortion-Breast Cancer studies. For older studies that may not; they are correctly deemed methologically flawed and are rejected. Recent studies take parity into account... for the most part. RoyBoy 20:19, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I agree that there is some debate to be had over the validity and the link between cancer and abortions. But regardless, what I added about the state laws requiring notifications to women, or their contractual consent, I feel is important to indicate. Regardless of what the outcome of the abortion-cancer link, these states raised awareness but arguably perpetuated a myth. Howrealisreal 15:21, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Under physical effects, risk of sterility should be mentioned, if it is correct that there are risks. Indeed, if it is merely a common misconception that abortions increase the risk of sterility, perhaps that is worth a mention also? Vintermann 11:11, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

As far as I know it's a misconception, but it's the kind of thing that's difficult to get good data on bacause of inherent selection bias, i.e. people who have abortions tend to be more fertile than the population as a whole (since they are clearly capable of getting pregnant). Azad 20:26, 2004 Nov 19 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's what I thought too. All the more reason to get data on it, since the inherent selection bias could potentially conceal quite large risks. The reason I am inquiring is that I have read many news articles blaming the low birth rates in the former USSR on its astronomically high abortion rates.

Vintermann 14:14, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

 * Well i would put out the social factor agani (i'm likely getting boring). There were much higher rates of abortion in the USSR but i always thought that was because there was less birth control available, and abortion was freely available (on that i could be wrong). You could very well be getting into social factors again though. The life of the average Soviet has declined by quite a bit since the end of communisim. You only need to look at how East and West Germany are having problems with each over on the topic (i think there has been somewhat of a decline generally but its been much larger in East Germany. There used to be child care so you could work after having a child. Hard to get now. You used to get at least enough to eat fine before, hard to be sure of now. I think you could put the blame on lower fertility rates on women just deciding they don't want to raise children when the circumstances are so much worse for the average person (now obviously some individuals are better off...its also a matter of how well off people feel they are comparatively). Also i knwo int he case of Germany that there have been huge problems trying to get a abortion policy for across country. Abortion is somewhat limited in West Germany and before reunification it was abortion on demand in East Germany. Its a been a while but last time i was reading on it they still didn't have one policy because the west wanted to impose theirs on the east and it looked like that would cause huge problems between the two areas....although its now more restrictive in the East than it had been.--Marcie 18:01, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Hi, I am from West Germany and as far as I know it works like this. Abortion is illegal, however, it is not possible to charge women for it. So, practically it is legal. There are opponents and proponents for abortion in Germany, however, my perception was, that it is not as emotional and religious biased like in the US. I am actually quite shocked about the quality of the US (en.wikipedia.org) article about abortion. This article is NOT about any religious, emotional, political or moral aspects of abortion (I think there is a separate article for it). It is about the mere facts of the WHAT, HOW, WHEN, HISTORY, etc. of abortion. It should be filled with facts and scientific evidence and somewho integrate all point of views. Somehow I do not see that this article improves much although I watch it now for a long time.

For the comment about fertility quote. I agree that refers a lot to social factors such as no child care, worse economy, etc. Getting children is not only about being able to but also wanting a child or able to raise it.
 * I'm glad someone is interested in my idea of being able to raise the child (of course not everyone would like my answer to that...i like the Scandinavian models. This isn't actually supposed to the be the "american" page...you can find that at "Abortion in the United States" however i agree with you there is a strong US flavour to the page. Take a look at the Abortion in Canada page, you will find that it is written quite differently in style and content. On that page we spent a lot of time talking about access through medicare...there is very little talk of financial access on the US page (which is find wierd because its harder to access in the US but it could just be a country thing) On this particular page i haven't written as much actual text as been involved in the discussions that result in text. Why not try to improve it to where you think it should go? New editors are always welcome on Wiki (and someone will erase what they don't like and then everyone can discuss it.....i'm glad to have your knowledge of W. Germany...its been a few years since i was reading on this...is it still the same that there are very different laws in the East and West...and can you have an abortion clinic or legalized safe spot to go to if individuals having the abortion can't be charged? In Canada for a while they stopped prosecuting a Doctor in Quebec resulting in Montreal having the only abortion clinic inthe country at the time...all other abortions had to be done in a hospital and fit a lot of other rules to fit into the criminal code excemption that allowed abortion--Marcie 22:52, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * back in the days of back street abortions there was an increased chance of infertility because there was no way of making sure folks knew how to do the procedure (i'm sure we all know well enough about that). I've never heard of any other fertility effects and the other thing to keep in mind is that about 1 out of every 15,000-24,000 (i'm not into looking up the numbers again unless someone feels the real need i did it about a month ago for another wiki page) of women who give birth to a child die. Many less die with abortion (its in the 1:200,000 range). So in the end it seems to me the risk of infertility are a lot smaller, if you just take chance of death if you are pregnant into account (ie if you are less likely to die from the abortion you are than birth you can have more kids easier...but maybe that is too cynical--Marcie 23:17, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

This paragraph is wrong on a few accounts, but I'll let someone else edit it since I'm short on time and don't want to do a hack job:

 * Some studies suggest that emergency conceptives can thicken the uterine mucus and thus interfere with implantation of a zygote, but, if true, this also happens with normal birth control pills taken regularly as well. Some institutions or individuals mistakenly consider use of emergency contraceptives to be abortions (notably the Roman Catholic Church) because they confuse emergency contraception with true fetotoxic abortion pills.

First, this issue is thinning not thickening the uterine lining. Secondly, whoever wrote this downplays the opposition to their position, e.g. Roman Catholic Church is not so naive as it is made to sound (and I'm not a Catholic!). Third, the thinning of the uterine lining is indeed an issue even with normal birth control pills.

Finally, I think a separate page should be created for the Morning After Pill and a link could be made from this page. Thanks. -

 * There is already a page on the morning-after pill. The actual mechanism discussion might be able to be moved there but i think it is still appropriate to have some information on it, on this page, because of the fact the Roman Catholic Church does view it as abortion and it might be looked up on an abortion page. A bit of information as to why those that aren't Roman Catholic don't generally view it as an abortion pill, as say opposed to RU486 is in my view necessary...but hey there is the link if anyone wants it ! It appears to be quite comprehensive although i didn't give it a full run-through...i just wanted to see if it was there--Marcie 22:20, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Abortion-Breast Cancer article title assistance
I have almost completed a long and I hope thorough article on the abortion-breast cancer issue. But I am remain unsure how I should name it. Here are some contenders and what my current feeling is of them.

"Abortion-Breast Cancer Link": Straight to the point, and gets a persons attention, but seems biased and inflammatory.

"Abortion-Breast Cancer Issue": Ambiguous, but safer.

"Abortion-Breast Cancer Debate": More descriptive... but unsure if this is correct syntax. Should it be "Abortion-Breast Cancer (debate)"?

Or should I just go for "Abortion-Breast Cancer" and leave it at that. Also should there by a hyphen or not? --RoyBoy 08:11, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Is this going to be a stub or a full article (curiosity...i want to follow it).Personally i would favour Abriton Breasty Cancer Debate, because at this point it is just that: a debate that no one has answered yet. Also if you are going to be dealing with effects of the pill somehow there are statistics of it increasing some types of cancer and decreasing other types.
 * All said the only link i've ever come across is linked to social factors, or has been an unclear study. One area not mentioned (if we are going to discuss breast cancer) is early onset of peroid which puts you at a higher risk...something they have tracked down and will become a bigger issue perhaps in the future because girls are getting their preiods earlier and earlier (no firm proof but some think its hormones in food.
 * If you are going to look at studies i would want their url on the talk page so we can all read them (everyone interprets all things in life to a certain extent)--Marcie 14:37, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * - Big, full article. Oh yeah, I need help finding a general graphic or two for the article. Okay, I'm confused :')... "Abriton"? Is that a typo? As to syntax, should it be "Debate", "debate" or "(debate)"? No, I will not be exploring the pill; I do mention it as a confounding factor on the ABC issue.
 * - Well if you think about it abortion is indirectly linked to social factors. For example a upwardly mobile women gets an abortion to pursue education and a career. Any effect this would have would be difficult to separate from the confounding factors of delayed child rearing, the pill and the like. "social factors" in essence is a way to say "we don't know which is doing what, but its probably a combination of these factors prevalent to this group of women." As to early menarche, I am aware of that and I'll make an effort to find mention of it in the studies I'm examining (there are statistics indicating that, but if the study(s) do not theorize on the cause and its impact on the ABC issue, I cannot elaborate on it). But as to the cause, yes diet has to have some impact, but so does environmental pollution (estrogen mimicry of chemicals, estrogen in water... thanks to the pill), and perhaps even time watching TV (ie. exposure to artificial light) triggering early maturation.
 * - The majority of my references will be studies, but with the injustice of scientific publishing, you will have to either pay a bunch of money to get the stuff online, or go to the nearest University / cancer-center and research this stuff yourself if you want all the details. Only abstracts are available online for the majority of the studies. --RoyBoy 01:43, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * It was a typo...i meant the abortion debate. As to the exact syntax as to word the article, i'm still new enough here that i'm not quite sure. My experience has been that if i do put the wrong title on an article usually someone fixes it (not that i've started that many on my own). The most recent article is started is on delisting and has to do with Canadian health care. So far its title has not gotten any complaint...but then it was one that was listed and needed a bit of filling out.

 * As for leaving issues of the pill out...well they are all linked in some similar ways..ie based on hormones. I'll look for an open source study in the days ahead although its likely to take a while to find. I haven't had to rely on any studies directly that weren't public domain yet.

 * At some point i may go to the library if there is suffient work on the page...for now i don't really feel that much like it---the right library is 45-60 minutes away that would have journal articles on the topic.--Marcie 04:47, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It is unfair and shows a biased point of view( or the tendency towards one)if someone is using material where only the abstract is generally available publicly without expense. All of this is supposed to be GNU regardless and no copyrighted material is to be directly used (and you can't do footnotes here...which might help the problem but i've been told you don't have footnotes in a encyclopedia when i asked when i started).

Also it seems to me from what i've seen of the first study you mention that it would need to be social effects to cause women from Russia and the US to have differences that were so large after having an abortion...although i'm going to go through the stats to see the probability. What do others think?--Marcie 21:55, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I have an acquaintance who works at the Center for Disease Control in Atlanta in the unit that deals with maternal health; specifically, she works on breast-feeding.  At dinner a few weeks ago we were discussing the studies concerning breast cancer and abortion.    She mentioned a recent study that showed that any correlation between breast cancer and abortion was due to the fact that breast-feeding lowers the risk of breast cancer, and of course women who have had abortions are less likely, often not being mothers, to be or to have been breast-feeders.   The incidence of breast cancer in women who have had abortions versus other non-mothers or non-breast-feeding mothers is the same, she said.  She also described how the CDC gets called in by State Health Departments to help with their publications and documents on this issue.  She mentioned that many state health department are under pressure from State Legislatures and governors to publish materials stating a link between abortions and breast cancer.    The workers in the CDC unit so far have not been put under political pressure about this, which I was pleasantly surprised to learn.   This is all from my memory of a conversation, but if this is of interest to anyone for the purposes of the article, I might be able to get references. --BM 22:13, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Breastfeeding as a factor is interesting and could explain partly the increase in breast cancer (more mothers feed by bottle now than did at one point, and there was no bottle early on). I've gone through the Russian/American stats in the paper. It took a lot of regressions for them to get statistically signficant information in most case P=.05 (as a minimum required in stats to prove anything). Also the methdology varied between the two groups (one group was asked the questionaire and the other was filled out). Also there seemed to be a good corelation between past abuse and PTSD symptoms...which even the authors state could be a complication of prior ptsd. While intersting i don't think this study proves much of anything except that Russian women on average seem to have less problems after they have an abortion.....but that is not what is on the page at the moment. Also it is clearly not GNU license. How far can an article be used that isn't GNU (and no this isn't particularly to be picky here...i've wondered but this is where it came up in a large way)....comments folks? And to put a bit of perspective in, i don't know if this has been published in a study (i've never cared to look) but a large percentage of abuse survivors in childhood (especially sexual abuse but not limited to) have a horrific time going to the dentist...books have chapters on how to deal with it if it is a problem for a person....but skipping the dentist isn't always the best solution--Marcie 22:26, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Hi, Marcie.  Well, very few references are under GNU.   Under the fair-use doctrine of copyright law,  you can quote copyrighted works, often quite long quotes. Facts cannot be copyrighted.  So that means statistics cannot be copyrighted, but the presentation format can be.  That means you can summarize and present facts and conclusions for a published study, expressed in your own words, and presented your own way, without any constraints at all.   Of course, academic standards related to plagiarism, etc, demand that you provide the reference and credit the source, somehow, either in the text or a footnote.   (But you knew that.)   I don't know if Wikipedia has a policy holding people to academic standards regarding citations, etc, but I don't see how it hurts.  If people couldn't quote passages and cite statistics and results from studies, studies would be of no use to anyone.   The only exception that I could think of would be if you had to sign some kind of Non Disclosure Agreement to get your hands on some material, which might take the form of a clause in a license or some other kind of agreement.   Then, it wouldn't be copyright, but the NDA that you had signed which you would have to worry about. --BM 22:42, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * When i started out (a while ago) and wanted to use footnotes on my first page i was told that "this was an encyclopedia, and they don't use footnotes". Interesting how things differ from place to place on the wiki eh? People didn't want the footnotes taking up space on the page was what i was told bascially. So i've never only infrequently quoted anything...just taken the statistics and information and reworded it. Is anyone else here good in stats? I'm not bad but i'm not great either but it seemed to me that the authors of the first study mentioned (on trauma) were presenting the statitics in full but only commenting on the one's that they found interestinig or that fit well into their model. I'd love to track back the funding too...could be an interesting one but not for tonight. The article was available which was appreciated.
 * Actually when you get down to it copyright probably differs between country. I'm Canadian and the Supreme Court recently ruled that stopping people from doing peer to peer music (in a non-comercial way ie not a company) was like trying to bar people from using the photocopier in the library and made no sense (record companies are not happy and are trying other methods to get it banned). In university i thought it was a hoot how they put up the rules of photocopying in the photocopy room and said they took no responsability if anyone broke the rule...but then they didn't exactly say what the rules were either (any journal article can be copied for personal use, a certain percentage of a book etc etc). More was allowed then you would sometimes thing...less at other times. I didn't bother to pay much attention to it...i didn't read well in the library so if it was on reserve it got photocopied.--Marcie 23:11, 7 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Concerning footnotes in the Wikipedia. I didn't know it was a policy, but I must admit I've never seen footnotes.   But that doesn't stop you from quoting and just giving the attribution right in text.   In the December, 2002 edition of the "Journal of Omniscience",  well-known know-it-all B.M. stated "You can do a kosher quote like this."  --BM 00:29, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes thank you BM. I'm not sure even that was left or maybe i gave up (i was never any good at doing that type of citation and took too old fashioned footnotes because they were most often used in my major and that meant on set with some variations in courses (ie history course wants it in this way, this teacher liked that. Eventually i came up with a mix that worked well for me and pleased the proffessors well enough except i'm not sure its in any book. I did a lot of cross discipline so it seemed like there was yet ANOTHER way to do it. For an article here i'll start that way i think.Academic habits are hard to get rid of when doing it wrong could get you kicked out of school (unusual they took it easy on folks in 1st year and sometimes 2nd...i was told one of my first year papers wasn't sufficiently footnoted and that how i did it was part of the problem as would likely be a bigger problem in 2nd year. But they showed me an idea of how it could have been done, and it was very clear they didn't think i'd taken someone else's idea, i just didn't quite get the standard right. I lost one mark for it (i forget what it was worth but say from like a B+ to a B)...and after a while its just a habbit that you work with towards writing better papers--Marcie 02:43, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I reverted my contribution about state laws that require notification or signatures in regards to the questionable Abortion-Breast Cancer link. I think it is absolutely valid to indicate in the article that there are states that perpetuate this finding regardless of substantial scientific evidence. --Howrealisreal 00:47, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Howrealisreal - Thanks for the formatting change, I did it that way initially and thought it was "wrong" because it didn't line up. As to the reversion I actually prefer it there since it provides a quick way to see the the 'news' of the ABC issue. But at the same time I agree with Marcie on using U.S. references in the Abortion page; and in case you had not noticed I put that paragraph in the Conclusion of the ABC debate article since it was a result of the ABC debate. As to your characterization of it being a "perpetuation", some would deem it an "informing". I'm not speaking from a pro-life perspective... I'm talking about potential legal action in the future. Something that, as I understand it, is a real threat to medical professionals. As I see it, it isn't a matter of biology, but of legal preemption. Some states may regret not doing it sooner regardless of what link there actually is. There could be a legal basis to argue information was withheld; particularly if the abortion is delayed for various reasons. Maybe I should add this to the Conclusion... hmmmm... maybe a new section called State Laws since the paragraph seems out of place in the conclusion in the first place. --RoyBoy 06:24, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I think that the information is relevant but that what needs to be kept in mind is that this is the page on abortion not the page on Abortion in the United States. A mention of it here as one way it is getting more difficult to get an abortion with a link to the american page would seem more suitable to me. The page here was split a while ago because of issues like this. It is very relevant information (forcing women to read stuff that isn't scientifically based as a way of decreasing abortions). However it is a US issue so i would suggest a very short summary here and them move over there (there is a list of countries and abortion and you'll find they are all written differently ,different concerns maybe as well as culture. The section on the cost of abortion and accessiblity in the US was brought up by me...while the Canadian page abortion in Canada has a whole section that deals with access to abortion in various ways...when access in Canada is generally better than in the US).--Marcie 02:30, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Marcie - As to forcing women to read things that aren't scientifically based, well that is certainly the style of pro-lifers, but I would hope the state was a little more discerning than that regarding what they tell women regarding the ABC issue. Then again I've never been one to trust Texas; they routinely try to get Creation in the classroom there! :'D --RoyBoy 06:24, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

These are ongoing concerns with the page which need to be discussed
 * Abortion when done early are much more safer than 1%. They tend to have a death rate of 1 for every 200,000 women who have the procedure. I don't know of the later types of abortion although i may well go and look it up. I do know that the death rate in giving birth is about 1 for every 15000-20000 women. One statistics means the other should be included i think. You are statistically much more likely to live if you have an abortion...and living you have a chance to have another child although i'd reword it for point of view issues
 * I don't think you have read one of the articles you included a paragraph about. It looks like you either used the abstract or copied out the conclusions (i'm going to look). If you look at the statitistics in the report i think it shows that they are ignoring important evidence that they are getting that is signficant ie p=0.05 or less and only using the statistically useful information to push their point of view.They don't spend much time on the impact of past abuse even though there is a huge load factor where those stats are concerned. In fact there were different methodologies used between the studies (a huge no no if it is at all possible to avoid in statistical papers),including that one was filled in personally and one was filled in by a doctor or nurse asking questions of the woman. While they were trying to correct for culture it makes the answers difficult to correlate, for good or for bad ie either way. The main thing that statistics seemed to show is that women from Russia don't get as upset over an abortion as women in the US which makes perfect sense because its not a big no no there and due to lack of birth control it was used regularly.
 * Have you looked into the Elliot institute. Generally its not proper to put a link in that has bias except at the end (where you will notice there are pro choice and pro life links. Generally links are left to the end of the page unless there is another Wiki article on the topic, especially ones that are opinonated in debate).
 * Personally i think too much is left in the article about the ABC link seeing as it is really an American set of arguments (you have to be way into reading the debates to come across it here and then you only usually do based on US policy, although people do recognize that there is a possibility perhaps...but as i pointed out there is a possibility that you will die in birth as well, which is more often pointed out). Given the fact that it is a large debate but American centric something along these lines i think would be better if presented as such (and i'm trying to maintain your writing)...
 * The Abortion-Breast Cancer (ABC) debate centers around the fact that during early pregnancy hormone levels increase significantly.. This initiates cellular differentiation (growth) in the breast preparing for lactation. The ABC theory is if the pregnancy is aborted prior to full differentiation in the third trimester this could leave more "vulnerable" cells than prior to the pregnancy; resulting in an elevated risk of breast cancer and this position has a significant but minority position and continues to do research. The Planned Parenthood website notes that "attempts to prove this theory, however, have failed."At the same time it has yet to be invalidated. Regardless of the debate over the Abortion-Breast Cancer Link some of the US states are requiring women to read information including this before having an abortion, which is more fully discussed on the Abortion in the United States page which appears to be a method of making abortions harder to aquire. It does not appear that they provide information on the full debate, just one side.

 * In my opinion the rest should be moved to the ABC page or to the abortion in the United States and some parts to both. Its an american issue in terms of main impact and which states are requiring it and such is also an american issue.Not a general one. Canadians are not forced to read anything before they have an abortion and i'm not currently aware of other countries that do (perhaps there are some...that would strengthen your argument to keep it on the main abortion page). Some of the medical information on what you wrote is not just an american issue. I don't necessarily agree with all of what i suggested be left in, but my POV is not the one to run the page by, and i have heard of the debate before so its not inappropriate on the page or POV in my view. My personal view from statistics follows the line of if you have no children you are more likely to get breast cancer and the possible one about breast feadin mentioned above...in fact i think that one would be worth working in as a counterpoint. Can you find a reference for what you were talking about BM? I would think its relevant regardless as it is another position that is taken frequently (that not having children at least causes some of the problems...this one suggests why).

 * Royboy i do appreciate that you have done a lot of work on the topic, and it may be controversial but worthy of partly being on the main page, partially on the US page, and partially on the ABC page (although i'm likely to go looking at your sources there eventually). Its not a personal issue and in fact your writing is good. Its an issue of where its relevant and what sources are being used...i would think that with such a popular (if small) opinion there ought to be some studies written in English---i've got second year statistics, enough to know some things but that paper was not written for those with even second year statistics. You would need a minimum of fourth year, at least where i went to university (there was a 200 and a 400 but the 400 was not required...however i think it dealt in large part with how regressions work and not a lot of new content because sometimes the grad students would take it and hand in extra paperwork---but the content can not then be that different)

 * And people can screw up their stats worse than this in my opinion. Do you remember the book The Bell Curve. If you went through all the statistics taht were supposed to show you that overall whites were smarter the author only managed with all his regressions to get a probability of p=0.10. That means that it might be worth looking into but from a staticians point of view it means nothing whatseover....but he sure sold a lot of those books--Marcie 14:44, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Thank you very much for the acknowledgement Marcie, it was a lot of work. As to changing the first two paragraphs of the ABC entry... well I was merely following Wiki formatting (as I understand it) and putting the introduction of the ABC article here. Although it does make reference to U.S. institutions, that happens to be where the debate is centered, as you noted. To move parts to "Abortion in the U.S." would make it not only difficult to read but would contradict the content of the ABC article intro. Although your editing attempt has made me reconsider the content of the ABC introduction; I currently believe it to be appropriate. The goal was to briefly tell about the ABC theory, show it wasn't proven, but at the same time plausible (although using U.S. institutions this is focused on the ABC debate)... and then give an overview of the ABC debate. So I would have to disagree with your edit, but as you may have noticed I do agree with removing the third paragraph since it deals just with the U.S. and is contained in the ABC article anyway. As to not having children and not breastfeeding; these are confounding factors in the ABC debate and are important to consider, but it is not a counterpoint. Meaning that scientists are fully aware those things reduce breast cancer risk, and they are included in the case-control and/or statistical adjustments in ABC scientific studies. Although breatfeeding is usually not listed as a factor, the reason for that is it's assumed part of the protective effect of having a full term pregnancy comes from breastfeeding. Meaning breastfeeding is already included within another factor. If women breastfeed less, well then the protective effect of having a full term pregnancy is reduced and that will be reflected by that factor. (assuming they have a recent study of it) And I just realized I might need to explain that in Confounding Factors. Thanks for pointing it out, and keep up the suggestions. BTW, I'm Canadian too! --RoyBoy 18:33, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I think someone may have reentered the paragraph after you...some guy that isn't even discussing things has done a lot of editing on the page and i must admit i somtimes find it hard to look exactly from edit to edit (although some of it just seemed to be Wiki stuff that some folks are particular about). I added in the meta-analysis that was done by the Lancet to the area as i feel that seeing as it is viewed as controversial it is reasonable to include other studies as well. Somewhere along the way someone erased it (but i remembered it being there and went back far enough to find it...unfortunately these pages get vandilized a lot).
 * I will admit i misread what was here in the article about PTSD (or its been altered i think i misread it). It says that it will be more likely to cause problems in those who are abused (just what i was bitching about in the last entry---sorry). I do think there could be a clearer way of putting it such as "a study showed that for those with a history of being abused it was shown that an abortion...and then on with the statistics". I do think also there needs to be a caution about the different methods used to collect the data...it isn't really fair to compare a self filled out form with a form that your doctor or nurse is filling out in my view (and that was how they did it although they do note that factor and why...)...even if it shows that Russian women are much less effected, which could well be used either way. Appreciate sane conversation...can be hard to find sometimes--Marcie 22:14, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Hi Marcie, uh it wasn't vandalized... I erased it since it is in the new ABC article I wrote. It should be removed, along with the other reverted paragraph not only because it is repetitive, its making the ABC entry in Abortion long, and elevating a study to the Abortion article is hardly NPOV. That would force me to put another study which indicates a link to balance that one out, but that is silly since they are both already in the ABC link debate article. Have you read the new article yet? And your welcome for the sane conversation... although I prefer insane conversation myself... civil, but insane. :') --RoyBoy 22:48, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

ABC Article Intro
I have reworded the ABC Article intro (moving part of it into Confounding Factors where it seems to be better suited) and pasted that into the Abortion article deleting the previous paragraph reversions. The reasons for the deletions is to be in compliance with Wiki formatting regarding the intro being the only thing to appear on a parent page, and because those paragraphs have been incorporated in the new article. --RoyBoy 00:28, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Hey man, I just got around to seeing your progress of the ABC debate article. I just wanted to take some time to thank you for maintaining my contribution, and placing it in a very appropriate spot in the debate article, which is referenced in the parent Abortion article. I think that this is a better way of organizing the information. Nice work, and let me know if I can help you at all in your future endeavors. --Howrealisreal 01:04, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks a bunch! And I thank you for not only the contribution, but also for the reversion. Because it forced me to reconsider the recent information (which I had missed in my research) in a broader context... hence the new State Laws section. I think I'm starting to feel the Wikilove. :'p Actually now that I think about it... I need help trying to come up with a good an appropriate image for the new article. The best I've come up with is a naked women covering her breasts... but isn't just about breasts, its about politics and abortion and bias and... argh! What kind of image can embody that? --RoyBoy 07:37, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Maybe you can keep the image of the naked woman but have her holding a law book over one of her breasts, a biology book over the other, and a confused look on her face. Perhaps that is a little too politically charged? =] --Howrealisreal 19:48, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

moved planned parenthood link
Sorry about the flurry of edits, I kept screwing up.

I went to the site, and even as a pro choice person, felt it was not neutral. Introduced many opinions without facts supporting them. GregNorc|[[User talk:GregNorc|Talk]]

 * It was a good call. Uh, I'm new here... should I say seconded or something like that? :'D In order to make up for the loss I added a religioustolerance.org link. You likey? --RoyBoy 07:28, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * (Moved religioustolerance.org link to appropriate section.) (Unsigned anon)

 * I moved Planned Parenthood back to the politically neutral section. The site has some great, documented, neutral information on it. PP is also involved with political action stuff like www.saveroe.com, etc., which is obviously not neutral. Since the material that has an agenda is not on the plannedparenthood site, though, I think it belongs back in the politically neutral section. T IMBO  ( T A L K )  19:54, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Without having looked at the site, I think I can say that it should have remained where it was. A link to a site that represents one side is not a politically neutral link, even if the information linked to is "factual" and "documented", and even if they try to be objective. As for neutrality, if side A feels that the article is biased toward side B, then side B shouldn't get to decide that it's neutral. In short, neutral should be reserved for those links everyone agrees is neutral. I'm putting it back. Oh, and I remove that dentist parallel. Comparisons like that don't belong in an encyclopedia.

 * Fair enough; I won't start an edit war over it. I do urge you to take a look at the site, though. The name "Planned Parenthood" might stir up some ire from pro-lifers because it does have a political agenda, but that's not the group's sole responsibility for being. What I intended for the "politically neutral" section was links that don't touch upon whether abortion should or shouldn't be legal, but rather links to sites where you can get factual information about the procedure. Seeing as the Planned Parenthood material that is political is not in the www.plannedparenthood.com domain, but rather www.saveroe.com etc., I think plannedparenthood.com fits. T IMBO  ( T A L K )  17:21, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

problems still (partial list)
References to the laws are still too american to the page...do you see many other references that specific to a country? No you don't because its been moved to that countries page. At the very most there should be a mention that women are forced to information on this is some american states. I'm sorry but that SHOULD be on an american page---and it makes sense on the debate page. So Planned Parenthood isn't neutral? None of the doctors you are using on these pages (or the next on one the debate) appear neutral at all to me or to have published neutral pages! If you want to write on a topic that can get as politicized as this one part of it is (IMHO) managing to balance the links, not just find one's that aren't political. Political pages will often do a better job of giving the character of the debate. And even if you view planned parenthood as "political" they are a well known group AND their biases are well known by the population. One way of solving this may be reintroduing the lancet article on meta analsys here.

Between this and the other page (ABC) page, i feel like there are a lot of problems. Hopefully they can be worked out...but at this point the page is blantantly POV even if such were not the goal --Marcie 10:34, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Elliot Institute
I agree on the Elliot Institute. That URL, when misleadingly introduced as "another good reference", has no place next to a discussion of academic quality research. I am deleting the reference from that section in its present form, though it may yet find a place when described properly as an organization that engages in anti-abortion campaigns. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 18:55, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The link removed is: http://www.afterabortion.org/elliot.html --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 00:42, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Clinical Depression
I have modified the categorical claim that abortion has been associated with clinical depression. Actually the evidence on this is mixed, and tends toward the negative. A longitudinal study by the APA found no evidence of Post Abortion Syndrome. There are many other studies that have tried and failed to find good evidence of a link. When I have time I'll write a review of the pro- and con- studies. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 19:51, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Politics and abortion
I've talked with American friends am so I'm aware that abortion is an extremely hot potato in some parts of the USA. I've added a section illustrating the apolitical nature of the abortion debate in the UK. British politicians do care about, and debate, issues like the improvements in technology that permit premature neonates to survive as early as mid-second trimester, but the debate lacks the edge that it possesses in the USA. No woman in the UK need fear that politicians will take away her right to a medically sanctioned first or second trimester abortion. I feel that the debate in the UK may more properly represent that general debate than that which takes place, in the presence of extreme religious viewpoints, in the USA. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 00:51, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

article rewording
I basically moved two parts of an article around, the one on ptsd like symtoms. The way it was presented it was not clear that most of the bad results came from women who had already been abused in the past. After shifting the two parts i added in that other factors that still need doing show similar effects for women in those situation--Marcie 21:54, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Link suggestions
An automated Wikipedia link suggester has some possible wiki link suggestions for the Abortion article, and they have been placed on this page for your convenience. Tip: Some people find it helpful if these suggestions are shown on this talk page, rather than on another page. To do this, just add to this page. — LinkBot 10:11, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Don't try that. I just did and the list is very big. --[[User:Tony Sidaway|Tony Sidaway|Talk]] 10:36, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Abortion/Archive 4


text:
Surface-to-surface missile

A surface-to-surface missile (SSM) or ground-to-ground missile (GGM) is a missile designed to be launched from the ground or the sea and strike targets on land or at sea. They may be fired from hand-held or vehicle mounted devices, from fixed installations, or from a ship. They are often powered by a rocket engine or sometimes fired by an explosive charge, since the launching platform is typically stationary or moving slowly. They usually have fins and/or wings for lift and stability, although hyper-velocity or short-ranged missiles may use body lift or fly a ballistic trajectory. The V-1 flying bomb was the first operational surface-to-surface missile.

Contemporary surface-to-surface missiles are usually guided. An unguided surface-to-surface missile is usually referred to as a rocket (for example, an RPG-7 or M72 LAW is an anti-tank rocket), whereas a BGM-71 TOW or AT-2 Swatter is an anti-tank guided missile.

Examples of surface-to-surface missile include the MGM-140 ATACMS and the Ground-Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB).

Examples

 * ALAS
 * BGM-109 Tomahawk
 * Bina
 * Hermes
 * Hyunmoo-3
 * KARA Atmaca
 * Kh-35
 * Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW)
 * Luz
 * Martlet
 * MGM-166 LOSAT
 * MGM-140 ATACMS
 * Nimrod
 * Otomat
 * PARS 3 LR
 * Polyphem
 * P-800 Oniks
 * RBS-15
 * Ure
 * 3M-54 Kalibr

Types
Surface-to-surface missiles are usually divided into a number of categories:

 * Ballistic missiles travel in a high trajectory, motor burns out partway through flight
 * Tactical ballistic missile: Range between about 150 km and 300 km
 * Battlefield range ballistic missile (BRBM): Range less than 200 km
 * Theatre ballistic missile (TBM): range between 300 km and 3500 km
 * Short-range ballistic missile (SRBM): Range 1000 km or less
 * Medium-range ballistic missile (MRBM): Range between 1000 km and 3500 km
 * Intermediate-range ballistic missile (IRBM) or Long-range ballistic missile (LRBM): Range between 3500 km and 5500 km
 * Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM): Range greater than 5500 km
 * Submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM): Launched from ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), all current designs have intercontinental range.
 * Cruise missiles travel low to the ground, motor burns during entire flight, typical range 2,500 km (1,500 mi)
 * Anti-tank guided missiles travel low to the ground, may or may not burn motor throughout flight, typical range 5 km (3 mi)
 * Anti-ship missiles travel low over the ground and sea, and often pop up or before striking the target ship; typical range 130 km (80 mi)

Different parties break down missile type by the range differently. For example, the United States Department of Defense has no definition for LRBM, and thus defines an ICBM as those missiles with ranges greater than 5,500 km (3500 mi). The International Institute for Strategic Studies also does not define a range for LRBMs, and defines SRBMs as having somewhat shorter ranges than the definition used by the Department of Defense.

title: Surface-to-surface missile


text: Talk:Howard Swanson

title: Talk:Howard Swanson


text:
Talk:QEMU

QEMU Object Model
The article QEMU Object Model has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Non notable component of QEMU."

Boot from USB?
"*It isn't possible to boot from the USB subsystem from within QEMU (it only can boot from floppy, hard disk, CD-ROM or an image of any of these (eg: an ISO Image of Windows XP Installation CD)), although a USB driver is available with the "-usb" switch, and will soon be loaded by default."

I saw that listed under the disadvantages of qemu and am wondering how this is relevant to qemu. The bios qemu uses (either bochs bios or bbios) would be responsible for this.

... be it under windows or linux you can boot any fat32 (didn't try others) bootable USB device (tested on QEMU 0.11.1 and later). As usual just "qemu " add extra option ad lib. __clu

title: Talk:QEMU


text:
Hope (Hillsong album)

Hope is the twelfth album in the live praise and worship series of contemporary worship music by Hillsong Church. The album reached No. 3 on the ARIA Albums Chart.

Making of the album
Hope was recorded live at the new Hillsong Convention Centre over two nights in early 2003 by Darlene Zschech and the Hillsong team. The DVD for the album was directed by Luke Irvine.

Track listing
Disc one
 * 1) "Better Than Life" (Marty Sampson) – worship leader – Marty Sampson
 * 2) "Glory" (Reuben Morgan) – worship leader – Darlene Zschech & Reuben Morgan
 * 3) "Ever Living God" (Raymond Badham) – worship leader – Darlene Zschech
 * 4) "Need You Here" (Morgan) – worship leader – Darlene Zschech
 * 5) "My Hope" (Darlene Zschech) – worship leader – Darlene Zschech
 * 6) "Still" (Morgan) – worship leader – Tulele Faletolu
 * 7) "Angels" (Sampson) – worship leaders – Marty Sampson & Darlene Zschech
 * 8) "Can't Stop Praising" (Tulele Faletolu & Sampson) – worship leader – Tulele Faletolu
 * 9) "You Are"/"You Are Lord" ("You Are" Darlene Zschech; choir arrangement for "You Are Lord": Jennifer Va'a) – worship leader – Darlene Zschech
 * 10) "Here I Am to Worship/Call" ("Here I Am to Worship" Tim Hughes; "Call": Darlene Zschech) – worship leaders – Reuben Morgan & Darlene Zschech
 * 11) "Highest" (Morgan) – worship leader – Darlene Zschech

Disc two
 * 1) "Song of Freedom" (Marty Sampson) – worship leader – Darlene Zschech
 * 2) "Shout Your Fame" (Jonas Myrin, Natasha Bedingfield, Gio Galanti & Paul Nevison) – worship leader – Steve McPherson
 * 3) "Exceeding Joy" (Miriam Webster) – worship leaders – Miriam Webster & Darlene Zschech
 * 4) "King of Love" (Tanya Riches) – worship leaders – Steve McPherson & Darlene Zschech
 * 5) "To the Ends of the Earth" (Joel Houston & Marty Sampson) – worship leader – Marty Sampson
 * 6) "Free" (Sampson) – worship leaders – Tulele Faletolu (CD) & Joel Houston (DVD)
 * 7) "Highest" (reprise) – worship leader – Darlene Zschech

 DVD
 * 1) "Song of Freedom"
 * 2) "Better Than Life"
 * 3) "Ever Living God"
 * 4) "Exceeding Joy"
 * 5) "Need You Here"
 * 6) "My Hope"
 * 7) "Can't Stop Praising"
 * 8) "To The Ends Of The Earth"
 * 9) "Here I Am To Worship"/"Call"
 * 10) "Free"
 * 11) "King Of Love"
 * 12) "Still"
 * 13) "You Are"/"You Are Lord"
 * 14) "Angels"
 * 15) "Shout Your Fame"
 * 16) "Glory"
 * 17) "Highest"

Personnel

 * Ruth Athanasio – choir conductor
 * Raymond Badham – producer, acoustic guitar, music director
 * Damian Bassett – vocals
 * Julie Bassett – vocals
 * Sonja Bailey – percussion
 * Marcus Beaumont – electric guitar
 * Steve Bullivant – saxophone
 * Michael Guy Chislett – electric guitar
 * Erica Crocker – vocals
 * Ned Davies – vocals
 * Holly Dawson – vocals
 * Tulele Faletolu – vocals
 * Ian Fisher – bass guitar
 * Kylie Fisher – choir conductor
 * Lucy Fisher – vocals
 * Michelle Frager – vocals
 * Craig Gower – piano, keyboards
 * Peter Hart – vocals
 * Scott Haslem – vocals, vocal production
 * Nigel Hendroff – electric guitar, acoustic guitar
 * Gary Honor – saxophone
 * Matt Hope – trumpet, brass director
 * Trent Hopkinson – trumpet
 * Karen Horn – vocals
 * Bobbie Houston (senior pastor) – executive producer
 * Brian Houston (senior pastor) – executive producer
 * Joel Houston – vocals, bass guitar
 * Greg Hughes – trombone
 * John Kasinathan – trombone
 * Peter Kelly – percussion
 * Peter King – piano, keyboards
 * Stephanie Lambert – trumpet
 * Garth Lazaro – vocals
 * Jonno Louwrens – saxophone
 * Steve Luke – trombone
 * Donia Makedonez – vocals
 * Steve McPherson – producer, vocals, vocal production
 * Luke Munns – drums
 * Reuben Morgan – producer, vocals, acoustic guitar
 * Steve Ollis – choir conductor
 * Katrina Peoples – vocals
 * Woody Pierson – vocals
 * Tanya Riches – choir conductor
 * James Rudder – saxophone
 * Natalie Rudder – choir conductor
 * Marty Sampson – vocals, acoustic guitar
 * Joanna Savage – vocals
 * Reuben Singleton – flute
 * Andrew Sloan – choir conductor
 * Elisha Vella – percussion
 * Miriam Webster – vocals
 * Tim Whincop – trumpet
 * Martine Williams – choir conductor
 * Darlene Zschech – producer, worship leader, vocal production
 * Hillsong Church Choir

title: Hope (Hillsong album)


text:
User:Dan w~enwiki

My name is Dan w

I am interested in Jehovah' Witnesses[] Bell's Theorem and QM[] and making bread

title: User:Dan w~enwiki


text:
Bronzino

Agnolo di Cosimo (17 November 1503 – 23 November 1572), usually known as Bronzino (Il Bronzino ) or Agnolo Bronzino, was an Italian Mannerist painter from Florence. His sobriquet, Bronzino, may refer to his relatively dark skin or reddish hair.

He lived all his life in Florence, and from his late 30s was kept busy as the court painter of Cosimo I de' Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany. He was mainly a portraitist but also painted many religious subjects, and a few allegorical subjects, which include what is probably his best-known work, Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time, c. 1544–45, now in London. Many portraits of the Medicis exist in several versions with varying degrees of participation by Bronzino himself, as Cosimo was a pioneer of the copied portrait sent as a diplomatic gift.

He trained with Pontormo, the leading Florentine painter of the first generation of Mannerism, and his style was greatly influenced by him, but his elegant and somewhat elongated figures always appear calm and somewhat reserved, lacking the agitation and emotion of those by his teacher. They have often been found cold and artificial, and his reputation suffered from the general critical disfavour attached to Mannerism in the 19th and early 20th centuries. Recent decades have been more appreciative of his art.

Life
Bronzino was born in Florence, the son of a butcher. According to his contemporary Vasari, Bronzino was a pupil first of Raffaellino del Garbo, and then of Pontormo, to whom he was apprenticed at 14. Pontormo is thought to have introduced a portrait of Bronzino as a child (seated on a step) into one of his series on Joseph in Egypt now in the National Gallery, London. Pontormo exercised a dominant influence on Bronzino's developing style, and the two were to remain collaborators for most of the former's life. An early example of Bronzino's hand has often been detected in the Capponi Chapel in the church of Santa Felicita by the Ponte Vecchio in Florence. Pontormo designed the interior and executed the altarpiece, the masterly Deposition from the Cross and the sidewall fresco Annunciation. Bronzino apparently was assigned the frescoes on the dome, which have not survived. Of the four empanelled tondi or roundels depicting each of the evangelists, two were said by Vasari to have been painted by Bronzino. His style is so similar to his master's that scholars still debate the specific attributions.

Towards the end of his life, Bronzino took a prominent part in the activities of the Florentine Accademia delle Arti del Disegno, of which he was a founding member in 1563.

The painter Alessandro Allori was his favourite pupil, and Bronzino was living in the Allori family house at the time of his death in Florence in 1572 (Alessandro was also the father of Cristofano Allori). Bronzino spent the greater part of his career in Florence.

Portraits

Bronzino first received Medici patronage in 1539, when he was one of the many artists chosen to execute the elaborate decorations for the wedding of Cosimo I de' Medici to Eleonora di Toledo, daughter of the Viceroy of Naples. It was not long before he became, and remained for most of his career, the official court painter of the Duke and his court. His portrait figures – often read as static, elegant, and stylish exemplars of unemotional haughtiness and assurance – influenced the course of European court portraiture for a century. These well known paintings exist in many workshop versions and copies. In addition to images of the Florentine elite, Bronzino also painted idealized portraits of the poets Dante (c. 1530, now in Washington, D.C.) and Petrarch.

Bronzino's best-known works comprise the aforementioned series of the duke and duchess, Cosimo and Eleonora, and figures of their court such as Bartolomeo Panciatichi and his wife Lucrezia. These paintings, especially those of the duchess, are known for their minute attention to the detail of her costume, which almost takes on a personality of its own in the image at right. Here the Duchess is pictured with her second son Giovanni, who died of malaria in 1562, along with his mother; however it is the sumptuous fabric of the dress that takes up more space on the canvas than either of the sitters. Indeed, the dress itself has been the object of some scholarly debate. The elaborate gown has been rumoured to be so beloved by the duchess that she was ultimately buried in it; when this myth was debunked, others suggested that perhaps the garment never existed at all and Bronzino invented the entire thing, perhaps working only from a fabric swatch. In any case, this picture was reproduced over and over again by Bronzino and his shop, becoming one of the most iconic images of the duchess. The version pictured here is in the Uffizi Gallery, and is one of the finest surviving examples.

Bronzino's so-called "allegorical portraits", such as that of a Genoese admiral, Portrait of Andrea Doria as Neptune, are less typical but possibly even more fascinating owing to the peculiarity of placing a publicly recognized personality in the nude as a mythical figure. Finally, in addition to being a painter, Bronzino was also a poet, and his most personal portraits are perhaps those of other literary figures such as that of his friend the poet Laura Battiferri. The eroticized nature of these virile nude male portraits, as well as homoerotic references in his poetry, have led scholars to believe that Bronzino was homosexual.

Religious and allegorical subjects
In 1540/41, Bronzino began work on the fresco decoration of the Chapel of Eleanora di Toledo in the Palazzo Vecchio and an oil on panel Deposition of Christ to be an altarpiece for the chapel. Before this commission, his style in the religious genre was less Mannerist, and was based in balanced compositions of the High Renaissance. Yet he became elegant and classicizing (cf. Smyth) in this fresco cycle, and his religious works are examples of the mid-16th-century aesthetics of the Florentine court – traditionally interpreted as highly stylized and non-personal or emotive. Crossing the Red Sea is typical of Bronzino's approach at this time, though it should not be claimed that Bronzino or the court was lacking in religious fervour on the basis of the preferred court fashion. Indeed, the duchess Eleanora was a generous patron to the recently founded Jesuit order.

Bronzino's work tends to include sophisticated references to earlier painters, as in one of his last grand frescoes called The Martyrdom of St. Lawrence (San Lorenzo, 1569), in which almost every one of the extraordinarily contorted poses can be traced back to Raphael or to Michelangelo, whom Bronzino idolized (cf. Brock). Bronzino's skill with the nude was even more enigmatically deployed in the celebrated Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time, which conveys strong feelings of eroticism under the pretext of a moralizing allegory. His other major works include the design of a series of tapestries on The Story of Joseph, for the Palazzo Vecchio.

Many of Bronzino's works are still in Florence but other examples can be found in the National Gallery, London, and elsewhere.

Selected works

 * St. Mark (c. 1525) – Oil on Wood, Capponi Chapel, Santa Felicita, Florence
 * St. Matthew (c. 1525) – Oil on Wood, Capponi Chapel, Santa Felicita, Florence
 * Portrait of Lorenzo Lenzi (1527–28) – Oil on panel, castello Sforzesco, Milan
 * Pietà (c. 1530) – Oil on panel, 105 x 100 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Portrait of Dante (1530) – Oil on panel, Milan
 * Portrait of a Lady in Green (1530–32) – Oil on panel, 76,7 x 65,4 cm, Royal Collection, Windsor
 * St. Sebastian (c. 1533) – Oil on panel, 87 x 77 cm, Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza, Madrid
 * Holy Family (1534–40) – Oil on wood, 124.5 x 99.5 cm, Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna
 * Adoration of the Shepherds (1535–1540) – Oil on wood, 65,3 x 46,7 cm, Museum of Fine Arts, Budapest
 * Portrait of Ugolino Martelli (before 1537) – Oil on panel, 102 x 85 cm, State Museums, Berlin
 * Portrait of Bartolomeo Panciatichi (c. 1540) – Tempera on wood, 104 x 84 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Holy Family (c. 1540) – Oil on wood, 117 x 93 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Portrait of a Young Man with a Book (c. 1540) – Oil on wood, 96 x 75 cm, Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York
 * Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time (Allegory; 1540–45) – Oil on panel, 146 x 116 cm, National Gallery, London
 * Adoration of the Bronze Snake (1540–45) – Fresco, 320 x 385 cm, Palazzo Vecchio, Florence
 * Deposition of Christ (1540–45) – Oil on panel, 268 x 173 cm, Musée des Beaux- Arts, Besançon
 * Alessandro de Médici (1540–1553) – Oil on panel, 34,90 x 26,20 cm, Cerralbo Museum, Madrid.
 * Crossing of the Red Sea (1541–42) – Fresco, 320 x 490 cm, Palazzo Vecchio, Florence
 * Portrait of a Young Girl (1541–45) – Oil on wood, 58 x 46,5 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Portrait of Bia de' Medici (c. 1542) – Tempera on panel, 63 x 48 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Portrait of Cosimo I de' Medici (1545) – Oil on panel, 74 x 58 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Portrait of Cosimo I de' Medici (c. 1545) – Oil on panel, 76,5 x 59 cm, Museo Thyssen-Bornemisza, Madrid.
 * Portrait of Giovanni de' Medici as a Child (c. 1545) – Oil on wood, 58 x 46 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Portrait of Eleanor of Toledo (c. 1545) – Oil on panel, 115 x 96 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Portrait of Lucrezia Panciatichi (c. 1545) – Oil on panel, 101 x 82.8 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Christ on the Cross (c. 1545) – Oil on panel, 145 x 115 cm, Musée des Beaux-Arts, Nice
 * Portrait of Stefano Colonna (1546) – Oil on panel, 125 x 95 cm, Galleria Nazionale d'Arte Antica, Rome
 * Portrait of Don Garcia de' Medici (1550) – Oil on panel, Museo del Prado, Madrid
 * Portrait of a Lady (c. 1550) – Oil on wood, 109 x 85 cm, Galleria Sabauda, Turin
 * PortraIt of a Young Man (possibly Pierino da Vinci) (c. 1550)
 * Venus, Cupid and Jealousy (or Envy) (c. 1550) – Oil on wood, 192 x 142 cm, Szépművészeti Múzeum, Budapest
 * Portrait of Andrea Doria as Neptune (1550–1555) – Oil on canvas, 115 x 53 cm, Pinacoteca di Brera, Milan
 * St. John the Baptist (1550–1555) – Oil on wood, 120 x 92 cm, Galleria Borghese, Rome
 * Portrait of Pierantonio Bandini (c. 1550–1555) – Oil on wood, 106,7 x 82,5 cm, National Gallery of Canada
 * Portrait of Francesco I de' Medici (1551) – Tempera on wood, 58.5 x 41.5 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Portrait of Maria de' Medici (1551) – Tempera on wood, 52.5 x 38 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Portrait of Ludovico Capponi (1551) – Oil on wood, 117 x 86 cm, Frick Collection, New York
 * Christ in Limbo, 1552, Florence, Museo dell'Opera di Santa Croce
 * Portrait of the Dwarf Nano Morgante (1552)
 * Holy Family (1555–1560) – Tempera on wood, 117 x 99 cm, Pushkin Museum, Moscow
 * Portrait of Laura Battiferri (1555–1560) – Oil on canvas, 83 x 60 cm, Palazzo Vecchio, Florence
 * Noli me tangere (1561) – Oil on canvas, 291 x 195 cm, Musée du Louvre, Paris
 * Allegory of Happiness (1564) – Oil on copper, 40 x 30 cm, Uffizi, Florence
 * Deposition of Christ (1565) – Oil on wood, 350 x 235 cm, Galleria dell'Accademia, Florence
 * Martyrdom of St. Lawrence (1569) – Fresco, San Lorenzo, Florence

title: Bronzino


text:
Talk:Hope (Hillsong album)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 18:14, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hope (Hillsong album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140705185958/http://australian-charts.com/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Hillsong to http://australian-charts.com/showinterpret.asp?interpret=Hillsong

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 22:00, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hope (Hillsong album)


text:
Talk:Telescoping series

Change Title to Telescoping Sums?
Not all telescoping sums are infinite series; some are finite. Should this be moved to telescoping sum? (For a nice example, see the section on probability distributions at order statistic.) Michael Hardy 01:07, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * While I agree that the title is misleading, a quick websearch notes that many math educational sites like Khan Academy and Brilliant refer to them as Telescoping Series. However, the esteemed Wolfram Alpha refers to them as Telescoping Sums. For this reason, I will add the terminology to the page. Fantasticawesome (talk) 21:06, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Gosper
My recollection is that Bill Gosper introduced the idea of telescoping. He is one of the pioneers of computer symbolic mathematics programs, having contributed to both Macsyma and Mathematica, for example. His web page cites A calculus of Series Rearrangements, which might be the place to look. --KSmrqT 01:52, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

 * What!!!??? How could he have introduced this idea if his life was so recent that he worked with electronic computers?? Michael Hardy 22:28, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, it is asserted at User talk:KSmrq that the term has been found in a 1957 document on mathscinet. Someone is telling me that it's in a math dictionary published in 1949. More to follow when I get more information. My guess is the term originated between 1850 and 1910 -- but that's just a guess. Telescoping sums were used by Euler in the 18th century, but I suspect not by that name. Michael Hardy 22:46, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

 * And to be clear, I completely agree that series were being rearranged long before Gosper. One of the challenges of formalization was to understand what rearrangements were safe, as pursued by Karl Weierstrass and others. The questions for this article are, what distinguishes "telescoping", when and where did the term originate, and how is it used today. With respect to current use, Gosper and others have made significant contributions to algorithms used in modern symbolic computer algebra systems, especially with regard to hypergeometric series. In this context the term "creative telescoping" is used. A helpful paper is
 * Abramov et al. "Telescoping in the context of symbolic summation in Maple". Journal of Symbolic Computation, v38 (2004), 1303–1326. (PDF)
 * The extraordinary generality of hypergeometric series and the power of these modern algorithms   allows the discovery of new and valuable identities. See
 * Petkovsek, Wilf, Zeilburger. A=B. (Book available online. )
 * for further details. I apologize if my previous brief remark confused or annoyed the historians! --KSmrqT 22:08, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Why use essentially the same example twice?
"Example 1" is essentially the same as the earlier example. Michael Hardy 22:33, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I propose putting the second occurance first, then putting something like, "This is useful to prove convergence, because as $$N \rightarrow \infty$$ the sum tends to 1."  Then removing that occurance.   x42bn6   Talk  07:27, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Rewrite
I have found some stuff about this article, and I am rewriting it now at User:x42bn6/Working On/Telescoping series. I would appreciate it if nobody did any major edits to this article, but I welcome feedback at User_talk:x42bn6/Working On/Telescoping series. x42bn6  Talk  13:24, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Proof?
Is there a possibility of a proof that relates for telescoping series? By that I mean, is there a formula for finding out what the final value is when it converges? If anyone really wants to talk about it, you can discuss it here. —EdBoy 13:10, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
 * You may want to ask Reference Desk/Mathematics but they will probably tell you to do it yourself, using limits.  x42bn6  Talk 02:11, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

What the final value is, is certainly stated explicitly in the article. Michael Hardy 21:55, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Applications?
I think it would be to include some practical applications of telescoping series in this article, but so far I have not found any. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Panchaos (talk • contribs) 16:08, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

 * I've added an application. I think others can be found by clicking on "what links here". Michael Hardy 20:50, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

Pitfalls
The pitfalls section is bad as it stands. The argument used for the valid sum could be used for the invalid example. It is necessary to use a convergence criterion that distinguises between them.

It is easy to create an example where the terms and the grouped terms tend to zero which does not converge. Create a series as follows: 1 - 1 + 1/2 + 1/2 - 1/2 - 1/2, + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 + 1/4 - 1/4 - 1/4 - 1/4 + ... where there are n terms 1/2^n followed by n terms -1/2^n. It is easy to group this with each grouped term being zero, but the original series oscillates rather than converging.

A criterion that is adequate for grouping to be valid is that the absolute sum of the terms in each group tends to zero over the sequence of groups. This criterion is true for the valid example given.

Elroch (talk) 22:13, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

 * But your counterexample is not a telescoping series, as the terms don't go positive, negative, positive, negative... If you arrange them that way, you have 1 - 1 + 1/2 - 1/2 + 1/2 - 1/2 + 1/4 - 1/4 + ..., which is truly telescoping and certainly does converge to 0. So there is nothing wrong with the convergence criterion stated in the article, except that it only works for those series covered by the article. -- Jao (talk) 01:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

I would take "telescoping" to mean that in finite partial sums every term cancels except the first and the last, or the last two, or some bounded number of terms. ("Bounded" means never exceeding some number that does not grow as the number of terms being summed grows.) The article isn't very precise about that. I'll think about how best to phrase a definition. Michael Hardy (talk) 02:26, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

 * The restriction that terms have to be alternately positive and negative does avoid the problem I mentioned. Alternatively, one can have an arbitrary series and group terms together by sign (resulting in a collapsed series whose terms alternate in sign). Elroch (talk) 09:15, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

So far there is NOTHING wrong with this statement: 0 = ∑0 = ∑(1 -1) = ∑(-1 +1)

But where did you get 1? ... = 1 +∑(-1 +1) =1?

Maybe there are indeed divergent examples of telescoping series. But this one is just wrong.

In my own opinion, the argument for a 'pitfall' here seems forced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.194.238.164 (talk) 04:59, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm removing it as it doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Someone's inability to do maths is not a pitfall of telescoping series. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smidderwibh (talk • contribs) 14:26, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Telescoping product
I can't find any reliable reference to the term "telescoping product". It would be one of the following:
 * $$ x_i = \frac{y_i}{y_{i+1}} $$
 * $$ \prod_{i=m}^n x_i = \frac{y_m}{y_{m+1}} \cdot \frac{y_{m+1}}{y_{m+2}} \cdot \frac{y_{m+2}}{y_{m+3}} \cdot \,\,\cdots\,\, \cdot \frac{y_{n-1}}{y_n} \cdot \frac{y_n}{y_{n+1}} = \frac{y_m}{y_{n+1}}. $$

or
 * $$ x_i = \frac{y_i}{y_{i-1}} $$
 * $$ \prod_{i=m}^n x_i = \frac{y_m}{y_{m-1}} \cdot \frac{y_{m+1}}{y_m} \cdot \frac{y_{m+2}}{y_{m+1}} \cdot \,\,\cdots\,\, \cdot \frac{y_{n-1}}{y_{n-2}} \cdot \frac{y_n}{y_{n-1}} = \frac{y_n}{y_{m-1}}. $$

-- Hugo Spinelli (talk) 00:27, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Incorrect?
From the pitfall section: "is not correct because this regrouping of terms is invalid unless the individual terms converge to 0;" The alternating harmonic series has individual terms which converge to zero, but regrouping of terms is not permissable there. Shouldn't this say that the partial sum of the individal terms must be absolutely convergent?

Definition
As long as the starting point for the index is finite and the domain of the index is countable (and – for simplivity – non-empty), should not all partial sums have a finite number of terms after cancellation? Moreover, after commutation, regrouping, and some number of evaluations, the number of terms can be reduced from the original N to any positive integer number of terms. I am not sure that this definition is really correct.

I would aim more for "partial sums have a pattern of cancellation between terms" or something. IbexNu (talk) 01:48, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Oops, sometimes, it cannot be reduced to more than 2 terms. And, I suppose, it could be reduced to 0 terms, if all of them cancel somehow (easy example: $$\sum_n (n-n)$$). IbexNu (talk) 01:51, 30 January 2021 (UTC)
 * What is more, a partial sum, by definition, only consists of a finite number of terms. So, I'm completely lost reading the first sentence of the article. Madyno (talk) 21:58, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

I have changed the opening paragraph. The salient feature of a telescoping series is that the general term is presented in a way such that consecutive terms cancel---again, it is about the *presentation* of the series, not the series itself. Any series *can* be rewritten as a telescoping sum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.207.16.4 (talk) 22:18, 12 April 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Telescoping series


text:
Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time

Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time (also called An Allegory of Venus and Cupid and A Triumph of Venus) is an allegorical painting of about 1545 by the Florentine painter Agnolo Bronzino. It is now in the National Gallery, London. Scholars do not know for certain what the painting depicts.

The painting has come to be known as Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time, and it is generally agreed that these are the principal figures (with "Folly" representing this or the personification of a similar concept). Cupid and Venus kiss in the foreground, while the putto Folly prepares to shower them with rose petals. The bald Time, at the top, looks on and holds a cloth. The meaning of the other three figures and the interactions between them all is much less certain. The painting displays the ambivalence, eroticism, and obscure imagery that are characteristic of the Mannerist period, and of Bronzino's master Pontormo.

Painting
The painting may have been commissioned by Cosimo I de' Medici, Grand Duke of Tuscany or by Francesco Salviati, to be presented by him as a gift to Francis I of France. Vasari wrote that a Bronzino painting, probably this one, was sent to King Francis, though he does not specify by whom: "He made a picture of singular beauty, which was sent to King Francis in France; in which was a nude Venus with Cupid kissing her, and on one side Pleasure and Play with other Loves; and on the other, Fraud, Jealousy, and other passions of love" (so not mentioning Time).

The erotic imagery would have appealed to the tastes prevalent in both the Medici and French courts at this time. The attention to texture and wealth is also consistent with Bronzino's aristocratic patronage. The painting was brought by Napoleon from Paris to Vienna, where in 1813, Johann Keglević gained possession of the painting from Franz Wenzel, Graf von Kaunitz-Rietberg. Since 1860 it has been in London.

The figure of Venus can be likened to a precious object (such as a marble statue) in a luxurious setting, desirable because of her unavailability. In this large, unusually cold composition, which is deliberately constructed on a counterpoint of opposing movements, the finest work is in the treatment of the faces. Bronzino, known above all as a portrait painter, painted several carefully drawn portraits of the Medici family.

Scholarly debate

Crowded into the claustrophobic foreground of the painting are several figures whose identities have been the subject of extensive scholarly debate. At times it has also been called A Triumph of Venus. Its meaning, however, remains elusive. Cupid, along with his mother (Venus) and the nude putto, to the right, are all posed in a typical Mannerist figura serpentinata form.

The two central figures are recognisable as Venus and Cupid. For example, she holds the golden apple she won in the Judgement of Paris, while he sports the characteristic wings and quiver. Both figures are nude, illuminated in a radiant white light. Cupid fondles his mother's bare breast and kisses her lips. The putto to the right of Cupid and Venus, preparing to shower them with rose petals, is often identified as Folly. On closer inspection his right foot can be seen pierced by large rose thorn pieces—an event that has no bearing on his expression, which seems engrossed in the pleasure of the moment.

The bearded, bald figure to the upper right of the scene is believed to be Time, in view of the hourglass behind him. He sweeps his arm forcefully out to his right. Again, it is difficult to interpret his gesture with any certainty; it could be to prevent the figure at the far left of the picture from shielding the incestuous transgressions of Venus and the adolescent Cupid with the billowing blue fabric that provides a screen between the figures in the fore and background. Many scholars believe that his gesture seems to say "Time is fleeting, and you never know when it may be all over." The figure opposite Time, and also grasping at the drapery, is usually called Oblivion because of the lack of substance to his form—eyeless sockets and mask-like head. The mask-like face of this figure is echoed by the image of two actual masks in the lower right-hand corner.

The identity of the remaining figures is even more ambiguous. The old woman rending her hair (see detail at left) has been called Jealousy—though some believe her to represent the ravaging effects of syphilis. The creature at the right-hand side behind the innocent-looking putto, with a girl's face and a concealed sphinx-like body, her head twisted at an unnatural angle, her hands reversed, extending a honeycomb with her right hand, and hiding behind her back a scorpion's barb at the end of her long serpentine tail, may represent Pleasure and Fraud. There is, however, no consensus on these identifications.

In popular culture

 * The foot at the lower left corner is the source of the emblematic Monty Python Foot.
 * The painting is discussed in Iris Murdoch's novel The Nice and the Good.
 * The painting is discussed in Nell Irvin Painter's memoir Old in Art School.
 * The painting is discussed in Robertson Davies' novel What's Bred in the Bone.
 * The painting is mentioned in David Mitchell's The Bone Clocks.
 * The painting is used in Simon Raven's The Survivors as a representation and incitement of the breakdown of Patricia Llewellyn.
 * The painting is the title of Episode 22 of Switched at Birth.
 * The name of the painting is also the name of a box set by the pop band The Divine Comedy
 * "Venus, Cupid, Folly, and Time" is the title of a short story by the American writer Peter Taylor.

title: Venus, Cupid, Folly and Time


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/METFIELDism

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 13:41, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

METFIELDism and METFIELD
Zero Google hits for METFIELDism, the only hits I could find for METFIELD are towns in England. RickK 01:10, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC) This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Delete Non-notable.
 * Delete Non-notable. This should probably be a speedy delete, but here we are, anyway. -- The Anome 01:23, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, possible hoax. Megan1967 02:11, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Hoax. JoaoRicardo 04:32, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete both. METFIELD is some guy on metallicabb.com. Rhobite 05:48, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete both. — Brim 09:52, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete joke. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 14:40, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, probable hoax, certainly not-notable. Rje 17:16, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. nn Carrp | Talk 03:44, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)


text: Talk:Joseph Cotten

title: Talk:Joseph Cotten


text:
Talk:Kaliurang

Moved from article
I've moved the following from the article - while accurate and reasonable, it's the kind of how-to or travel information that Wikipedia doesn't usually host.

How to reach

 * You can reach Kaliurang by taking the main road from the Yogyakarta ring road on the north side. Road signs will tell you where to go and the road is also named after the town (Jalan Kaliurang). Before entering the village itself, visitors from outside are requested to pay a small amount before they are allowed in.
 * Public buses, large and smaller ones, ply the route without a time schedule. Just stop a bus when you see it. During the weekend the road towards the town can be crowded, you can partially avoid these crowds by taking a motorbike.

CDC  (talk)  01:11, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kaliurang


text:
User:MPerel/Articles and images I have created

Articles I have created

 * University of Oxford Botanic Garden
 * Gary Zukav
 * Shraga Simmons
 * Seudah

Texts I have entered at Wikisource

 * Epistle to Yemen (22 pages)

Quote collections I have entered at Wikiquote

 * On the Jews and Their Lies

Resources I have created at Meta-Wiki

 * Range blocks: CIDR sample block chart

Images I have created and/or uploaded

 * Image:Eden Natan Zada.jpg: Eden Natan Zada


text:
Talk:Works of Aristotle

Comments
To the author of this article: how did you come to the list? can you quote scholars for each spurious and non-spurious book? Josemazcorro (talk) 23:50, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Not knowing the history of Bekker numbers, I can't write that, but I feel that knowledge of them is important for certain texts. I may be wrong in that they only apply to Ancient Greek texts, but that's the only area I've come across them. Please add anything you can, thanks. Tom M 01:15, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

After doing some research, I've found that the numbers were put in place by Immanuel Bekker, a philologist at Berlin university during the 19th century. I've found it hard to find out much about Immanuel Bekker, so anything further would be good. Tom M 12:34, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I put in some stuff I found some info here... which is about Aristotle, The Politics. It looks like the numbers come from his std. greek edition of the complete aristotle. I'm not sure if he compiled any works of Plato or anyone else too. WhiteC 20:52, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, what do the asterisks following some indexed items represent? WhiteC 07:56, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have completed the list, which was lacking many titles. I also introduced the * vs. ** distinction. I corrected a couple of minor errors in the previous list. I itemized the Parva Naturalia. I added the section at the bottom on works outside the Bekker corpus. For the titles of Aristotle's works in English, I used the standard set by the Revised Oxford Translation. Please think twice before altering these; I myself would prefer other English titles in a couple of cases, but the Revised Oxford Translation provides a recognized standard for consultation of the Corpus Aristotelicum in English. Wareh 19:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm removing the image Aristotelis_Opera_Omnia_Cover.png and replacing it with a better one. That image was the title page of Bekker's edition as printed in 1837 by Oxford UP (not the original 1831 edition). Since this is an article on the numbers as a system of reference, I have scanned a page of the public-domain 1831 edition that actually shows physically what the Bekker numbers are referring to. Wareh 16:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Inclusion of dubious material
Please see discussion at Aristotle as the same material has been inserted there -- Snowded TALK  18:23, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

 * As the non-linear, lecture-note style is an important side note to understanding Aristotle I have added this section in. I have taken several college courses that address Aristotle's works and each time both the text and teacher referred to his writing style. If both teacher and book include this information it is obviously important. I agree with my teachers that it is important. One of the major drivers of higher quality text copying into Arabic was complaints about Aristotle's "poorly-translated" (actually poorly-written) corpus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheThomas (talk • contribs) 18:28, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Lets have the discussion in one place please - cutting and pasting the same material to two articles and two talk pages is not the way to go about this. -- Snowded TALK  18:29, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Is there a reason why this article's title is not italicized?
This title is not italicized, even though it is in a foreign language and is the title of a collection of works. Was this a conscious choice due to an established yet modern reason? If so, it should stay as is. If not, then the phrase should be italicized throughout.

My real-life limitations most likely will prevent me from following up on this, so I appreciate others who can follow through. Thank you for your consideration. —Geekdiva (talk) 11:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Why is this article even called "Corpus Aristotelicum", since it says nothing about it?
According to Shoja, Tubbs, Loukas, & Ardalan 2008, The Aristotelian account of“heart and veins”, Intl. J Cardiology 125 p. 304-310, the Corpus Aristotelicum was prepared in Rome beginning in around 86 BC. If this is true (and Shoja et al. cite no source), this article doesn't say who made it, when, what was in it, or how it was transmitted to us today. This is a critical point, because accepted dogma is that Aristotle's works were lost, and then recovered in the 12th century from Constantinople. What works of Aristotle were available in Latin, in Rome, before then? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philgoetz (talk • contribs) 16:49, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Additional Material for This Page
Physics (Aristotle) includes substantial material on the Aristotelian corpus that's not specific to the 'Physics' and should be moved to another article, as the editors have discussed on the talk page. The ideal article for this material would probably be this page, Corpus Aristotelicum. What do you think?

Also: is there a special procedure for moving material from one article to another?

JKeck (talk) 19:26, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

 * If there are no objections here, I'm going to move the sections (The authorship paradox, Research at the Lyceum, The question of the library) from Physics (Aristotle) to this article. JKeck (talk) 23:34, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Since there were no objections, I went ahead and moved those sections. JKeck (talk) 13:41, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

Quantity of Topic Notes
Why are there so many [ref group="topic note"] entries that are basically parenthetical asides? If they're important, why are they not in the many body of the article? If they are not important, what purpose do they serve? How many footnote-equivalents does one article need? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2607:F2C0:943F:9200:D011:A857:5882:E903 (talk) 01:29, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

Removed the long digression
I'm not sure what that "question of the library" section was or where it came from, but it seemed to be working pretty freely without much support from its citation. It's almost certainly not appropriate for a page intended to cover the works of aristotle.  - car chasm (talk) 00:37, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

 * Indeed that digression was dysfunctional. However, the entire problem of how works that were not published during the lifetime of Aristotle came to be known by posterity, now remains untreated. Very famous story. Also, the removal of the lists leaves behind an article about the works of Aristotle that does not indicate what precisely are those works. The average reader might see that as a disappointing omission.--MWAK (talk) 08:41, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I've re-added the bekker number template so that there's a list of the works now. That's a good point.
 * I think the story of Aristotle's work being recovered (the story about the lecture notes all hidden in a basement, I presume?) should probably have some fairly recent reliable sources supporting it if we're going to have anything on the subject. Last I read, more recent scholars were skeptical that the "esoteric" works weren't available the whole time.  - car chasm (talk) 09:02, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

 * Thank you for reinserting Bekker's list. True or not, it is still a famous story :o). But I agree recent sources are needed.--MWAK (talk) 09:37, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Renamed article to Works of Aristotle
I'm open to other suggestions but strongly opposed to "Corpus Aristotelicum" or anything similar. WP:COMMONNAME and WP:ENGLISH at the minimum apply here, that name was horrible.  - car chasm (talk) 01:01, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

 * Apart from aesthetics, it still is rather common. The least we should do, is mentioning it in the first sentence. Of course while avoiding any suggestion it was the original title...--MWAK (talk) 08:17, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, it's also not the same thing. So it's a bad title.  - car chasm (talk) 08:20, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Works of Aristotle