text:
Talk:Gary Larson

New Website for Far Side coming, from CNN
It seems that Gary Larson is launching a new website for The Far Side. Here is a CNN article: https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/18/entertainment/gary-larson-far-side-return-trnd/index.html Gregorybard (talk) 04:55, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

Pictures in article
While I like the picture of Larson, why was the one of his home, taken by a Wikipedean so there is no copyright problem, removed? I think the castle part, especially the flag, is evocative of some of his cartoons and is therefore notable and encyclopedic. Is it considered an invasion of his privacy that he is known to value highly? Spalding 01:05, Jun 21, 2005 (UTC)

whoever deleted the picture is a pedantic moron with too much time on their hands just like everyone else here —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.224.217.39 (talk • contribs).

 * I'll bet you anything it was Knowledge Seeker. You won't believe how many images of mine he's deleted, hyperventilating over copyright issues, thinking that the world will end if one image doesn't have all rights released! I can't stand people like that--he obviously has way too much time on his hands--he has to if he can find time to stalk me and block me for every little comment I make on every little talk page that he thinks is "innapropriate". Hey, I like that--stalk and block! I think I've made a limerick! Scorpionman 20:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Then again, it could have been someone else, not meaning to insult anyone--Scorpionman 20:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

privacy
Since when do any public figures in North America have a right to privacy? User:Anthergene 14:10, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * According to Robert Bork and others of his ilk, NO ONE has a right to privacy. Wahkeenah 17:23, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I guess I need to go review my "Big Evil Book of Nasty Borkiness", because I don't seem to recall this bit.1Winston 18:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Have to assume/hope this is sarcasm. But it would depend surely on what 'public' means. People like politicians owe us some account of much of their private lives because it is tied to their credibility. It is their resume. But a film star or a book author (the latter more than the former) or a cartoonist owe the public nothing of their private lives. Their offering to us is a product of their imaginations. We don't rely on a knowledge of their private lives for our decision about whether we enjoy their "product". --50.68.140.76 (talk) 20:15, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Prehistory of the Far Side
I've just written almost the entire article of The Prehistory of the Far Side, and I've provided a link to it in the article on Larson. I wouldn't mind suggestions on it. Also, I recommend that the Larson article should have a list of Larson's books at the end, linkified if possible. marbeh raglaim 11:28, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Discoveries
Seems to be an attempt at vandalism... since I could not find any references about the discovery of the "Bozone Layer" and it had a large number of spelling mistakes...

Cease and Desist?
Is there any reliable information about the rash of Cease-and-Desist letters sent either by or on behalf of Larson? There's lots of webpages that purport to know someone who recieved a C&D letter, or that Larson is fanatical/obsessed with protecting his "children".

Why did he stop doing the far side?
Does anyone know? This was the readon I came to the page.

--> He stopped in 1995 because he didn't want his cartoons to become overly repetitive or stale. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.120.161.6 (talk) 15:08, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

The Jane Goodall incident
Has it been confirmed that the letter Gary Larson received in the Jane Goodall incident had actually come from the real Jane Goodall Institute? The way I understand the relevant section in The Prehistory of the Far Side, the letter did not come from the Jane Goodall Institute at all, and that it was a prank someone had pulled on Gary Larson. Any comments? -- leuce 15:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

All the information we have on the incident come from Larson and Goodall themselves, who have never indicated that the letter was a hoax. Potentially it could have been a publicity stunt crafted by both of them, but without any evidence to support this theory we have little choice but to take them at their word. In any case I don't think the stance of the letter was implausible, even if it was misguided. marbeh raglaim 01:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Having said that, I should add that I have had some doubts about the veracity of the protest letters Larson reprints in The Prehistory of the Far Side. Larson is a kidder if I ever saw one, and it's possible that more than a few of these "hate letters" are about as genuine as his purported childhood drawings from earlier in the book. (For example, am I to believe that someone really started an organization called the Cow Tools Fellows dedicated to solving the mystery of the notorious "Cow tools" cartoon?) marbeh raglaim 01:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

General Comments for page editing
The biography section and the 'Far Side' section are extremely repetitive. The should be merged or content taken out so they do not overlap so much. Iammaggieryan 22:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Biography
The biography section states that Larson graduated from high school and college in the same year (1972). Is this correct? 66.41.249.234 (talk) 03:03, 9 January 2009 (UTC) M

There's a Hair in my Dirt!
The section on "There's a Hair in my Dirt" says "It is considered the completion of a Gary Larson collection". What does that mean? It makes no sense. One could certainly buy it before getting all of the Far Side collections. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WorldAsWill (talk • contribs) 05:38, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

Lutheran
Although Larson being a Lutheran is implied by the "Lutheran pages" stuff at the top and bottom of the article, I could not find any actual mention of his Lutheranism in the Article itself?Masternachos (talk) 01:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Dan - cause of death
This article - http://www.mentalfloss.com/blogs/archives/9597 - says it was a heart attack, not cancer as stated here. 70.50.52.111 (talk) 03:31, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

He can't have died in 2009, because he is quoted in a CNN interview in December of 2019. https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/18/entertainment/gary-larson-far-side-return-trnd/index.html Gregorybard (talk) 04:57, 19 December 2019 (UTC)

 * Dan is the brother. The enitre section of his brother's death seems to have been removed despite there being a page after the Jane Goodall story dedicated to his brother's death. Including a comic of what far side may have been like without his brother's influence. 2604:3D09:2276:C400:68BA:AB8:A2D9:F8B0 (talk) 15:55, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

Chimp attack
I added a reference to a 2002 article in The Spectator which mentions Larson being attacked by Frodo. Doesn't give the year that it happened. I looked in news archives but I haven't found contemporary news articles on it (the wikipedia article currently says it happened in 1988.)--Larrybob (talk) 07:52, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Retirement
I think that, seeing as Larson is retired, the infobox should reflect this. I shall change this, unless anyone objects. ☠ QuackOfaThousandSuns (Talk''') ☠ 01:46, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

The Far Side - 2 remarks
2 remarks. Thanks Kvsh5 (talk) 21:59, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) About "Themes in The Far Side", I think "Animals and other creatures were frequently presented anthropomorphically" is the main theme, and the surreal nature of the comics are a result of that.
 * 2) the Jane Goodall issue deserves a section or sub-section of its own.

Gary Larson Photo
Exactly how does this photo look ok? It's a picture of some sort of plastic mannequin. --Xyzzyplugh (talk) 19:24, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Have you seen any of his work? This image is perfect and from the cover on one of his books with essentially the same caption(although that might be considered a primary source and therefore not satisfy notability requirements). Besides, he's retired and the value to the article of a recent photograph is very small. Voiceofreason01 (talk) 19:33, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Yes, the photo was taken from one of his books. It's an obvious joke, as Gary Larson is not a plastic mannequin.  So you think it's appropriate to have a joke photo in the article which is clearly not him? --Xyzzyplugh (talk) 19:47, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

conversation copied from here

 * I think that given the nature of Larson's work, the fact that this photo is from one of books with a caption identifying Larson and the small value to the article of having a more recent photo of Larson(since he is retired and apparently has no desire to be a public figure) that this photo is uniquely appropriate for the article. Perhaps if the photo caption noted where the photograph is from you'd be more comfortable with it's inclusion? Voiceofreason01 (talk) 20:00, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

 * The photo is a copyright violation as we don't have permission to use it, so it will be removed soon enough. If we had permission to post the photo, it would need to be posted as an example of his work, not in the infobox claiming to actually be him.  Wikipedia is not Encyclopedia Dramatica, we don't post joke photos to make our articles funny.  --Xyzzyplugh (talk) 20:11, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

While I rarely deal with copyright issues on Wikipedia, I think this image may be ok per non-free content criteria. Assuming there are no copyright issues, it would be far more appropriate to change the caption than to delete the photo entirely and leave the article without any images at all. Our job as editors is to build an encyclopedia and while that often means removing inappropriate material it is often better to use small changes to improve an article rather than simply deleting anything that at first glance we might find offensive. Voiceofreason01 (talk) 20:30, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

 * If you wanted to add it back as an example of Larson's work (and outside of the infobox, certainly), I would not object. Although it would probably be deleted for copyright reasons.  If we were to have examples of his work in this article, this photo would be an odd choice, since he is a cartoonist and not a photographer.  Also, there is already one of his cartoons in the article.  But I'm not too concerned over whether this photo is the best example of his work, I just want to make sure it isn't being posted in the infobox and being labelled as actually being him. --Xyzzyplugh (talk) 21:02, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Xyzzplugh, You are such a buzzkill. I'm going to go ahead and reiterate the question rhetorically-have you ever seen any of his work? The photo should be put back the way it was, and it does make unique sense in this circumstance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.176.148.72 (talk) 22:50, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Post Far-Side comics
I distinctly recall that after retiring, Larson continued to write the occasional comic. A couple times a year, the New York Times Science section would publish a new cartoon of his. Also, every year one new cartoon would be the subject of a multiple choice question in the New York Biology Regents (a standardized test generally taken by 9th graders in New York State). One comic featured a square paramecium being wheeled away into an ambulance while regular shoe-shaped paramecia looked on in horror. I could not find references to these cartoons online, can anyone verify a source and put something in this article? Yserbius (talk) 19:59, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Gary Larson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130807052556/http://www.creators.com:80/a-note-from-gary-larson.html to http://www.creators.com/a-note-from-gary-larson.html

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 18:03, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gary Larson. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3724/is_200206/ai_n9130751/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121002063030/http://articles.cnn.com/1998-07-10/entertainment/9807_10_gary.larson_1_larson-is-lowly-worm-humor?_s=PM%3Abooks to http://articles.cnn.com/1998-07-10/entertainment/9807_10_gary.larson_1_larson-is-lowly-worm-humor?_s=PM%3Abooks

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:20, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Image of Larson
Photos of Larson himself seem to be short supply on the internet, although there is one here. So a free-use image may be difficult to find. There is a copy of a 1986 interview with Lynn Sherr on ABC's 20/20 on YouTube, but I guess this may be a copyright violation. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:25, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Age
He turned 70 today, not 69. The Mo-Ja'al (talk) 23:54, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * His birthdate (as cited in the article) is August 14, 1950. The age calculation is triggered at midnight UTC. By the time you read this it is likely correct in your time zone. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 04:27, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * So this means that, for all readers not in the UTC time zone (or in the BST-1 time zone in Summer) the ages of all Wikipedia BLP subjects calculated in this way, will be wrong, for at least an hour ever year? If your lucky enough to live in New Zealand, all these ages will be wrong for 12 hours every year? That's surprising. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:34, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
 * How could it be otherwise? Even if the template could adjust to your time zone, it would have to do some backflips to handle where and when the subject was born and where the subject is right now.
 * The only compromise I can imagine would be for it to not display a calculated age for 48 hours every year. - Sum mer PhD v2.0 18:04, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Garylarsonus beetle
I tagged the sentence The Garylarsonus beetle carries his name. with a Better source back in 2017:. As I said in my reason, that source (and many others others I've seen repeating this claim) doesn't provide any information as to who named it after him and when, or anything about the genus other than its name and namesake, and I also cannot find such genus name in the literature about beetle taxonomy. I'm certainly skeptical that we should use "Curiosities of Biological Nomenclature" as a reliable source for this. The best sources I been able to find in terms of providing specifics are:

"Perhaps the ultimate scientific compliment will be paid to Larson by a Smithsonian Institution scientist who studies water beetles. Entomologist Paul Spangler said he is now trying to pick the perfect South American diving beetle from among several new species he collected on a recent expedition to name "larsoni" after the cartoonist."

"This exquisite specimen will be celebrated throughout the scientific world as the newest of 300,000 known beetle species - beetle garylarsonus. Museum of Natural History entomologist Paul Spangler is combing the darker, danker corners of the globe for just such a creature to commemorate the approaching extinction of the only cartoon on the funny pages he ever reads - The Far Side."

So at the very least this was only ever going to be a species of beetle, not a genus. And perhaps people took his intention to formally name a beetle species after him as a fact and just relayed that as such. He certainly intended to name a species after him, but I've been unable to find out if he actually succeeded in doing so. Not sure if we want to just strike the sentence altogether or mention his intention in doing so. Hopefully knowing it was a species and that it was Paul Spangler who wanted to do so helps people find more sources if they do exist. Umimmak (talk) 06:09, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

 * I've looked. It's a dead end, and it should probably be stricken. The story was written in 1987. The entomologist, Paul Spangler, had a long career until his death in 2011, (Google scholar seems to have the year wrong as 2010) and you would think he would've made something official long before his death. The original author of the news story, Celia Hooper, last published in 2014.  I sent an email to the Smithsonian to see if they have any links or published info (to avoid WP:OR). MartinezMD (talk) 14:40, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

 * Well I've taken the liberty of removing it, curious if you got any response from the Smithsonian though, . Umimmak (talk) 02:06, 13 June 2021 (UTC)

 * No response from them. :( MartinezMD (talk) 12:19, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * If nothing else, Garylarsonus, with an -us, would be against the naming conventions of zoology, even if there were already another animal species with the proper -i form of the name. It could be a genus name, but the way it's written out as "beetle garylarsonus" makes me think that somebody made a mistake.... for example, it could have been a placeholder name that was never intended to make it into the published story. It's worth noting also that twenty-one years between the original story and its update is quite a long time. — Soap — 17:45, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Commencement addresses
Gary Larson was also the commencement speaker at WSU 1986- College of Science and Arts Charwkh (talk) 01:58, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

 * You'll need a reliable source to include it in the article and what made it notable. MartinezMD (talk) 13:14, 24 April 2023 (UTC)

Ian and Sylvia videos
There are a number of videos on Youtube of the music of the Canadian folk duo Ian and Sylvia, the credits of which say they are the work of Gary Larson. IF this is the same person, they are certainly worthy of inclusion. Toyokuni3 (talk) 17:39, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gary Larson


text:
User talk:Trivial

Greetings and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for starting to contribute to Wikipedia. If you have not yet registered a user name, I encourage you to do so, because while editing anonymously is great, anonymous users sometimes don't get to experience the full community aspect of Wikipedia. Registering a user name will give you an identity on Wikipedia and allow you to do several things anonymous users can't, such as vote in polls, set preferences, and upload images. You may wish to review some or all of the following pages to aid you in your editing: * Welcome! * Wikipedia Help * Wikipedia Tutorial * What Wikipedia is not * Wikipedia Manual of Style * Avoiding common mistakes

If you have a specific question about how to do something on Wikipedia, feel free to ask on the help desk. Also, remember you can create and edit your own user page to include information about yourself and anything you may find useful. Again, welcome, and thanks for contributing. Enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Solver - Talk

Changing merge templates
Please see Template talk:mergewith before changing more merge templates. - Omegatron 12:40, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)

Katharobe
Hi. In the future, please use the Move tab, instead of cut&paste, to move content to a new name, to preserve the page history. Thanks. Happy editing. Niteowlneils 18:39, 7 May 2005 (UTC)

Many thanks
Perhaps I'm egotistical, but I love seeing articles I've started...growing as people add to them, some people just add a category, fix some errors or whatever - but I wanted to let you know I appreciated the substantial changes you made to Gotthard Heinrici, and that I learned something from your writing :) Sherurcij 07:02, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

West Virginia Candidate for US Collaboration of the Week
Hey Trivial! I've added West Virginia's main article to the list of candidates for US Collaboration of the Week. It's in much need of reorganization and lacks a lot of information. I was hoping that with some extra exposure and some wiki teamwork we can get the article up to par with other U.S. state articles. Please voice your comments and vote at the US Collaboration page. I also wanted to commend you on your work with the Wheeling Convention article. Thanks! --Caponer 18:44, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Cairnebloodhoof.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Cairnebloodhoof.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL-self to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Shyam ( T / C ) 22:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Single login
In few weeks, all wikimedia projects will have a simgle login system. I'm fr:User:trivial, and you are en:User:trivial. What about this merge?
 * I've changed my account name to fr:User:jmtrivial.

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Thunderbluff.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Thunderbluff.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 15:32, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Redirect of Andorhal
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Andorhal, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Andorhal is a redirect to a non-existent page (CSD R1). To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Andorhal, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 13:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Lowelloffering.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Lowelloffering.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 07:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 07:32, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Shaysites article
See the discussion of the Shaysites article at Talk:Shays'_Rebellion. WCCasey (talk) 05:35, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Carlilejohn.jpg

The file File:Carlilejohn.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Orphaned image, higher-resolution version without watermark already available on Commons at File:JCarlile.jpg"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ★ Bigr   Tex  22:32, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Trivial


text:
Talk:Richard S. Ewell

Anonymous criticism
This article is a perfect illustration of why Wikipedia is utterly useless as a valid source for academic research.

Almost every fact in this article is wrong or questionable; most notable is the myth repeated here regarding Ewell's conduct at Gettysburg, a myth that was definitively debunked nearly a century ago. Are we still protecting Lee's legend even now? If Ewell did make a mistake on 1 July 1863 - it was the exact opposite of the mistake alleged in this horrid article.

No, I'm not fixing the article. It should be deleted and started over. Educate yourself, starting here:

http://www.historynet.com/acw/blbaldyewell/

68.52.39.124 20:01, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Ewell's conduct at Gettysburg was certainly much more questionable compared to Winchester. Research the letters of one of his best subordinates, John Brown Gordon, whose papers can be found in the library of the University of Georgia in Athens. Gordon was quite heated in a letter to his wife written during the time of the battle. He feared that a grave mistake had been made. So, the criticism of Ewell did not begin with the Lee apologists, but with Ewell's very own generals in July 1863. See also the collected papers of Early, Trimble, Harry Hays, etc. I'm certainly not a Lee apologist (his men killed my great-great uncle on East Cemetery Hill), but as a Civil War author and writer, as well as tour guide, Ewell's conduct needs to be discussed from both perspectives. It was late in the day; Anderson was not fully up; Johnson was not yet in position; and part of Early's men were fought out. Still, the odds on July 2 were far slimmer than on July 1. If the article needs any editing, it is that perhaps both sides of the issue should be presented in a little more depth. However, the article is by no means worthless - not at all. Scott Mingus 20:32, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * While I do not normally get excited about comments from anonymous reviewers who offer broad criticism without specific recommendations, this article does need a bit of work, which I will undertake in the next day. Hal Jespersen 21:43, 30 May 2006 (UTC) BTW, I just looked at that article, to "educate" myself, and I'll point out that many of those who disagree with its conclusions have published more scholarly works than this magazine article without footnotes seems to be. But our article should cover both sides more thoroughly. Hal Jespersen 21:51, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Updated. If you have any specific recommendations, post here or edit away. Hal Jespersen 15:45, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Another Critical remark
The boxed text attributed to Historian Larry Tagg which states “Ewell inspired his men in spite of, not because of, his appearance. Historian Larry Tagg described him:” A description follows and is noted –Larry Tagg, The Generals of Gettysburg. If one reads the description you can see it is actually from a first hand account by General Richard Taylor in his book “Destruction and Reconstruction” copyright 1879. Below is the description by Taylor from his book. Sound familiar?

 * Bright, prominent eyes, a bomb-shaped, bald head, and a nose like that of Francis of Valois, gave him a striking resemblance to a woodcock; and this was increased by a bird-like habit of putting his head on one side to utter his quaint speeches. He fancied that he had some mysterious internal malady, and would eat nothing but frumenty, a preparation of wheat; and his plaintive way of talking of his disease, as if he were some one else, was droll in the extreme. His nervousness prevented him from taking regular sleep, and he passed nights curled around a camp-stool, in positions to dislocate an ordinary person's joints and drive the "caoutchouc man" to despair. On such occasions, after long silence, he would suddenly direct his eyes and nose toward me with "General Taylor! What do you suppose President Davis made me a major-general for?"—beginning with a sharp accent and ending with a gentle lisp. Superbly mounted, he was the boldest of horsemen, invariably leaving the roads to take timber and water. No follower of the "Pytchley" or "Quorn" could have lived with him across country. With a fine tactical eye on the battle field, he was never content with his own plan until he had secured the approval of another's judgment, and chafed under the restraint of command, preparing to fight with the skirmish line. On two occasions in the Valley, during the temporary absence of Jackson from the front, Ewell summoned me to his side, and immediately rushed forward among the skirmishers, where some sharp work was going on. Having refreshed himself, he returned with the hope that "old Jackson would not catch him at it." He always spoke of Jackson, several years his junior, as "old," and told me in confidence that he admired his genius, but was certain of his lunacy, and that he never saw one of Jackson's couriers approach without expecting an order to assault the north pole.

Later, after he had heard Jackson seriously declare that he never ate pepper because it produced a weakness in his left leg, he was confirmed in this opinion. With all his oddities, perhaps in some measure because of them, Ewell was adored by officers and men. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.180.153.32 (talk) 03:16, 18 January 2010 (UTC)

 * I can see that there are some similarities between the texts. What are you proposing we do about it? It is not close enough to the Taylor quotation that you list here to credit it directly to Taylor. Hal Jespersen (talk) 18:37, 18 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The “historian”/rock singer Larry Tagg in 1998 more than likely cribbed his description of R. S. Ewell not from General Taylor’s memoir, but rather from Shelby Foote, whose three-volume history of the war had taken note of Ewell’s eccentricities back in 1958. LewisChessman (talk) 05:35, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Richard S. Ewell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031214172727/http://stonewall.hut.ru/leaders/ewell.htm to http://stonewall.hut.ru/leaders/ewell.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:45, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Richard S. Ewell


text:
Intrinsic finality

Intrinsic finality is the idea that there is a natural good for all beings, and that all beings have a natural tendency to pursue their own good. It is an underlying principle of both teleology and moral objectivism. The concept was summarized by Thomas Aquinas as follows:

 * By the form which gives it its specific perfection, everything in nature has an inclination to its own operations and to its own end, which it reaches through these operations. Just as everything is, such also are its operations and its tendency to what is suitable to itself.

The idea of intrinsic finality presumes an objective reality that obeys a natural order or natural law in the universe. Things are meant to be and behave a certain way, and naturally tend to act that way. For instance, animals have natural instincts for self-preservation, seeking food, and reproduction. They do so because it is their nature to do so. Theologians go further, to argue that they do so because they were created to do so.

The existence of such a finality is often challenged, particularly by philosophers ascribing to philosophical naturalism. They argue that it is unreasonable to say that all beings naturally pursue their own benefit, when some beings clearly do not. They point to instances of imperfection, disease, and death as evidence that natural beings do not naturally move toward perfection. But proponents of intrinsic finality respond that the very recognition of such imperfection requires an ideal or standard of the perfect end from which the being in question falls short owing to a variety of factors including improper education, sin, or predestination.

Intrinsic finality provides the basis for the teleological argument for the existence of God and its modern counterpart, intelligent design. Proponents of teleology argue that Darwinism does not resolve a fundamental defect in philosophical naturalism; that it focuses exclusively on the immediate causes and mechanisms of events and does not attend to the reason for their synthesis.

Naturalists respond that biology has been profoundly concerned with the ways function constrains structure since the time of Aristotle and that Darwin's own awareness of teleology is evident in his study in functional constraints on the evolutionary development of the beaks of Galapagos finches, of which he wrote, "Seeing this gradation and diversity of structure in one small, intimately related group of birds, one might really fancy that from an original paucity of birds in this archipelago, one species had been taken and modified for different ends." (Origin of Species, chapter 19)

title: Intrinsic finality


text: User talk:24.128.209.177

title: User talk:24.128.209.177


text:
Valerius Romulus

Marcus Aurelius Valerius Romulus (died 309 AD), was the son of Emperor Maxentius and of Valeria Maximilla, daughter of Emperor Galerius by his first wife. Through his father, he was also grandson of Maximian the Tetrarch, whom he predeceased.

Biography
Valerius bore the title clarissimus puer in his youth, and later nobilissimus vir. He was consul with his father in 308 and 309; the fact that Maxentius was the only consul for year 310 suggests that Valerius died in 309. He was buried in a tomb along the Via Appia. After death, his status was raised to Divus and his father dedicated the Temple of Divus Romulus to him along the Via Sacra near the Roman Forum. Also, a series of commemorative coins was issued in his name, showing a domed shrine with one of the doors ajar, and an eagle on top.

title: Valerius Romulus


text:
Talk:St. Celestine V

from the discussion on Copyright problems --Duk 17:13, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * St. Celestine V From
 * From the Catholic Encyclopedia, and probably PD in the same way that the 1911 EB is. --rbrwr± 21:46, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * refereing url states; The Catholic Encyclopedia, Volume III, Copyright © 1908 by Robert Appleton Company, Online Edition Copyright © 2003 by K. Knight --Duk 08:43, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * There are hundreds of articles here from the Catholic Encyclopedia in Category:Based on Catholic Encyclopedia (and probably others not included in the category). We have the same situation (a site claiming copyright for an online edition of an old PD printed secondary source) with the old Jewish Encyclopedia. IANAL, but it appears that de facto Wikipedia policy is to regard these modern copyright claims as invalid. / Uppland 09:11, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:St. Celestine V


text: Template:QCOTW

title: Template:QCOTW


text:
User talk:Jsaiks

Could you please present some evidence that the driving charges against Alan Riddell were retracted. - SimonP 17:16, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Continually reverting this article without comment can be considered vandalism and may get you banned from Wikipedia. - SimonP 18:50, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jsaiks


text: User talk:81.135.247.23

title: User talk:81.135.247.23