text:
Talk:PGA Tour

Capitalization
Why has "capitalization of name of tour as branding been dismissed"? This is what they call it, even if our unsigned-in editor doesn't like it! I hate "Monster Park" for Candlestick Park, but I don't control the naming rights. Does anyone else favor reversion, or is it just me? Rlquall 02:46, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I didn't think that the person who wrote that was dismissing that they do, in fact, put it in all caps, but they suppressed the statement that it is done for "branding" reasons. I, for one, know that they want it written in all caps, but I don't know that it is done for branding reasons. I really have no idea why they do it. Whoever made that comment has not changed me from rewriting it PGA TOUR wherever I happen to see it. My question is: should references to "the tour" that do not rise to the level of the full name PGA TOUR, use TOUR, or Tour, or tour? My vote is simply for "tour," referring to the general, improper noun of a circuit of competition. If you use "Tour," you're saying it's a proper noun, but the proper noun is all caps, and not only would that look awkward to say that they did such-and-such on "the TOUR," I think it's unnecessary. If you were talking about NFL policies, you probably wouldn't say "League policy says xyz," but simply "league policy says xyz," "league" referring to the improper noun that is the general concept of a league instead of this specific league. --AppleFan84

So shouldn't the page be moved to PGA TOUR? zellin 22:38, Jun 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd much prefer if it wasn't. I can only assume it is a silly attempt to make the name catch the reader's eye in a paragraph of print, and most media outlets ignore it just as it deserves to be ignored. Osomec 29 June 2005 15:50 (UTC)
 * My preferences run along the same lines as Zellin, since it is not for us to judge the propriety of what various organizations choose to do with their names. Osomec and I discussed this and I was left with the impression he would write "Tour" when he wrote it originally but would not go out of his way to change it in places where it is already capitalized. I see he has since deviated from that. I am hesitant to start a revert war although I don't see why he deserves ipso facto deference on this matter. AppleFan84

Regarding the first major; "The Masters" is not the "official" name of the event. Personal correspondence with Ivan Maisel indicated that he was told to use "Masters Tournament" as the name of the event.

The page should be moved to PGA TOUR, that's the way they always write it (even if it's just "The TOUR"). It may be for "branding", or it may be just to distinguish between just any old Tour put on by the Professional Golfers Association and the PGA TOUR, but I don't see why it shouldn't be moved.--Cuchullain 21:47, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
 * "PGA Tour" is normal English usage, and Wikipedia follows normal English usage.

ReeseM 02:36, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Most people still think of Myanmar as Burma and call it that, so "Burma" is arguably the normal English usage. The Wikipedia article is "Myanmar" because that is the official name of the country, so that rule is not necesarily always followed.  Rlquall 01:50, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Entry fees
Do PGA Tour events require entry fees from the contestants? If so, are the fees uniform, or set at the discretion of the sponsor, or some other way?

Filled in the blanks!
I've successfully created full pages or stubs (along with winners lists) for tournaments that didn't have one. Now what do I do? :P Dakpowers | Talk 19:47, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Purses
Does anyone think the purses at PGA TOUR events would be useful? My only problem with this is that the PGA TOUR's website isn't accurate when it comes to the purses. For example, it lists the British Open purse in terms of dollars (it's in pounds, you couldn't put a dollar figure until you know the conversion rate on the day the winner wins); it says the U.S. Open purse was $6.25 million when it was really $6.8 million; says the B.C. Open purse is $3 million when it is really $3.5 million; and so on. Would someone be willing to chase down the right information and put it on there? I don't know where to look for all of it and it is frustrating the "official" source isn't accurate.

I would check out http://www.thegolfchannel.com.
 * They appear to have copied it right from the PGA TOUR's published schedule; those numbers were available in January and since then some have changed. The B.C. Open was supposed to be $3.5 million, that appears to have changed with all the flooding and the change in venue. However, the U.S. Open's website explicitly says the purse is $6.8 million; both the PGA TOUR and Golf Channel sites say $6.25 million. Additionally, both of them are evidently using an exchange rate for the British pound sterling from some other time, because the £4 million purse comes to $7,434,400 as of COB Friday, not the $6.75 million the PGA TOUR says.
 * We now have details of the ranking points at each tournament, which is a more reliable indicator of the strength of field. Mowsbury 18:28, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Schedule
Is it proper to speak of the Southern Swing anymore? I remember it once being another of the series (like the Fall Finish/West Coast Swing) but it no longer appears on the schedule. Since there are regularly scheduled events that take place in the American south after those events we're designating the "Southern Swing" (through the FedEx St. Jude Classic), it seems like we could only limit it to the events we're limiting it to if it was an organized points competition, like the FF/WCS, and since it isn't, it's my feeling we should drop the reference since the attached text does a fine job of explaining the tour's geographic procession.

Why are the tournament dates listed by the final day of the four days that make up the event, which is always a Sunday? Surely they should list the start date i.e. the Thursday. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Miriom (talk • contribs) 14:32, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

 * Tournaments usually end on Sunday, but not all do, i.e. Deutsche Bank Championship is scheduled to end on a Monday. Some tournaments are rain delayed until Monday or even Tuesday. U.S. Open's 18-hole playoffs are on Monday. Final date makes more sense because that is when the player won the tournament - not the first day. Putting in the range of dates makes the table unnecessarily wider, especially when it splits months.Tewapack (talk) 15:37, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

The "Schedule" section of this article needs to be saved somewhere for use as an historical resource. I don't know of another place on the web that so conveniently records the results, including the OWGR points to the winner, of each event, and I was very disappointed to see that all the useful information in the 2009 schedule was apparently thrown away at the beginning of 2010. There should be an article of "PGA Tour Year XXXX" that contains this table for each year, and similarly with other major tours, for those who want to see results from past years conveniently tabulated. Davexvi (talk) 00:06, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

 * This is already done, see the "PGA Tour Seasons" navbox at the bottom of the page (seasons back to 1970). Every major tour has the same thing, some going back further than others. You can also go to Category:PGA Tour seasons for a list of season schedules. Tewapack (talk) 02:40, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

The Open Championship
There are two reasons why people refer to The Open Championship as the British Open. a) Its needed to save people from confusing it with the US open or b) ignorance of the fact that it is called The Open and doesn't need a prefix. Case (a) doesn't apply here because the fact that it is in the United Kingdom is given in the next column. Which just leaves (b).

Wikipedia is meant to be a place to correct ignorance and not perpetuate it. This is why the term British Open should be avoided. Using the term would re-enforce the mis-guided belief that it is the official term of the tournement, which is the precise opposite of what Wikipedia is trying to achieve.

While the United States could be refered to as America or even Columbia you wouldn't dream of using these terms here because an encyclopedia requires a higher standard of language than is used in everyday life. Please explain why you feel this should be ignored in this case. josh (talk) 22:20, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Awards
I think we should make a new article for PGA Player of the Year and Money title awards. When you search for these awards on google, wikipedia doesn't come on the first page of results, which is bad since we are very comprehensive and better than other sites. Also, the page is over 40 kb, which is long for 1 article especially since it strays from the main topic.

2006 Schedule
What will happen to this schedule once the new season begins? It should be moved and made into a new article. I don't know what has happened in the past, but I do hope it is not deleted.

yourPGA.com - PGA Message Boards and Fan Site
The creators of myLPGA.com have decided to venture into men's golf and have now launched yourPGA.com which is a discussion forum and fan site for the PGA Tour as well as the European Tour and other PGA tours around the world. Please add it to your external links. Mahalo!

Amagab 08:36, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Ranking Points
I'm not sure that ranking points add anything to this chart other than clutter. I think it might be wiser to put this at the very least someplace else. I just think it is too abstract. For most events, we don't know how many ranking points were allocated until the new OWGR are released on Monday, but putting it in the chart suggests there is something inherent about the event which determines the number of points, which is true for only 5 events. It is going to result in more weeks going onto a 2nd line, which is something I have been trying to avoid. 65.42.16.135 03:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

FGF2007 Agrees
The Ranking Points Column is something not everyone viewing the PGA Tour schedule is necessarily interested in. Perhaps, a separate page titled, say, "2007 PGA Tour: OWGR Tournament Ranking Points", could be created to deal with that subject.

Also, take out the career wins in parenthesis next to the player's name. If people want to find out how many career PGA Tour wins (or any other specific achievements) that a player has, they should be able to click-on the player's name and read such info on the player's own Wikipedia page.

ADDITIONAL: 1-29-07 10:18 PM EST The State column can go as well, since that info should be present on each event's Wikipedia page.

Thanx-A-Lot and Enjoy, Frank   Fgf2007 00:55, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the State column retains value; the point of it is (or was) to show the progression of the geography of the tour. It provided more concrete statements to the generalizations in the preceding paragraph about starting on the west coast, going to the American southeast, etc. As for the career wins, I can go either way, but it doesn't offend me to have it there simply because it doesn't take up a great deal of space. My key concern is spacing. 65.42.16.135 03:54, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The state column is of long standing and it shows the structure of the season. The ranking points are tremendous added value, showing the strength of field in a clear way that you just don't get from any other source. Note the FedEx X Cup points would not achieve the same thing as the main season tournaments are divided into just three categories, which is not an accurate reflection of the relative strength of tournaments at all. The number of wins shows what type of players are winning at the moment, and is especially useful for those who are less familiar with golf. Mowsbury 18:20, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ranking points only shows strength of field to the insiders who have any notion of what the ranking system even means, how it works, etc. It is far too abstract for this forum. 65.42.16.135 23:42, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, it is most useful for people who would otherwise have little idea of the standing of the various tournaments. Anyone who is curious can read the article, that is how wikipedia helps people to learn. Mowsbury 19:14, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 * That logic can be carried out ad infinitum. Even a wikified encyclopedia has to show some discretion as to the information presented in any given article, to make sure it conforms with the level of generality appropriate to the topic. This is just too detailed. And Fgf2007 agrees with me. Moreover, the argument that it provides some context to the "standing" of the various tournaments is flawed. The rankings points are not linear; a 50-point tournament is not twice as "good" as a 25-point tournament. The points are allocated in a fashion that balances a variety of concerns, which include inter-tour politics, history, and the desireability of maximizing TV ratings for those events that use the OWGR as a sweep-up category; all of which are concerns that have nothing to do with the actual game of golf. 65.42.16.135 19:22, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Field Size
It's not my feeling that the Field Size is needed. It unnecessarily spreads out the table laterally (shifting almost every event onto a 2nd line) and does not, in my opinion, express information that is really needed here. This is a general overview of the season; something as particular as the precise number of tournament entrants is more appropriate for the article for that particular event. MrArticleOne (talk) 22:26, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Awards
This article is starting to get quite long; wouldn't it be a better idea to split them off to separate articles, with links to them on this page? Or maybe a box at the bottom about the PGA TOUR? MrArticleOne (talk) 02:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Official styling
Recently, the table was changed to eliminate the official styling for THE PLAYERS Championship and other events using non-standard capitalization etc. I feel that, while this is the right move for the main text of the article, the table ought to reflect the official styling. I recognize that there is an on-point policy, but I think that policy does not squarely cover this situation or that this is otherwise not the sort of context where it is important to preserve traditional English spelling conventions. Thoughts? MrArticleOne (talk) 21:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:FedexCup.jpg
The image Image:FedexCup.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --04:25, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Season articles
You need to set up separate articles for each season so that we don't have to schlub through the history to find out information about old seasons.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You could even go through the history and get the last several seasons by just copying the end of the season.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:18, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * They exist. See 2008 PGA Tour, 2007 PGA Tour, 2006 PGA Tour, etc. MrArticleOne (talk) 15:39, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * There is also a navbox at bottom of each article. wjemather bigissue 15:46, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Early history missing
I understand the "PGA Tour" started in 1968, but the history of PGA touring professionals prior to that year really should be included here, as this is where people looking for info would probably start, and there's more info in this article than any other I could find on PGA golf. If placed within the PGA of America article instead, a dominant link should be placed here to it. Besides the exploits of caucasion professional golfers prior to 1968, there should also be a section on racial exclusion of black golfers (and all other non-Caucasion golfers) that was a defined policy of the sport until 1961. It's a part of PGA history and presenting here as an important historical fact is very important in my opinion.24.197.2.22 (talk) 05:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

HSBC Champions
I question whether we ought to put the HSBC Champions on the table of PGA TOUR events this season. If you look at the PGA TOUR's website, it is listed only as a "Featured Event," along with the World Cup and Presidents Cup. I thought I read somewhere that a win at the event will not count as a PGA TOUR victory, which suggests even more strongly that it should not be included on the table (if true). Can anybody add additional color to these comments? MrArticleOne (talk) 17:37, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This was written in late April: http://www.pgatour.com/2009/r/04/28/ap.on_the_fringe/index.html. This is going to be a real oddball. A win at the HSBC Champions will not count as a PGA TOUR victory. Money won at it will not count toward the PGA TOUR's Money List. However, a win at the event qualifies the winner for the 2010 SBS Championship. You might say the event has sui generis status. Should it be on the season table? My vote is "no." MrArticleOne (talk) 19:43, 16 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't know if anybody reads this talk page, but if they do, I'd like to reiterate that I think we should remove the HSBC Champions from the season table. The fact that we have to put "(unofficial)" after Mickelson's name, the fact that the money doesn't count, the fact that if a player had registered an incomplete round he would not have lost his eligibility for the Vardon Trophy--all of these are reasons why I don't think it belongs on the table. The fact that the winner gets an invite to the SBS Championship in January seems like an exceedingly thin basis for including it. MrArticleOne (talk) 16:07, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

The "Unique" Players Championship
I have removed the sentence "It is increasingly referred to by the media as the "Fifth major"." from the footnote regarding the TPC - a claim such as this regarding the media should be sourced, especially since the "fifth major" tag has been given to various tournaments down the years, and to my knowledge, as many commentators loathe the name as use it. Sourcing on the claim "In North America, some people would like to make the tournament an official major" would also be desirable... EJBH (talk) 18:54, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It is not at all uncommon to hear it bandied about to make it a "fifth major." See, e.g., http://golf.about.com/od/tourmajorevents/i/players_major.htm MrArticleOne (talk) 21:02, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

 * The Players has been widely referred to as the 5th major for as long as I can care to remember (at least the last 15+ years). From a very quick google search, how about The Independent (UK newspaper), ESPN, BBC, New York Times, etc., etc. wjemather bigissue 23:05, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Fair enough; if anyone wants to revert, and includes sources like these, I'll (slightly reluctantly) give in. EJBH (talk) 00:18, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Money List
By my math, even if Steve Stricker won the final 4 PGA TOUR events this year, he would not surpass Tiger Woods in earnings, which would mean that Woods has clinched the Money List for this season. I can't find a source for that, but the standard 18% champions' share times the purse at the remaining events is less than the $4,175,527 by which Woods leads Stricker. I was just wondering if anybody has anything to add. It's possible this hasn't been covered by the media since it's been recognized as basically a foregone conclusion for a while. MrArticleOne (talk) 22:07, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to follow that up, if Stricker won the remaining 4 events, by my math that would be $3,150,000, which is over $1 million less than the difference between he and Woods. Stricker needed to appear in (and win) the Turning Stone Resort Championship, which would have given him a chance at $4,230,000, which would have been just enough to have passed Woods. MrArticleOne (talk) 22:10, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
 * And, today the AP is reporting in offhanded fashion that Woods has in fact clinched the money title, and a few other awards as well. MrArticleOne (talk) 20:23, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Flags
I'd just note that the icon for the Flag of Northern Ireland shows a flag that has not actually been used by the government there since 1972. The only flag flown in Northern Ireland is the Union Jack. It strikes me that this not only calls into question the use of the deprecated flag for McIlroy and McDowell's wins; it also calls into question the use of the English flag for the other victories (otherwise you'd be using the English flag for those guys, but the Union Jack (which also flies in England) to other non-English Britons). MrArticleOne (talk) 20:14, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

 * The Ulster Banner is used by individuals and teams representing Northern Ireland in sporting events, which would include McIlroy and McDowell, so it is appropriate here. Note that the golfing authorities and broadcasters also use this flag. wjemather bigissue 21:11, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Crossover
Is there a way to implement an "edit once, change everywhere" method for the separate season tables at this article and the 2011 PGA Tour article? MrArticleOne (talk) 23:54, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Best solution is not to have the full list here - aside from recentism issues, splitting the current season to a separate article is neater and reduces the size of this page. wjemather bigissue 00:24, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It was my sense that the schedule was included in order to illustrate the annual scheduling pattern. MrArticleOne (talk) 02:17, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * As far as the schedule goes, this article should really only include a general overview of the season structure, which aside from the occasional restructure (such as the introduction of the playoffs), remains fairly consistent. I personally, think it is much better this way. Also, as an added bonus, Category:Current golf seasons gets populated with articles rather than redirects. wjemather bigissue 09:32, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

What do they do?
No where in the article does it say how much golf is in a event? How many holes?, how many rounds, are there cuts to the field between rounds?, time span of events? There doesn't seem to be any simple explanation of what is happening? Rmhermen (talk) 02:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, these enhancements would really help shed some light on "The Tour".Tepkunset (talk) 15:29, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

Questions: What Rights do PGAT Members Have?
Is being a member like owning stock in a company? Do a majority of the members have the right to direct decisions of PGAT management? I know there is a member advisory board, which I have heard is essentially powerless. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.244.137.86 (talk) 19:16, 21 June 2023 (UTC)

Jimmy caspio
Did jimmy caspio ever win on pga tout 47.150.214.129 (talk) 22:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)

Top ten earners
Hello! I noticed in the subheading of career earning leaders, Phil Mickelson is missing in the table. If memory serves, he’s 2nd in career earnings. I’m not at a computer at the moment, but I wanted to bring it here also, in case something was amiss. Thanks! SPF121188 (talk this way) (my edits) 21:55, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Looks like the list excludes LIV golfers. Dustin Johnson should be on it as well. Jessintime (talk) 02:13, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi ! Do you know if this is something that’s been discussed anywhere? If it has, pardon my ignorance 😊 I would figure they’d include them and only factor in their PGAT earnings, but it looks like you’re right, just excluding LIV guys. SPF121188  (talk this way) (my edits) 11:20, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It doesn't look like it's been discussed on this talk page, but I couldn't tell you if it was brought up elsewhere. Jessintime (talk) 15:14, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm going to ping, as they seem to be active on this page; would be able to shed some light on this for us? I don't mean to be random or a bother, we just can't find any discussion around whether current LIV golfers Dustin Johnson and Phil Mickelson should be included on the career money list section. Their PGAT earnings would land them on the list, but wasn't sure if a decision was made elsewhere to exclude them. Sorry again for the random ping, just want to make sure this is correct. Thanks! SPF121188  (talk this way) (my edits) 13:37, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Mickelson and Johnson remain numbers 2 and 4 in career earnings, and we really should reflect that. The PGA Tour's rewriting of history should not influence our content, even if they are the primary source for information. Pinging who did the updates (following that source) that removed them . wjematherplease leave a message... 13:59, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you ! Yeah, even setting aside their earnings over on LIV, they still should be on the list, given their PGAT earnings. I do notice that the PGAT website excludes them (which is slightly odd, and obviously not within our purview,) but as for Wikipedia, should there be a discussion here? Given that their PGAT earnings make this list, I really can't think of an argument for excluding them. Sorry to open up a can of worms here, potentially, but it seems erroneous to not include them. SPF121188  (talk this way) (my edits) 15:03, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

 * Added note about Mickelson and Johnson. Tewapack (talk) 19:46, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you, ! That makes sense, and addresses their PGAT suspensions. SPF121188 (talk this way) (my edits) 19:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

It's not exactly rewriting history. For years the PGA Tour has kept two separate lists, one including all players ("Career Earnings") and one including only Tour members ("Career Money Leaders"), but the difference wasn't that noticeable until the suspensions. Perhaps using "Career Earnings" would make more sense for Wikipedia's purposes. pʰeːnuːmuː →  pʰiːnyːmyː  →  ɸinimi  →  fiɲimi  20:29, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yes, we should definitely be using the career earnings list. wjematherplease leave a message... 21:10, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:PGA Tour


text:
1922 Locomotive Cyclopedia of American Practice

The 1922 Locomotive Cyclopedia of American Practice, published by Simmons-Boardman, is the most recent Locomotive Cyclopedia to be in the public domain. At 1141 pages of main text, plus indices, front matter, and other content, it is a substantially sized book. It is basically a combined catalog for all the major builders of railroad locomotives and associated equipment in North America. It contains photographs and scale drawings of several hundred locomotive types as examples of the locomotives that North American builders can produce, as well as chapters on all manner of locomotive components, appliances and equipment, with material provided by the major builders of such.

Picture gallery
Illustrations from the 1922 Locomotive Cyclopedia

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


text: User talk:65.27.28.148

title: User talk:65.27.28.148


text: Category:Grammars of specific languages

title: Category:Grammars of specific languages


text:
Category:House music genres

Different genres of house music.

title: Category:House music genres


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Winterroth

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was UNANIMOUS DELETE. Postdlf 23:26, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Matt Winterroth
Delete: Apparent vanity; hardly any hits on Google, and maybe none. --Durin 02:52, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think it's a hoax by User:Holzp.  "Article" states that this is an alias of David Kutcher.  Image description of the image says "Matthew Winterroth, World Surfing Championships 2005."  David Kutcher mentions nothing about surfing.  The same image was uploaded by Holzp under a different name with the description "David Kutcher, after being arrested at the NYC RNC protest 2004."  No relevant google hits for either name.  These are Holzp's only edits, btw.  Postdlf 04:22, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, possible hoax. Megan1967 08:54, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Definite hoax. The picture is actually a police mugshot of Sollog.  --  P Ingerson 11:19, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Yep. You're right.  Postdlf 16:40, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, we're not Snopes. Master Thief Garrett 03:48, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Talk:Pieter van den Hoogenband

Untitled
He's often nickednamed the "Flying Dutchman" in swimming circles and by the media. Perhaps this bit could be included in the intro paragraph? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.215.166.92 (talk • contribs) 18 April 2005 (UTC)

the dutch swimming tradition
In this article the author wrote that Pieter van den Hoogenband and Inge de Bruijn "brought the Netherlands its first real victories in the sport".

However, this is not true. Dutch (female) swimmers have been succesfull since the 1920's. With Marie Braun, Willie den Ouden, Rie Mastenbroek, Nida Senff, Iet van Feggelen and Cor Kint the Netherlands dominated the sport in the 1930's. After World War Two the swimming world met Nel van Vliet, Geertje Wielema, Atie Voorbij, Cocky Gastelaars, Mary Kok, Jans Koster, Lenie de Nijs, Ada den Haan, Ria van Velsen, Tineke Lagerberg and of course Ada Kok; all of them were worldrecordholders. But the story continued in the 1970's and 1980's: Enith Brigitha, Annelies Maas, Conny van Bentum, Annemarie Verstappen, Petra van Staveren and Jolanda de Rover attained many medals at international tournaments.

Therefore, one cannot state that Pieter van den Hoogenband and Inge de Bruijn were the first dutch international swimming stars. On the contrary, they are 'but' the last in a long tradition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.93.78.40 (talk • contribs) 3 July 2005 (UTC)

Not sure where to put this
"His anchor leg of 46.79 in the 4x100m Freestyle Relay was the fastest split in history" is no longer true as it was beaten by Jason Lezak in 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.67.240.146 (talk) 23:12, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The comment above isn't true either. In the Heats, Frederick Bousquet swam a 46.63 anchor leg which they reference on air during the final as "the fastest split in history". Then during the finals, Lezak (46.06), Bousquet (46.63) and Alain Bernard (46.73) were all under Hoogie's record for their splits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.73.141.43 (talk) 01:47, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Dutch naming conventions
Dutch naming conventions state that the first prefix always begins with upper case, unless it is preceded by the given name. E.g. Mister De Boer but Jan de Boer, and not Jan De Boer. 2nd and 3rd prefixes are always fully lowercase. It's all well and good that you have discovered the prefixes are part of the surname, but please apply the rules correctly. Writing prefixed surnames starting with lowercase is considered very ignorant in Dutch. Please note that Flemish naming conventions might differ. CrashTestSmartie (talk) 05:36, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Is it still wrong somewhere? Gap9551 (talk) 20:48, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

You sure about that? I'm Dutch and have never heard of that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.195.251.194 (talk) 14:19, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pieter van den Hoogenband


text:
Energy-Quest

Energy-Quest (formerly The Hydrogen Expedition) was an organization launched in 2005 that sought to educate the public about the risks of an impending energy crisis due to the current worldwide dependence on fossil fuels and the benefits of energy conservation and the use of renewable energy sources. It intended to do so through a series of three record-setting ocean voyages:

 * 1) The Earthrace
 * 2) The Aurora Expedition
 * 3) The Triton Expedition

Started and staffed by university students, the project was endorsed by several organizations and prominent individuals.

The Earthrace
The Earthrace will be an attempt to break the speed record for circumnavigating the globe in a powerboat while using only renewable fuels. It is being supported by over 100 companies, and is led by New Zealander Pete Bethune. Energy-Quest is providing organizational and fundraising assistance to the Earthrace in the United States.

The Aurora Expedition
The Aurora Expedition will involve an around-the-world voyage in a powerboat which, at 20 ft, will be the smallest vessel of its kind to ever complete such a journey. Due to its limited fuel capacity, the Aurora will rely on advanced fuel-efficient technologies for propulsion. Energy-Quest thus seeks to incorporate highly clean and efficient diesel engines, solar cells, and wind turbines into this design.

Aurora will stop at over forty major ports around the world, where she will showcase the cleanest and most efficient energy technologies available at the time, and her crew will promote the widespread use of such technologies. Ultimately, the Aurora Expedition is intended as a stepping stone towards the completion of the organization's final and most important endeavor – the Triton Expedition.

The Triton Expedition
The Triton Expedition will be the first circumnavigation of the world by a boat powered solely by a hydrogen fuel cell. Triton will stop at major destinations around the world, where her crew will meet with local political and industrial leaders to promote the importance of alternative energy development. Through Triton's voyage, Energy-Quest hopes to generate international media attention, and in this way stimulate the development of a renewable energy-based hydrogen economy.

History
The project was started in the summer of 2005 by Joseph F. Sahid, a graduate of the Phillips Exeter Academy and currently a sophomore at the University of Pennsylvania. He soon was joined by other volunteers, and an official team was rapidly assembled. The Energy Quest program has now been discontinued.

Endorsements
Organisations who officially endorse the Hydrogen Expedition:
 * Bluewater Network
 * National Hydrogen Association of Australia
 * Save the Planet USA
 * Environment Colorado
 * Italian Hydrogen and Fuel Cell Association
 * HydrogenBoyz

title: Energy-Quest


text:
Karukutty

Karukutty is a village panchayat in Aluva Taluk, Ernakulam district of Kerala, India. Classified as a Grade A panchayat, Karukutty comprises 17 wards and falls under Angamaly block panchayat in Aluva taluk. It is part of Angamaly Assembly constituency and Chalakudy Parliament constituency.

History
Located on the northern border of the erstwhile Travancore kingdom, Karukutty has been influenced by the cultures of both Travancore and Cochin kingdoms and has been cited in ancient Portuguese records. Remnants of an old fort, referred to locally as Kottathendu (കോട്ടത്തെണ്ട്), can be seen here. The fort - Nedumkotta (നേടുംക്കോട്ട) was built jointly by the Travancore and Cochin kingdoms to resist invasions by Tipu Sultan. Numerous other artifacts and vessels used by natives to store their treasures and valuables have also been excavated. There is a popular saying that goes "Karukutty kandaal maru kutty venda" (കറുകുററി കണ്ടാല് മറുകുററി വേണ്ട). It roughly translates to "If you have reached Karukutty, then you need not go looking elsewhere" – a sign of the self-sufficient and prosperous nature of the locality.The name karu kutty means Dark fortress.

Geography
Spread over an area of 33.57 km2 in central Kerala, the terrain is primarily of five types: plain land, valley, high land, sloped terrain and hilltops.

Borders

 * East: Mookkannoor panchayat
 * North: Chalakudy River and Koratty panchayat
 * West: Parakkadavu panchayat
 * South: Angamaly municipality

title: Karukutty


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Kutcher

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE, 5 to 1. Postdlf 23:27, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

David Kutcher
Delete: Apparent vanity; hardly any hits on Google, and maybe none. --Durin 02:55, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think it's a hoax by User:Holzp.  Matt Winterroth states that it is an alias of David Kutcher.  Image description of the image says "Matthew Winterroth, World Surfing Championships 2005."  David Kutcher mentions nothing about surfing.  The same image was uploaded by Holzp under a different name with the description "David Kutcher, after being arrested at the NYC RNC protest 2004."  No relevant google hits for either name.  These are Holzp's only edits, btw.  Postdlf 04:23, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, possible hoax. Megan1967 08:54, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The picture is actually a police mugshot of Sollog. Definite hoax.  --  P Ingerson 11:21, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Yep. You're right.  Postdlf 16:41, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep FroggyMoore 23:17, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Because...?? Postdlf 02:56, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, we're not Snopes. At least, not yet... Master Thief Garrett 03:50, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Franck Report

The Franck Report of June 1945 was a document signed by several prominent nuclear physicists recommending that the United States not use the atomic bomb as a weapon to prompt the surrender of Japan in World War II.

The report was named for James Franck, the head of the committee that produced it. The committee was appointed by Arthur Compton and met in secret, in all-night sessions in a highly secure environment. Largely written by Eugene Rabinowitch, the report spoke about the impossibility to keep the United States atomic discoveries secret indefinitely. It predicted a nuclear arms race, forcing the United States to develop nuclear armaments at such a pace that no other nation would think of attacking first from fear of overwhelming retaliation. This prediction turned out to be accurate, as the nuclear arms race and the concept of mutual assured destruction became a major factor in the Cold War. The report recommended that the nuclear bomb not be used, and proposed that either a demonstration of the "new weapon" be made before the eyes of representatives of all of the United Nations, on a barren island or desert, or to try to keep the existence of the nuclear bomb secret for as long as possible.

In the first case, the international community would be warned of the dangers and encouraged to develop an effective international control on such weapons. In the latter case, the United States would gain several years time to further develop their nuclear armament before other countries would start their own production. The Franck Report was signed by James Franck (Chairman), Donald J. Hughes, J. J. Nickson, Eugene Rabinowitch, Glenn T. Seaborg, J. C. Stearns, and Leó Szilárd.

Franck took the report to Washington June 12, where the Interim Committee, appointed by President Truman to advise him on use of the atomic bomb, met on June 21 to reexamine its earlier conclusions. However, this committee reaffirmed that there was no alternative to the use of the bomb and on August 6 and 9, the Americans dropped atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

The Report was declassified and released to the public in early 1946, but Manhattan Project officials required the censorship of some passages.

title: Franck Report


text:
Baruch Plan

The Baruch Plan was a proposal put forward by the United States government on 14 June 1946 to the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission (UNAEC) during its first meeting. Bernard Baruch wrote the bulk of the proposal, based on the March 1946 Acheson–Lilienthal Report. (The United States, Great Britain and Canada had called for an international organization to regulate the use of atomic energy, and President Truman responded by asking  Undersecretary of State Dean Acheson and David E. Lilienthal to draw up a plan.) The Soviet Union, fearing the plan would preserve the  American nuclear monopoly, declined in December 1946 in the United Nations Security Council to endorse Baruch's version of the proposal, and the Cold War phase of the nuclear arms race followed.

Description
In the Plan, the US agreed to decommission all of its atomic weapons and transfer nuclear technology on the condition that all other countries pledged not to produce atomic weapons and agreed to an adequate system of inspection, including monitoring, policing, and sanctions. The Plan also proposed to internationalize fission energy via an International Atomic Development Authority, which would exercise a monopoly of mining uranium and thorium, refining the ores, owning materials, and constructing and operating nuclear plants. This Authority would fall under the United Nations Atomic Energy Commission. In short, the plan proposed to:

In presenting his plan to the United Nations, Baruch stated: "We are here to make a choice between the quick and the dead. That is our business. Behind the black portent of the new atomic age lies a hope which, seized upon with faith, can work our salvation. If we fail, then we have damned every man to be the slave of fear. Let us not deceive ourselves; we must elect world peace or (elect) world destruction."
 * 1) extend between all countries the exchange of basic scientific information for peaceful conclusions;
 * 2) implement control of nuclear power to the extent necessary to ensure its use only for peaceful purposes;
 * 3) eliminate from national armaments atomic weapons and all other major weapons adaptable to mass destruction; and
 * 4) establish effective safeguards by way of inspection and other means to protect complying States against the hazards of violations and evasions.

Reaction
The Soviets rejected the Baruch Plan and suggested a counter-proposal on the grounds that the United Nations was dominated by the United States and its allies in Western Europe, and could therefore not be trusted to exercise authority over atomic weaponry in an evenhanded manner. Nationalist China, a UN Security Council member with veto privileges, was anti-communist and aligned with the US at this time. The USSR counter-proposal insisted that America eliminate its own nuclear weapons first before considering any proposals for a system of controls and inspections.

Although the Soviets showed further interest in the cause of arms control after they became a nuclear power in 1949, and particularly after the death of Stalin in 1953, the issue of the Soviet Union submitting to international inspection was always a thorny one, upon which many attempts at nuclear arms control stalled. Crucially, the Baruch Plan suggested that none of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council would be able to veto a decision to punish culprits. Because of the difficulties in monitoring and policing, as well as Stalin's ambition to develop atomic weapons, although negotiations over the Baruch Plan and the Soviet counter-proposal continued in the UNAEC until 1948, the Plan was not seriously advanced later than the end of 1947. Throughout the negotiations, the USSR was fast-tracking its own atomic bomb project, and the United States was continuing its own weapons development and production. With the failure of the Plan, both nations embarked on accelerated programs of weapons development, innovation, production, and testing as part of the overall nuclear arms race of the Cold War.

Bertrand Russell urged control of nuclear weapons in the 1940s and early 1950s to avoid the likelihood of a general nuclear war, and initially felt hopeful when the Baruch Proposal was made. In late 1948 he suggested that "the remedy might be the threat of immediate war by the United States on Russia for the purpose of forcing nuclear disarmament on her." Later he thought less well of the Baruch Proposal as "Congress insisted upon the insertion of clauses which it was known that the Russians would not accept." In his 1961 book Has Man a Future?, Russell described the Baruch plan as follows:

"The United States Government... did attempt... to give effect to some of the ideas which the atomic scientists had suggested. In 1946, it presented to the world what is now called "The Baruch Plan", which had very great merits and showed considerable generosity, when it is remembered that America still had an unbroken nuclear monopoly... Unfortunately, there were features of the Baruch Proposal which Russia found unacceptable, as, indeed, was to be expected. It was Stalin's Russia, flushed with pride in the victory over the Germans, suspicious (not without reason) of the Western Powers, and aware that in the United Nations it could almost always be outvoted."

Historical significance
Scholars such as David S. Painter, Melvyn Leffler, and James Carroll have questioned whether or not the Baruch Plan was a legitimate effort to achieve global cooperation on nuclear control. The Baruch Plan is often cited as a pivotal moment in history in works promoting internationalizing nuclear power or revisiting nuclear arms control. In philosopher Nick Bostrom's 2014 work Superintelligence: Paths, Dangers, Strategies, he cited the Baruch Plan as part of an argument that a future power possessing superintelligence that obtained a sufficient strategic advantage would employ it to establish a benign 'singleton' or form of global unity. :89

title: Baruch Plan


text:
Louis William Valentine DuBourg

Louis William Valentine DuBourg (Louis-Guillaume-Valentin DuBourg; 10 January 1766 – 12 December 1833) was a French Catholic prelate and Sulpician missionary to the United States. He built up the church in the vast new Louisiana Territory as the Bishop of Louisiana and the Two Floridas and later became the Bishop of Montauban and finally the Archbishop of Besançon in France.

Born in the colony of Saint-Domingue, DuBourg was sent to France at a young age to be educated and entered the Society of Saint Sulpice. As a cleric and son of a noble family, the French Revolution forced him into exile in Spain. In 1794, DuBourg sailed to the United States and began teaching and ministering in Baltimore, becoming the president of Georgetown College in Washington in 1795. He significantly improved the quality of the institution, but mounted a substantial debt and was ousted by the Jesuit owners of the college in 1798. DuBourg then founded a lay collegiate counterpart to St. Mary's Seminary in Baltimore. He also selected the site of Baltimore's first cathedral and became the ecclesiastical superior to Elizabeth Ann Seton's newly founded Sisters of Charity.

In 1812, DuBourg was made the apostolic administrator of the Diocese of Louisiana and the Two Floridas, and three years later, its bishop. Catholic New Orleanians rejected his authority and he was forced to move his episcopal seat to St. Louis, Missouri. There, he built the first cathedral west of the Mississippi River and established missions to the American Indians, dozens of churches, and numerous schools, including St. Mary's of the Barrens Seminary and Saint Louis University. He also recruited the Sisters of Loretto and Rose Philippine Duchesne's Sisters of the Sacred Heart to found several academies.

Never able to establish his seat in New Orleans, DuBourg returned to France in 1826, where he was made the Bishop of Montauban. Just months before his death in 1833, he became the Archbishop of Besançon.

Early life and education
Louis-Guillaume-Valentin DuBourg was born in the city of Cap-Français (known today as Cap-Haïtien) in the French Caribbean colony of Saint-Domingue, likely on 10 January 1766. Born to a noble family originally from Bordeaux, France, his mother was Marguerite DuBourg née Armand de Vogluzan and his father was Pierre DuBourg, who held the titles of chevalier de la Loubère et Saint-Christaud and Sieur de Rochemont. Pierre was a licensed sea captain and highly successful merchant in the coffee trade.

Following the death of his mother, when he was two years of age, DuBourg was sent to France to be educated. He lived with his maternal grandparents in Bordeaux, and eventually enrolled at the College of Guienne, where he proved to be a good student. Deciding that he would become a priest, DuBourg entered the Saint-Sulpice Seminary, attached to the Church of Saint-Sulpice, in 1786. There, he studied under the direction of Francis Charles Nagot, who would later introduce the Society of the Priests of Saint Sulpice to the United States.

In 1788, Nagot selected DuBourg to be the superior of the newly established Sulpician minor seminary in Issy-les-Moulineaux, outside of Paris. At the same time, he continued his studies at the College of Sorbonne, and was ordained a priest by Antoine-Éléonor-Léon Leclerc de Juigné, the Archbishop of Paris, on 20 March 1790.

Exile and arrival in Maryland
DuBourg was not in Issy long before the school became the target of the French Revolution. With the persecution of clerics during the Reign of Terror, he left the seminary. Five days later, on 15 August 1792, it was attacked by a Jacobin mob that massacred the four remaining priests. DuBourg fled first to Bourdeaux. However, his aristocratic lineage, the presence of anti-clerical spies, and the conduct of home inspections forced him to eventually leave France. Disguised as a traveling fiddler, he escaped to Ourense, Spain.

While exiled in Spain, DuBourg became fluent in Spanish. The Spanish government believed French clergy were engaged in heterodox practices, and restricted their ability to teach and publicly minister. Dissatisfied with these limitations, DuBourg sailed for the United States and arrived in Baltimore, Maryland, on 14 December 1794. He was incardinated in the Diocese of Baltimore by Bishop John Carroll and petitioned Jacques-André Emery, the Sulpician Superior General, for admission to the order, which was by then operating in Baltimore. On 9 March 1795, he became a professed member of the Society of Saint Sulpice.

In Baltimore, there was a rapidly growing population of West Indians who had fled the Haitian Revolution, and French who had fled the French Revolution; in a short time, they doubled the total number of Catholics in the United States. DuBourg began ministering to these French-speaking immigrants and holding classes for their children, as well as those of Spanish immigrants. By teaching these classes, DuBourg learned English, and came to be regarded as a polished and effective preacher.

President of Georgetown College
In October 1795, just several months after arriving in the United States, DuBourg was appointed by Carroll to succeed Robert Molyneux as the third president of Georgetown College. He was one of four Sulpicians to serve on the faculty during the founding era of the Jesuit college, who together had a significant influence on the school's development. DuBourg had an ambitious vision for Georgetown, seeking to make it the best college in the United States. One historian of the university credits him with transforming Georgetown from an "academy" into a "college."

Seeking to make the school more cosmopolitan, DuBourg recruited many students from Baltimore, particularly French refugees from the West Indies. He also admitted many non-Catholics. Overall, the size of the student body grew during his tenure. DuBourg solicited financial support from Catholic donors, which allowed him to sponsor sixteen students throughout his tenure to study at Georgetown in preparation for the seminary. In 1797, he sponsored one potential seminarian instead of accepting a salary increase. DuBourg hired 16 new teachers, greatly expanding the size of the college's faculty and raised the salary of professors. A significant departure from his predecessors, the significant majority of professors he hired were laymen, rather than clerics.

In keeping with his mission to make Georgetown an elite college, DuBourg improved and expanded the curriculum by adding courses in history, moral philosophy, natural philosophy, and Spanish; music, dancing, and drawing were also taught for the first time. He instituted new features, including the college's first seal and uniforms for students. He promoted the school's public image by advertising its favorable situation upon a hill and proximity to Washington, D.C., the seat of the federal government. DuBourg became active in Washington's high society, including making the acquaintance of Thomas Law, a merchant who enrolled his son at Georgetown. Through Law, DuBuissson received an invitation to dine with the former President George Washington at his home, Mount Vernon, in July 1797. The following month, Washington visited Georgetown's campus. Around this time, DuBourg also invited a group of Poor Clares who fled the revolution in France, and they founded a school for girls in the Georgetown area in 1798.

Though DuBourg's improvements elevated the college's quality, they placed Georgetown in substantial debt. Donations were inadequate to offset this debt, which was worsened by economic stagnation in Washington in the 1790s. This strained the relationship between DuBourg and the Jesuits, who were forced to sell some land in Maryland to meet the financial obligations. The trustees of the Corporation of Roman Catholic Clergymen, which owned Georgetown, elected new Jesuits to the college's board of directors and empowered the board to remove the president. In October 1797, the board decided to keep DuBourg as president, but stripped him of his power over Georgetown's finances, transferring it to a new vice president, Francis Neale, who implemented strict austerity measures. Motivated in part by anti-French sentiment, the Maryland Jesuits eventually took steps to oust DuBourg in 1798, leading to his resignation. He was succeeded by Francis Neale's brother, Leonard Neale, at Christmas.

Founding St. Mary's College
Upon leaving Georgetown, DuBourg traveled to Havana, Cuba, where he joined two other Sulpicians seeking to establish a college there. However, this project faced political opposition, and DuBourg returned to Baltimore in August 1799.

That year, DuBourg founded and became the first president of a college for lay students at St. Mary's Seminary. Though DuBourg initially intended the school to be open for general education, Bishop Carroll required that admission be limited only to West Indian students, so as not to compete with Georgetown College. As a result, many Cubans who had met DuBourg during his time in Havana sent their sons to be educated at St. Mary's College. The Jesuits opposed the founding of St. Mary's College, and DuBourg offered to resolve the dispute by closing St. Mary's College and transferring its students and faculty to Georgetown; however, the Jesuits did not act on this proposal.

In 1800, the Sulpicians lodged a protest with Carroll over the restriction on admitting only West Indian students. DuBourg travelled to Cuba in 1802 to recruit students, where he was informed by the Spanish government—which feared the education of Cubans in a republican country—that Cuban students would no longer be allowed to attend school in Baltimore. The following year, the Spanish Navy sent a frigate to Baltimore to demand that all Spanish nationals return. Carroll then lifted the restriction on enrollment, and the school began admitting students of any nationality in 1803. As a result, enrollment at St. Mary's College grew rapidly, overtaking that of Georgetown. Students arrived not only from the West Indies, but from South America, Mexico, and many parts of the United States. The new college was chartered by the State of Maryland in 1805, and was elevated to university status by the Maryland General Assembly the following year.

To accommodate the prospering school, DuBourg oversaw the construction of several new buildings. Among these was St. Mary's Seminary Chapel, referred to by Elizabeth Ann Seton as "Mr. DuBourg's chapel." DuBourg hired Maximilian Godefroy to design the chapel, who he had previously appointed to the faculty of St. Mary's. Work began in 1806, and DuBourg expedited the project by retaining Benjamin Henry Latrobe, the Architect of the Capitol, whose skilled Italian artists completed the building ini 1808.

Diocesan ministry

DuBourg ministered to and provided charity to the many refugees living in Baltimore who had fled Saint-Domingue during the Haitian Revolution. With John Tessier, he also established a congregation for the many poor Black Baltimoreans who met and celebrated Mass at St. Mary's Chapel. From this congregation eventually formed the Oblate Sisters of Providence. DuBourg also established a lay fraternal organization of parishioners that provided charity for the city.

DuBourg played an important role in the construction of Baltimore's first cathedral. Bishop Carroll desired to replace St. Peter's Pro-Cathedral with a proper cathedral, and DuBourg convinced him to move it from St. Peter's to a new location. DuBourg identified a site atop a hill, which would become known as Cathedral Hill, and negotiated with the sale with the owner of the land. He then raised the $23,000 necessary to purchase the land,. Construction on the cathedral began in 1806.

Work with Elizabeth Ann Seton
In 1806, DuBourg was in New York City to sell lottery tickets as a fundraiser for St. Mary's University, where he met the future saint Elizabeth Ann Seton, who he urged to travel to Baltimore to establish a school for girls. Seton opened her school in June 1808, where women from around the country joined her. DuBourg was influential in the founding of her religious community. He contributed $8,000 to establish her religious community, and proposed that she adopt the rule of the French Sisters of Charity. Heeding this proposal, she established a community of the Sisters of Charity on 31 July 1809, in Emmitsburg, Maryland. While Seton was the head of the organization, DuBourg functioned as their ecclesiastical superior.

Before long, tensions arose between Seton and DuBourg, who forbade her from communicating with her mentor, a Sulpician priest, Pierre Babade. Seton appealed DuBourg's instruction to John Carroll, who referred the matter to Nagot, the Suplician superior in the United States. In response to the dispute, DuBourg resigned as superior of Seton's religious community. Despite Seton's desire that DuBourg would remain as superior, he declined and Nagot refused to order him to return.

Apostolic administrator
With the Louisiana Purchase of 1803, a vast new territory became part of the United States. The first bishop overseeing this territory, which spanned from the Gulf of Mexico to the Illinois Territory, was transferred to another diocese in 1801, leaving the bishopric vacant. The second bishop appointed, Francisco Porró y Reinado, never took possession of the diocese and either died or was appointed to another diocese. Moreover, the vicar general died in 1804, leaving no one to oversee the diocese. While Carroll and the Holy See corresponded to select a new bishop, Carroll named DuBourg the apostolic administrator of the Diocese of Louisiana and the Two Floridas on 18 August 1812.

Upon becoming administrator, DuBourg found an expansive diocese with few priests, hardly any churches, and no Catholic schools or charitable institutions. Upon arriving in New Orleans, he found the local Catholic population aligned with their pastor, a Capuchin priest, Antonio de Sedella. Sedella rejected the jurisdiction of Carroll, an American bishop, to appoint DuBourg as administrator over the French clergy in Louisiana. Due to hostility from the locals, DuBourg was forced to reside outside of the city. Meanwhile, while the Holy See eventually settled on DuBourg as the next bishop, he could not be immediately appointed. Pope Pius VII had been taken prisoner by Napoleon in 1809, and then forcibly brought to France in 1812. In protest of his captivity, Pope Pius refused to issue any papal bulls, including those appointing bishops.

The diocese became embroiled in the War of 1812. During the Battle of New Orleans in 1815, DuBourg called on Catholics to support the Americans over the British. Following the American victory, on 23 January 1815, Major General Andrew Jackson entered the city and was escorted by DuBourg into the St. Louis Cathedral, where he was greeted with a Te Deum hymn.

In order to alleviate the shortage of priests and lack of institutions, DuBourg sailed to Europe in 1815 to recruit priests and fundraise. While in Rome, he was officially appointed by Pius VII as the Bishop of Louisiana and the Two Floridas. He was consecrated by Cardinal Giuseppe Doria Pamphili on 24 September in the Church of San Luigi dei Francesi. He would continue his recruiting in Europe for two years, and while in Lyon, France, he met a widow and expressed his desire to create an organization to raise funds for the church in the vast Louisiana diocese. This eventually became the Society for the Propagation of the Faith several years later.

He eventually sailed to the United States from France on 1 July 1817. He returned with five priests—including several Lazarists from Rome, among whom were Felix de Andreis and Joseph Rosati—and 26 other men from Italy and France—including Antoine Blanc—who intended to become priests or brothers. DuBourg also invited the Ursuline nuns to establish a ministry in the diocese, and nine postulants accepted. He arrived in Annapolis, Maryland on 4 September.

Bishop of Louisiana
Upon returning to his diocese, DuBourg decided that it was not safe for him in New Orleans, and he took up residence in St. Louis, Missouri. As such, he became the first bishop to use the city of St. Louis as his episcopal see. The overland journey from Maryland to St. Louis was perilous and took several weeks. He started out in a stagecoach, which at one point overturned on the rough terrain, causing him to nearly fracture his skull. Unable to continue by stagecoach, he finished the last five days of his journey to Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on foot. From there, he traveled by boat to Louisville and Bardstown, Kentucky. DuBourg finally arrived in St. Louis in January 1818, and would remain there for five years.

Establishing the church in St. Louis
Unlike in New Orleans, DuBourg was warmly received by the Catholics of St. Louis. Shortly after arriving, he began building up the part of the diocese in the Missouri Territory. He soon raised funds to construct churches throughout the region and staff them with priests. Among these was a grand church for St. Louis that would eventually become the cathedral of the Archdiocese of St. Louis and the first cathedral west of the Mississippi River. DuBourg also sought to promote education in the diocese. In order to be able to train priests at home, rather than rely on a European missionaries, he established St. Mary's of the Barrens Seminary in Perryville in 1818, placing it under the charge of the Lazarist fathers. In August of that year, he also recruited the future saint Rose Philippine Duchesne and her religious order from France, the Society of the Sacred Heart, to open schools for girls on the frontier. They founded the Academy of the Sacred Heart in St. Charles as the first free school west of the Mississippi River. They opened another soon thereafter in Florissant. DuBourg also invited the Sisters of Loretto to establish a school for girls.

In 1818, at DuBourg's instruction, the Saint Louis Academy was founded. Operating out of several rented rooms, its purpose was to educate local laymen. Several years later, he requested that the Maryland Jesuits send several of their members to Missouri to staff the diocese's missions to the American Indians. The Jesuits sent several Belgian members, who arrived in 1823, and established a house in Florissant and began ministering to the Indians. DuBourg visited Washington, D.C. in 1823, where he met the U.S. Secretary of War, John C. Calhoun, who encouraged the Jesuit missions and obtained federal funding for the establishment of Indian schools. On 7 January 1824, DuBourg offered the Jesuits to assume control of the academy, which became known as Saint Louis College in 1820. The Jesuits accepted this offer in 1827, and Peter Verhaegen became the first Jesuit president of the college, which was chartered as Saint Louis University several years later. The school's first Jesuit treasurer was Pierre-Jean De Smet, who became a famous missionary to the Indians. The lower division of the academy became St. Louis University High School.

In 1823, DuBourg's time in St. Louis came to an end. While he had visited New Orleans every year while his seat was in St. Louis, he decided it proper to return the diocesan seat to New Orleans and requested the appointment of Joseph Rosati as his coadjutor bishop. He consecrated Rosati on 25 March 1824, and left him to oversee the church in St. Louis.

DuBourg remained in New Orleans for three years, and once again met local opposition. On 28 August 1825, he became the Vicar Apostolic of Mississippi, in addition to his episcopal duties. He found a shortage of priests in Louisiana but faced resistance when trying to establish a seminary in New Orleans or transfer priests from other parts of the diocese. By this time, he was also weary of traveling throughout the expansive diocese. Therefore, DuBourg sailed to Rome, and on 26 June 1826, he resigned the bishopric. Later that year, the large diocese was split into the Diocese of New Orleans and the new Diocese of St. Louis. By the end of his episcopacy, 40 new churches had been built, in addition to many schools. This significant development, however, left the diocese with considerable debt.

Bishop of Montauban
Believing that he would enter retirement, DuBourg returned to France on 3 July 1826. However, soon thereafter, he was named to replace Jean-Louis Lefebvre de Cheverus, the first Bishop of Boston, as the Bishop of Montauban on 2 October of that year. This was possible because with the end of the French Revolution, DuBourg's clerical rights and noble rank were restored. In his writings, he wrote of his dislike for Napoleonic titles of nobility, which carried no social responsibilities, and instead supported a noblesse oblige. Pursuant to the Concordat of 1801, he swore an oath of allegiance to the French government before King Charles X on 13 November 1826.

DuBourg found his episcopacy in France much less taxing than that on the American frontier. At the time he was installed a bishop, the Diocese of Montauban had 242,000 Catholics, 353 priests, grand churches, seminaries and lay schools, and numerous religious orders operating. During his seven years in Montauban, DuBourg improved education in the diocese and increased the number of scholarships for students. He also dissuaded the French authorities from persecuting Catholics in the diocese during the July Revolution of 1830.

Archbishop of Besançon
In February 1833, DuBourg was appointed to succeed Cardinal Louis-François de Rohan-Chabot as the Archbishop of Besançon. By this time, however, his health had deteriorated, and he visited the thermal baths of Luxeuil-les-Bains for relief. He was formally installed as bishop of the archdiocese on 10 October 1833, and he received the pallium on 1 November. Though confined to his deathbed, DuBourg organized two retreats for the 900 priests of his archdiocese. Two months after his installation, he died in Bensançon on 12 December 1833. He was interred in the Cathédrale Saint-Jean in Besançon.

Legacy
Several institutions bear the name of DuBourg. DuBourg Hall at Saint Louis University was dedicated on 10 January 1898. Bishop DuBourg High School in St. Louis, Missouri, opened in 1950.

Slavery
It is known that Dubourg, like two other early bishops in St. Louis, owned slaves. Discussion are ongoing in the archdiocese about how to address the issue.

title: Louis William Valentine DuBourg


text:
McCloy–Zorin Accords

Conceived by Dwight D. Eisenhower and John F. Kennedy, the 1961 McCloy–Zorin Accords between the United States and the Soviet Union established a foundation or "roadmap" for all future negotiations and international treaties with regard to nuclear and general and complete disarmament under effective international control. Effectively aiming at abolishing war as an institution, it was unanimously passed by the UN General Assembly on December 20.

The McCloy–Zorin Accords provided far-reaching measures. The Agreed Principles for General and Complete Disarmament, as they were also known, emphatically declared that war should "no longer [be] an instrument for settling international problems;" "general and complete disarmament" was to be "accompanied by the establishment of reliable procedures for the peaceful settlement of disputes." The agreement also called for the "dismantling of military establishments ... cessation of the production of armaments ... elimination of all stockpiles of nuclear, chemical, bacteriological and other weapons of mass destructions [and] ... discontinuance of military expenditures." Member States were expected to make "agreed manpower" available to the United Nations, such as would be "necessary for an international peace force."

In Britain the trend was viewed with favor, its Foreign and Commonwealth Office apparently being happy "to see much in common between the Russian and the American plans," and aiming at "a master plan of our own, which would lead to the physical destruction of weapons, beginning now, and going on until the business is complete..." In 1963 Mr. Harold Wilson, speaking for the Labour Party in an address to the Fabian Society said that he would like to "establish a separate Ministry of Disarmament."

title: McCloy–Zorin Accords


text: Category:Colombian styles of music

title: Category:Colombian styles of music


text:
Robert Steen

Robert Ashley Steen, (August 12, 1933 in Winnipeg, Manitoba – May 10, 1979) was a politician in Manitoba, Canada. He was a Progressive Conservative member of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba from 1966 to 1969, and later served as the 38th Mayor of Winnipeg from 1977 to 1979.

Steen was educated at the University of Manitoba and the Manitoba Law School, was called to the Manitoba bar in 1959 and worked as a barrister and solicitor. In March 1979, he was appointed Queen's Counsel for his exceptional merit and contribution to the legal profession.

His brother Warren also served on Winnipeg city council and in the provincial assembly.

Steen was an adviser to the federal Minister of Veterans Affairs in 1961, and to the provincial Minister of Education in 1965.

He was elected to the Manitoba legislature in the 1966 provincial election, winning a relatively easy victory in the Winnipeg riding of St. Matthews. For the next three years, he served as a backbench supporter of the governments of Dufferin Roblin and Walter Weir.

The Progressive Conservatives were defeated by the New Democratic Party in the 1969 provincial election, and Steen lost his seat to NDP candidate Wally Johannson by almost 800 votes. He tried to return to the legislature in the 1973 provincial election, but finished third against Liberal leader Izzy Asper in the riding of Wolseley.

He had much greater success in municipal politics. Steen was elected to the Winnipeg City Council in the elections of 1971 and 1974. Originally aligned with the right-wing Independent Citizens' Election Committee, Steen later broke away from this group and emerged as an independent centrist.

In 1977, Winnipeg mayor Stephen Juba announced his retirement after twenty years in office. He made this announcement in the most dramatic manner possible, waiting until almost the last moment before declaring that he would not file nomination papers (many believe he did this to prevent Bernie Wolfe from organizing a campaign to succeed him).

Steen, who had entered the race as a long-shot candidate, suddenly found himself supported by Juba's north-end support base. Although not a left-wing candidate, he was seen by many on the left as more palatable than Bill Norrie, the candidate of the ICEC. The results were extremely close, with Steen defeating Norrie by 69,818 votes to 67,999.

Steen had developed a reputation as a master deal maker during his time in council but died of liver cancer on May 10, 1979 soon after taking office. Bill Norrie easily won the by-election that followed.

He served as chairman of the board for the Misericordia Hospital in Winnipeg, the hospital where he was born and later died.

In 1980, the National Film Board of Canada issued a documentary film entitled "The New Mayor", covering Steen's rise to power.

The Robert A. Steen Day Hospital [a part of Riverview Health Centre] and the Robert A. Steen Community Centre are named in his honour. Additionally, the annual winner of the Manitoba Marathon is awarded the Mayor Robert Steen Memorial Trophy. Finally, The Mayor Robert Steen Memorial Trophy is awarded annually to the top pins over average bowler at the Manitoba Master Bantam Junior 5 Pin Bowling Tournament.

title: Robert Steen


text: User talk:68.109.100.48

title: User talk:68.109.100.48


text: User:Elitcher

title: User:Elitcher


text: User talk:69.212.31.20

title: User talk:69.212.31.20


text:
The School for Wives

The School for Wives (L'école des femmes; ) is a theatrical comedy written by the seventeenth century French playwright Molière and considered by some critics to be one of his finest achievements. It was first staged at the Palais Royal theatre on 26 December 1662 for the brother of the King. The play depicts a character who is so intimidated by femininity that he resolves to marry his young, naïve ward and proceeds to make clumsy advances to this purpose. It raised some outcry from the public and established Molière as a bold playwright who would not be afraid to write about controversial issues. In June 1663, the playwright cunningly responded to the uproar with another piece entitled La Critique de L'École des femmes, which provided some insight into his unique style of comedy.

Characters and scene
The characters are:
 * Arnolphe, a bachelor who also uses the noble-sounding name of Monsieur de la Souche
 * Agnès, his innocent teenage ward
 * Alain, a peasant who is one of his servants
 * Georgette, a peasant who is another of his servants
 * Chrysalde, one of his friends
 * Horace, a young man in love with Agnès
 * Oronte, another friend of Arnolphe's, and father of Horace
 * Enrique, Chrysalde's brother-in-law, and father of Agnès

The scene is a square in a provincial town.

Plot
Arnolphe, the protagonist, is a mature man who has groomed the young Agnès since she was 4 years old. Arnolphe supports Agnès living in a nunnery until the age of 17, when he moves her to one of his abodes, which he keeps under the name of Monsieur de la Souche. Arnolphe's intention is to bring up Agnès in such a manner that she will be too ignorant to be unfaithful to him and he becomes obsessed with avoiding this fate. To this end, he forbids the nuns who are instructing her from teaching her anything that might lead her astray. Right from the very first scene, a friend of his, Chrysalde, warns Arnolphe that such a scheme will likely fail, but Arnolphe takes no heed.

After Agnès moves into Arnolphe's house, Arnolphe meets by chance Horace, the young son of Arnolphe's friend Oronte, whom Arnolphe had not seen in years. Not realizing that Arnolphe and Monsieur de la Souche are the same person, Horace unwittingly confides to Arnolphe he had been visiting Agnès for the past week while the master of the house, one Monsieur de la Souche, was away.

Arnolphe then schemes to outmaneuver Horace and to ensure that Agnès will marry him.

Arnolphe becomes more and more frustrated as the play goes on. Agnès continues to meet with Horace despite Arnolphe's displeasure until, finally, a misunderstanding leads Arnolphe to believe that Agnès has agreed to marry him and Agnès to believe that Arnolphe has given her permission to marry Horace. When they realize the actual situation, Arnolphe forbids Agnès from seeing Horace. Horace, in his distress, comes to Arnolphe, asking for his help in rescuing Agnès from "Monsieur de la Souche".

In the final act Oronte and Enrique arrive and announce that Horace is to marry Enrique's daughter. The daughter turns out to be Agnès, rendering all of Arnolphe's scheming useless.

Reception and significance
In the small but culturally significant world of Parisian theatre, the play created a sensation. Comedy had been looked down on by the intellectual élite as a minor genre, lacking dignity and solidity, until Molière replaced its fantastical characters and plots with individuals and situations close to real life. Talking of the stage, he said:
 * You've achieved nothing if you don't get people of today to recognise themselves.

While his characters may have the dramatic necessity of one overriding trait, the more important ones have added complexity and even ambiguity. Supreme perhaps is the tantalising opacity of Agnès, who herself says very little in the play but has left readers and viewers intrigued ever since over how innocent she really is.

Twentieth-century theatrical productions

 * The Compagnie Jouvet of Paris staged the play at the first Edinburgh International Festival in 1947
 * Let Wives Tak Tent, a free translation into Scots by Robert Kemp, was first performed at the Gateway Theatre in Edinburgh in 1948
 * First produced on Broadway, performed in French, with Louis Jouvet at the ANTA Playhouse from 18 March to 3 April 1951.
 * A production using the Richard Wilbur translation was staged at the Lyceum Theatre, on Broadway from 16 February to 29 May 1971, directed by Stephen Porter, with cast members Brian Bedford as Arnolphe, Joan Van Ark as Agnes, and David Dukes as Horace.
 * 1983Ingmar Bergmandirected a TV version of the play, starring Allan Edwall as Arnolphe, Lena Nyman as Agnes, and Stellan Skarsgård as Horace.
 * 1983-84György Fehér directed a Hungarian Tv movie based on the play.

Audio recordings

 * The play was adapted for audio in 1965 by Daniel Bernet, in a production directed by Bertrand Jérome, with music by Michel Puig, starring François Périer as Arnolfe, issued on the Sonores Bordas label.
 * In 1971, Caedmon Records recorded and released on LP (TRS 344) a production originally performed at the Lyceum Theatre in New York City using the Richard Wilbur translation and directed by Stephen Porter. The cast included Brian Bedford as Arnolphe, Joan Van Ark as Agnes and David Dukes as Horace. This recording has not to date been re-released on CD.
 * In 2009, L.A. Theatre Works recorded a production using the Richard Wilbur translation (ISBN 1-58081-384-4) featuring William Brown as Arnolphe and Judy Greer as Agnes.

Related articles

 * Iceberg (short story)

title: The School for Wives


text: Category:Jazz genres

title: Category:Jazz genres


text: User talk:69.47.235.72

title: User talk:69.47.235.72


text: User:LeaMaimone/Taxobox (Primates)

title: User:LeaMaimone/Taxobox (Primates)