text:
Talk:Titus Andronicus

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Racquel-ortega, LinhMao94, Mkoggeusf. Peer reviewers: Maricarmen garciaramos, Rummens97, Jmirto95.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 11:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
"It could be argued though that the play's heritage of violence could be traced as far back to Seneca, by whom Shakespeare was influenced and imitated to good effect."

This sentence is written as though it's supposed to contest something in the previous sentence, but it fails to do so - it seems like a non-sequitor. And no one "argues" that Shakespeare was drawing on Senecan tradition because everbody agrees that Seneca was the inspiration for this type of play. I'd rewrite the sentence, but I can't figure out what the original author was trying to say.68.118.61.219 00:35, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

See also??
Should we tie to Andronicus I Comnenus which may have been a historical reference for the play? WBardwin 08:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Do you have any evidence that the play is based on him? The Singing Badger 13:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Just my university Shakespeare teacher/and my memory. There's probably a book reference with the theory out there somewhere.  WBardwin 21:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Isaac Asimov argues pursuasively that the play has no direct connection to any historical figure. For example, it is clearly part of pre-Christian Rome, because the whole cycle of revenge starts with the burial-sacrifice of one of Tamora's sons. Andronikos I Komnenos OTOH was 12th century, definitely Christian era. The play's theme of revenge piled upon revenge could have drawn upon many sources ... it's a popular theme! rewinn 06:28, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

 * At the same time, there is a very strong argument that Lavinia is based on Philomel in Ovid's Metamorphoses. But that's more of a literary foundation than any sort of historical tie-in.  The Jade Knight 10:31, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

In my Penguin edition of Shakespeare, the 'unknown' boy is called "young Lucius". Rintrah 13:42, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Good point. I just looked again, and "young Lucius" is in the stage direction opening Act IV. Also Marcus says "Stand by me, Lucius, do not fear thy Aunt". Later the boy refers to Marcus as "Uncle" and Lavina as "Aunt". Perhaps these terms are being used a little loosely; if Lavinia were his aunt, Marcus would be his great-uncle. But anyway, at least the boy has a name! thanks. rewinn 15:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Reputation
I have changed the text so that "consider it childish, juvenile, or believe that it is populist trash written only to make money" now reads "consider it childish, juvenile, or believe that it is low-brow trash written only to make money." "Populist" has political connotations that are certainly irrelevant, and "popular" would probably be the correct word to use EXCEPT that many of WS's plays were popular and so condemning one of his plays for being popular is tantamount to condemning pretty nearly all his plays for the same reason. (Shakespeare wrote for people and audiences and not for the desk-drawer, as someone or other once remarked!) However, it seemed to me that that sense intended was not to condemn it for being popular but for being low-brow, and so have changed the text conformably.

 * This entire section strikes me as rather awkward. It doesn't read clearly, and much of the writing strikes me as unnecessarily complex to the point of confusion. I've made some edits, but I'm still not very happy with how it reads. Anyone with better ideas on how to rephrase some of the more glaringly clumsy sections, please do so. --CurtisSchweitzer 21:08, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

 * It's difficult to justify any Shakespeare play as "low-brow" or "trash", since the language, classical references, and themes are always above the low-brow or trashy level. Even the notorious scene in Hamlet, with the obvious genitalia reference, is too subtle to fit the modern definition of low-brow or trashy theatre. Anyway, Titus Andronicus is far more enjoyable than Silence of the Lambs. Rintrah 07:15, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

 * I quite agree with you but I can understand someone slagging this particular play for the cited reasons, although I personally do not agree with them. I think that it is a valid opinion, and might as well be left in; my only concern was that the choice of that particular word "populist" was problematical and wanted to change it to one more fitting. Hi There 14:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Fair enough. I just get annoyed at the insidious criticism which insinuates itself into the reputation of Shakespeare's plays. Rintrah 14:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Is the Bloom comment necessary? I understand why criticisms of the play are described, but this opinion, from a pompous scholar, seems extraneous and annoying. Rintrah 12:59, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

This section is incredibly one-sided and subjective. "Generally uninspired verse" is not presented as an opinion but as a fact. Only unfavourable, even mostly derisive, opinions about the play are reported. In The Oxford Companion to Shakespeare (possibly a better authority than whoever wrote this section), Anthony Davies writes, "The play is currently very popular [...]. Critics now tend to regard TA as at very least an interesting precursor of the mature tragedies." Both recent editors of TA in major editions (Jonathan Bate for Arden Third Series and Eugene Waith for The Oxford Shakespeare) do take the play seriously. I take it they are complete idiots since Harold Bloom's opinion is the only one worth taking into account. S.Camus (talk) 15:57, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Separate Character Pages
Its seems that none of the characters in this WS play have a separate page. Are they not notable enough to do so. I am no expert on WS, but if people think these pages could do with being created I am willing to give a hand. Cheers --81.111.69.221 19:03, 4 October 2006 (UTC) aka user:Lethaniol
 * It's a wiki. If you want to do separate pages then BE BOLD and do it. For what it's worth, though, if I were in your position I would expand the characters here in this article, then only break them out when and if this article got too long. AndyJones 19:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
 * In my opinion, it's really not necessary. AFAIK, the characters of the play aren't archetypes that have been repeatedly used by Shakespeare, nor have they been adapted into other works (Like Rosencrantz & Guildenstern in Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead). I'd recommend just creating a "Characters" and "Minor Characters" subsection with a blurb for each.
 * Okay I agree with you two - I will (when I get time) write up short summaries of each of the major characters and a list of the minor ones. If they become article worthy on their own then they can be made. By the way this is WS we are speaking about, and although I try to be bold, mucking about with these sorts of pages is a bit scary - oh well I am quite new. Cheers Lethaniol 13:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * There is no abuse to WS that hasn't been used by some academic. Others will amend your mistakes, if there are any. Rintrah 14:32, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I've just added a section, copied from my complete works, for a character list. Most other Shakespeare plays on Wikipedia seem to have such a section.--King Hildebrand 17:40, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that making a separate page for the major characters is a good idea, but if that happens then the characters should be listed here in order of importance as opposed to whatever order in which they are currently. On a similar note, Chiron and Demetrius are said to play the spirits of Rape and Murder but it is not specified who plays whom. Racquel-ortega (talk) 22:45, 19 October 2015 (UTC)

Use of the word 'hack'
I've noticed a few uses for 'hack' in this article...are they meant to be there? I'm going to edit them out, but if anyone disagrees with my decision let me know and I'll unedit them. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thebluelagoon (talk • contribs) 22:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

Removed extraneous links
I've deleted a good number of pointless links on this page: specifically ones that were redundant (pointing to articles articled linked to only a few paragraphs above) or extraneous (pointing to common words like revenge, murder, gore, and so on. Can we try to keep the links in an article only to subjects that will expand the reader's understanding of the article itself?  How likely is it that someone reading this article doesn't know what the word "murder" means?

Fabulous Creature 19:19, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Removing unnecessary spoiler tags
Most of the articles about Shakespeare plays have a clearly marked section labelled "Synopsis" in which the plot is discussed. It's really unnecessary, and quite insulting, to put a further warning directly beneath that. These are well established plays and people come to read about them. When they see that the article contains a synopsis, they're not going to be surprised because this is an encyclopedia. If they read on and find out the plot of the play, then we have done our job correctly. Pandering for some imaginary people who may not realise that encyclopedias tell you about stuff, or that a plot summary inevitably contains a summary of the plot, is not productive, and certainly no justification for unnecessary duplication of information. --Tony Sidaway 03:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I think that's fine where headers clearly show that plot-related material is present (such as under the "Synopsis" heading). The Jade Knight 10:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Does the dead emperor have a name?
Does the dead emperor have a name or not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.119.112 (talk) 23:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

April 9 edits
Hi guys. Well, as y’all can see, I’ve made a couple of minor changes to the page!!! Now, I know the first thing everyone is thinking – it’s far far far too long. Far. Yep, I totally accept that, but it won’t be for long. I’ve earmarked three individual sections to be taken out and put on their own pages, but I wanted to get some opinions about it before I went to the trouble of creating pages that people may think are a waste of time. The three sections are The Peacham drawing, Authorship and Themes. Removing these three sections would bring the article down to an acceptable length. I think they’re the most logical ones to move (obviously, I’ll need to write brief intros and whatnot, and add links, but that’s no biggie), as the Text, Sources, Language, Performances and Adaptations sections wouldn’t really stand on their own as individual articles. That’s my thinking anyway, but I wanted to get some feedback before I did anything. The other thing I wanted to ask about is names; obviously the Peacham drawing will be at Peacham drawing, and I’ll redirect link Longleat manuscript and The Peacham drawing. But what should I call the other two: Titus Andronicus authorship question or Titus Andronicus (authorship question) or Titus Andronicus (authorship) and Titus Andronicus (themes) or Titus Andronicus themes or Themes in Titus Andronicus. Any advice on this is very much appreciated, as is any general feedback on the article itself. Bertaut (talk) 17:39, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

Files_for_deletion/2011_April_9
All opinions welcome. walk victor falktalk 13:24, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Stratford Festival productions
The performance section makes reference to productions at the Stratford Shakespeare Festival:

"It had been set to be staged at the festival in 1929, as the only play in the canon not performed since the festival's origin in 1879, but it was replaced by Much Ado About Nothing when ticket sales proved poor."

This is clearly wrong as the Stratford Shakespeare Festival was established in 1953, but I don't have the resources at hand to straighten it out. -Dhodges (talk) 05:23, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

 * Nice spot. I double checked my source (Dessen), and he says it was scheduled for the jubilee season in Stratford in a section where he talks about the 1978 production. Obviously, I misread it and conflated the jubilee season with the festival. I've deleted the inaccurate info. Thanks for pointing that out. Bertaut (talk) 16:20, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

 * it's still a little muddled, 1879 would refer to the Royal Shakespeare Company. Doing some Googling, it seems they toured a production of 'Much Ado in what would have been their golden jubilee. Incidentally, it could only have been a tour, as their old theatre burned down and the new theatre opened in 1932.

What I'd suggest is moving that material up to the paragraph which refers to the 1955 Peter Brook production. again, I hesitate to do it myself as I don't have your source. -Dhodges (talk) 18:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

 * I'm not fully sure what you mean - move the cancelled 1929 info to the Brook section?

 * Here's the exact quote from Dessen. He's talking about box office and unwanted laughter and whatnot, and he says "For the 1929 jubilee season in Stratford, Titus was proposed and even announced (as the only play that had not been done there in the fifty years since 1879) but box-office logic prevailed and its place was taken by Much Ado About Nothing." That's all the info he gives. Bertaut (talk) 00:08, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Actually, I'm inclined to remove it altogether. This is a general interest encyclopedia, too much detail isn't going to help the average reader. The main thing is not to put information about one Stratford in a paragraph that's primarily about the other.

 * Yeah, fair point. I've removed it so. Bertaut (talk) 17:54, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

bot botch-ups
I noticed two places in Section Titus Andronicus where dates like "1 January 64" were given in places where verse numbers were expected (1.1.64). I assume this was due to a bot that was out to detect malformed dates. I've changed them back. I haven't found any other occurrences in this article, but of course there may be some in other articles. --Wrongfilter (talk) 16:51, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Radio
In 1923, extracts were broadcast on BBC Radio 1, performed by the Cardiff Station Repertory Company as the second episode of a series of programs showcasing Shakespeare's plays, entitled Shakespeare Night.

Now, are we sure about that? When, precisely, in 1923? And could someone please confirm that BBC Radio 1 was broadcasting in 1923. My understanding is that it first came on air in 1967. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.166.126 (talk) 16:20, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Actually BBC radio was established October 18, 1922; and experimental transmissions were going on as early as 1920. So it is quite possible that they were doing Shakespeare broadcasts in 1923. In 1967 the BBC established BBC Radio 2, renamed the existing BBC Radio station as BBC Radio 1. Mediatech492 (talk) 17:36, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

BBC Radio was established in 1922. It was not called BBC Radio 1. To digress a little: the then 3 national BBC Radio stations "Home Service", "Light Programme" & "Third Programme" were replaced by respectively Radio 4, Radio 2, & Radio 3 and a new service "Radio 1" in 1967. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.141.166.126 (talk) 18:40, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

 * Here's the link with the info: There is a citation in the article itself, right at the start of the radio section, it says "All information is this section is taken from...". Regarding the name of the channel, the source is vague, so feel free to change it. Bertaut (talk) 21:44, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

It seemed nobody else was going to fix it so I did. The idea of BBC Radio 1, a modern pop music station, featuring ANY play, let alone this one, is risible! Burgh House (talk) 16:42, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Removal of non-free files
Do not re-add or I will take this to ANI and request that the user is blocked. If you want the removals reviewed file a request at WP:NFCR until that is closed the files say out. Werieth (talk) 13:34, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Any removal of content needs to be discussed on the talk page of the article. I'm not gonna get into an edit war, but I'm not gonna cave in to threats, either. Discuss the removal here as per WP policy and guidelines. WP is a collaborative venture, not a one-man show. From what I've read about this dispute just in the past 15 minutes it appears you do not play well with others. Tom Reedy (talk) 13:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * There has been no attempt to file a WP:NFCR. these files clearly fail NFCC and will be removed. Anyone can replace the non-free photos of the play with free ones. Werieth (talk) 14:05, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * If they "clearly fail" you need to lay out your case here. I don't know if they fail or not; arguments have been made that indicate to me they do not fail. I do know your style of editing is not going to win you any awards. Tom Reedy (talk) 14:17, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * NFCC enforcement will never get me anything other than abused. Anyone can replace the non-free files with free versions, the play is outside of copyright and thus creating free examples is doable. Werieth (talk) 14:45, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * So you've been here eight months now and you're the Enforcer, eh? Tom Reedy (talk) 15:11, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Ive been here since March of 2010, and an active editor since June of last year. Im not the enforcer, just one of many. Werieth (talk) 15:18, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Your account was created in December 2012. If you've been here longer, then you should know that you're supposed to notify an editor when you file a grievance at ANI, which I only discovered by looking at your edit history. You have not established that these files violate NFCC, nor have you achieved a consensus. To the contrary, your attempts have done nothing but sow disruption and begun an edit war. I am not questioning your motives; I'm sure you have nothing but the protection of Wikipedia in mind. If so, you should review the policies and guidelines in a bit more depth, and you also need to review the sanctions put in place by ArbCom for all Shakespeare-related pages here. I am going to revert your deletion one lst time. If you feel that your privileged position entitles you to violate Wikipedia polices concerning page reverts because your cause is just, by all means do so. Tom Reedy (talk) 16:39, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I see that the page has been protected until the dispute is settled. Tom Reedy (talk) 16:40, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Please check your facts, Im not sure where you are getting December 2012 from, but if you look at the logs you will see March 14, 2010 User account Werieth (talk | contribs) was created. Werieth (talk) 23:26, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

However, the scenes for File:Lavinia_-_Ninagawa_production.jpg are not described and there is no verbaige at all about File:Titus_Poster.jpg as the poster. Because of that, the images are not demonstrating anything original in the article and do not pass WP:NFCC. Because Werieth's complaint was partially valid, I've chosen not to block him. Right or wrong about NFCC, that's the bottom line. The question to ask yourself for WP:NFCC is not "Is there a free copy of this image out there?" The question is really "Can the article content be demonstrated by a free image?" That's the threshold for NFCC#1. Editors should take copyright claims very seriously and edit warring to restore images whose acceptance under WP:NFCC is in dispute can quickly earn a block. You all should seek to build consensus or outside help before restoring that material.--v/r - TP 16:57, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Page Protected I've protected the page and I've decided that no one will get blocked. However, were I to block anyone it likely would've been the three editors restoring the content.  I find that Werieth's argument is convincing on some images and not others.  Werieth's failure to address each individual image is a fault in his reasoning but the assumption that because one image is allowed means all are allowed is a fallacy of composition.
 * File:Titus_(Final_Image).jpg This image passed WP:NFCC because the text directly speaks about this portion of the play and attempts to describe the scene: "At the end of the film, young Lucius takes the baby and walks out of Rome, which Taymor feels represents hope for the future. Originally, the film was to end as Taymor's 1994 production had, with the implication that Lucius is going to kill Aaron's baby, but during production of the film, actor Angus Macfadyen, who played Lucius, convinced Taymor that Lucius was an honourable man and wouldn't go back on his word."
 * File:Baby_Coffin.jpg Likewise, this image is also allowed.  "At the end of the play, as Lucius delivers his final speech, the camera stays on Young Lucius rather than his father, who is in the far background and out of focus, as he stares in horror at the coffin of Aaron's child (which has been killed off-screen)."
 * File:Laura_Rees_as_Lavinia.jpg Again, allowed. This is described in the article and no free image could serve it's purpose: "Bailey focused on a realistic presentation throughout the production; for example, after her mutilation, Lavinia is covered from head to toe in blood, with her stumps crudely bandaged, and raw flesh visible beneath."

 * I came late to this dance but I clearly stated that consensus should be built on the talk page before any wholesale removal by anyone. If Werieth had followed the ArbCom sanctions in place for this page, all this drama could have been avoided. And if I am not mistaken in my interpretation of this discussion, Bertaut clearly agreed that the File:Titus_Poster.jpg could go. By your judgment above, Werieth is 40% correct, not an encouraging percentage for a self-appointed enforcer. Tom Reedy (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't intend to comment anymore on this dispute, but please don't take what I say as a "judgement." Admins do not solve content disputes.  I'm only explaining my rationale on why I didn't block Werieth or any of ya'all.  The rest is up to ya'all to determine.--v/r - TP 21:47, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * TP you're not from Texas, are you? "Y'all" is the contraction for "you all". Tom Reedy (talk) 02:10, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Replaceability
No one has yet to assert why we cannot have a freely licensed image to illustrate the points in this article. This play is over 400 years old. It should be fairly easy to either request a freely licensed image from one of the groups performing it, or to get a group of actors together to stage a scene or two and photograph that under a free license. Just because we have non-free files available doesn't mean we can use them. So far the only reason to use non-free files is ease of use and WP:ILIKEIT, which boils down to blatant violations of WP:NFCC as a free version of any of these images can be created. Werieth (talk) 23:32, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It's great that anyone can edit, but it's a shame that some of those who do have no idea of when it would be appropriate to explain their position rather than act like an automaton. Special:ListUsers/Werieth shows "Created on 14 March 2010" (an easy way to see that is to click "User rights" at the bottom of the a user's contribs). Being right does not replace the need to collaborate. Johnuniq (talk) 23:55, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * What more needs clarified? I have asserted that the files are replaceable, and provided reasons for that position. I have yet to be given an answer to that issue. Werieth (talk) 23:58, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I understand that it is not possible to fully explain every action taken, but anyone enforcing an obscure policy like WP:NFCC should have some boilerplate or a link to provide as an explanation when opposition is encountered. Bear in mind that the issue is not that urgent that it must be resolved in the next five minutes, and by just edit warring you are sucking good editors into a trap. This is an excellent article maintained by excellent editors, and they deserve a little more care than is possible when dealing with new accounts advocating for a garage band. It's likely that editors of topics related to Shakespeare have never heard of NFCC, and it's hard to tell the difference between an enforcer and the random warriors that are often seen at Wikipedia. Fortunately the admins who saw your attempt at ANI are smarter than average. Johnuniq (talk) 00:20, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * What's sad is that people view the NFCC as an "obscure policy". Werieth has demonstrated that the images are inherently replaceable, making them an WP:NFCC violation. That's all he really needs to demonstrate.—Kww(talk) 17:14, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * When something that has already been discussed and judged to be fine such as this, then it is not "unquestionably" a violation. On that alone Werieth would need to seek to established it is in fact a violation per WP:3RRNO #5.  His attitude so far has been that he knows more than other reviewers, as he said here, and that those who judged it otherwise must be wrong.  That is not an attitude that is conducive to a collaborative environment in Wikipedia.  Randomly looking at his edits, you'd find that he would simply remove all the images, claiming excessive use for example here - excessive does not everything should be removed, therefore he did not actually give a proper reason for removing everything.  Whether he is correct there I don't know, but his actions come across as indiscriminate and he sees his opinion to be better than others. I don't think he has shown anyway that the images are necessarily replaceable, for example File:Lavinia_-_Ninagawa_production.jpg appears to be something highly stylized and unusual and I'm not sure it will be repeated again (I'm happy to be corrected if I'm wrong), therefore may not be photographed. I should also add I'm sure what he does is useful and necessary in Wikipedia, but he needs to take other people's opinion into account and be more considered in his approach. Hzh (talk) 18:56, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The FfD you cite has no mention of WP:NFCC at all, and the #8 argument wasnt made. You cite my removals at T. K. Seung as being invalid, I disagree, and am starting to wonder about your competence in regards to non-free media. I removed 6 non-free files from a biography article, which reads more like a bibliography on a set of books that are not notable enough to have their own article. Please see WP:NFLIST which prohibits usage of non-free files in lists, discographies, bibliographies, and similar cases. If thats not enough I can point you to megabytes of discussion clarifying it. Usage of book covers in the articles about the author is a violation of WP:NFCC in most cases, See WP:NFCI there was not critical commentary on the contents of the covers. I often leave other non-free media in articles when I remove others I left 2, 2, 2, and one more example where 4 where left. Any of the images can be re-created, whether they are re-created or not isnt a factor. NFCC#1 doesnt say anything about the probability of a free image being released, it is about whether or not a free image can be created. I do take all sides into consideration, however invalid arguments dont carry much weight. When I removed 59 non-free files from a single list article the arguments of the author where taken into consideration and where completely invalid. Just because someone complains about the removal of non-free media doesn't mean Im going to leave the files there. Wikipedia Mission and policies dictate my actions, WP:ILIKEIT isnt a valid reason. Werieth (talk) 20:51, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You are not helping your argument, denigrating other people's understanding of non-free media while making false argument. WP:NFLIST states "It is inadvisable to provide a non-free image for each entry in such an article or section", it does not "prohibits usage of non-free files in lists, discographies, bibliographies, and similar cases" as you put it, instead it says "non-free images should be used judiciously". It is also meant to apply to "small sections of information", not the large sections in that article (T. K. Seung).  With such deliberate misrepresentation of the guidelines (and indeed what I said), and continuing attempt to belittle others who don't agree with you, I doubt that is anything further to discuss and anything meaningful can come out of this.  So I'll leave this discussion. Hzh (talk) 21:16, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Just for the record, I did intend to file a WP:NFCR yesterday when I got home from work, but by that stage all hell had broken loose, two AN/I had been filed and an admin was already involved, so there seemed little point. As regards "Werieth has demonstrated that the images are inherently replaceable". No he hasn't. He has stated it (repeatedly) and made suggestions about putting on a production of the show so as to take a photo(!). Presumably with a Laura Rees lookalike. He keeps saying the play is 400 years old and in the public domain. Very true. But it was off the stage for over 300 years and only revived in the modern theatre in 1955. It's one of Shakespeare's least performed plays and very much a fringe piece of drama in the grand scheme of things. Comparing it to Romeo and Juliet (the most illustrated play in the history of literature) is like comparing a selfie-obsessed Z-list Twitter using celebrity with J.D. Salinger or Terry Malick. And I'm curious as to how the image from Titus and the BBC production are "inherently replaceable". They are, by definition, non-replacable non-free images. And, as I've told Werith three times, the Lavinia image was already adjudged not to fail WP:NFCC when it was up for deletion. WP:NFCC is a judgement call (not in all cases obviously, but certainly in this one) and the majority of people have judged it passes. However, Werith seems to think that whatever judgement he makes must be binding. This is not so. I'm happy enough with the admin's arguments above. So I see little point in continuing to drag this out. That's pretty much all I have to say really. Bertaut (talk) 18:43, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, Bertaut, the Rees image is replaceable with "Bailey focused on a realistic presentation throughout the production; for example, after her mutilation, Lavinia is covered from head to toe in blood, with her stumps crudely bandaged, and raw flesh visible beneath." There's nothing about actually seeing Rees in that makeup that significantly aids a reader's understanding of "Titus Andronicus" as a subject, and that's the point that "keep" proponents miss. It doesn't matter if the images are useful or make a point better than text would. To use a non-free image, you have to demonstrate that using the free alternative would significantly hinder understanding. I don't think you can make that argument about File:Laura Rees as Lavinia.jpg. Crossing WP:NFCC and WP:NFCC is generally difficult.—Kww(talk) 19:02, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Fair point. But to quote what was said when this image was originally up for deletion: "This image of Lavinia, in many ways, is the play. An image like this is vital to an understanding of how the work is seen today." I didn't say that, another user did. And I would agree with it. However, I do see what you mean. Just out of curiosity though, what do you mean when you say "Crossing WP:NFCC and WP:NFCC is generally difficult." I don't quite understand what you mean by that. Bertaut (talk) 21:41, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I was thinking faster than I typed. How about "Crossing the threshold of necessity mandated by WP:NFCC and WP:NFCC is generally difficult."—Kww(talk) 23:49, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Haha. "Thinking faster than I typed". I usually do the opposite and then have to read back to myself what I've typed for it to make any sense to me! I thought that's what you meant, just wanted to be sure you weren't referring to some kind of bizarre Ghostbusters "crossing the streams" type situation! Bertaut (talk) 00:19, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * So what exactly happens now, when the block is lifted tomorrow? Bertaut (talk) 20:04, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Given the facts that have been established, (The files in question can be replaced, not easily but certainly doable), the files need to stay out of the article for failing WP:NFCC. Werieth (talk) 21:28, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Anyone care to answer who doesn't live in Werithland. Kww perhaps? "Given the facts that have been established" You do make me laugh Werith. Bertaut (talk) 22:07, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Werieth is correct. His challenge on NFCC grounds is solid, and that means the images should not be reinserted.—Kww(talk) 22:27, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Well there's an admin in the section above who disagrees with you. According to his reading, three of the disputed images are acceptable. Tom Reedy (talk) 04:09, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * It's true that TParis misanalyzed the situation with the images, and fell into the trap of believing that having discussion in the article was an automatic justification. He has not, however, demonstrated what understanding of Titus Andronicus would be difficult to achieve given textual explanations.—Kww(talk) 04:47, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * More importantly, I wasn't making a judgement call at all on content. I was only explaining why no one was blocked.  When it comes to content, I'm just as subject to consensus as everyone else.  Admins are not special.--v/r - TP 13:04, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Edits October 2015
In the Language section I wrote the interpretation of the action Titus took upon Tamora, and that action being imposed the same way through unwanted bodily violence. Meaning that just how Tamora forced her sons to rape Lavinia Ttius forced her to eat her sons. Tamora is seen as have being raped (figuratively) just as Lavinia actually was. Mkoggeusf (talk) 05:49, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

In the authorship section I added the sentence “However, it is important to keep in mind that Shakespeare favored experimentation and ‘refused to be pegged down to a single style.’” because I thought it helped the flow of the paragraph and briefly touches upon why it is so difficult to determine whether or not he is the author. Racquel-ortega (talk) 18:48, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

In the Synopsis section I added that Titus lost twenty-one sons during the war with Goths because I think this will highlight his hatred over Tamora and the Goths. I also edited the sentence which said "Aaron kills the midwife and the nurse" to "Aaron kills the nurse to keep the race of the child a secret" because in Tituse Andronicus there is nothing indicated that Aaron kills the midwife. LinhMao94 (talk) 08:22, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

In Language section I added "The other significant motif in Titus Andronicus is metaphor related to violence. "The world of Titus is not simply one of meaningless acts of random violence but rather one in which language engenders violence and violence is done to language through the distance between word and thing, between metaphor and what it represents."" This is a motif that make up the special language in Titus so I think it should be included. LinhMao94 (talk) 10:32, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

In the Synopsis section I corrected grammar mistakes and clarified information. Most of the edits were to maintain parallelism and to provide transitions so that the sentences flowed more smoothly. Racquel-ortega (talk) 01:56, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

In the Date Section I mentioned briefly on the printings of Titus that eventually led to the ridicule of the play and the irrelevancy of Titus past the 17th century. I also mentioned that the play regained popularity back in the mid twentieth century. Mkoggeusf (talk) 03:05, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

A helpful outlook of the Wikipedia page as well as some confusing situations that went on in the writing
[Section heading added by: Xover (talk) 07:16, 20 October 2015 (UTC)]

In the beginning they sound very neutral on the situation however some of the information sounds unclear or it’s complicated to really see where the information is being derived. The rest of the Wikipedia just appeared to be a summary of the book and the analysis of where some certain principles or acts came from. Bringing in the information from other historic texts or from older books shake spear had written. Titus Andronicus page was portrayed as a lot of keeping with the continuity of the time and themes/motifs that appear frequent in early writing. The actual printing date or publishing date for Titus Andronicus remains a mystery though. With many different scholars contradicting one another and going back and forth on when it was represented as a popular play it becomes very unsure and confusing. 75.114.76.106 (talk) 22:37, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

==This article is very thorough and includes a lot of information. Some parts of the article though seem unnecessary or contradictory to other parts, and it could be made easier to understand by straightening through those parts. I read through the talk page and saw a lot of arguments throughout the page by fellow contributors over the years, so I understand this is not your faults. Other than that though, all of contributions and editing made by my fellow peers was helpful and made the article the best it could be. Rummens97 (talk) 23:47, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

Very informative and organized. Nice that it has sections for the characters, the history of the play, a lot of photos and enhance the article, and even samples from the original text. There is however a lot of arguing in the Talk page about certain aspects of the article. Some sentences do seem to contradict each other and for a person who has not read the play, this article might seem too overwhelming. Maybe some sections are unnecessary. Removing some aspects to the article might improve it or having them as a link, like Theme is, can improve the article and make it shorter and easier to follow. Overall very informative but unnecessarily long.Maricarmen garciaramos (talk) 02:00, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Sources section
I find the term "sources" to be used very loosely in the section. To me it seems lack of a better term. I think something along the lines of Historical and literature influences or foundations would more precisely describe the section. Also, the important section regarding themes is a bit hidden. An important part of Shakespearian writings is the themes, I don't think it would hurt to make the themes section more than just a hyper link to another page. Adding a short paragraph summarizing the themes would definitely help. Jmirto95 (talk) 20:42, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Regarding the themes section, I agree in theory; a short paragraph or two summarising the stand-alone article wouldn't be a bad idea. In fact, when I originally wrote this article, I had a small summary section. The reason I removed it is length. The article is already very long, and adding more material which would essentially simply be a conflation of another article could be construed as adding unnecessary material. Additionally, one of the benefits of not having a summary is that a reader interested in themes will jump to the "Themes" section, see the link, and go straight there without having to read material that is only going to be elaborated upon when he or she gets to the main article. However, having said all that, if you want to add a small paragraph or two, go ahead. Just don't forget to reference it. As for the "Sources" section. That's just the Shakespeare article standardisation. All the articles have a sources sections irrespective of the nature of the sources, be they very specific literary antecedents such as Romeo and Juliet, vague possibilities such as The Taming of the Shrew, mythology and ancient history such as Titus or more recent English history such as the Henry VI plays. "Sources" is simply the standard term we use. Bertaut (talk) 03:20, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

South Park
The South Park episode mention is sourced and shows how the play is still relevant to today's culture. If the removers want to start a RFC that is fine but until that happens removal is against the current WP:CONSENSUS. MarnetteD|Talk 21:27, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * How much of Shakespeare's work was included in the show? I suspect it was actually significantly less than a fraction of 1%, which makes it of negligible worth in terms of reference to Shakespeare's play. Mediatech492 (talk) 21:50, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * It was quite a bit more than 1%. In fact it was central to the whole revenge aspect the episode. MarnetteD|Talk 21:55, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The source is in a collection of critical essays and meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. MarnetteD|Talk 22:01, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it was pretty central to things. In any case, assigning numerical values is irrelevant. What's at issue here is threshold for inclusion, and on Wikipedia that threshold is verifiability. There are numerous scholars who have written about this episode not just as alluding to the play or borrowing from it slightly, but as being a direct adaptation. See for example,

 * Keith M. Booker, "You Can't Do That on Television: The Animated Satire of South Park", in Drawn to Television: Prime-Time Animation from The Flintstones to Family Guy (2006)

 * Anne Gossage, "'Yon Fart Doth Smell of Elderberries Sweet': South Park and Shakespeare", in The Deep End of South Park: Critical Essays on Television's Shocking Cartoon Series (2009)

 * Fran Teague, "Shakespeare and America", in The Oxford Handbook of Shakespeare (2012)

 * All of these critics engage with the episode as an adaptation of Shakespeare in a scholarly sense, so it warrants inclusion here (as per my comment above about the threshold). Whether I or anyone else think these scholars are correct is neither here nor there. Unless someone writes an essay challenging their arguments, or unless one of the creators of South Park comes out and says the episode was not based on the play (unlikely given how much Parker and Stone love their Shakespeare), then the fact is that scholarly opinion is that this episode is indeed based on Titus Andronicus, and as such, it meets the criteria for inclusion on Wikipedia. Bertaut (talk) 22:07, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Considerably more? That is an exaggeration at best. Per, Mediatech492 (talk) 22:22, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * No one used the term "considerably". This is not an indiscriminate mention and the sources provided back that up. WP:IDONTLIKEIT is not a reason for the items removal. MarnetteD|Talk 22:38, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I apologize for misquoting you, though the difference between "quite a bit" and "considerably" in this context is pedantic. My objection is on the basis of relevance, so your claim on the basis of WP:IDONTLIKEIT is nonsense. You still have made no case to demonstrate the show is of any significance relevant to Shakespeare's play. Mediatech492 (talk) 22:50, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Claiming there is no case when a clear one has been presented is classic WP:IDONTLIKEIT. MarnetteD|Talk 22:53, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * To Quote WP:IDONTLIKEIT: "Simply saying something is "verifiable" or "sourced" does not show how it is relevant to the subject or why it otherwise belongs." On that basis you are the one in violation of WP:IDONTLIKEIT, not me.Mediatech492 (talk) 23:07, 22 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I guess I'm a little confused as to what exactly the problem is. The episode is a television adaptation of Titus, in a section on television adaptations of Titus. You keep on asking "how is this episode relevant to the play?" Well, why would it not be relevant? Have you read the articles, for example? They posit numerous thematic and narrative parallels. You mention above, "Just because a popular show does a parody of a work does not mean it is of significance to the original work." Very true. But, apart from the fact that I don't fully understand what you mean by "of significance to the original work" (how is Olivier's Hamlet "of significance" to Shakespeare's play text?), in this case, you're talking about a massively popular show which has adapted the play (as per the sources). This is the very essence of why Shakespeare is still relevant today when virtually none of his contemporaries are. The reason the episode is relevant relates to cultural significance, socio-political reconstitution, whatever you want to call it, the same reason that, say, 10 Things I Hate About You is relevant to The Taming of the Shrew. This is what Jan Kott is partially referring to when he talks about "Shakespeare our contemporary." Now, if you're asking "what does it tell us about the original work", that's different. Bertaut (talk) 00:29, 23 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The relevance of Titus Andronicus to the South Park episode is not in question. The unanswered question is how is the south park episode relevant to Titus Andronicus. The fact that A is relevant to B does not automatically mean that B is relevant to A. Example: The ocean is significant to a boat, but the boat is not significant to the ocean. Shakespeare is popular and culturally significant in his own right; not because he gets parodied on shows like South Park. Mediatech492 (talk) 14:42, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I suggest you file an RfC., and myself have all addressed this issue multiple times. Bertaut (talk) 15:34, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, you have all repeatedly made it quite clear that none of you are able to make any case for inclusion here on the the basis of relevancy. Mediatech492 (talk) 14:29, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I personally find this entire discussion somewhat gelastic. Five Antonios (talk) 16:11, 24 August 2017 (UTC)
 * That is your WP:POV and quite irrelevant. Mediatech492 (talk) 14:15, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Be that as it may, as discussion seems unproductive and circular at this stage, and as the current consensus is that the offending paragraph remain, as and  have both suggested, your recourse now is to file an RfC. Five Antonios (talk) 16:24, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Bertaut (talk) 21:36, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

Setting
The 'Setting' section is rather muddled. First we are told the play is set during the reign of Theodosius and are given the dates of Theodosius I, though the citation doesn't specify any particular Theodosius. Then it states: "On the other hand, the general setting appears to be what Clifford Huffman describes as "late-Imperial Christian Rome", possibly during the reign of Justinian I (527–565)". This doesn't make any sense because the reign of Theodosius was during the late-Imperial Christian era of Rome. No reasons to back up this assertion are given.

Then it states: "Also favouring a later date, Grace Starry West argues, "the Rome of Titus Andronicus is Rome after Brutus, after Caesar, and after Ovid. We know it is a later Rome because the emperor is routinely called Caesar; because the characters are constantly alluding to Tarquin, Lucretia, and Brutus, suggesting that they learned about Brutus' new founding of Rome from the same literary sources we do, Livy and Plutarch." Again, this makes no sense because all these conditions apply to the era of Theodosius as much as to that of Justinian.

Then: "Jonathan Bate has pointed out that the play begins with Titus returning from a successful ten-year campaign against the Goths, as if at the height of the Roman Empire, but ends with Goths invading Rome, as if at its death". This is not a logical argument, because the Gothic War (which included a significant defeat for the Romans, but which led ultimately to their subjugation) did indeed take place during the reign of Theodosius I shortly before the Sack of Rome in 410, and is almost certainly what is being referred to by Shakespeare.

There may be good reasons for rejecting the notion that the play is set during the reign of Theodosius I, but none are given here, and if they can't be found I think removing any suggestions to the contrary would be wise. 2A01:CB04:326:AC00:3DCF:A13C:4A85:ACEF (talk) 14:46, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Rethinking Revenge
— Assignment last updated by DecreasingQuisby (talk) 22:00, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Disambiguation
See Titus (disambiguation). I added to it an entry, "Titus Andronicus, a tragedy by Shakespeare". This entry should be kept; after all, said play is a well-known use of the name Titus. Okay? Solomonfromfinland (talk) 06:00, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

 * I also created "Titus Andronicus (disambiguation)". Okay? Solomonfromfinland (talk) 06:02, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Titus Andronicus


text:
St Andrew's Cathedral School

St Andrew's Cathedral School is a multi-campus independent Anglican co-educational comprehensive and specialist primary and secondary day school, located in the Sydney central business district, New South Wales, Australia. The school currently caters for approximately 1450 students from Kindergarten to Year 12.

The School is one of Sydney's oldest, founded in 1885, as a choir school for St Andrew's Cathedral, Sydney. St Andrew's is legally supervised by the Cathedral Chapter which appoints and approves members of the School Council which was formed in 1979. The council is responsible for administering the School's policies and formulating its mission and vision as well as appointing successive Heads of School. A boys' school for much of its history, St Andrew's opened its doors to senior girls (Year 10 to Year 12) in 1999. In 2008, the school became a fully co-educational school with boys and girls enrolled from Kindergarten to Year 12. In addition to providing a comprehensive education and a specialist choir school, the School operates an Indigenous primary school, called Gawura.

The School is a member of the International Choir Schools' Association, the Independent Schools Association (ISA), the Association of Heads of Independent Schools of Australia (AHISA), and the Junior School Heads Association of Australia (JSHAA).

In 2009, St Andrew's became an IB World School and commenced offering the International Baccalaureate Diploma as an alternative leaving qualification to the NSW Higher School Certificate (HSC).

First 90 years
St Andrew's Cathedral School was founded by the third Bishop of Sydney, Metropolitan of New South Wales and Primate of Australia Alfred Barry. The school was opened as the St Andrew's Schoolroom on 14 July 1885 in the Old Baptist Church premises in Pitt Street, on the corner of Bathurst and Kent streets. At the school opening, Bishop Barry stated that St Andrew's was established to provide "the choristers with a high-class, free education on Church principles, in addition to a musical training". The school started with 27 boys, of whom 22 were choristers and, although it was later nicknamed the "Choir School", provision was made for non-choristers to attend. Enrolments reached a total of 80 in 1892, but suddenly dropped to about 50 and remained at this number for many years.

St. Andrew's Church in Pitt Street (now Stafford House) was the next home of the school, and remained so from 1892 to 1914, when it was moved to St. Phillip's Parish Hall, Church Hill (No. 1 York Street, Sydney).

The school made several subsequent moves, to the old Deanery (Church House) in 1917 and to the adjacent Worker newspaper printing works building in 1937. In 1961 the Cathedral Chapter and Standing Committee, after years of deliberation, decided to commence Stage One of a vast master plan to redevelop the Cathedral Site. As a result, Stage One of the "New School" was built along Kent Street, from the Bathurst Street corner and integrated with the adjoining old Worker Building.

That building lasted only eight school years from 1965 to 1972. There followed three-and-a-half years, from 1973 to August 1976, during which it was housed temporarily in the CENEF Building diagonally opposite across Bathurst and Kent Streets.

Modern establishment
On 13 August 1976 St. Andrew's Cathedral School returned to its previous site and occupied the sixth, seventh and eighth floors, and rooftop of the newly constructed St. Andrew's House, where it remains. The school has its own entrance off Kent Street and a dedicated lift to levels 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8.

The school commenced outdoor education in 1982 using hired properties. During 1984, the school purchased a 100 acre rural property at Penrose, near Moss Vale in the NSW Southern Highlands for its own outdoor education campus.

In 1991, the school established a senior secondary learning centre at 51 Druitt Street, Sydney, in close proximity to St Andrew's House. The Premier of NSW, Nick Greiner, officially opened the Bishop Barry Senior Secondary Centre. In 1997, the School Council decided that St Andrew's students would be better prepared for post-school work, study and lifestyle choices if the school became co-educational in Years 10, 11 and 12. Accordingly, in Term 1, 1999, the first 76 girls commenced in the Senior College. St Andrew's became the only co-educational school in the city.

In 1999, the school's Student Business Club formed a working partnership with the Sydney 2000 Paralympics Organising Committee (SPOC) to raise awareness of the Games. The students conducted a range of events over a two-year period that ultimately raised $100,000 to help stage the Sydney 2000 Paralympic Games.

In 2001, the school negotiated long-term occupancy in St Andrew's House by signing a 120-year lease for its facilities.

Canon Melville Cooper Newth, the eleventh and longest-serving Headmaster of St Andrew's Cathedral School (1941-1979), died on 21 October 2004, aged 90. The MC Newth Auditorium was named in his honour.

The school marked its 120th year in 2005. At the same time, Phillip Heath celebrated his 10-year anniversary as the Head of School. This year also saw the School Council confirm the decision to vacate the Leadership and Enterprise Centre at 495 Kent Street. The main campus remains within the eight-storey St Andrew's House, located at 474 Kent Street.

On 22 September 2006, a new entrance to the school was opened by former Archbishop of Sydney, Sir Marcus Loane. This was attended by the Lord Mayor of Sydney, Clover Moore, as well as many parents and friends of students. The contemporary entrance is directly opposite the west door to St Andrew's Cathedral in Sydney Square. The school's address subsequently changed from 474 Kent Street, Sydney to Sydney Square, Sydney. In 2008, the school successfully negotiated a lease with the Wentworth Park Stadium Trust to allow the School to use the Wentworth Park sporting fields and stadium. The lease also includes the exclusive use of a three-storey building on the eastern side of the field and change rooms on the western side. These lease arrangements are ongoing. On 20 November 2008, it was announced that the Head of School, Phillip Heath, after 14 years in the position, would depart the school to take up the principalship of Radford College, Canberra, effective from 1 July 2009. Dr John Collier, Head of St Paul's Grammar School for 12 years, was announced as his replacement on 4 June 2009, and commenced the position in Term 1, 2010.

Co-education
In Term 1, 1999 the school introduced the first girls into the senior college, and 76 girls entered into Years 10, 11 and 12.

During the 2006 Speech Night, the school revealed a plan to introduce full co-educational years from Kindergarten through to Year 12 in 2008. In 2006, the youngest female student was enrolled in Year 8, and graduated with the Class of 2010. During 2007, 10 girls were enrolled into the middle school (Years 7 to 9) and the school introduced twin classes (single-sex classes) in those years for the key subjects of English, Mathematics and Science. All other subjects, including sport, and in all other years of the school, are taught in a co-educational environment. St Andrew's was the first independent school in New South Wales to choose this twinning model in a coeducation environment.

Visits by British royalty
Royals have attended services at the cathedral on numerous occasions, on all of which the school's choristers have sung and had the opportunity of meeting them:

 * 1920 – 13 June, Edward, Prince of Wales
 * 1927 – May, Prince Albert, Duke of York, and Duchess of York
 * 1945 – 11 March, Duke of Gloucester and Duchess of Gloucester
 * 1954 – 7 February, Her Majesty The Queen and His Royal Highness the Duke of Edinburgh
 * 1958 – 23 February, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, Elizabeth, the Queen Mother
 * 1963 – 3 March, the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh, on 175th Anniversary of the Foundation of Australia by Governor Philip in 1788
 * 1967 – 6 March, Princess Alexandra, on 150th Anniversary of the British and Foreign Bible Society in Australia
 * 1970 – 30 March, the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh, Prince Charles and Princess Anne, on 200th Anniversary of Capt. James Cook's landing at Botany Bay
 * 1973 – 21 October, Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, after opening the Sydney Opera House the previous day
 * 1977 – 13 March, The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh, on their Jubilee anniversary
 * 1977 – 7 September, Charles, Prince of Wales
 * 2006 – 13 March, The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh, at the Commonwealth Day Observance in St Andrew's Cathedral

Heads of school
The following individuals have served as Head of School or any precedent title:

Campuses
St Andrew's Cathedral School is on two city campuses near Town Hall Station, St Andrew's House in Sydney Square and Bishop Barry Centre in Druitt Street. It has a leasing arrangement with St Andrew's College within the grounds of The University of Sydney and the nearby Wentworth Park Sporting Complex. The school also uses the university's facilities for basketball, swimming, tennis and squash.

St Andrew's also owns a rural property known as Kirrikee at, in the NSW Southern Highlands for its own outdoor education campsite.

Gawura campus
Headmaster M. C. Newth introduced Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander boys into the school as far back as 1965. In 2007, the school opened a co-educational Kindergarten to Year 6 school for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander students, named "Gawura" (meaning "whale"), located in the Junior School and on the rooftop of St Andrew's House campus. During the planning stage, the school searched twelve sites in the Redfern area to build the Gawura campus, but, facing opposition from some members of the Redfern community, it was decided the school should be set up within St Andrew's House. Gawura is Australia's first independent campus for Aboriginal children.

Students at Gawura study Gadigal, an Aboriginal language, culture and NESA numeracy and literacy skills. All students are sponsored primarily by individual and family donors, corporates and foundations. Gawura was established in response to the disparity in educational outcomes of Indigenous and non-Indigenous children. Initially a part of St Andrew's Cathedral School, Gawura became a school in its own right in 2011.

Gawura offers full scholarships to local Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children who live at home with their families.

House system
St Andrew's Cathedral School contains eight houses, each named after an English cathedral or abbey with a choir school. The houses are:
 * Canterbury
 * Durham
 * Hereford
 * St Paul's
 * Salisbury
 * Westminster
 * Winchester
 * York

The houses compete for the Dean Pitt Shield, awarded annually.

Uniform
The navy blue uniforms were designed to be similar to those worn by business people in the city, preparing the students for professional employment.

The boys' uniform consists of mid-grey trousers, white shirt (blue for Junior and Middle School K - 9), navy school blazer, black shoes and St Andrew's tie. House and sporting ties are also acceptable, and Year 12 students may wear their Year 12 ties.

The girls' uniform (winter) consists of the navy blazer, white shirt (blue with white collar for Junior and Middle School), navy skirt (navy tunic for junior school), navy stockings and black shoes. The summer uniform consists of a white, navy and blue dress, white socks, and black shoes for junior and middle school, and the winter uniform minus the stockings for senior college.

Cathedral choir

The Cathedral Choir can trace its origins to the consecration of St. Andrew's Cathedral in 1868 and this establishes the choir as one of the oldest continuously active choirs in Australia. The choir comprises choristers and choral scholars from St Andrew's Cathedral School as well as a group of men, known as lay clerks, who sing the lower parts.

Through overseas tours and recordings St Andrew's Cathedral Choir has won an international reputation and has accepted invitations to deputise for the resident choirs in such places as St Paul's Cathedral, London, York Minster and many other important centres of Anglican worship. In 2002 the choristers appeared before HM the Queen at a Golden Jubilee concert in St. George's Chapel, Windsor Castle and also made a significant contribution to the ANZAC Day service in Westminster Abbey.

The Cathedral Choir has made several recordings.

During school terms the choir sings at the morning Sunday service at 10.30am and at Evensong on Thursdays at 5.30pm.

Michael Deasey completed a 24-year stint as the School's Master of the Choristers in 2005, and Ross Cobb, from the UK, was appointed as his successor.

To celebrate 140 years of the Cathedral Choir, the choir went on tour to England and Italy in July 2008. The first tour under the direction of Ross Cobb, the 11th organist and choirmaster of St Andrew's, the choir was invited to sing at services and concerts in some of Europe's most historic and significant buildings, including Wells Cathedral, Dedham and Harwich Parish Churches, Bath Abbey, Bristol Cathedral, All Soul's Langham Place, Christ Church Clifton, the Anglican churches of Venice and Florence, St Paul's Cathedral London and, for the first time, the Basilica of San Marco in Venice.

Sport
The school has a compulsory winter sports program. Middle School and Senior College students can choose from over 20 different sports and activities ranging from rugby, netball, football and hockey to fencing, cross-country running, chess and ping pong. In summer, students compete in swimming, athletics, basketball, softball, water polo and cricket in the ISA competition. From 2014, the school also offers dance as a co-curricular activity at the school. The school also participates in a large number of sporting events not only within the school but also against other schools statewide, and occasionally outside the state.

Performing arts
St Andrew's provides extra-curricular opportunities in music, drama and performing arts.

Alongside its music curriculum, the school supports musical ensembles, student orchestral performances and domestic and international choral tours including to Europe, the United States and Asia. Extra-curricular drama activities include Senior and Middle School drama ensemble productions, an Old Andrean annual play, Theatresports and a weekly Year 7 Drama Club. The school has dedicated drama and performance spaces and a Black Box Theatre.

St Andrew's also has a lengthy history in musical production. The first whole of school musical was Oliver!, performed in 2001. Since then, a whole school musical production has been produced at least every two years (with the exception of 2019-2022 due to the COVID-19 pandemic). These have included:

 * West Side Story (2003), performed at Sydney's Footbridge Theatre
 * Godspell (2005), performed in St. Andrew's Cathedral
 * Gilbert and Sullivan's The Pirates of Penzance (2006), performed at the Seymour Centre at the University of Sydney
 * Les Misérables (2007), in the Chapter House adjoining St. Andrew's Cathedral
 * Guys and Dolls (2008) performed at the Seymour Centre at the University of Sydney
 * Paris (2009), performed at the Seymour Centre
 * Children of Eden (2011), performed at NIDA's Parade Theatre
 * Beauty and the Beast (2013), performed at NIDA's Parade Theatre
 * Peter Pan (2015), performed at Chatswood's Concourse Theatre
 * The Wizard of Oz (2017), performed at NIDA's Parade Theatre
 * Fiddler on the Roof (2019), performed at NIDA's Parade Theatre
 * Annie (2022), performed at The Concourse Theatre, Chatswood
 * Disney’s The Little Mermaid (2024), performed at The Concourse Theatre, Chatswood

Outdoor education
St Andrew's offers an outdoor education program that includes year-group-based camping expeditions and outdoor activities. The school owns a property named Kirrikee, south-west of Sydney near Penrose, where the majority of their in-school outdoor education expeditions are conducted.

The school also offers more challenging optional overseas expeditions for older students. The Duke of Edinburgh's Award Scheme is offered to all students in Year 9 and above.

Mock trial
St Andrew's has had considerable success in the Mock Trial Competition, organised and operated by the Law Society of New South Wales, in which both government and independent schools throughout NSW participate. In 2004, the team were runners-up to Mereweather High School. In 2005, the school team of Year 11 students won the competition and then went on to compete in an International Mock Trial Competition against the UK National Mock Trial team, Ysgol Tre-Gib, Cardiff, United Kingdom, and once again was victorious.

Incidents
In May 2015, former school mathematics teacher Robert Emmett was convicted on his guilty plea of possessing child abuse material and of aggravated filming of the private parts of a child under the age of 16 in 2013, for which he received an Intensive Corrections Order, a form of non-custodial sentence.

In November 2019, the female students of Year 12 were told to stay behind after a grade meeting. John Collier (then Headmaster) stated this was to address 'issues with uniform compliance.' Social media posts from the students state that they were told to kneel onto the floor to ensure the correct length of their skirts. Dr Collier (who was absent in the uniform check) denied this, stating that 'one staff member knelt on the ground to show the girls how they could test the length of their skirts, with some students copying the staff member.' Dr Collier states that he had received emails both in support and disapproval of the uniform check. Due to the backlash received from this situation, Dr Collier issued an apology to the students and parents involved.

On 25 October 2023, the body of a woman was found in the toilet of the school's gymnasium by police before midnight. The woman was identified to be the dance and water polo coach, Lilie James. The suspect, Paul Thijssen, was found dead in The Gap in Vaucluse, 11km away from the initial crime scene. A make-shift memorial was made in front of the school as a tribute to James. The gymnasium was closed to students and the school's library was turned into a drop-in counselling centre. Assessments were either postponed or cancelled with students eligible for special consideration before exams.

Old Andreans
The Old Andreans' Association (OAA), which is the alumni organisation of St Andrew's Cathedral School, was established as the Old Boys' Union (OBU) by the school's third Headmaster, Percy Simpson, in 1906. The first president was the Hon Justice Webb, a judge of the Industrial Relations Commission of NSW. He held office for over 40 years.

The OAA has become an incorporated entity, and has improved its governance arrangements greatly. It continues to provide a means of maintaining contact between Old Andreans and their school.

Past and present members of the OAA (and OBU) include Sir Charles Kingsford Smith, Ken Tribe AC, Lt-Gen John Grey AC, Simon Tedeschi, John Antill, Julian Hamilton, Malcolm Page and Matt Levy.

Aviation

 * Sir Charles Kingsford Smith – pioneering aviator

Entertainment, media and the arts

 * John Antill – composer
 * Rebecca Breeds – actress
 * Nicholas Gledhill – film and stage actor
 * Andrew Goodwin – international operatic tenor
 * Julian Hamilton – one half of dance/electro duo The Presets
 * Tim Harding – television identity and musician
 * Stuart Skelton – international operatic tenor
 * Simon Tedeschi – pianist
 * Professor Barry Tuckwell – musician (horn)

Politics, public service and the law

 * Jim Longley – former NSW Minister for Community Services, Minister for Aboriginal Affairs, and Minister for the Ageing (1993–1995)
 * Richard Murden – Member of the NSW Legislative Assembly (Lib) (1953–1959)

Sports

 * Matt Levy – Australian Paralympian swimmer
 * Rod Macqueen – former Wallabies coach
 * Abigail Paduch – judoka
 * Malcolm Page – two-time Olympic gold medalist in sailing in the men's double-handed dinghy 470 in 2008 and 2012; flag-bearer for the 2012 London Olympics closing ceremony
 * Warwick Selvey – Australian shot put and discus champion, Olympic athlete (1960, 1964), won the discus event at the 1962 Commonwealth Games in Perth
 * Chelsea Pitman – netballer

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

title: St Andrew's Cathedral School


text:
User talk:Slgrandson

Your draft article, Draft:Majestic Films International

Hello, Slgrandson. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Majestic Films International".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 07:07, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Waiting-for Series

Hello, Slgrandson. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Waiting-for Series".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗ plicit  14:38, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Thu Feb 8 NYC Hacking Night + Feb 21 WikiWednesday
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:15, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Tue March 5: Wiki Gala NYC
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

WikiNYC: 3/14 Hacking Night + 3/16 Queens Name Explorer
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:59, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

New Pages Patrol newsletter April 2024
Hello ,

Backlog update: The October drive reduced the article backlog from 11,626 to 7,609 and the redirect backlog from 16,985 to 6,431! Congratulations to, who led with over 2,300 points.

Following that, New Page Patrol organized another backlog drive for articles in January 2024. The January drive started with 13,650 articles and reduced the backlog to 7,430 articles. Congratulations to, who achieved first place with 1,340 points in this drive.

Looking at the graph, it seems like backlog drives are one of the only things keeping the backlog under control. Another backlog drive is being planned for May. Feel free to participate in the May backlog drive planning discussion.

It's worth noting that both queues are gradually increasing again and are nearing 14,034 articles and 22,540 redirects. We encourage you to keep contributing, even if it's just a single patrol per day. Your support is greatly appreciated!

2023 Awards won the 2023 cup with 17,761 article reviews last year - that's an average of nearly 50/day. There was one Platinum Award (10,000+ reviews), 2 Gold Awards (5000+ reviews), 6 Silver (2000+), 8 Bronze (1000+), 30 Iron (360+) and 70 more for the 100+ barnstar. led on redirect reviews by clearing 36,175 of them. For the full details, see the Awards page and the Hall of Fame. Congratulations everyone for their efforts in reviewing!

WMF work on PageTriage: The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers deployed the rewritten NewPagesFeed in October, and then gave the NewPagesFeed a slight visual facelift in November. This concludes most major work to Special:NewPagesFeed, and most major work by the WMF Moderator Tools team, who wrapped up their major work on PageTriage in October. The WMF Moderator Tools team and volunteer software developers will continue small work on PageTriage as time permits.

Recruitment: A couple of the coordinators have been inviting editors to become reviewers, via mass-messages to their talk pages. If you know someone who you'd think would make a good reviewer, then a personal invitation to them would be great. Additionally, if there are Wikiprojects that you are active on, then you can add a post there asking participants to join NPP. Please be careful not to double invite folks that have already been invited.

Reviewing tip: Reviewers who prefer to patrol new pages within their most familiar subjects can use the regularly updated NPP Browser tool.

Reminders:
 * You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Pages Patrol Discord.
 * Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
 * To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:27, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

WikiWednesday (April 10) and City Tech Library LGBTQIA edit-a-thon (April 11)
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Bobby Vee Meets The Ventures
@Slgrandson How did you find that article that my made and reviewed it while it wasn't finish yet? Samchristie05 (talk) 17:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Through Special:RecentChangesLinked/Category:Draft AfC submissions. (Just so you know, it was merely "marked as patrolled".) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 22:39, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
 * thanks hope i'll hit summit draft to review button after i find record mirror review i hope i'll find it and tracks i'll need to finish Samchristie05 (talk) 23:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

Thu April 25: WikiNYC Hacking Night
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Sign (Bluey) has been accepted
 The Sign (Bluey), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=The_Sign_(Bluey) help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Robert McClenon (talk) 04:41, 21 April 2024 (UTC)

Josei Tennō
hiya! Could you please link Josei Tennō to the wiki data for it? It's https://m.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5374675. I'm not sure how to do it myself... please do it if you can! Thanks! Camillz (talk) 20:51, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

 * ✅ Resolved! (For future reference, "Sitelinks" → "Wikipedia" → pencil button → en + article title.) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 21:03, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

Other subjects
Thanks for the barnstar! Draft:Central Life Insurance Company and Draft:North Greenwood might interest you. FloridaArmy (talk) 15:56, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

May 8: WikiWednesday Salon with new Executive Director
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:08, 6 May 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Dan Hennessey for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Dan Hennessey is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Dan Hennessey until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Bennyaha (talk) 04:04, 17 May 2024 (UTC)

DYK for The Sign (Bluey)
Z1720 (talk) 00:02, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

June 2: Hacking Sunday (+preview of June 8 Wiknic)
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:00, 29 May 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Template:Guru Studio has been accepted
 Template:Guru Studio, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Template-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Template:Guru_Studio help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! microbiology Marcus [petri dish·growths] 23:08, 31 May 2024 (UTC)

Sat June 8: Governors Island Wiknic
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Iveliz Explains It All has been accepted
 Iveliz Explains It All, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Iveliz_Explains_It_All help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! ~ L 🌸 (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

 * I went to welcome the editor who created this since it was in such good shape as an AfC submission -- and it looks like you rescued it from languishing as a draft! Thanks for the save! ~ L 🌸  (talk) 22:33, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kimboo has been accepted
 Kimboo, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Kimboo help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Atlantic306 (talk) 21:14, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ban This Book has been accepted
 Ban This Book, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Ban_This_Book help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing!  Waqar 💬 14:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Hi Reginald, in addition to the above, thank you so much for creating this article, you actually beat me to it, lol. I had it drafted on my notepad, and trust me, you wrote it just well. Happy editing. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 15:54, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Wow! How did you know my pseudonymous first name? (Guessing you actually had a glance at my userpage.)
 * By the way, this may be the first time I ever got referred to as such on this site--but thanks all the same! --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 16:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I definitely glanced at your user page, hehe. Keep the good work up (you obviously have been). Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:13, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Professor Bull's Umbrella has been accepted
 Professor Bull's Umbrella, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Professor_Bull%27s_Umbrella help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Chetsford (talk) 03:34, 23 June 2024 (UTC)

June 26: ONLINE WikiWednesday Salon NYC
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:24, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Waiting-for Series has been accepted
 Waiting-for Series, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Waiting-for_Series help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Atlantic306 (talk) 21:38, 24 June 2024 (UTC)

Page Karoline Levitt renamed to Karoline Leavitt
The page name Karoline Levitt should be changed to Karoline Leavitt. I don't have the power to rename a page.

Pages are renamed by moving them to new target names. This procedure preserves the page's edit history. Please do not rename a page by copying/pasting its content to a new page name. If you have an autoconfirmed account (an account that is at least four days old and has made more than 10 edits), you can move a page yourself, but please first review Article titles. If you still wish to rename the page, go to it, click the Tools drop-down menu at the top on the old vector legacy look (near the View history button and Watchlist star), and choose Move. On the new vector look, simply click Move under Tools in the right margin. You can then specify a new name for the article. The old page name will automatically become a redirect to the new page. However, if it isn't possible for you or you think the move would be at all controversial you should request the move on the talk page using the Template:Requested move. Even where a move is uncontroversial, if the desired target page name already exists and is other than a redirect with only one edit, you will need an administrator or page mover to move the page for you, which can be requested at the technical requests section of requested moves. Hope this helps. JoeK2033 (talk) 17:29, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

DYK for Ban This Book
— Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Ah man... if this had a picture this would definitely be one of the most viewed hooks ever 48JCL 23:07, 29 June 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kassim's Shoes has been accepted
 Kassim's Shoes, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Kassim%27s_Shoes help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! Safari Scribe Edits! Talk! 09:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Fri July 19: Wikicurious in NYC, Editing Wikipedia for Beginners
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

--Wikimedia New York City Team via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:51, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:Slgrandson


text:
Fred Hampton Jr.

Fred Hampton Jr. (born Alfred Johnson; December 29, 1969) is an American political activist, based in Chicago. He is the president and chairman of the Prisoners of Conscience Committee and the Black Panther Party Cubs. He is the only child of Fred Hampton, the Black Panther Party leader assassinated by police in Chicago on December 4, 1969, with his fiancée, now known as Akua Njeri.

Early life and education
Born in Chicago, Hampton is the son of Black Panther Party leader Fred Hampton and his fiancée, Deborah Johnson. He was born 25 days after his father, at age 21, was assassinated by the Chicago police in a 1969 FBI instigated raid.

His mother named him Alfred Johnson at birth. When he was ten years old, she had his name legally changed to "Fred Hampton Jr." She had already changed her own name to Akua Njeri, as she increasingly had identified with Africa in the years after Hampton Sr's death. She wanted to drop what she and many in the Black Power movement considered "slave names".

Hampton graduated from Tilden High School and sporadically studied journalism at Olive–Harvey College.

Career
During the late 1980s, Hampton worked part-time as an auto mechanic while speaking at rallies and working as an organizer for the National People's Democratic Uhuru Movement (NPDUM), an interracial group. He also sold The Burning Spear, the newspaper associated with the affiliated African Socialist Party.

He now serves as president and chairman of the Prisoners of Conscience Committee (POCC) and the Black Panther Party Cubs (BPPC), made up of descendants of Black Panthers. He continues to organize to bring people together across racial and class lines. He also is a spoken word artist and poet, and draws from his experiences with police and incarceration.

Legal issues
During his early adulthood, Hampton was tried and acquitted on charges of armed robbery and murder. He and his supporters say that he was framed.

In 1993, he was convicted of aggravated arson. The case involved the 1992 firebombing of a Korean menswear store and a Korean jewelry store in Chicago on Halsted Street. No persons were injured. The arson occurred in 1992, during the 1992 Los Angeles riots, a six-day period of protests and outrage in many African-American communities after the acquittal of four Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) officers who were charged with excessive force in the beating of African-American motorist Rodney King during an arrest. The incident had been videotaped and widely viewed in television broadcasts.

Hampton and his supporters maintain his innocence, claiming he was framed in both cases. During the trial, fire officials testified that the bottles that held the gasoline never broke, preventing more widescale damage. According to Hampton's supporters, the fingerprint expert for the Chicago Police Department Crime Lab testified that none of Hampton's fingerprints was found on the bottles. But photographs of his hands showed blisters that were evident when he was arrested.

Hampton was sentenced to eighteen years in prison. He was paroled on September 14, 2001.

In popular culture

 * Hampton appeared in Michel Gondry's 2006 film Dave Chappelle's Block Party.
 * His 1993 trial is referred to in Fall Out Boy's song "You're Crashing, But You're No Wave".
 * He and his father are mentioned in the song "Behind Enemy Lines" by Dead Prez, as well as "Clap for the Killers" by Street Sweeper Social Club.

Hampton and his mother both worked as consultants on the film Judas and the Black Messiah (2021), a biopic about his father co-written and directed by Shaka King. It stars Daniel Kaluuya as Hampton Sr. and Lakeith Stanfield as William O'Neal, a young FBI informant who infiltrated the Panthers. With nearly equal screen time in the film, both men were nominated for Academy Awards as Best Supporting Actor; Kaluuya won.

title: Fred Hampton Jr.