text: User:FREE JOEM

title: User:FREE JOEM


text: Talk:No Paradise to Lose

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

title: Talk:No Paradise to Lose


text:
Living Arts Centre

The Living Arts Centre is a 225,000 ft2 multi-use facility which opened in Mississauga, Ontario, Canada, on October 7, 1997. The complex houses three theatres for the performing arts, Hammerson Hall, RBC Theatre and Rogers Theatre ), an exhibition gallery (the Laidlaw Hall ), seven art studios and facilities for corporate meetings.

The Living Arts Centre was designed by the Zeidler Partnership, who were awarded an Award of Merit in the City of Mississauga Urban Design Awards in 1998 for the complex. The building was funded by donations by corporate, community and individual sponsors, as well as the City of Mississauga and the Government of Canada.

Glass artist Stuart Reid designed a piece made of etched and enameled glass, blown by mouth, for the main foyer titled "Dance of Venus", which won an international competition. It measures 30 ft by 150 ft.

Hammerson Hall is the larger of the two theatres, providing tiered concert seating for 1300 people, while the RBC Theatre has a flexible seating arrangement, allowing for cabaret-style seating at tables or up to 400 people for theatre performances. The complex also includes a 110-seat lecture style space known as the Rogers Theatre, a variety of meeting rooms, rehearsal space and an on-site Food & Beverage department.

A range of exhibitions, events and performances are hosted by both the Living Arts Centre and community partners, including the Mississauga Choral Society, Mississauga Symphony Orchestra, Mississauga International Children`s Festival, and several resident artists occupy the studio spaces. The centre has averaged over 400,000 visitors each year.

title: Living Arts Centre


text:
User talk:Rickscholz

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Follow the Simplified Ruleset
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 00:53, Apr 26, 2005 (UTC)

I-180
I interpreted the Kurumi description as meaning that it was officially I-180. It doesn't seem all that clear to me on either site - do you know anything definite on whether AASHTO called it I-180 pre-1983? --SPUI (talk) 05:44, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm trusting the cahighways site more, which says "Around 1985, the number I-180 was briefly proposed for the Richmond-San Rafael stretch of what is now I-580 and was formerly part of CA 17."

If AASHTO did actually call it that, it's news to me, and to all of the road geek web sites I visit. If anything, it was unsigned, but I don't think this is even the case. I don't think AASHTO would call it one number and the state would call it a different number... that would be way too confusing.

According to cahighways, that stretch of highway was transferred from CA-17 to I-580 in 1984.--Rickscholz 06:00, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

October 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page San Francisco – Oakland Bay Bridge has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you.  F ASTILYsock  (T ALK ) 05:10, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Rickscholz


text:
The Braxtons

The Braxtons are an American musical quintet consisting of singer Toni Braxton and her younger sisters, Traci Braxton, Towanda Braxton, Trina Braxton, and Tamar Braxton. Despite being commercially unsuccessful, the group's first single, "Good Life", led to oldest sister Toni's solo career. All five members reunited in 2011 to star in the WE tv reality television series Braxton Family Values alongside their mother, Evelyn Braxton.

In October 2015, the group released the album Braxton Family Christmas.

History
The Braxtons' parents are Rev. Michael Braxton Sr. (born June 26, 1947) and Evelyn Braxton (born January 14, 1948). Their first child, Toni Michele Braxton was born on October 7, 1967. Michael Conrad Braxton Jr., the only son, was born on November 17, 1968, then Traci Renee Braxton was born on April 2, 1971. Traci died on March 12, 2022. Towanda Chloe Braxton was born on September 18, 1973. The Braxtons' fifth child Trina Evette Braxton, was born on December 3, 1974. The youngest sibling, Tamar Estine Braxton, was born on March 17, 1977. They are originally from Severn, Maryland.

The sisters began to harmonize together when a then five-year-old Tamar demanded, "somebody get me some toilet paper!" Each sister and brother Michael soon after went in the bathroom and began singing the "Toilet Paper Song". The Braxtons credit this incident as their first song-writing experience and the first time that they harmonized as a group. Growing up, they sang in the choir at several churches and toured the East Coast with their religious parents singing at various events.

1989–1991: Good Life and lineup change
Toni, Traci, Towanda, Trina, and Tamar Braxton signed their first record deal with Arista Records in 1989. In 1990, they released their first single, "Good Life". It would be their only single as a quintet. "Good Life" was not a hit, peaking at No. 79 on the Billboard Hot R&B/Hip-Hop Singles chart. At the time of the single's release, the members' age differences created a problem with marketing. Subsequently, the Braxtons were dropped from Arista Records.

In 1991, during a showcase with Antonio "L.A." Reid and Kenneth "Babyface" Edmonds, who were in the process of forming LaFace Records, Toni Braxton, minus her four sisters, was chosen and signed as the label's first female solo artist. At the time, the remaining members were told that LaFace was not looking for another girl group since it had just signed TLC.

1992–1995: Record deal and Traci's pregnancy
After Toni's departure from the group in 1991, the remaining Braxtons members became backup singers for Toni's first U.S. tour, music videos, and promotional appearances. Traci, Towanda, Trina, and Tamar were featured in the music video for Toni Braxton's third single, "Seven Whole Days", from her debut album.

In 1993, LaFace Records A&R Vice President, Bryant Reid, signed the Braxtons to LaFace. However, the group never released an album or single for the record label. When Reid moved on to work for Atlantic Records, he convinced executives at LaFace to allow him take the group to Atlantic also. They signed with Atlantic the following year, with a three-album deal.

It was reported in Vibe magazine that in 1995, Traci Braxton had left the group to pursue a career as a youth counselor. However, it was not confirmed until 2004 when Towanda Braxton appeared in season 2 of the reality show Starting Over, that Traci was not allowed to sign with Atlantic because of her pregnancy at the time.

1996–1997: So Many Ways
In June 1996, Tamar, Trina, and Towanda returned with a new album entitled So Many Ways, which shared the same title as its lead single. Released on August 13, 1996, the album peaked at No. 26 on the Billboard R&B/Hip-Hop Albums charts. It became their first and only LP. Atlantic Records A&R VP, Bryant Reid, served as the album's executive producer. At the time of its release, Reid told Billboard Magazine, "I had a vision for them then that was about young sophistication with sex appeal." So Many Ways included production from Jermaine Dupri and Daryl Simmons along with Christopher "Tricky" Stewart and Sean "Sep" Hall. The album also included a cover of Diana Ross's hit "The Boss" and Klymaxx's song "I'd Still Say Yes".

The Braxtons released a music video in order to promote "So Many Ways". It was directed by Cameron Casey and featured upcoming actor Mekhi Phifer. The trio also performed a remixed version of "So Many Ways" with rapper Jay-Z on September 9, 1996, at the Soul Train Lady of Soul Awards. The single was also used as the opening track for the soundtrack to the comedy film High School High. "So Many Ways" went on to peak at No. 83 on the Billboard Hot 100 chart in 1996, No. 22 on the Billboard R&B Charts and number 32 on the UK Singles Chart in January 1997.

The album's second single, "Only Love", was released on January 25, 1997, and peaked at number 52 on the Billboard R&B/Hip-Hop Songs Chart. A music video for this song was also released. A Masters at Work remix version of the Braxtons third single "The Boss" reached number 1 on Billboard Dance/Club Play Chart in early 1997. "Slow Flow" was the final single released from So Many Ways. It peaked at No. 26 on the UK Charts in July 1997, becoming their highest-charting single in the UK.

The Braxtons also served as the opening act for Toni Braxton on the European Leg of her Secrets Tour in 1997.

1998–1999: Disbandment
The Braxtons decided to part ways as a group after lead singer Tamar Braxton left to pursue a solo career with DreamWorks Records in 1999. However, the members continued to sing and act in various other projects. There was a lot of drama surrounding the situation, which is part of the reason why Towanda went on Starting Over. She had caught wind of Tamar's signing of a contract through industry insiders rather than Tamar herself. This notably caused tension between the group, due to them planning on doing a second album, with the inclusion of Traci, that time around.

2000–2010: Solo projects
Trina appeared in the 2004 Tyler Perry play Meet the Browns as Tracy Stevens. She was also part of the play Rise, written by Salt from Salt-n-Pepa and Christopher "Play" Martin from the rap group Kid 'n Play and starred in an off-Broadway production of Dreamgirls as Deena Jones. In 2004, Trina Braxton appeared in "The Walk" with Eva Pigford and Vanessa Bell. Additionally, she co-starred in two independent films, including Jail Party, and was host for the unbroadcast Urban Idol for UPN. She also made a cameo in Tyler Perry's I Can Do Bad All By Myself as a member of a band performing with singer Mary J. Blige's character. In 2009, Trina joined the wedding band "Simply Irresistible" as a lead vocalist. In 2012, Trina left the band to pursue a solo music career, releasing her debut solo single "Party or Go Home" in March 2012.

Trina and Tamar performed as background singers and dancers for the entire duration of Toni's Libra Tour in 2006. They also performed in Toni Braxton: Revealed at the Flamingo Hotel and Casino until R&B singer Sparkle and Towanda Braxton replaced them.

Towanda Braxton appeared in season 2 of the reality show Starting Over. She performed and recorded a solo song, "Here I Am", for the show and conducted a radio interview on the Wendy Williams Experience about her time on Starting Over. Towanda is also a member of Zeta Phi Beta sorority and pledged at Bowie State University in 1995. In September 2005, People magazine's website reported that Towanda was pregnant.

Tamar Braxton released her debut solo album Tamar in 2000. She also made a cameo in the music video for "He Wasn't Man Enough". She appeared for a short time as Sasha in the stage play version of Madea Goes to Jail in 2005 alongside Tyler Perry and Cassi Davis. Tamar co-wrote several songs and sang background vocals for several of Toni's albums including Snowflakes, More Than a Woman, Libra, and Pulse. In 2012, Tamar released the single "Love and War", followed by two albums in 2013: a studio album entitled Love and War, followed by a Christmas album entitled Winter Loversland.

In 2010, the Braxtons, including Traci Braxton, appeared in sister Toni Braxton's music video for her dance single "Make My Heart".

2011–2014: Braxton Family Values
In January 2011, WE tv confirmed that it had signed Toni Braxton and her sisters, Traci, Towanda, Trina, and Tamar for a reality series, entitled Braxton Family Values, to be marketed as one of the network's flagship shows. The show looks at the relationship between Toni, her mom, and her sisters along with the interpersonal relationships of each family member. After only four episodes, the series had renewed for a second season. There would be 13 more one-hour episodes of Braxton Family Values on WE tv in 2012, up from 10 during the debut season – which was later upped to a 26 episode second season, including the Reunion Show.

As of the second-season finale of Braxton Family Values, it is still unclear whether or not the EP that the Braxtons were working on will be released. During the show's reunion, Toni Braxton stated that she thought the Braxtons should "feature on [her] record" instead of her completely rejoining the group for a full EP.

The Braxtons posed for the June 2011 VIBE magazine summer swimwear issue. They also presented the "Best Gospel Artist" award to Mary Mary at the 2011 BET Awards. In mid-2011, Traci, Tamar, Towanda and Trina performed their song "The Boss" at WEtv Women's Luncheon in New York City. The performance was documented on Season 2 Episode 8 of Braxton Family Values.

In July 2014, a sneak peek of the fourth season of "Braxton Family Values" was uploaded via YouTube on WE tv's user account of the Braxton sisters discussing doing a gospel record together. In the same time, Toni, Tamar and Trina guest starred on their sister Traci's music video "Last Call".

2015–present: Braxton Family Christmas
In October 2015, the group including Toni, Tamar, Traci, Trina and Towanda, released an album titled Braxton Family Christmas as five members. The album was released on October 30 and pre-order on October 16. Braxton Family Christmas debuted at number 27 on the US Billboard R&B/Hip-Hop Albums, number 10 on the US R&B Chart and number 12 on US Top Holiday Albums on November 21, 2015. The album charted at number 1 on the US Heatseekers Albums on December 12, 2015.

title: The Braxtons


text:
Fort Whoop-Up

Fort Whoop-Up was the nickname (eventually adopted as the official name) given to a whisky trading post, originally Fort Hamilton, near what is now Lethbridge, Alberta. During the late 19th century, the post served as a centre for trading activities, including the illegal whisky trade. The sale of whisky was outlawed but, due to the lack of law enforcement in the region prior to 1874, many whisky traders had settled in the area and taken to charging unusually high prices for their goods.

Fort Whoop-Up is also the name of a replica site and interpretive centre built in Indian Battle Park.

Construction
Fort Hamilton was first built in 1869 by John J. Healy and Alfred B. Hamilton—two traders who had done business in the Fort Benton area of Montana and in the basin of the Upper Missouri —to serve as a trading post. Fort Hamilton was originally a group of 11 cabins. The traders in these cabins traded for $50,000 worth of buffalo robes in just six months of operations. This first fort was destroyed by fire within a year of its construction by an overturned lamp. Whether this was an accident or deliberate arson is unknown.

Healy and Hamilton contracted James Gladstone and a crew of 30 workers to construct a second, more secure fort, which was later nicknamed Fort Whoop-Up. It took two years to build at a cost of $25,000. When it was finished, Fort Whoop-Up was "a squared timber post complete with a stockade, cannon-mounted bastions, loopholes for firing rifles, and three wickets for trading with the aboriginals." According to Healy, the new fort was built with six thousand cottonwood logs.

Fort Whoop-Up was located at the junction of the Belly (Oldman) River and the St. Mary's River, 6 km south of where the Fort Whoop-Up interpretive centre is located.

Trade and enforcement
One type of alcohol sold by the whisky traders in and around Whoop-Up bandits was known as Whoop-Up Bug Juice, a highly prized alcohol spiked with ginger, molasses, and red pepper. It was then coloured with black chewing tobacco, watered down, and boiled to make "firewater".

The spread of American traders from Fort Benton north into Canada was spurred by the enforcement of prohibition in Montana in 1869. Traders, like Healy and Hamilton, brought their stockpile of whisky to Canada to continue their lucrative trade. While whisky was a foundational trading item at Fort Whoop-Up and other trading posts, there was much legal trading that occurred, such as trading blankets, food, firearms, or ammunition for buffalo robes.

The outlaws of Fort Whoop-Up and surrounding areas—combined with the supposed flying of an American flag over Canadian territory—contributed to the formation of the North-West Mounted Police (NWMP). Fort Whoop-Up was a destination on their March West in 1874.

The NWMP arrived at Fort Whoop-Up in October 1874, with the task of establishing Canadian sovereignty in the territory and controlling the alcohol trade. They found no whisky on the premises and the flag that had been reported as an American flag was inspected and found to be a trade flag for the fort (later adopted by the City of Lethbridge as the municipal flag). Finding no reason to close the fort, they continued further west and the fort continued in the trade of legal goods.

Their first strike on the alcohol traders came after a Peigan chief named Three Bulls complained at Fort Macleod about a group of whisky traders who had sold him overpriced whisky. Shortly after, the NWMP caught and fined the perpetrators, although they were not at Fort Whoop-Up at the time. Although the presence of the NWMP decreased the abundance of whisky trading, it still occurred.

In 1875, the NWMP rented a room from the owners of the fort, Healy and Hamilton, and established a post there. This arrangement lasted for at least twelve years, the fort acting as both a trading post and a NWMP post. The following year, Healy and Hamilton sold the fort to Dave Akers, who was in control of the fort almost until its demise. The fort was again burned in 1888, the fire having started in the NWMP barracks. This fire was not as severe as only the NWMP barracks were destroyed. The fort remained in operation until it was deserted somewhere between 1890 and 1892. It was then destroyed piece by piece until the last of it was washed away in a flood in 1915.

On 28 June 1985 Canada Post issued 'Fort Whoop Up, Alta.' one of the 20 stamps in the "Forts Across Canada Series" (1983 & 1985). The stamps are perforated $12 1/2$ x 13 mm and were printed by Ashton-Potter Limited based on the designs by Rolf P. Harder.

Name
There are several theories as to why the fort was nicknamed Whoop-Up. The most prominent is that it came by a description of the illicit activities that were taking place at the fort: that people said they were going to Fort Hamilton to whoop it up. Another theory comes from the process of getting a bull train moving over the trail. The bull whacker would walk alongside the bull train and crack his whip. This process was called whooping them up, which may have led to naming the trail from Fort Benton, Montana the Whoop-Up Trail, and hence the fort as well.

Reconstruction
A reconstruction-effort was undertaken to adapt the fort to what it was originally, based on new photographic evidence. The replica site was built as a centennial project, downstream from the original site, in 1967. Since then, various new exhibits have been unveiled, including the Thunderchief Collection, showcasing artifacts from the local Blackfoot culture; the Shockley Firearms Gallery; and Voice from the Past, an audio program that enables visitors and school children to receive guided tours year round. Seasonal re-enactments take place in the summer involving characters from the fort's history, and are done in partnership with Drama Nutz Productions and Guns of the Golden West, as well as local re-enactment talent.

title: Fort Whoop-Up


text:
User talk:Phacade

Hi! Whoever made that user page, could ya give us your name for curiousity's sake?

 * 1) 0# n0 fr1gg1ng w4% ph4( w1## k1## m3 P5P3

title: User talk:Phacade


text:
User talk:FREE JOEM

Please do not vandalize Wikipedia articles. Georgia guy 00:55, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This user is likely a sock puppet of User:JoeM. NTK 01:10, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:FREE JOEM


text:
Category:Maltese sportspeople

nl:Categorie:Maltees persoon uit de sport

title: Category:Maltese sportspeople


text:
Talk:Old Norse religion

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 25 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Mathewmeaders.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Citation System
Simple question: Which citation style should this article employ?
 * Option (1):
 * Option (2): "Andren 2011: 56" (as plain text)
 * Option (3): "Andren, p. 56."
 * Option (4): "Andren, "Old Norse and Germanic Religion", p. 56."
 * Option (5): "Andren 2011, p. 56."
 * Option (6):

Further explanation: According to WP:CITEVAR, "citations within any given article should follow a consistent style". As this article existed up till August 2017, that was not the case, with a wide variety of different citation styles being employed. As there was no community of editors active on the page, I was WP:BOLD and in my expansion of the article standardised the referencing using Option 1, the sfn/harv style. I considered it particularly appropriate given that this is the citation system employed at thematically linked articles like Norse mythology and the FA-rated Heathenry (new religious movement). User:Yngvadottir has since started rewriting the article's prose, replacing instances of option 1 with a mix of options 3 and 4, on the basis that these are easier to edit with. Concerns have been raised by User:PBS that option 3 generates confusion in the context of this article, because "Andren, p. 56" does not stipulate which of Andren's works (for instance) is being referred to (multiple works by the same author are cited in this article). As per Wikipedia policy, there needs to be a standardised system introduced and the decision which to adopt should be made via WP:Consensus, after which all editors should abide by it in their edits. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment I have added an options "5" and "6" -- PBS (talk) 20:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Defer decision till rewrite is complete. The mixed situation we have now is temporary and I intend it to be so. It enables me to fix and improve the rewrite and keep track of my work. Per NODEADLINE and the fact both my short citations and the sfn system provide the reader with complete information - assuming I've now found and fixed all my errors? - the citations do not have to be made consistent yet. It's also better to wait because what is cited will continue to change; we may eventually not cite some references we cite now, and I have already added several and will add more. I have a personal opinion on the ultimate citation system but insofar as some editors intend to take this to GA, that becomes none of my business, and in any case I'm incompetent to adapt some of my citations to one format. At this stage, worrying about citation format is impeding progress on the article. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:53, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * An RfC like this will take a month, at the very least, before it comes to any form of conclusion. Even if a decision is made in this time, it need not inherently affect your edits, for we can always defer on implementation until a point that is convenient for all. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:01, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * A good reason to close it down right away! -- PBS (talk)

 * Use (1) or (5) and sometimes (6). Style has nothing to do with the use of templates (that is an old argument that goes back to about 2005 and editors like SV who hate templates), so as they appear visually the same options "1" and "5" are the same. I don't endorse "2" because it varies in looks/style from "1" and "5". "3" is inadequate because it does not fail-safe (as was proved earlier today). Sometimes it is necessary to use option 4 or 6 because there is no published date on the long citation (this is a common problem with web sites) so to link the short to the long article options 4 or 6 are needed, to link 6 via use   in the long citation. -- PBS (talk) 20:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Options 1 I think you misread CITEVAR. This RfC is a waste of time. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 13:57, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Nobody disputes that the article should use sfn when it's in a more complete state. There's no deadline for getting there.  Yngvadottir is a subject matter expert who struggles with sfn and wishes to develop the article using a different citation system.  It would be courteous and collegial to allow Yngvadottir to work with her preferred style for the time being and do the converting later.— S Marshall  T/C 17:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree which is why I support among others options (5). -- PBS (talk) 08:37, 24 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Generally supportive of sfn, but agree with other editors, converting will be quicker - if the article is being heavily developed, sfn can slow things down. Of course, editors working on the article should provide page numbers and complete cites, to make the conversion easier during cleanup. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 22:40, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Options 1 and 5 As per PBS, this provides an easy way to accommodate both editing styles in a uniform citation style. It also ensures that citations are unambiguous by including dates, the importance of which an expert on the subject should recognize.  I see no drawbacks to going this route now, which will also reduce or eliminate the need to convert later.  Cl ea n Co py talk 05:58, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Options 1 and 5 as per PBS and Cl ea n Co py talk (editor is a volunteer for Feedback request service)--BoogaLouie (talk) 14:21, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

 * Comment. I'm seeing several people placing a great importance on dates. In addition to the fact that that is merely one way to differentiate between publications by the same author, and one I find opaque, there are two issues related to this topic that I feel I should point out. First, this is not a field that progresses linearly, such that later work is better, or even builds on all previous work; there are separate traditions of interpretation in different places, linguistic bariers, and rival theories (as in many non-science fields with a sprawling scholarship). Secondly and perhaps more crucially, many works have been republished and has multiple citable dates. Even Dronke's relatively recent Poetic Edda has been reissued. The third edition of De Vries's work on the religion/mythology is an exact reprint of the second, and has been further reissued. One of Ellis Davidson's handbooks turns up with multiple dates, partly because of paperback reprinting in both the US and the UK. Then there are Greenwood Press reprints of, for example, Turville-Petre (1977, I just checked Worldcat), and those are are identical in text (for some books they omit illustrations). For Dumézil's works in the original French, the year is important, because he revised them without the fact being clearly noted in the publication info, but for many other scholars, several years could be given and the text would be the same. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:47, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Using dates to identify a work is absolutely standard; as far as I know, there is no citation system that does not include these. When, as you say, there are multiple editions of a work, if a page number is referenced without a date, it can be impossible to find the cited text, as it is not clear which edition is referred to.  Cl ea n Co py talk 20:48, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what you mean; of course all citation systems identify the date somewhere, but not all of them include the date in every parenthetical or footnote reference to a work previously cited. The issue here is that the format imposed in Midnightblueowl's rewrite attempt uses dates as the identifier in every repeated citation. By no means does every citation system do that, and it's actually a problem for many of the sources this article is citing and will need to cite. Nobody is suggesting the date should not appear at all, and one of the reasons I prefer other footnoting styles is that they provide a full citation the first time a work is referred to, rather than requiring the reader to click through or scroll down to see what's meant by the code. Yngvadottir (talk) 21:02, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Some citation systems use (ibid. p. 4), but its use is discouraged on Wikipedia because it makes inline citations fragile. All it takes is for someone else to add another inline citation to a different source between the first and the ibid. to break the ibid. citation. In a similar way relying on a source to be unique with only one edition is just a fragile and that is why it is best to include the year as part of a short citation. Then in future if another edition is added the year protects the initial citation, otherwise the short citation could be supported by one of two long cations making it impossible to tell from the text which one was meant. Occasionally there will be two editions in the same year (typically of a book published in the US and the UK by separate publishers, as was traditionally the case), in which case the Wikipedia templates have a build in solution—add a lower-case letter after the year (eg 1998a and 1998b)—so that the two editions can be identified and linked using the standard templates (see Help:CS1). -- PBS (talk) 17:17, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I think you've missed my whole point, or maybe I've missed yours. Nobody's advocating the use of ibid. or yet separating refs from what they reference. Including the year as part of the short citation, as you call it, does nothing to deal with the problem of republished books, in fact it instils a false confidence that the source was only published in that version in that one year; there is nothing authoritatively identifying about a particular year if the source has been reprinted, and many of these books have. Also, the sfn format masks repeated refs; Midnightblueowl frequently reused the same page of the same source, but that repetition simply sinks in a sea of "name, year" refs in that system. Maybe that's where you get the idea ibid. is relevant here, since that is a method of indicating a repeated reference, one Wikipedia rightly avoids? Yngvadottir (talk) 19:26, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Reprinted editions do not change anything, as it is the copyright date, not the printing date, that is used. Cl ea n Co py talk 03:18, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It is??? First I've heard. Either way, it's not a clear way of distinguishing works by the same author in footnotes for readers; and it's unnecessary when tehre's only one work cited. So I do not see the necessity for the year to be present in every footnote. Yngvadottir (talk) 06:46, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * This begins to seem a very clear situation.
 * It is standard practice in any academic work to include dates in citations.
 * This may seem unnecessary when there is only one work cited, but this is a dynamic encyclopedia, and there is a reasonable chance that other works by the same author may later be included, as well, at which point an undated citation will automatically become ambiguous, and someone will have to try to figure out which work is meant. Best practice is clearly to include the year from the beginning.
 * I have heard absolutely no justification grounded in the needs of an encyclopedia for not including dates. None whatsoever. Cl ea n Co py talk 08:05, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The dates will be there in the full footnotes and the bibliography entries, either way. There is no purpose to imposing one method of short citations, and WP:CITEVAR applies. Academic works also continue to vary; footnotes or parenthetical references that use years as identifiers have spread out of the sciences, but are still far from pervasive. In any case, this is not an academic work; it's an encyclopedia. In my opinion, requiring the reader to click or scroll twice to identify a source is an impediment; others differ. But putting it in terms of absolutes is based on untenable assumptions. In any case, as I said far above, the citation format can be revisited when the article is completely rewritten to a decent standard, and I will likely have no part of that discussion since the long-term objective is to get it to GA, which is something I don't do. Yngvadottir (talk) 15:01, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Mythology Section
Hello everyone. I see there's a lot of discussion going on here about sourcing and so on. I haven't had a chance to dig into this lately, but my schedule is opening up a bit.

As I see it, this article's main weakness is that it delves too deeply into details and relies far too heavily on authors who make dubious, general statements. The discussion regarding Heimdallr we had earlier is one such example (a runic inscription explicitly mentioning the god was in fact unearthed by archaeologists around the publication of Abram's book, despite his poorly considered claim).

First, let's talk about the "death" section of this article. There's a lot of conflation and confusion in this section about what the Prose Edda says and what it doesn't say. Much of this is unhelpfully referenced to "Snorri", who may and fact have not authored much of the Prose Edda. As the Heimdallr inscription circumstance details, statements like "There is no archaeological evidence clearly alluding to a belief in Valhalla" are totally useless. That applies to nearly everything in the corpus. It tells us nothing.

Next, the comment "The concept of Hel as an afterlife location never appears in pagan-era skaldic poetry, where "Hel" always references to the eponymous goddess" is also useless. For example, the etymology of the name Hel makes such associations inherent, as many scholars have discussed over the past few centuries. This is far too much reliance on Abram.

Then there's a comment on Fólkvangr cited to Abram. What is attributed to Abram here implies that the Prose Edda is the source of this claim, whereas the same stanza in fact appears in Grímnismál (and is even quoted in the Prose Edda). The statement "In mythological accounts, the deity most closely associated with death is Oðinn" is a bizarre statement — many figures, particularly female beings, are closely associated with death in the very same narratives. There’s plenty of specialized discussion about this out there.

These are just a few examples. I think this article needs to be reconsidered in an overview or directory format than its current state. We have detailed, highly developed articles on many of these topics, and there's no way this article can begin to cover the complexities surrounding specific topics such as, say, rebirth in North Germanic religion (which is currently not even mentioned here...). :bloodofox: (talk) 03:13, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I mentioned the rebirth article in a sentence I added regarding personal names. Yes, the sourcing needs to be improved; I've been gradually incorporating more Davidson and more Turville Petre, and adding de Vries (who covers a lot more) and Simek, so that we get away from Abram and Andrén, but as recent scholars they should be used. The sections I haven't yet rewritten, I've barely looked at; your points are valid but I'm not sure we should even have a separate Mythology section here.
 * Drmies raised an issue regarding the use of the word "sources"; he ultimately rewrote a sentence I had written on that. I had intended to deal in the Sources section with the fact that all the written evidence—including the heathen skaldic verse, the most reliably heathen literary evidence—was first written down after the conversion, presumably by Christians, and that we necessarily rely heavily on the Prose Edda, which contains a manual of Norse mythology as well as skaldic quotations, but was of course written by a Christian. Drmies sees the term "sources" as necessarily implying "primary sources", i.e., heathen sources. I don't see it as having that implication; how can we make that clear without saying the same thing in the Sources section and all over again later? Yngvadottir (talk) 03:28, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I've looked over the "Sources" section here and I think I see what you mean. Right now it's a bit of a mess in that, again, the section decides to dive into a handful of opinion-interjected specifics instead of providing a general overview of the literary record and saving the specifics for more focused articles. Currently, our Norse mythology article breaks this down the complex attestation situation both accurately and succinctly. Of course, as you know, solid familiarity with primary, secondary, and tertiary sources on this topic is a necessary requirement for working on this complex topic, something we're going to need to demand from anyone who approaches it. :bloodofox: (talk) 07:09, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Would the "heathen sources" be runestones? (And incidentally is it right to say "heathen" here?  or "pagan"?)— S Marshall  T/C 16:59, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Some runic inscriptions are explicitly heathen, some are explicitly Christian, and some could be read either way. Many are quite secular (or so we’d call them today) — the alphabet was used for all sorts of purposes before it was superceded as a byproduct of Christianization. “Heathen” and “pagan” are both widely acceptable today, though you’re likely to see most anglophone academics employing “pagan” over “heathen”. :bloodofox: (talk) 19:07, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * What they said—plus, it becomes a continuum. Snorri was a Christian: but he undoubtedly knew more Norse myths than any modern, and he quoted reams of skaldic verse; the verses he quotes have a high probability of having been accurately transmitted to him as the heathen poets composed them, but it isn't 100% because it was oral transmission through a change in religion. Some sagas also preserve skaldic verses; they are a little less certain because there is less certainty about the date the saga was committed to writing (or composed), so there's a higher chance of fake verses having been added. The sagas themselves have all been subject to varying opinions as to their authenticity: once upon a time they were taken at face value, some later scholars have regarded them as entirely medieval fictions, between those extremes there are a range of opinions, including many scholars regarding the religious material specifically as likely to be fictional (such as the temple descriptions in a couple of Icelandic sagas). The ancient kings of both Sweden and Norway are represented as fictions by some individual scholars. There's a continuum of reliability to the written sources, but where its more reliable end is and what passage should be placed where on it are more or less vigorously debated. Then the article should mention the widely divergent interpretations of the petroglyphs. Some scholars also attach importance to the Trundholm sun chariot, and some regard the Gundestrup cauldron as Norse; others hardly mention these archeological artefacts. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:27, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Well, if we limit editing of the article to those who know the scholarship inside out, I'm not sure that includes me. There's always going to be some recent hotshot I haven't read, and there are enduring disagreements. I'm mulling over how to reorganize the article, and considering getting the different scholarly views—including the shamanism theory, to which we are currently giving prominence—out of the way at the outset before diving into beliefs, cultic practices, etc. For one thing that would help explain the continuing deep disagreement over temples. On the whole, I agree, not just because it's a huge field, but also because the popular books tend to merge discussion of Scandinavian religion with discussion of continental German and Anglo-Saxon religion (Tacitus keeps coming up, for example, and many of the books we currently cite devote considerable space to the conversion of the English). Even though this is the version of Germanic paganism about which we know most, it takes knowledge to winnow out what's not relevant to this article. And I'd also like to see more attention paid to shifts over time. But I've been trying to honor Midnightblueowl's effort—and reflect the fact that they gravitated toward more recent sources, which we should try to use where we can—by initially at least, keeping as much of their work as possible. So some of what both you and Drmies have objected to is Midnightblueowl's work that I haven't yet even examined closely—notably the lead, which I really think should be rewritten last, after the shape and emphases of the rest of the article are more or less clear—and some is me trying to be respectful. And some is likely me having less than perfect mastery of the scholarship. I feel competent to rewrite the temples/hofs section. And I do see one of the major functions of this article as being to link to our existing articles, quite densely, although I think it should be done in running prose rather than an endless series of "Main article" notes. But please, jump in and rewrite, or re-rewrite (unless I missed a revert, the bits I have rewritten or added should be identifiable by using conventional short refs rather than sfn under the hood), a section, such as Sources. And I hope Drmies and S Marshall—and others who are good at explaining things—will continue to help out too. I would probably have written more clearly if I'd done the rewrite from scratch, but then there also wouldn't have been nearly so many references, and Midnightblueowl has stated that everything must have a reference. As it is, I'm all too aware that I haven't been producing prose with the clarity of a lecture. In addition to the likelihood that other experts will see stuff I've failed to include; heck, I only added in fulltrúi/godfriend the other day. Please further refine it. Yngvadottir (talk) 19:13, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Three further thoughts from me:-
 * 1) I wonder if we're missing an article. Maybe somewhere between Vikings and Old Norse religion we need something like Old Norse society or Old Norse culture that contains less specialist concepts?
 * 2) I'm almost scared to mention this, but did you know someone's written Viking Childhood? I found that by accident while I was looking at the article structure we currently have and comparing it with what we need.
 * 3) Germane to religion, as opposed to mythology, seems to be a brief section on what people mean when they say "religion". Defining "god" is notoriously slippery but as I understand it the Norse "gods" were mortal and doomed to die at Ragnarok; and Baldr had already died. Other religions have figures that die and are reborn, as a metaphor for the seasons, but as a non-expert I'm intrigued by a religion where gods die and don't come back.  I feel like the article is missing all this content on what makes this a religion, rather than a mythology attached to a culture.— S Marshall  T/C 20:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I was hoping someone else would answer this - I don't have a background in comparative religion. But I personally think that would be stepping too far back. And I suspect what one expects of a religion varies depending on one's own history as well as philosophical leanings: Karen Jolly's book on the elves and the transition of religions in Anglo-Saxon England makes useful points about how most people just bumble along fitting things into how they already lived and thought. Those of us who discuss this religion run into assumptions about "earth religions" and about all religions being pacifist that make me tempted to recommend people just read "Hávamál" and then get back to me. Having so much material purporting to be about pre-Christian Norse life and thought is a privilege, but it doesn't include reams of commandments/rules, and of course it has to be treated somewhat sceptically. On the other hand, "mythology" can be seen from different angles. To get cynicism out of the way first, I have said in other contexts that "mythology" is the term reserved for sacred stories of religions that the speaker does not wish to grant full rights as religions. (Lindow puts it more diplomatically. This is the "lie" meaning of myth.) To flip that, myths are by definition the sacred stories of a culture, so by my definition, all mythologies are important to the self-definition of cultures, and that makes them religious within that culture. The most useful category is that of indigenous religions, many of which have seemed similarly hard to define or otherwise surprising to moderns studying them (Sami traditional belief, even more so than Norse, although part of that may be that they kept a lot of their secrets); although we have qualms today about using such a term for colonisers rather than those they invaded and killed, I am unaware of any cases of proselytisation of Norse paganism, so I don't feel too guilty about it. But there have been a startling variety of scholarly conceptions about how the religion worked. So I'm for just presenting it, including a representative selection of those scholarly views, past and present, and letting the reader fit it into their worldview. (Which from my experience, including reading the scholars, they will do anyway.) Yngvadottir (talk) 17:48, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

 * I didn't think the Vikings were pacifist, but I think I will read the Hávamál. Is the Benjamin Thorpe translation reliable?  And for Snorri's Edda, is the Anthony Faulkes translation reliable?— S Marshall  T/C 21:44, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It's a bit old; Bellows and Hollander are old, but less so; of those two, Hollander takes more liberties. I would recommend Dronke as best (however, I'm at work; in case Evans' edition includes a translation, that would also be excellent, but I don't believe it does). For the Prose Edda, Faulkes is adequate and has the advantage of being complete, but except for the poetry and the þulur, it's not a challenging text to translate, and so if you only want to read the prologue and the stories, the two old translations, Brodeur and Young, are fine. Yngvadottir (talk) 13:17, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Cultural Appropriation (Norse Mythology)
I am working on adding a section to the article Cultural Appropriation. I believe there is at least some, if not a lot, of disappointment on the part of Norwegians and other Scandanavians regarding the Thor comics and movies. This is not too well recognized in the Western world or by "modern" culture.

There are feelings that the Norse deities have been presented in a distorted and culturally insensitive way by Western media promoters. The characters of Thor, Loki, Odin, the city of Asgaard, and the litergy of Norse mythology have been made into cartoons and movies.

I am looking for citations in the news from reliable sources. If you have any links or citations you might be able to provide, I will appreciate your help. Please reply to this post below if you can add to this discussion.

Thanks in advance. בס״ד  69.112.128.69 (talk) 17:54, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

 * I am a student studying Germanic religions and I would be very very interested in this. I have noticed that more liberties are taken with Germanic religions than any others on Earth and things are done to them that if they tried :with any other religion would have, well, violent and immediate repercussions. Whether it's the comical depictions of the gods in American Gods, or turning Heimdallr the White God into a black man in the Thor franchise these :liberties if taken for any other peoples culture would have pretty staunch and global repercussions. That said even just in the article I find discriminatory approaches, for example in ALL other religious articles oral tradition :by the adherents is considered a primary source when no written material is available, EXCEPT in this one it goes straight to written source. So we have physical artifacts going back 500 BCE at least, but I suspect because this is :the origin point of Ash and Elm / Aske and Emble and the flood myth (given the origin of the Germanic peoples being closer to the Black Sea which is probably where the flood originated) which would mean it predates the Abrahamic :telling of those stories and may well be the origin point. But to avoid that they suddenly change the rules to written primary sources only, meanwhile it is acceptable to say for Australian indigenous religions that it predates :the literal existence of humans because their oral tradition says so. 121.210.33.50 (talk) 03:18, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

 * Such a segment would be great (especially regarding the weird genderfluid Loki stuff floating around). I would recommend emailing Jackson Crawford on the matter, as he is one of the more unbiased experts on "old norse religion" in our day and age.--Blockhaj (talk) 06:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

 * I think this is not neutral POV - the politics and aesthetics section should be an article by itself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kathybramley (talk • contribs) 00:56, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

Cult-like and no priests??
As a Norse pagan I will say this, the priests are called Gothi’s, and they are spiritual leaders. And after seeing the world cult I know this was 100% made by a Christian. I would like to say, it’s not very cult, more like a standard religion, we never did things like sacrifices despite what media will tell you 2600:1700:ADEA:8800:A491:5030:6291:5786 (talk) 06:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

 * As far as I can see, there are no references to it being "cult-like". In religious studies, "cult" is used in a neutral sense to refer to religious practices often focused on a particular aspect such as a god or fertility. It is equally used about heathens and Christians, with a cult of saints being mentioned. As for priests, the article correctly states the scholarly consensus that there were not typically dedicated priest figures whose only job was religious. Instead elites (including goðar) would act as both religious leaders and rulers. I hope this clears it up. Ingwina (talk) 08:48, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Old Norse religion


text:
Electronic Labyrinth: THX 1138 4EB

Electronic Labyrinth: THX 1138 4EB is a 1967 social science-fiction short film written and directed by George Lucas while he attended the University of Southern California's film school. Lucas reworked the short into the 1971 theatrical feature THX 1138.

In 2010, the film was selected for preservation in the United States National Film Registry by the Library of Congress as being "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant".

Plot
In an underground city in a dystopian future, the protagonist, whose name is "THX 1138 4EB", is shown running through passageways and enclosed spaces. It is soon discovered that THX is escaping his community. The government uses computers and cameras to track down THX and attempt to stop him; however, they fail. He escapes by breaking open a door and runs off into the sunset. The government sends their condolences to YYO 7117, THX's mate, claiming that THX has destroyed himself.

The USC program guide accompanying the film describes it as a "nightmare impression of a world in which a man is trying to escape a computerized world which constantly tracks his movements".

Cast

 * Dan Nachtsheim as THX 1138 4EB
 * Joy Carmichael as 7117
 * David Munson as 2222
 * Marvin Bennett as 0480
 * Ralph Stell as 9021

Production
Lucas had an idea for a long time "based on the concept that we live in the future and that you could make a futuristic film using existing stuff". Fellow USC students Matthew Robbins and Walter Murch had a similar idea which Robbins developed into a short treatment, but Robbins and Murch lost interest in the idea, whereas Lucas was keen to persist. Years later, in "The Making of THX 1138" DVD featurette, Robbins recalls that the "EB" in the title (and the character's serial number name) stands for "Earth born".

One of Lucas' USC instructors suggested an opportunity for Lucas to make the short film that he had in mind: since the 1940s, the USC film school had a working arrangement with the US Navy, whereby Navy filmmakers attended USC for additional study. Teaching the class was not popular amongst USC staff, as the Navy filmmakers often had rigid, preconceived ideas about filmmaking, and sometimes misbehaved in class. However, the Navy paid for unlimited color film and lab processing costs for their students. Lucas offered to teach the class, and was allowed the opportunity.

The Navy men formed the crew of the film, and some appeared in the cast. Because of the Navy connection, Lucas was able to access filming locations which would not otherwise have been available to him: the USC computer center, a parking lot at UCLA, the Los Angeles International Airport, and the Van Nuys Airport. Much of the filming was done at night, with some on weekends.

The film was completed in 12 weeks, with Lucas editing it on the Moviola at the home of Verna Fields, where he was working during the day editing United States Information Agency films under Fields' supervision.

Score
An eclectic soundtrack includes organ music from Bach's Passacaglia in C minor and modified excerpts from Virgil Fox Plays the Wanamaker Grand Court Organ.

Reception
In January 1968, the film won first prize in the category of Dramatic films at the third National Student Film Festival held at the Lincoln Center, New York, where it was seen and admired by Steven Spielberg, who had not previously met Lucas. It also came to notice of parts of the mainstream film industry, such as Los Angeles Times film critic Charles Champlin, and Ned Tanen, then a Universal Studios production executive, who was later involved with Lucas' American Graffiti.

Feature film
In 1971, Lucas re-worked the short as a theatrical feature, THX 1138. The last act of the feature-length THX 1138 roughly corresponds with the events in this film. In the final scene, people are warned not to exit the underground city through the door, which allegedly leads to death. In truth, the exit leads to their freedom. Cosmetically, there are similarities in coloring and appearance, although one noticeable difference is the actors did not have to shave their heads for the short film, unlike the later feature version.

Versions
The film became widely available on the bonus disc of the 2004 George Lucas Director's Cut DVD release of THX 1138, and later on the Blu-ray release. The film also exists as a 16 mm reference print and on videocassette with a run time of 15 minutes.

title: Electronic Labyrinth: THX 1138 4EB


text:
Numerical relativity

Numerical relativity is one of the branches of general relativity that uses numerical methods and algorithms to solve and analyze problems. To this end, supercomputers are often employed to study black holes, gravitational waves, neutron stars and many other phenomena described by Einstein's theory of general relativity. A currently active field of research in numerical relativity is the simulation of relativistic binaries and their associated gravitational waves.

Overview
A primary goal of numerical relativity is to study spacetimes whose exact form is not known. The spacetimes so found computationally can either be fully dynamical, stationary or static and may contain matter fields or vacuum. In the case of stationary and static solutions, numerical methods may also be used to study the stability of the equilibrium spacetimes. In the case of dynamical spacetimes, the problem may be divided into the initial value problem and the evolution, each requiring different methods.

Numerical relativity is applied to many areas, such as cosmological models, critical phenomena, perturbed black holes and neutron stars, and the coalescence of black holes and neutron stars, for example. In any of these cases, Einstein's equations can be formulated in several ways that allow us to evolve the dynamics. While Cauchy methods have received a majority of the attention, characteristic and Regge calculus based methods have also been used. All of these methods begin with a snapshot of the gravitational fields on some hypersurface, the initial data, and evolve these data to neighboring hypersurfaces.

Like all problems in numerical analysis, careful attention is paid to the stability and convergence of the numerical solutions. In this line, much attention is paid to the gauge conditions, coordinates, and various formulations of the Einstein equations and the effect they have on the ability to produce accurate numerical solutions.

Numerical relativity research is distinct from work on classical field theories as many techniques implemented in these areas are inapplicable in relativity. Many facets are however shared with large scale problems in other computational sciences like computational fluid dynamics, electromagnetics, and solid mechanics. Numerical relativists often work with applied mathematicians and draw insight from numerical analysis, scientific computation, partial differential equations, and geometry among other mathematical areas of specialization.

Foundations in theory
Albert Einstein published his theory of general relativity in 1915. It, like his earlier theory of special relativity, described space and time as a unified spacetime subject to what are now known as the Einstein field equations. These form a set of coupled nonlinear partial differential equations (PDEs). After more than 100 years since the first publication of the theory, relatively few closed-form solutions are known for the field equations, and, of those, most are cosmological solutions that assume special symmetry to reduce the complexity of the equations.

The field of numerical relativity emerged from the desire to construct and study more general solutions to the field equations by approximately solving the Einstein equations numerically. A necessary precursor to such attempts was a decomposition of spacetime back into separated space and time. This was first published by Richard Arnowitt, Stanley Deser, and Charles W. Misner in the late 1950s in what has become known as the ADM formalism. Although for technical reasons the precise equations formulated in the original ADM paper are rarely used in numerical simulations, most practical approaches to numerical relativity use a "3+1 decomposition" of spacetime into three-dimensional space and one-dimensional time that is closely related to the ADM formulation, because the ADM procedure reformulates the Einstein field equations into a constrained initial value problem that can be addressed using computational methodologies.

At the time that ADM published their original paper, computer technology would not have supported numerical solution to their equations on any problem of any substantial size. The first documented attempt to solve the Einstein field equations numerically appears to be Hahn and Lindquist in 1964, followed soon thereafter by Smarr and by Eppley. These early attempts were focused on evolving Misner data in axisymmetry (also known as "2+1 dimensions"). At around the same time Tsvi Piran wrote the first code that evolved a system with gravitational radiation using a cylindrical symmetry. In this calculation Piran has set the foundation for many of the concepts used today in evolving ADM equations, like "free evolution" versus "constrained evolution", which deal with the fundamental problem of treating the constraint equations that arise in the ADM formalism. Applying symmetry reduced the computational and memory requirements associated with the problem, allowing the researchers to obtain results on the supercomputers available at the time.

Early results
The first realistic calculations of rotating collapse were carried out in the early eighties by Richard Stark and Tsvi Piran in which the gravitational wave forms resulting from formation of a rotating black hole were calculated for the first time. For nearly 20 years following the initial results, there were fairly few other published results in numerical relativity, probably due to the lack of sufficiently powerful computers to address the problem. In the late 1990s, the Binary Black Hole Grand Challenge Alliance successfully simulated a head-on binary black hole collision. As a post-processing step the group computed the event horizon for the spacetime. This result still required imposing and exploiting axisymmetry in the calculations.

Some of the first documented attempts to solve the Einstein equations in three dimensions were focused on a single Schwarzschild black hole, which is described by a static and spherically symmetric solution to the Einstein field equations. This provides an excellent test case in numerical relativity because it does have a closed-form solution so that numerical results can be compared to an exact solution, because it is static, and because it contains one of the most numerically challenging features of relativity theory, a physical singularity. One of the earliest groups to attempt to simulate this solution was Anninos et al. in 1995. In their paper they point out that
 * "Progress in three dimensional numerical relativity has been impeded in part by lack of computers with sufficient memory and computational power to perform well resolved calculations of 3D spacetimes."

Maturation of the field
In the years that followed, not only did computers become more powerful, but also various research groups developed alternate techniques to improve the efficiency of the calculations. With respect to black hole simulations specifically, two techniques were devised to avoid problems associated with the existence of physical singularities in the solutions to the equations: (1) Excision, and (2) the "puncture" method. In addition the Lazarus group developed techniques for using early results from a short-lived simulation solving the nonlinear ADM equations, in order to provide initial data for a more stable code based on linearized equations derived from perturbation theory. More generally, adaptive mesh refinement techniques, already used in computational fluid dynamics were introduced to the field of numerical relativity.

Excision
In the excision technique, which was first proposed in the late 1990s, a portion of a spacetime inside of the event horizon surrounding the singularity of a black hole is simply not evolved. In theory this should not affect the solution to the equations outside of the event horizon because of the principle of causality and properties of the event horizon (i.e. nothing physical inside the black hole can influence any of the physics outside the horizon). Thus if one simply does not solve the equations inside the horizon one should still be able to obtain valid solutions outside. One "excises" the interior by imposing ingoing boundary conditions on a boundary surrounding the singularity but inside the horizon. While the implementation of excision has been very successful, the technique has two minor problems. The first is that one has to be careful about the coordinate conditions. While physical effects cannot propagate from inside to outside, coordinate effects could. For example, if the coordinate conditions were elliptical, coordinate changes inside could instantly propagate out through the horizon. This then means that one needs hyperbolic type coordinate conditions with characteristic velocities less than that of light for the propagation of coordinate effects (e.g., using harmonic coordinates coordinate conditions). The second problem is that as the black holes move, one must continually adjust the location of the excision region to move with the black hole.

The excision technique was developed over several years including the development of new gauge conditions that increased stability and work that demonstrated the ability of the excision regions to move through the computational grid. The first stable, long-term evolution of the orbit and merger of two black holes using this technique was published in 2005.

Punctures
In the puncture method the solution is factored into an analytical part, which contains the singularity of the black hole, and a numerically constructed part, which is then singularity free. This is a generalization of the Brill-Lindquist prescription for initial data of black holes at rest and can be generalized to the Bowen-York prescription for spinning and moving black hole initial data. Until 2005, all published usage of the puncture method required that the coordinate position of all punctures remain fixed during the course of the simulation. Of course black holes in proximity to each other will tend to move under the force of gravity, so the fact that the coordinate position of the puncture remained fixed meant that the coordinate systems themselves became "stretched" or "twisted," and this typically led to numerical instabilities at some stage of the simulation.

2005's Breakthrough (annus mirabilis of numerical relativity)
In 2005, a group of researchers demonstrated for the first time the ability to allow punctures to move through the coordinate system, thus eliminating some of the earlier problems with the method. This allowed accurate long-term evolutions of black holes. By choosing appropriate coordinate conditions and making crude analytic assumption about the fields near the singularity (since no physical effects can propagate out of the black hole, the crudeness of the approximations does not matter), numerical solutions could be obtained to  the problem of two black holes orbiting each other, as well as accurate computation of gravitational radiation (ripples in spacetime) emitted by them. 2005 was renamed the "annus mirabilis" of numerical relativity, 100 years after the annus mirabilis of special relativity (1905).

Lazarus project
The Lazarus project (1998–2005) was developed as a post-Grand Challenge technique to extract astrophysical results from short lived full numerical simulations of binary black holes. It combined approximation techniques before (post-Newtonian trajectories) and after (perturbations of single black holes) with full numerical simulations attempting to solve General Relativity field equations. All previous attempts to numerically integrate in supercomputers the Hilbert-Einstein equations describing the gravitational field around binary black holes led to software failure before a single orbit was completed.

The Lazarus approach, in the meantime, gave the best insight into the binary black hole problem and produced numerous and relatively accurate results, such as the radiated energy and angular momentum emitted in the latest merging state, the linear momentum radiated by unequal mass holes, and the final mass and spin of the remnant black hole. The method also computed detailed gravitational waves emitted by the merger process and predicted that the collision of black holes is the most energetic single event in the Universe, releasing more energy in a fraction of a second in the form of gravitational radiation than an entire galaxy in its lifetime.

Adaptive mesh refinement
Adaptive mesh refinement (AMR) as a numerical method has roots that go well beyond its first application in the field of numerical relativity. Mesh refinement first appears in the numerical relativity literature in the 1980s, through the work of Choptuik in his studies of critical collapse of scalar fields. The original work was in one dimension, but it was subsequently extended to two dimensions. In two dimensions, AMR has also been applied to the study of inhomogeneous cosmologies, and to the study of Schwarzschild black holes. The technique has now become a standard tool in numerical relativity and has been used to study the merger of black holes and other compact objects in addition to the propagation of gravitational radiation generated by such astronomical events.

Recent developments
In the past few years, hundreds of research papers have been published leading to a wide spectrum of mathematical relativity, gravitational wave, and astrophysical results for the orbiting black hole problem. This technique extended to astrophysical binary systems involving neutron stars and black holes, and multiple black holes. One of the most surprising predictions is that the merger of two black holes can give the remnant hole a speed of up to 4000 km/s that can allow it to escape from any known galaxy. The simulations also predict an enormous release of gravitational energy in this merger process, amounting up to 8% of its total rest mass.

title: Numerical relativity


text:
Asilomar

Asilomar can refer to a number of things:

 * Asilomar State Beach, a state park unit on the Monterey Peninsula in California
 * Asilomar Conference Grounds, a conference center at "Asilomar State Beach and Conference Grounds"
 * Asilomar Conference on Recombinant DNA, an influential conference on the regulation of biotechnology held at the Asilomar Conference Grounds in 1975
 * Asilomar Microcomputer Workshop, formerly named IEEE Workshop on Microprocessors
 * Asilomar International Conference on Climate Intervention Technologies, a conference on the regulation of climate engineering held at the Asilomar Conference Grounds in March 2010
 * Asilomar Conference on Beneficial AI, held at the Asilomar Conference Grounds in January 2017

title: Asilomar


text:
Surgery (politics)

A political surgery, constituency surgery, constituency clinic, mobile office or sometimes advice surgery, in British and Irish politics, is a series of one-to-one meetings that a Member of Parliament (MP), Teachta Dála (TD) or other political officeholder may have with their constituents. At a surgery, constituents may raise issues of concern or request assistance in regard to local or national government matters. Often the constituent's issue will be followed up by a caseworker or assistant. Surgery meetings are usually confidential in contrast to town hall meetings, which are open to many people at the same time.

One meaning of the word "surgery" in British English is "the time during which a doctor, dentist or vet is available to see patients". The use in politics reflects this meaning.

It is up to each MP to decide whether they have any surgeries at all and if so, how many and in what locations. MPs often use local party offices, church halls or rooms in public houses as the venues, with a number of surgeries possibly being held at different locations around a constituency. Surgeries are traditionally held on Fridays or at weekends when MPs have returned from sittings of parliament in Westminster. Some MPs' surgeries are "appointment only", some "drop-in", and others a mix. An MP with a large constituency will sometimes hold surgeries in a wide range of locations during the summer recess.

As an opportunity for the public to meet directly with politicians, surgeries have been noted as a significant security risk. Three MPs have been murdered at surgeries – Robert Bradford in 1981, Jo Cox in 2016, and David Amess in 2021 – and Stephen Timms and Nigel Jones survived attacks (Jones's assistant Andrew Pennington died). Security for MPs during surgeries and in constituency offices was increased after the killing of Cox.

In the Republic of Ireland, clinics/surgeries are an even more important source of publicity and contact for Teachtaí Dála (TDs) and other representatives, as under the PR-STV system there are very few truly safe seats. One paper published by Queen's University Belfast's Institute of Irish Studies states "Clinics, for instance, appear to epitomize personalistic politicsindividuals are asking politicians for personal assistance, and, as they receive it, they become clients of the politician and vote accordingly. The evidence is otherwise. Voters make the rounds of all the politicians, trying to play one off against the other. Even if they are helped, there is no certainty that they will vote for the politician at the next election. Politicians are all well aware that clinics are a very mixed blessing indeed; the major reason given for holding clinics is their publicity value. It is important that voters in an area feel they are getting some attention from the politician; without it, they might decide to transfer their votes to a politician who demonstrates greater concern for the area. Thus, the clinics are part of the general strategy of maximizing a reputation in the local community, rather than a means of obtaining the support of specific individuals."

The term mobile office has been used in Australian politics and in American politics.

title: Surgery (politics)


text:
List of Manchester United F.C. players

Manchester United Football Club is an English professional association football club based in Old Trafford, Greater Manchester. The club was formed in Newton Heath in 1878 as Newton Heath LYR F.C., and played their first competitive match in October 1886, when they entered the First Round of the 1886–87 FA Cup. The club was renamed Manchester United F.C. in 1902, and they moved to Old Trafford in 1910. The club won its first significant trophy in 1908 – the First Division title. Since then, the club has won a further 19 league titles, along with 12 FA Cups and five League Cups, among many other honours. They have also been crowned champions of Europe on three occasions by winning the European Cup. The club was one of 22 teams in the Premier League when it was formed in 1992. They experienced the most successful period in their history under the management of Alex Ferguson, who guided the team to 13 league titles in 21 years.

Since playing their first competitive match, 965 players have made a competitive first-team appearance for the club, of whom 223 players have made at least 100 appearances (including substitute appearances). Manchester United's record appearance-maker is Ryan Giggs, who made a total of 963 appearances over a 23-year playing career; he broke Bobby Charlton's previous appearance record in the 2008 UEFA Champions League final. Giggs also holds the record for the most starts (802 matches), and for the most matches played as a substitute (161).

Charlton was also the club's top goalscorer with 249 goals in his 17 years with the club. He held the mark for 45 years, until his record was overtaken by Wayne Rooney, who scored his 250th goal during the 2016–17 season; Rooney finished his 13-year tenure with Manchester United with 253 goals in 559 appearances. Other than Charlton, Giggs and Rooney, only eight players have made more than 500 appearances for the club, including three members of the 1968 European Cup–winning team (Tony Dunne, Alex Stepney and Bill Foulkes as well as Charlton) and three members of the 1999 Treble-winning team (Denis Irwin, Gary Neville and Paul Scholes as well as Giggs); the two other players to reach 500 appearances are Joe Spence, who played for the club during the interwar period, and David de Gea, who played for the club from 2011 to 2023. De Gea, who is Spanish, is the first 500 Club member from outside of the United Kingdom and Ireland. Other than Charlton and Rooney, only two players (Denis Law and Jack Rowley) have scored more than 200 goals for the club.

The most recent player to reach 100 appearances for the club is Diogo Dalot, who reached the milestone on 16 April 2023.

List of players

 * Appearances and goals are for first-team competitive matches only, including Premier League, Football League, FA Cup, League Cup, Charity/Community Shield, European Cup/Champions League, UEFA Cup/Europa League, Cup Winners' Cup, Inter-Cities Fairs Cup, Super Cup and Club World Cup matches; wartime matches are regarded as unofficial and are excluded, as are matches from the abandoned 1939–40 season.
 * Players are listed according to the date of their first-team debut for the club.

Statistics correct as of match played 25 May 2024

 * Table headers
 * Nationality – If a player played international football, the country/countries he played for are shown. Otherwise, the player's nationality is given as their country of birth.
 * Manchester United career – The year of the player's first appearance for Manchester United to the year of his last appearance.
 * Starts – The number of matches started.
 * Sub – The number of matches played as a substitute.
 * Total – The total number of matches played, both as a starter and as a substitute.

title: List of Manchester United F.C. players


text:
Talk:Eric Gorden Corley

Untitled
This article is extremely biased. The reader base of 2600 is at the fringe of the hacker community and may not actually be considered "hackers". They are mostly comprised of preteens and teenagers whose skills are solely getting around parental control filters so they can look at porn.

Eric Corley does not even belong as an article in ANY encyclopedia, but if he's going to be found here, at least the article could be more unbiased.

--

I disagree partly.

The question of whether or not 2600 is widely read is disputable. Your statement that it is mostly comprised of preteens/teens looking to get around parental filters is, itself, indicative that you haven't looked at the magazine to see that this might or might not be true. Had you looked, you would not have made such a statement.

The question of whether or not Corley belongs in an encyclopedia is where you and I disagree most strongly, though. Corley is a radio personality. If we exclude the shortwave outlet (WBCQ) and the college station (WUSB) from where he is carried, it leaves, at the very least, WBAI, which is a respected public media outlet with a very sizeable audience. That he gets phone calls says he has listeners.

That he also acted as an advisor to the producers of a major motion picture (Hackers), further bolsters that this entry should be here.

That he also is a poignant social critic further bolsters that this entry should be here.

That you disagree with him or what you think he represents means squat.

I have touched up the text a bit to remove some bias that I perceived, and correct one factual matter. I have also removed the bias flag. Feel free to put it back if you don't think this is good enough.

I'll one-up and say I entirely disagree with the person(s) who says Eric Corley isn't notable and I question their scope of knowledge about the history of computer hackers. While 2600 magazine's popularity has waned in the past decade or so, Emmanuel (Eric Corley) continues to be one of the most recognizable figureheads of the hacking community.

He may not be "the leader" of the hacker community, but I certainly recognize him as one of the "fathers" of hacking. He was absolutely instrumental (via 2600 magazine) in growing the hacker community (keyword here: community).

Aside from 2600 magazine, he's also considerably known (at least amongst the hacker community) for his radio shows and the infamous lawsuit related to the DVD/CCA/DeCSS case. He and his magazine also inspired the worldwide "2600 hacker meets" which occur in numerous major cities around the world.

Jgw 16:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Dear Posterity ...
Corley is sufficiently notable for inclusion in the Wikipedia even if considered only on his merits as a radio personality; Wikipedia contains content relating to other individuals based only on their broadcast media presence.

The readership demographic of 2600 is not relevant to the importance of this entry. We are not in the business of judging readership demographics. It is enough that the demographic is significant, ongoing, and has been involved in several important aspects of Internet history.

If there is controversy regarding Corley, it is entirely appropriate to note it in Talk:Eric_Corley, as has been rightly done. If this controversy survives review, the aspects of it which are deemed to be NPOV should be included in the article. However, personal dislike for the subject of an article does not negate the relevance or appropriateness of the article itself.

Corley has been repeatedly included in CNN content related to hacking, including a line-item mention on CNN's 40-year history of hacking. A Google search for +"Emmanuel Goldstein" +2600 -- the most restrictive set of search terms plausible -- returns over 10,000 hits. I feel this effectively addresses any concerns raised as to the legitimacy of Corley's inclusion in the Wikipedia.

I do encourage anyone with feelings RE: the POV-ness of any of the aspects of this article to submit appropriate, objective corrections.

In the interests of full disclosure, I'm not exactly an objective, disinterested party when it comes to 2600 Magazine. But I _have_ made every effort to make my contentions objective, and to back up my basic points with appropriate, third-party sourcing.

I encourage anyone with feelings on this topic to feel free to email me from my user page.

Adrian 22:27, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Eric Corley is certainly a notable individual, having helmed 2600 Magazine for so long. While I will agree with the general view that he is no ESR, he has been a high-profile voice for his own causes (which of course range from general "hacker ethic" promotion to overtly leftist anti-corporate causes). The audience of 2600 magazine may be verified by the yearly circulation report that Corley files, but some extrapolation may be done with the list of 2600 meetings on the back page of the magazine. Given the number of meetings that are listed as active (and some DO get removed periodically for inactivity), his audience (which would arguably know him, since the bulk of the magazine is simply composed of Letters to the Editor and the Editor's (Corley's) responses) is both widely dispersed around the globe and considerably large.

 * Please see http://www.2600.com/meetings/mtg.html for this (meeting) data.
 * DickClarkMises 21:34, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Removing npov header
Since the person who put it there has not participated in useful and constructive discussion, I now remove the npov notice. — David Remahl 14:09, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Controversial ruling?
In the main article, the following is mentioned: "In his controversial ruling against Corley". However, there is nothing about the nature of this ruling. Did Corley walk or was he sentenced, and if so, to what? Isn't that a piece of information that should be included?

-Un-informed conformity---

I'm personally a fan of WUSB, and the Emmanuel Goldstein/Eric Corely shows. I've never personally met him face to face however, so I cannot vouge on his personality away from broadcasting. I can partially validate the original accusation though. I've been seriously flamed for no apperant reason on the 2600 IRC channel for simply trying to hold a clean conversation while Emmanuel was connected, he dosen't type into the room but his followers seem to fancy blasting racial slurs out and riding anyone who joins and dosen't sit quiet.

I also would like to bring to light a act that happened on I believe 'Off the Hook' maybe the second or third week after hurricane katrina whent down. A african american gentleman called in and talked about the governments failure to help in time of need; normally the guys at the show would be agreeing, but this time it was oddly different. After about 2 minutes the economical state of the hurricane katrina victoms came to, and instead of stateing facts and getting to the root of the problem corely and his convicted hacker friends whent on to make passivly humiliating comments about them as if they where stupid cause they couldn't afford to leave there homes. At that time the black gentlemen was quick to state the fact that corely and the other all come from welthy familys(and they do,) at which time the host, Eric Corely, disconnected the caller.

The WBAI station is a "Free Speech" radio station mind you. You can listen to that same broadcast on there site because they have archives of all there shows time stamped and all. I'd also like to mention that your average "Hacker" comes from a high income family with cut throat buisness ethics and a long history of manipulation of honest working class people, so don't glamourise them as if they where Peter Pan and the lost boys protecting us from Captain Hook(Federal Intelligence agencys in this case,) they are basiclly wolves in sheeps clothing and very manipulative of honest people.

---

Perhaps you should either explain his political views or remove him from "anarchist" category? Advocacy of "freedom" whatever it means does not yet qualify to being "an anarchist".

Things that should be addressed in this article
I've tried to get these answers myself many times before, by writing to and calling up OTH, OTW, Brain Damage, and 2600, but in all these years I've never received a straight answer. If anyone can achieve this seemingly insurmountable feat, that would be wonderful. metaspheres 13:31, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) Origins of 2600: How and why (and when) did Corley become interested in phreaking and hacking? Corley admits to not being technically inclined. Has Corley ever been involved in any type of actual phreaking and hacking activity?
 * 2) Was 2600 originally intended to solely be a phreaking zine or has there been a focus on both subjects from the very beginning?
 * 3) What computer and operating systems has Corley used most often in his lifetime and what does he currently use (computer + OS)?
 * 4) How does Corley fund all his travels (including his vast global trip for Speaker's World?)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 14:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Eric Gorden Corley


text:
16 Horsepower

16 Horsepower was an American country rock band based in Denver, Colorado, United States. Their music often invoked religious imagery dealing with conflict, redemption, punishment, and guilt through David Eugene Edwards's lyrics and the heavy use of traditional bluegrass, gospel, and Appalachian instrumentation cross-bred with rock. For the bulk of its career, the band consisted of Edwards, Jean-Yves Tola, and Pascal Humbert, the latter two formerly of the French band Passion Fodder. After releasing four studio albums and touring extensively, the group broke up in 2005, citing "mostly political and spiritual" differences. The members remain active in the groups Wovenhand and Lilium.

Band history

David Eugene Edwards and Pascal Humbert formed 16 Horsepower in 1992 in Los Angeles, California, where they had met building movie sets for Roger Corman's Hollywood Studios. Friend, co-worker and trained jazz drummer Jean-Yves Tola joined shortly after. The trio performed once as Horsepower before they parted ways with Humbert as Edwards and Tola relocated to Denver, Colorado.

In Edwards's hometown of Denver, the band again became a trio with the addition of Keven Soll, a luthier and accomplished double bass player. Frustrated by misconceptions about the name Horsepower being related to heroin and inspired by a traditional American folk song about sixteen horses pulling the coffin of a beloved to the graveyard, they changed the name to 16 Horsepower. The band spent the following years rehearsing and gaining a reputation for their intense live performances while touring extensively across North America and eventually they released a seven-inch single, "Shametown", in 1994 on Ricochet Records. By this time they had gained the attention of A&M Records, and recording of Sackcloth 'n' Ashes began in 1995. For various reasons A&M postponed the release of the album, so the band returned to the studio and recorded their eponymous debut EP, which was released the same year.

The debut full-length studio album, Sackcloth 'n' Ashes, was eventually released in 1996, garnering praise from the international music press. Pascal Humbert had relocated to Denver and joined the band as a second guitarist, although his primary instrument is the bass. Following differences about the musical direction, Soll was asked to leave and was replaced by Rob Redick, later known as the bassist for Candlebox. Redick did not last long because of what the band has referred to as "kind of a mutual unhappiness", and Humbert took over the bass duties. Jeffrey-Paul Norlander joined on second guitar shortly before recording began on the second album, Low Estate, with John Parish as producer. Edwards and Norlander had previously been in several bands together, most notably The Denver Gentlemen.

Norlander departed in 1998 and was replaced by Steve Taylor, the band's guitar technician, who had already been performing on a handful of songs on the bands European tour in 1996.

Spending two years touring and writing new material, 16 Horsepower's third full-length album, Secret South, was not recorded and released until 2000. The album marked a distinct change in sound and tone from earlier releases as the up-tempo rock influences had all but vanished completely and left room for a more melodic folk-inspired sound. The band toured in Europe in 2000 with the new album, and rumours of a break-up circulated shortly after. This rumour was further fueled by the fact that the band members had begun to focus on solo and side projects. Humbert had released his solo-debut with his project Lilium the previous year and Edwards had begun recording and performing live with his new project Woven Hand.

16 Horsepower, short of Steve Taylor, returned in 2002 with Folklore. As hinted by the title, this fourth studio album took the band further into traditional folk territory and featured only four original 16 Horsepower compositions. While the band went on several tours in support of the album, their creative output was focused on Woven Hand and Lilium, Tola having also joined the latter. Olden, a compilation of previously unreleased versions of early material, was released in 2003. This release was supported by a tour in early 2004, including their first US dates in three years, featuring a set split between early material and Folklore-era songs. In April 2005 the band announced their official break-up, as a result of personal, political and spiritual differences as well as finding the constant touring incompatible with their daily lives.

Alternative Tentacles, a San Francisco-based record label run by former Dead Kennedys frontman Jello Biafra, absorbed American distribution of the band's latter records shortly before their breakup. Since the band's demise, the label has released two DVD retrospectives, and in 2008 released two-CD set Live March 2001. Humbert joined Woven Hand in 2007.

Musical style
It has always been difficult to describe the band's music in simple terms as it borrowed just as heavily from folk music, country, bluegrass, and traditional as it did from rock music. Described as "progressive country-tinged" and "hypnotic, rustic country-rock", their music has been categorized as alternative country and gothic country-rock. They were representatives of the "Denver sound".

Edwards' grandfather was a Nazarene preacher and young Edwards often went along as his elder preached the gospel to various peoples. This experience colored his approach to songwriting as well as the instrumentation employed to develop the band's unique sound. On several tracks over the course of the band's career, Edwards evoked decisive Christian imagery, particularly that of the redemptive capacity of Jesus Christ.

16 Horsepower, especially in their early days, saw themselves first and foremost as a rock band. David Eugene Edwards, however, had an interest in all things from past times, including musical instruments. One instrument that was paramount during the nascent days of 16 Horsepower was the Chemnitzer concertina. It was erroneously credited as a bandoneon (a closely related instrument) on Sackcloth 'n' Ashes. The antique instrument used on the early tours and recordings was falling apart and quite cumbersome to tour with; some time before the sessions for Low Estate, it was replaced with the more modern American-made Patek brand instrument.

Acknowledged influences on the band included Joy Division, the Gun Club, Nick Cave and the Birthday Party. 16 Horsepower would eventually share the same management as Nick Cave and the Bad Seeds and tour with them. They also collaborated with Bertrand Cantat from French band Noir Désir on a cover of The Gun Club's "Fire Spirit" for the 1998 EP The Partisan and on "The Partisan" itself.

Legacy
16 Horsepower are among the Denver-based bands credited for laying the foundation for what today has become known as "Gothic Americana". American metal band DevilDriver paid homage to 16 Horsepower with a cover of "Black Soul Choir" on their 2011 release, Beast.

A post-rock interpretation of "Black Soul Choir" sung by Brandy Bones became a live staple of Canadian band Big John Bates during their 2012 Battered Bones tour, and a studio version was included on their 2015 album From the Bestiary to the Leathering Room.

Their 2000 cover of "Wayfaring Stranger" was featured at the end of Bart Layton's 2012 documentary The Imposter, as well as in the opening scene of the 2021 film Titane.

Band members

 * Former members
 * David Eugene Edwards – vocals, guitar, banjo, Chemnitzer concertina, hurdy-gurdy, lap steel, bandoneon, piano (1992–2005)
 * Jean-Yves Tola – drums, percussion, piano, vocals (1992–2005)
 * Pascal Humbert – bass, upright bass, guitar, vocals (1992, 1996–2005)
 * Keven Soll – upright bass, flat top bass, cello, vocals (1993–1996)
 * Rob Redick – bass (1996–1997)
 * Jeffrey-Paul Norlander – fiddle, guitar, cello, organ, vocals (1997–1998)
 * Steve Taylor – guitar, keyboards, vocals (1998–2001)

 * Live guests
 * Bob Ferbrache – lap steel guitar (1996)
 * Elin Palmer – violin (2001)
 * Daniel McMahon – organ (2002)
 * John Rumly – guitar, bass, banjo (2002)

Albums

 * 16 Horsepower EP (CD - 1995)
 * Sackcloth 'n' Ashes (CD - 1996)
 * Low Estate (CD - 1997)
 * Secret South (CD/vinyl - 2000)
 * Hoarse (CD - 2000)
 * Folklore (CD/vinyl - 2002)
 * Olden (CD/vinyl - 2003)
 * Live March 2001 (CD - 2008)
 * Yours Truly (compilation 2CD/vinyl - 2011)

Compilation albums

 * Radio Asylum Vol. 1

Singles

 * "Shametown" (vinyl 7" - 1994)
 * "Black Soul Choir" (CD - 1996)
 * "Haw" (vinyl - 1996)
 * "For Heaven's Sake" (CD - 1997)
 * "Coal Black Horses" (CD - 1997)
 * "The Partisan" (CD - 1998)
 * "Clogger" (CD - 2000)
 * "Splinters" (CD - 2001)

Video

 * "Black Soul Choir" and "Haw" (1995)
 * 16HP DVD (2005)
 * Live DVD (2006)

title: 16 Horsepower


text:
User talk:Jeremybornstein

Deletion discussion about List of people who have petitioned for the right to be forgotten
Hello, Jeremybornstein,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether List of people who have petitioned for the right to be forgotten should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/List of people who have petitioned for the right to be forgotten.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Wittylama 10:45, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know! Jeremybornstein (talk) 21:58, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Alternate account
Hello, Jeremy,

If User:JeremyBornstein is an alternate account of yours, you must disclose this on your User page or you could be seen as engaging in sockpuppetry. Please be transparent about any alternate accounts you might use. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 02:21, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

Yep, that's me. It was ages ago, but I think I created the second one when I had forgotten about the first; no deception intended. JeremyBornstein (talk) 02:25, 6 September 2021 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jeremybornstein