text:
Talk:Ivaylo of Bulgaria

Untitled
This article is outdated and does not correspond to the modern historian views. The fact is that Ivailo was called a "swineherd" by the byzantines who started hating him after a succesfull series of battles against the Byzantine empire in which Ivailo was known not to keep any alive prisoners. In no other source was he called a peasant or a swineheard.

>>> This is not true, Burdokva is a bulgarian nickname which means cabbage, and was incorrectly recorded by Georgi Pachimer as Kor-do-kuvas, an attempt at transliteration. I am thinking I will update this article.....

Historians started asking themselves long time ago, is it actually possible for a "swineheard" to defeat the perfect war machine of the so called Tartars - namely the Mongols,

>>> He actually lost battles to the main Mongol force commanded by Nogai himself; his early victories were against poorly organized troops

who were unobstructedly ravaging through Europe at the time, and be so easily crowned as car. Having byzantine sources that call enemy rulers with insulting names is not an isolated case. Modern historians do not accept the possibility of a peasant becoming a monarch in such a short time. Unfortunately Bulgarian sources are not abundant and though his personality seems to be shrouded in mystery the modern view is that it is highly possible that Ivailo was a boyar or other aristocracy member, who was actually educated in millitary tactics and had the social support to become a monarch.

Ivailo was also most likely a vegetarian if not a Bogomil, which explains a lot of the mystery surrounding his behaviour and persona.

The legent of the "peasant tsar" was gladly embraced by the communists, because in him they were seeing the social emblem of the ruling working class. I guess another good example of using Ivailo`s personality for imposing ideas.

>>> Yes, marxist historians love this guy :) 75.168.80.133 (talk) 06:54, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Transliteration
I replaced Ivaylo with Ivailo. The correct (and adopted by the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences) Latin rendering should be Ivajlo, but I am aware it is not popular and will be replaced immediately by the next person who reads the article. It would also pose difficulty in reading the name by an English-speaker. In Slavic Latin alphabet, the letter Y renders the sound between I and Ǎ, called in Russian yery, ы, like in RYBA (Polish, Czech, Russian, Ukrainian). This letter should not be used to denote consonant I (Bulgarian and Russian"i kratko", Й), which should be rendered with J (at least in initial position). 85.11.148.52 08:46, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Acording the new rules for tranliteration of Bulgarian names, recognized by the Council of Science of the institute at the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences and approved by the Ministerial council of Bulgaria, his name should be transliterated as Ivaylo. Please, check COMPREHENSIBLE BULGARIA! ---Nauka (talk) 13:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Siege of Silistra
The book cited as reference says on page 198 that Ivaylo was sieged for 3 months in Silistra by the Byzantines, while this articles says the attackers were Mongols. Could someone check this?Baltaci (talk) 21:08, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Nicknames
Why was he nicknamed after vegetables? Tad Lincoln (talk) 04:16, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

>>>Because supposedly that is all he ate, vegetables and bread, before usurping the throne. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.168.80.133 (talk) 06:55, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ivaylo of Bulgaria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140204035315/http://www.britannica.com/list/20/7/the-cabbage-ivaylo-tsar-of-bulgaria to http://www.britannica.com/list/20/7/the-cabbage-ivaylo-tsar-of-bulgaria
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140809221023/http://www.historythathappened.com/category/bulgaria/ to http://www.historythathappened.com/category/bulgaria/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140718171724/http://panacomp.net/bulgaria?s=bugarska_ovec to http://www.panacomp.net/bulgaria?s=bugarska_ovec

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:56, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ivaylo of Bulgaria


text:
Wilson Sporting Goods

The Wilson Sporting Goods Company is an American sports equipment manufacturer based in Chicago, Illinois. Wilson makes equipment for many sports, among them baseball, badminton, American football, basketball, fastpitch softball, golf, racquetball, soccer, squash, tennis, pickleball and volleyball.

The company owns the brands Atec, DeMarini, EvoShield, Louisville Slugger, and Luxilon to provide sports equipment and protective gear for baseball, lacrosse, softball, and tennis. The company has been a subsidiary of Finnish retailer Amer Sports since 1989.

History
The company traces its roots to the "Schwarzschild & Sulzberger" meatpacking company (later changed to "Sulzberger & Son's") based in New York, that operated meat packing slaughterhouses.

Sulzberger & Son's founded the "Ashland Manufacturing Company" in 1913 to use animal by-products from its slaughterhouses. It started out in 1914, making tennis racket strings, violin strings, and surgical sutures, but soon expanded into baseball shoes and tennis racquets.

In 1915, Thomas E. Wilson, former president of meatpacker Morris & Company, was appointed president by the controlling banks and renamed the company "Thomas E. Wilson Company". The company acquired the Hetzinger Knitting Mills to produce athletic uniforms and a caddie bag company which produced golf balls but soon expanded into footballs and basketballs.

In 1918, Wilson left to concentrate on the beef-packing business, changing the Sulzberger company to Wilson & Co. (which would ultimately become Iowa Beef Packers and then be taken over by Tyson Foods). The packing company continued to have control in the company until 1967 when it was sold to Ling-Temco-Vought.

Under new president Lawrence Blaine Icely, it acquired the "Chicago Sporting Goods Company" and struck a deal to supply the Chicago Cubs. It also hired Arch Turner, a leather designer who would design the leather football.

In 1922, it introduced the Ray Schalk catcher's mitt which later became the standard. It worked with Knute Rockne to introduce the double-lined leather football and first valve football and the first waist-line football pants with pads. In 1925, it was renamed "Wilson-Western Sporting Goods" following a distribution agreement with "Western Sporting Goods".

After Rockne's death, the company focused on golf, introducing the R-90, a sand wedge golf club inspired by Gene Sarazen's victory in the 1932 British Open.

In 1931, it renamed itself "Wilson Sporting Goods Company". During World War II it introduced the Wilson Duke football, featuring high-quality leather, ends that were hand-sewn, lock-stitch seams, and triple lining, which was adopted as the official ball of the National Football League in 1941; this partnership between Wilson and NFL has continued since.

Horween Leather Company has supplied Wilson with pebbled cowhide since 1941 for use in the manufacture of footballs and basketballs. Wilson is Horween Leather Company's largest customer.

Wilson became the official game ball supplier of the newly-formed Basketball Association of America (BAA; the forerunner league of what would eventually become today's NBA) in 1946, this partnership would last 37 years until 1983.

After World War II, Wilson focused on tennis and signed Jack Kramer, who developed its line of Jack Kramer signed tennis rackets. L. B. Icely died in 1950, but the company continued to expand. In 1955, it acquired Ohio-Kentucky Manufacturing for making footballs.

In 1964, Wilson acquired "Wonder Products Company", which made toys and custom-molded items. The company transformed the custom-mold section to make protective equipment for American football and baseball, such as face masks for football helmets and leg guards for baseball catchers.

In 1967, the company was acquired by Ling-Temco-Vought. Only three years later, PepsiCo became Wilson's new owner. In those days, the company manufactured and commercialized the official balls of both the NBA and NFL, and provided most of the uniforms of teams in Major League Baseball (MLB) and the United States Summer Olympics teams.

In 1979, Wilson tennis balls were first used in the US Open, and still are used to this day. In 2006, the Australian Open began using Wilson tennis balls. In 1985, Wilson was acquired by Westray Capital Corporation, through subsidiary WSGC Holdings. In 1989, WSGC merged with Bogey Acquisitions Company, which is affiliated with the Finnish group Amer Sports.

In May 2020, it was announced that Wilson became the NBA and WNBA's official game ball supplier, starting with the 2021 season; Wilson replaced Spalding, after the latter company's 37-year partnership with the league ended, thus returning Wilson as the game ball supplier to the NBA.

Products
Wilson manufactures and commercializes a variety of products for several sports. The following chart contains all the product lines by the company.

 * Notes

Louisville Slugger
The Louisville Slugger brand baseball bat has been manufactured since 1884, and has been very popular in professional baseball for many decades. The bat was endorsed by Honus Wagner in 1905 (likely the first endorsement of a product by an American professional athlete), and was used by Babe Ruth along with many other baseball stars through history.

The Louisville Slugger brand was controlled and manufactured by Hillerich & Bradsby from 1884 until 2015, when the brand was bought by Wilson. The brand complements Wilson's existing DeMarini subsidiary which also produces bats. Hillerich & Bradsby remains an independent business and continues to manufacture bats as an exclusive supplier for Wilson. The company also operates Louisville Slugger Museum and Factory, an attraction in downtown Louisville, Kentucky which showcases the story of Louisville Slugger baseball bats in baseball and in American history.

P72 baseball bat
The P72 model Louisville Slugger bat was created in 1954 (while the brand was still under the ownership of Hillerich & Bradsby) for career minor leaguer Les Pinkham, and became one of baseball's most popular bats. Baseball Hall of Famers Cal Ripken Jr. and Robin Yount are among the players who used the P72 over the years. New York Yankee star Derek Jeter used the P72 for every at bat in his 20 MLB seasons, with over 12,500 plate appearances and 3,749 P72 models ordered.

On September 25, 2014, in honor of Jeter's impending retirement, the P72 designation was retired, and the bat was renamed the DJ2 (Jeter wore #2). Descendants of Les Pinkam will still be allowed to get the bat with its P72 designation. In addition to retiring the P72 model number, Louisville Slugger also promised to give the final 72 P72 bats produced to Jeter to raise funds for his Turn 2 Foundation.

American football
Wilson has been the official game ball supplier of the NFL and CFL since 1941 and 1995, respectively, and the now defunct UFL and AAF; in addition, the company also makes footballs for college and high school levels of play.

Baseball
Wilson makes a variety of baseball gloves for several different patterns. Wilson has three main series of baseball gloves, the A2K, the A2000, and the A1000, as well as many other models for younger children. The A2K is made from Wilson's Pro Stock Select leather, which is made from triple sorting their famous pro stock leather. A stock A2K (Pro Stock select leather) retails for US$399. The A2000, made from Wilson's Pro Stock leather, is the oldest glove series Wilson offers. The A2000 retails for US$299. The A1000 is made from Wilson's top-shelf leather and retails US$149. Some of Wilson's most famous patterns include the datdude, 1786, Dp15, 1787, 1776, 1788, 1799, 2800, M1, 1791 Pudge, and many others.

Basketball
Wilson has been the official ball supplier for many FIBA competitions, the NBA, the WNBA, the NCAA basketball championship tournaments the BAL, and many others.

Golf
Wilson Staff is the golf division of Wilson Sporting Goods. The company designs and manufactures a full range of golf equipment, accessories and clothing using the Wilson Staff, ProStaff and Ultra brands.

Many of the world's top professional golfers have used Wilson equipment including Nick Faldo, Arnold Palmer and Ben Crenshaw; the latter two of whom used Wilson 8802 putters. Crenshaw's even received the moniker Little Ben due to his proficiency with it. Current Wilson Staff players include British Open and PGA Championship champion Pádraig Harrington.

Soccer
Wilson has been the official ball supplier for NCAA soccer.

Tennis
Wilson is a major manufacturer of tennis rackets. The original kevlar Pro Staff model racket, known for its use by Pete Sampras, was heavy (more than 350g strung) and small-headed (85 sq. in.); Roger Federer also used the same racket model. In 2015, he used the Pro Staff RF97 Autograph model that is heavy (340 g/12 oz unstrung) and larger (97 sq. in.). Jim Courier and Stefan Edberg also used the Pro Staff Original, Edberg later switching to the Pro Staff Classic in 1991, which was the same racket (85 sq. in. with slightly rounded frame edges) but with different paint work. In late 2009, Wilson unveiled their latest line of rackets, codenamed 20x, which they would later rename BLX. This line directly replaces their previous K-Factor series with all new technologies. Also, many pros use custom-made rackets that perform differently from the mass-produced versions.

Aside from tennis rackets, the Wilson sporting goods company also makes tennis balls (including the official balls of the US Open and starting in 2020, the French Open major championships), shoes, balls, strings, clothes, and racquet bags.

Volleyball
Wilson is the official ball supplier of the AVP. In 2021, Wilson developed a brand partnership with Crossnet.

In popular culture
A Wilson volleyball "co-starred" alongside Tom Hanks in the film Cast Away. Hanks' character named the ball, with a smiling face drawn from a bloody handprint, which he became deeply attached to, "Wilson" in the film. After the success of the film, Wilson Sporting Goods actually created and marketed special edition volleyballs with Wilson's "face" printed on.

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

title: Wilson Sporting Goods


text:
Major League Baseball All-Star Game Most Valuable Player Award

The Major League Baseball All-Star Game Most Valuable Player (MVP) Award is an annual Major League Baseball (MLB) award that is presented to the most outstanding player in each year's MLB All-Star Game. Awarded each season since 1962 (two games were held and an award was presented to each game winner in 1962), it was originally called the Arch Ward Memorial Award in honor of Arch Ward, the man who conceived of the All-Star Game in 1933. The award's name was changed to the Commissioner's Trophy in 1970 (two National League (NL) players were presented the award in 1975), but this name change was reversed in 1985 when the World Series Trophy was renamed the Commissioner's Trophy. Finally, the trophy was renamed the Ted Williams Most Valuable Player Award in 2002, in honor of former Boston Red Sox player Ted Williams, who had died earlier that year. No award was presented for the 2002 All-Star Game, which ended in a tie. Thus, the Anaheim Angels' Garret Anderson was the first recipient of the newly named Ted Williams Award in 2003. The All-Star Game Most Valuable Player also receives a Chevrolet vehicle, choosing between two cars.

, NL players have won the award 28 times (including one award shared by two players), and American League (AL) players have won 33 times. Baltimore Orioles players have won the most awards for a single franchise (with six); players from the Cincinnati Reds, Los Angeles Dodgers and San Francisco Giants are tied for the most in the NL with five each. Five players have won the award twice: Willie Mays (1963, 1968), Steve Garvey (1974, 1978), Gary Carter (1981, 1984), Cal Ripken Jr. (1991, 2001), and Mike Trout (2014, 2015, becoming the only player to win the award in back-to-back years). The award has been shared by multiple players once; Bill Madlock and Jon Matlack shared the award in 1975. Two players have won the award for a game in which their league lost: Brooks Robinson in 1966 and Carl Yastrzemski in 1970. One pair of awardees were father and son (Ken Griffey Sr. and Ken Griffey Jr.), and another were brothers (Roberto Alomar and Sandy Alomar Jr.). Three players have won the MVP award at a game played in their home ballpark (Sandy Alomar Jr. in 1997, Pedro Martínez in 1999, and Shane Bieber in 2019). Derek Jeter is the only player to win the All-Star Game MVP and World Series MVP in the same season, doing so in 2000.

Elías Díaz of the Colorado Rockies is the most recent MLB All-Star Game MVP, winning the award in 2023 and becoming the first Rockie to be named MVP. Only six players have won the MVP award in their only All-Star Game appearance; LaMarr Hoyt, Bo Jackson, J. D. Drew, Melky Cabrera, Eric Hosmer, and Elías Díaz. Only the Chicago White Sox, the Detroit Tigers, the Arizona Diamondbacks, the St. Louis Cardinals and the Washington Nationals (aside from their predecessor the Montreal Expos) have never had a player win the All-Star Game MVP award.


text:
Members of the Western Australian Legislative Assembly

Following are lists of members of the Western Australian Legislative Assembly:


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aggregation awareness

 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. – ABCD 22:31, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Aggregation awareness
It would be nice to think that the writer knew what he or she was talking about, because there's no clue for the casual reader. This might as well be in Swahili for all I can get out of it. And the phrase "Aggregation awareness" gets a mammoth 15 Google hits. Grutness|hello? 04:06, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Deletion optimizer directs the admins to use the highest level of delete available. - Jersyko 04:28, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Maybe a merge to query optimizer? The sum total of my experience with database systems is a two-hour intro ten years ago, so I can't vouch for its accuracy, but it seems reasonable. —Korath (Talk) 19:07, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the fact that this apparently isn't the usual name for this isn't helping. "Aggregation awareness" as a phrase only occurs in Oracle 8i marketing blurbs and as a section heading in a paper.  The more well-known concepts appear to be materialized views and aggregation tables (and perhaps summary tables) — see view and table. And read this. Uncle G 02:35, 2005 Apr 16 (UTC)
 * Delete as content-free. --Carnildo 22:36, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, indeed content-free, and a dictdef even if the words meant something. Tempshill 22:37, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Nonsense without context. Dsmdgold 01:48, Apr 16, 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:
Symphony No. 39 (Mozart)

The Symphony No. 39 in E♭ major of Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, K. 543, was completed on 26 June 1788.

Composition
The Symphony No. 39 is the first of a set of three (his last symphonies) that Mozart composed in rapid succession during the summer of 1788. No. 40 was completed on 25 July and No. 41 on 10 August. Nikolaus Harnoncourt argues that Mozart composed the three symphonies as a unified work, pointing, among other things, to the fact that the Symphony No. 39 has a grand introduction (in the manner of an overture) but no coda.

Around the time that he composed the three symphonies, Mozart was writing his piano trios in E major and C major (K. 542 and K. 548), his sonata facile (K. 545), and a violin sonatina (K. 547). Mozart biographer Alfred Einstein has suggested that Mozart took Michael Haydn's Symphony No. 26, in the same key, as a model.

Premiere
It seems to be impossible to determine the date of the premiere of the 39th Symphony on the basis of currently available evidence; in fact, it cannot be established whether the symphony was ever performed in the composer's lifetime. According to, around the time Mozart wrote the work, he was preparing to hold a series of "Concerts in the Casino", in a new casino in the Spiegelgasse owned by Philipp Otto. Mozart even sent a pair of tickets for this series to his friend Michael von Puchberg. But it seems impossible to determine whether the concert series was held or was cancelled for lack of interest. In addition, in the period up to the end of his life, Mozart participated in various other concerts the programs of which included an unidentified symphony; these also could have been the occasion of the premiere of the 39th (for details, see Symphony No. 40 (Mozart)).

First eyewitness account
However, we now have what is likely the first known eyewitness account of the performance of the 39th Symphony. An all-Mozart memorial concert took place in Hamburg in March 1792, where the verified performance of this symphony was noted by an eyewitness named Iwan Anderwitsch, who describes the start of the symphony as follows: "The opening is so majestic that it so surprised even the coldest, most insensitive listener and non-expert, that even if he wanted to chat, it prevented him from being inattentive, and thus, so to speak, put him in a position to become all ears. It then becomes [so] fiery, full, ineffably grand and rich in ideas, with striking variety in almost all obbligato parts, that it is nearly impossible to follow so rapidly with ear and feeling, and one is nearly paralyzed. This actual paralysis became visible in various connoisseurs and friends of music, and some admitted that they would never have been able to think or imagine they would hear something like this performed so splendidly in Hamburg."

In modern times, the work is part of the core symphonic repertoire and is frequently performed and recorded.

Instrumentation and movements
The symphony is scored for flute, two clarinets, two bassoons, two horns, two trumpets, timpani and strings.

There are four movements:

1.

2. Adagio, (Alla breve) — Allegro, (in sonata form)

3. Andante con moto in A♭ major, (in modified sonata form without development)

4. Menuetto (Allegretto) — Trio, (in compound ternary form)

5. Allegro, (in sonata form)

I. Adagio – Allegro

The first movement opens with a majestic introduction with fanfares heard in the brass section. This is followed by an Allegro in sonata form, though while several features – the loud outburst following the soft opening, for instance – connect it with the galant school that influences the earliest of his symphonies. The independence of the winds and greater interplay of the parts in general, and the fact that the second theme group contains several themes (including a particularly felicitous "walking theme") compared to those earlier symphonies whose second groups were practically always completely trivial, are just a very few of the points that distinguish this movement from those earlier works, from which it has more differences than similarities.

II. Andante con moto
The slow movement, in abridged sonata form, i.e. no development section, starts quietly in the strings and expands into the rest of the orchestra. Quiet main material and energetic, somewhat agitated transitions characterize this movement. The key is A♭ major, the subdominant of E♭ major.

III. Menuetto (Allegretto)
The work has a very interesting minuet and trio. The trio is an Austrian folk dance called a "Ländler" and features a clarinet solo. The forceful Menuetto is set off by the trio's unusual tint of the second clarinet playing arpeggios in its low (chalumeau) register. The melody for this particular folk dance derived from local drinking songs which were popular in Vienna during the late 18th century.

IV. Allegro
The finale is another sonata form whose main theme, like that of the later string quintet in D, is mostly a scale, here ascending and descending. The development section is dramatic; there is no coda, but both the exposition, and the development through the end of the recapitulation, are requested to be, and often are, repeated.

title: Symphony No. 39 (Mozart)


text:
Orbital Space Plane Program

The Orbital Space Plane (OSP) program was a NASA spaceplane concept in the early 2000s designed to support the International Space Station requirements for crew rescue, crew transport and contingency cargo transport. It was part of the Space Launch Initiative.

When NASA began the Constellation program in 2004, NASA transferred the knowledge gained on the OSP to the development of the Crew Exploration Vehicle.

Origin
A small, low-cost 'Assured Crew Return Vehicle' (ACRV) had been envisaged for the International Space Station, serving as an emergency evacuation capability. The X-38 was the prototype. This evolved into the Orbital Space Plane concept: rather than being only a lifeboat, the OSP would serve as a crew transport vehicle to and from the ISS. This had been expected to enter service by 2010.

The Space Launch Initiative program began with the award of reusable launch vehicle study contracts in 2000. In November 2002 it was evolved into the Orbital Space Plane Program and the Next Generation Launch Technology Program.

Function
Future versions of the Orbital Space Plane would have been launched on an existing Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle (EELV) rocket to carry crews to the International Space Station. It was envisaged that the OSP would operate alongside the Space Shuttle with the OSP responsible for crew flights and the shuttle handling construction and cargo flights. At the time, the shuttle program was not yet set for retirement and was thought to be technically viable up until the 2030s. Thus it was expected that the two spacecraft would complement each other throughout the lifespan of the ISS. One advantage of this approach would have been assured human access to space; the lack of this capability was to be highlighted starkly with the loss of Space Shuttle Columbia.

Top level requirements for the Orbital Space Plane and its related systems were approved in February 2003. In March 2003, the program began evaluating system operations to ensure the alignment of systems design between the NASA mission and the contractor design.

Transfer to the CEV program
The Crew Exploration Vehicle program was based on four groups of concepts considered for the physical design of the space plane itself — or the vehicle architecture: a capsule, a lifting body, a sharp body with wings and a blunt body with wings.

After the Columbia accident investigation, the capsule design with a separate escape system was considered the optimal design for crew safety.

Other program components
Other components of the OSP program were the X-37 and the DART.

The X-37 vehicle was designed to flight test advancing technologies to reduce the risk of future reusable launch vehicle systems, including the Orbital Space Plane.

The Demonstration for Autonomous Rendezvous Technology or DART, was another flight demonstrator vehicle designed to test technologies required to locate and rendezvous with other spacecraft. Using onboard guidance sensors, DART would have performed a series of maneuvers around a retired satellite. However, after a successful launch, unknown problems with the guidance system caused the vehicle to run out of thruster fuel prematurely, ending the mission before all objectives could be carried out.

In 2010, Orbital Sciences Corporation reused some work done under OSP program contracts for its Prometheus spacecraft proposal to NASA under phase 2 of the Commercial Crew Development program.

title: Orbital Space Plane Program


text:
Members of the Western Australian Legislative Council

Following are lists of members of the Western Australian Legislative Council:

Prior to responsible government:

 * 1832–1870
 * 1870–1872
 * 1872–1874
 * 1874–1880
 * 1880–1884
 * 1884–1889
 * 1889–1890
 * 1890–1894

After responsible government:

Under proportional representation:

 * 1989–1993
 * 1993–1997
 * 1997–2001
 * 2001–2005
 * 2005–2009
 * 2009–2013
 * 2013–2017
 * 2017–2021
 * 2021–2025


text:
Jamie Gangel

Jamie Sue Gangel (born 1955) is an American television news reporter working as a CNN special correspondent. She joined NBC News in 1983 as a general assignment and political correspondent based in Washington, DC, and was a frequent contributor to NBC Nightly News, Today, Dateline NBC and MSNBC. She became a national correspondent for the NBC News' Today show in February 1992.

Early life and education
Gangel was born and raised in New York City, the daughter of Richard I. Gangel and Phyllis Gangel-Jacob. Her parents divorced eleven months after her birth. Her mother is a retired justice of the New York Supreme Court. Gangel was raised in the Jewish faith. Gangel earned a Bachelor of Science degree from Georgetown University's Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service in 1977. She attended Harvard University in 1976, where she studied international economics.

Career
Gangel began her career in broadcast journalism in 1978 as an assignment editor for WJLA-TV in Washington, D.C. At the same time, she worked for all-news radio station WTOP-AM, the CBS affiliate in Washington. In 1982, she joined television station WPLG-TV in Miami, Florida as a general assignment reporter and substitute anchor.

Gangel broadcast some of the first reports of the September 11, 2001 attacks from New York, including confirming that the Pentagon had been hit by a plane and that the CIA offices had been evacuated. Her exclusive interviews have included Frank Zappa and former Presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.

On August 24, 2015, Gangel began a new phase of her career as a Special Correspondent for CNN. On July 14, 2024, she garnered criticism for downplaying an assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump.

Personal life
Gangel is married to New York Times bestselling author Daniel Silva and they have two children, twins Lily and Nicholas. The family resides in Florida. Silva converted to Judaism as an adult.

Awards
Gangel has won numerous awards for reporting, including the
 * Edward R. Murrow Award, presented by the Radio-Television News Directors Association;
 * Gracie Award, by the American Women in Radio and Television;
 * Clarion Award, and the
 * Associated Press Award for Best Spot News Coverage.

title: Jamie Gangel


text:
Symphony No. 35 (Mozart)

Symphony No. 35 in D major, K. 385, also known as the Haffner Symphony, was composed by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart in 1782. It was commissioned by the Haffners, a prominent Salzburg family, for the occasion of the ennoblement of. The Haffner Symphony should not be confused with the eight-movement Haffner Serenade, another piece Mozart wrote on commission from the same family in 1776.

Background
The Haffner Symphony did not start its life as a symphony, but rather as a serenade to be used as background music for the ennoblement of Sigmund Haffner. The Mozarts knew the Haffners through Sigmund Haffner's father,, who had been mayor of Salzburg and who had helped them out on their early tours of Europe. The elder Haffner died in 1772, but the families remained in contact. In 1776, the younger Haffner commissioned a serenade for the wedding of Marie Elizabeth Haffner to Franz Xavier Spath. This work became the famous Haffner Serenade, which was so successful that, when the younger Sigmund Haffner was to be ennobled, it was only natural that Mozart was called upon to write the music for the occasion. The request to write music actually came via Mozart's father on 20 July 1782 when Mozart had no spare time. Mozart was "up to his eyeballs with work". Not only was he teaching, but he also had to rearrange the score of his opera Die Entführung aus dem Serail before July 28. In addition to these demands, his proposed marriage to Constanze Weber was threatened by a number of complications, including moving to a house on the Hohe Brücke in Vienna. Nevertheless, Mozart worked on the music, and sent it through section by section to his father. What Mozart wrote at this time was a new serenade – a completely different work from the serenade presented four years earlier – with an introductory march and two minuets. According to historical evidence, it is quite possible that Mozart did not actually meet his father's deadline to have the music completed by Sigmund Haffner's ennoblement. Mozart later reworked this music into what we now know as the Haffner Symphony.

At the end of December 1782, Mozart decided to present music from the new Haffner serenade at a concert. After asking his father to send the score of the serenade back again, Mozart was amazed at its quality, given the fact that it was composed in so short a time. He set to work to make a number of alterations to the score in order to convert the new Haffner serenade into the Haffner symphony. These alterations included dropping the introductory march (K. 385a) and one of the two minuets (now lost). In addition, the repeat signs were removed from the end of the first movement's exposition. Mozart also gave the Haffner Symphony a fuller sound by adding two flutes and two clarinets to the woodwind section of the first and last movements. These added woodwind parts are not new melodic material, but simply a doubling of octaves within the woodwinds.

The Haffner Symphony, as we know it today, received its first performance on 23 March 1783 at the Vienna Burgtheater. At the concert, Mozart opened matters with the first three movements of this symphony, the aria "Se il padre perdei" from Idomeneo (described in his letter to his father of March 29 that year as his Munich opera), piano concerto no. 13 K. 415, a scena K. 369 (a genre related to the concert aria), the concertante movements from his last Finalmusik K. 320, his piano concerto K. 175 (with a new finale), and another scena, "Parto, m'affretto" (from the opera Lucio Silla, which he had composed for Milan); at this point he improvised a fugue "because the Emperor was present" and then two sets of variations (K. 398 on an aria by Paisiello and K. 455 on an aria by Gluck). After this, Madame (Aloysia) Lange sang his new rondo (K. 416?) and then to finish the concert, the last movement of the Haffner Symphony was played. The performance of the Haffner Symphony at this concert proved very successful.

Cuyler (1995) classifies the Haffner, Linz (No. 36) and Prague (No. 38) symphonies as "three symphonies that transcend all his former symphonic works."

The autograph manuscript currently resides in the archives of the Morgan Library & Museum in New York City.

Anton Reicha used the theme which opens the symphony for a fugue in his set of 36 Fugues.

Instrumentation
The symphony is scored for two flutes, two oboes, two clarinets in A, two bassoons, two horns in D and G, two trumpets in D, timpani, and strings.

The key
The Haffner Symphony is in the key of D major. Mozart's choice of key for the Haffner Symphony is interesting, according to Cuyler, because "the key of D major, which was so felicitous for the winds, served Mozart more often than any other key, even C, for his symphonies," including the Paris (No. 31) and Prague (No. 38) symphonies.

Movements
The symphony is in four movements:

 * 1) Allegro con spirito,
 * 2) Andante,
 * 3) Menuetto,
 * 4) Presto,

I. Allegro con spirito

When communicating with his father Leopold, Mozart stated that this movement was to be played with fire. The movement is in sonata form with a short development section. The exposition begins with a fake slow-introduction with all instruments in unison, until the rhythm of the 4th bar reveals the quick tempo of the movement. The second subject is similar in melodic material and rhythm to the first subject, recalling the monothematic sonata movements of Haydn (e.g. Symphony No. 104).

Mozart places no repeat signs at the end of the exposition. This goes against the standard sonata form convention of the day, but is something that he also does in the three big symphonies which precede the Haffner (Nos. 31, 33 and 34).

The development begins by hinting at D minor (bars 95–104), before settling on the key of F♯ minor (bars 105–118). A string of consecutive dominant sevenths (bars 119–128) then returns the music to D major to begin the recapitulation. The recapitulation is similar to the exposition with the exception of expected differences in the transition passage.

II. Andante
The G major second movement provides a welcome relief with its slow, graceful melodies announced by the woodwind section. The movement is in an abridged sonata form. Instead of a development, a brief chorale-like passage is presented by the woodwinds. The rhythmic structures of the first subject theme and the second subject theme provide a subtle, but excellent contrast to each other. Whilst both themes are quite similar in character, the first subject theme has a slow-moving accompaniment based upon sixteenth notes, whereas the second subject theme has a busier accompaniment of thirty-second notes. The brief, chorale-like passage which replaces the development is clearly punctuated by the use of syncopated accompaniment by the violins and violas. This movement has been summarized by some as being delicate and elaborate, but definitely relaxing.

III. Menuetto
The D major minuet provides a bright change of atmosphere from the previous slow, serious "Andante" movement. One may notice when listening to this movement the constant tug between two main chords – the tonic and dominant keys. Only three times do we see chords other than the tonic or dominant.

Also notable is that the dynamics for the whole "Menuetto" is marked forte. However, in both instances where chord IV and vi appear, Mozart marked these sections piano. These changes produce a pleasant contrast, both melodically and dynamically.

Leading straight on from the "Menuetto", the "Trio" provides a complement to the character of this "Menuetto". As indicated by Mozart in the score, the "Trio" immediately follows the "Menuetto" without a moment of silence. Stepping up into the key of A major, it soon becomes apparent that the "Trio" is also in Ternary form, like the "Menuetto". One may note the fact that no sections of the "Trio" are marked as forte. All is marked as piano, with the exception of bars 33–36, and 43–44, where Mozart has indicated a small crescendo. Perhaps to supplement the fact of any clear contrast in dynamics, Mozart has freely used sforzandos throughout the "Trio". The same type of suspense and resolution is present in the "Trio" as that found in the "Menuetto". In fact, Mozart takes a step further in the "Trio" by adding a pedal note on the dominant. This dominant pedal then subtly slips back into the tonic by means of a chromatic B sharp. When comparing the character of the "Menuetto" with that of the "Trio", a number of individual "personalities" are apparent. The "Menuetto" is brighter and lighter; whereas the "Trio" creates a more flowing effect. Also notable is that Mozart used chromaticism freely in the "Trio", but limited its use within the "Menuetto".

IV. Presto
The last movement, labeled "Presto", maintains just as much fire as the first movement. According to Steinberg, and Ledbetter, this "Presto" movement not only bears a similar atmosphere to the overture to Le nozze di Figaro, but also provides a reminiscence of Osmin's comic aria "O wie will ich triumphieren" from Die Entführung aus dem Serail. This opera was first performed just two weeks before the composition of this finale. Hence, it may explain why there exist such similarities. When providing his father, Leopold, with performance instructions for the "Presto", his advice was that this movement should be played "as fast as possible". Although the "Presto" begins at a quiet, brisk pace, the listener is immediately arrested by three beats of silence, followed by the full orchestra performing at a clear forte level in bar 9. Such musical surprises appear throughout this movement. Like the first movement, this movement is in the key of D major, and the form of the "Presto" movement is clearly in sonata-rondo form. Permeated with silences, rapid dynamic shifts, and a bright grace note passage near the closing of the movement, one may expect the unexpected.

Length
The Haffner Symphony usually runs somewhere around 20 minutes in length. A recording by George Szell with the Cleveland Orchestra (Sony SBK 46333) runs 19:11; one by Iona Brown with the Academy of St Martin in the Fields (Haenssler CD 94.003) is 21:09; and one by Sir Neville Marriner also with the same ensemble (Philips 420 486-2) runs 21:34. Karl Böhm's acclaimed 1960 recording with the Berlin Philharmonic (Deutsche Grammophon 00289 477 6134), by contrast, runs 17:47.

General and cited references

 * Abert, H. 2007, W.A. Mozart, Yale University Press.
 * Boerner, S. 1997, The Mozart Project, K. 385 [online].
 * Boynick, M. 1996, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart – Symphony 35 [online].
 * Cuyler, L. 1995, The Symphony, 2nd ed., Harmonie Park Press, Michigan.
 * Downs, P. G. 1992, Classical Music, W. W. Norton, New York.
 * Einstein, A. 1945, Mozart: His Character, His Work. Translated by Arthur Mendel and Nathan Broder. Oxford University Press, London, New York.
 * J. A. W. 1972, "Symphony in D Major, K. 385" from Music & Letters, vol. 53, no. 2. (April 1972), pp. 231–232.
 * Landon, H. C. R. (ed.) 1996, The Mozart Compendium, Thames & Hudson, London.
 * Ledbetter, S. 1997, Pro Arte: Mozart; Symphony No. 35 in D, Haffner [online].
 * Liner notes from Universal Classics issue of the Haffner Symphony performed by the Vienna Philharmonic conducted by Karl Böhm.
 * Rushton, J. 2007, "Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart" from Grove Music Online.
 * Sadie, S. (ed.) 1985, The Cambridge Music Guide, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
 * Simpson, R. (ed.) 1967, The Symphony – 1: Haydn to Dvořák, Penguin Books Ltd, Middlesex.
 * Steinberg, M. 1995, The Symphony – A Listener's Guide, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
 * Wilson, B. E. 1969, "Haffner Symphony; Facsimile of the Original Manuscript Owned by the National Orchestral Association, New York" from Notes, vol. 26, no. 2., pp. 350–351.
 * Zaslaw, N. 1989, Mozart's Symphonies: Context, Performance, Practice, Reception, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

title: Symphony No. 35 (Mozart)


text:
User talk:Pikapika~enwiki

Hello. I noticed you uploaded Bundesliga.png to Wikipedia. Please attach an image copyright tag to that image's description page so we know its copyright status. Please see our image use policy for more information. Thanks. Zzyzx11 | Talk 04:10, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * And could you also do that for Bundesliga2.png too? Thanks. Zzyzx11 | Talk 04:13, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:Bundesliga2.png
This is an automated message from a robot. You have recently uploaded Image:Bundesliga2.png. The file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 19:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. If you believe you received this message in error, please notify the bot's owner. OsamaKBOT 19:58, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Bundesliga2.png
 Thanks for uploading File:Bundesliga2.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 05:48, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Pikapika. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Pikapika~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 02:24, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:37, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Pikapika~enwiki


text:
User talk:Edyz

Please stop. If you continue to use Wikipedia for advertising, you will be blocked from editing. → Jarlaxle Artemis   04:11, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. → Jarlaxle Artemis   04:17, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Edyz


text:
File:Portuguesa football.png

Old logo of Portuguesa

Source of the image: High Quality Football Logos

Fair use rationale for Associação Portuguesa de Desportos article
The image linked here is claimed to be used under fair use as:
 * 1) Doesn't infringe ability of Associação Portuguesa de Desportos to make money.
 * 2) Low resolution.
 * 3) No free replacement available.
 * 4) Useful as a visual representation of the football club.

title: File:Portuguesa football.png


text:
Mayrig

Mayrig (Mother) is a 1991 semi-autobiographical film written and directed by French-Armenian filmmaker Henri Verneuil. The film's principal cast includes Claudia Cardinale and Omar Sharif as parents of Azad (Henri Verneuil depicted as child). Mayrig means mother in Armenian. The film is about the struggles of an Armenian family that emigrates to France from Turkey after the Armenian genocide of 1915.

For the film's main soundtrack, Verneuil used the traditional Armenian song "Dle Yaman".

Following the film's success, Verneuil edited the movie into a television series. He followed that up with 588 rue paradis, a sequel to the original movie.

Synopsis
The film opens with the court process of Soghomon Tehlirian who was being tried in Berlin for his 1921 Assassination of Talat Pasha, one of the plotters of the Armenian genocide. This introduces the viewer to the arrival of the Armenian Zakarian family fleeing persecution in the Ottoman Empire to refuge in Marseilles, France.

The film recounts the biography of Azad Zakarian and his parents and aunts, taking us in a 20 year journey of the family facing tough times as refugees. This is based on the memories of Azad (actually Henri Verneuil himself) starting from a six-year-old kid with many flashbacks to the period of genocide in Turkey.

Azad also tells us about difficulties of integrating in French society with hostile attitudes of the French towards the refugees (neighbour who refuse to give access to the common kitchen prohibiting the family of cooking its food, the owner of the lodging blaming them for bringing bedbugs to the facility, heavy bullying of Azad in school, mocking of the Catholic priest of Azad's Armenian Christian beliefs, difficulty of finding work for the family members, language issues, etc.

Cast

 * Claudia Cardinale : Araxi (Mayrig), Azad's mother
 * Omar Sharif : Hagop, Azad's father
 * Cédric Doucet : Azad Zakarian (7 years old)
 * Tom Poncin : Azad Zakarian (12 years old)
 * Stéphane Servais : Azad Zakarian (20 years old)
 * Richard Berry : Azad Zakarian's voice (narrator)
 * Nathalie Roussel : Gayane, Azad's aunt
 * Isabelle Sadoyan : Anna, Azad's aunt
 * Jacky Nercessian : Apkar, family friend
 * Serge Avedikian : Vasken Papazian
 * Michèle Bardollet : Madeleine
 * Christian Barbier : Father Pignon
 * Denis Podalydès : Soghomon Tehlirian
 * Patrick Timsit : Garbis
 * Ticky Holgado: Racist neighbour
 * Jean-Pierre Delage : Dr. Philibert
 * Nicolas Silberg : Lawyer
 * Ève Ruggieri : Herself

Reception
The film has a 95% rating at Rotten Tomatoes.

Awards and nominations

 * Mayrig received a César Award nomination for Jean-Claude Petit's original score.
 * Mayrig also won an Academy Award by the National Academy of Cinema, France, in 1991.

In popular culture
Certain scenes of the film were used in the music video for "Chez nous (Plan d'Aou, Air Bel)" by French singer of Armenian descent Patrick Fiori with French singer of Comorian descent Soprano.

title: Mayrig


text:
Talk:Vole

The table of links to other language entries on these animals is very short and probably incomplete. For example, there should I think be a link to the German Wühlmäuse article.

---

Usage of Vole in Reference to Microsoft
A number of people appear to refer to Microsoft as "The Vole" and sometimes also refer to "Vole Hill, Redmond" as a pointer to Microsoft.

Finding such occurrances is easy, but I can't find any reference to where this phrase arose or what the rationale is for it.

(I suspect it may have started with www.theinquirer.net because that's where I've seen it used most often - but why?) -User:203.167.249.253 00:12, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * The term stems from a rather nasty critter found in the videogame "Quake" that was called "The Vole," its use began among the zealot GNU/OSS (including Linux) group and has spread to places such as The Inquirer.

It's in the same manner as "Windoze," or "M$." Those with functioning brains do not use the term, similar to how the term "Linsux" is avoided. I hope that helps. -User:206.156.242.39 09:36, 21 Apr 2005 UTC)

"Those with functioning brains do not use the term"

Is it necessary to turn this discussion page into a flamewar? It's a mildly amusing pet name. It doesn't reflect the intelligence of the user. -User:68.149.127.173 00:12, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * The reference to vole is entirely inappropriate, POV and unfit for an encyclopedia. Not just that, but it links to The Inquirer which wouldn't make sense anyway.  Wikipedia documents slang, but only in articles specifically related to slang.  To suggest that a slang term, especially a less commonly used one, be mentioned in an unrelated encyclopedia article is silly.  And it does tell something about the speaker, it's a nick-name slang tends to be very childish.  -Nathan J. Yoder 05:55, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I could care less about Microsoft voles, but this seems quite extreme to me. I think a quick notice that there is a common slang usage of the term vole is completely appropriate.  --Aranae 06:30, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

For the validity of the vole reference please see here: http://groups-beta.google.com/group/alt.wikipedia/browse_thread/thread/c80e09fb8428be77/1e3621b1dc17204c?hl=en#1e3621b1dc17204c

It makes sense to link to The Inquirer page because that is where there is further information on the term and it seems it was The Inquirer that coined the phrase or brought it into more widespread usage.

The fact that it is less commonly used is not really a strong point i think - Wikipedia should be comprehensive enough to cover such things - especially if they turn up in google news ( see below ) also please refer to the above newsgroup post.

The article Vole is not unrelated: If you are searching for uses of the word Vole as i was when i first came across the term in google news and tried to find out about it. I searched wikipedia for vole, i drew a blank when i did that - which was why i decided to create a link to the Inquirer site for others on such a quest as myself.

As for whether the term is childish or not or what the mindset of the 'speaker' is not relevant here i think. What is relevant is that Wikipedia should provide information on items in use on the web and eleswhere again please see the newsgroup link above for further information.

I found the deletion process (referenced in the newsgroup article)to be an unsatisfying affair ( Taking the time to put together a reasoned argument only to be met with single liners or single words such as "unencyclopedic" is sapping to say the least( non of the terms used were supportable by their normally accepted definitions)).

I will not re-add the link just now as an act of good faith although obviously we both feel that we have the right to supersede the other.

If you do not agree with my argument above and re-instate the reference to the Inquirer nickname - where do we go from here? 24.215.220.246

 * I think that the link to The Inquirer page on Wikepedia is much more interesting and explanatory than a link to the article itself. --ReallyNiceGuy 07:04, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

 * To start, would the anonymous users please sign your posts, please see Sign_your_posts_on_talk_pages. In any case, it has already been established from the VfD for Microsoft Vole that this slang term is unverifiable and non-notable.  If someone wants to add slang, they should do so in wiktionary:Category:Slang on Wiktionary, not here.  Even then it's questionable since wiktionary does not exist for every obscure slang term.  Being in google news is totally meaningless, since google includes many obscure and local news articles from lesser know news sources.

 * Google news is just a google search limited to news websites, they don't publish their own articles, it's JUST A PORTAL. Thus, being in google news is no more special than being in a google search as google in no way, shape or form pretends to give any validity to a news source by its inclusion.  Precedent has already been set that appearing in google does not make it worthy of inclusion and further that inclusion in some small publication does not make it worthy of inclusion.  Many articles have been deleted since they were only from local publications about some person (which DID show up in google news--google indexes local news sources).  The Inquirer is the ONLY news source that uses it and thus it is not even noteworthy.  -Nathan J. Yoder 16:31, 13 May 2005 (UTC)

 * The votes for deletion page simply showed that there were more delete votes than keep votes. However nowhere in the argument did anybody demonstrate that it was either non-notable or unverifiable.

 * Obscurity is not a reason to be excluded - indeed it is just what wikipedia is about please see Technopilgrims's quote here "...where Wikipedia is likely to be more authoritative than traditional encylopedias: new knowledge, obscure knowledge, and controversial knowledge." ( http://weblog.siliconvalley.com/column/dangillmor/archives/010745.shtml ). Obscurity i believe is not a reason to exclude a term - in many ways it's a reason to include since people who come across the term are less likely to know what it is.

 * Although google news is "JUST A PORTAL" it is special since it's "front page" is viewed by an average of 20% of Internet users daily ( http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=3m&size=large&compare_sites=&y=r&url=news.google.com ). Since The Inquirer is one of the news sources that google news draws upon then it's articles are much more likely to be seen by people and thus although the term may have started off in a niche area it is rapidly gaining visibility. It was in fact the reason that i came across the term The Vole in the first place as it was a headline in the Sci/Tech section. So there i was a non-Inquirer user ( in fact i had never heard of them ) reading an article placed before me as a headline ( and that headline was potentially seen by 20% of the Internet ) and coming across this term. So i would say that 'being on google news' is more significant than simply searching for a term in google search. I think this make the term eminently valid for inclusion.

 * Even if the Inquirer were the "ONLY news source" ( infact it isn't http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=microsoft++%22the+vole+%22+-inquirer&btnG=Google+Search ) that does not preclude it from an entry in wikipedia. Essentially i think that my own experience as that of a non-Inquirer user who came across the term while going about my everyday use of the Internet makes this a valid article - or as it has now become a simple redirection to the The Inquirer entry on wikipeidia. I may be the only person ( infact I'm not as i can see from this talk page ) who decided to contribute to explaining the term but i was certainly not the only one who was mystified by the term when it came up.

 * Again although I disagree with you removing the link I will not revert your edits - as an act of doubleplusgood will. Winston Smith May 13, 2005 at 01:32:27 ( UTC )

'However nowhere in the argument did anybody demonstrate that it was either non-notable or unverifiable.'

The burden of proof is on those suggesting that it is notable to establish that it is. They already googled and there weren't that many hits. If you do a google search excluding references to the rodent on English language pages, you only get about 10k hits, mostly from the inquirer and blogs. That is not notable in the slightest.

'"...where Wikipedia is likely to be more authoritative than traditional encylopedias: new knowledge, obscure knowledge, and controversial knowledge."'

You're misrepresenting what was meant by this quote. He was referring to obscure knowledge in general, not obscure slang. This is an encyclopedia, not reference for every single slang term under the sun. Furthermore, slang is a matter for a dictionary, not an encyclopedia, unless you are writing something documenting the history of notable slang (an analysis that goes beyond a simple etymological description) or listing many slang terms.

The justification for obscure knowledge makes sense, because it's still knowledge even if it's not well known. This, however, is just a piece of slang, not something worthy of mention.

Although google news is "JUST A PORTAL" it is special since it's "front page" is viewed by an average of 20% of Internet users daily[...] So i would say that 'being on google news' is more significant than simply searching for a term in google search.

As I already stated, google news indexes as many news sources as it can find, regardless of their prominence. This includes everything for all the tiny local gazettes to the biggest newspaper publications in the world. Thus, being in google news means only that Google recognizes the source as a news source and nothing else. Simply being a news source doesn't warrant inclusion, thus you must evaluate the news source on its own merits. Considering this is a less popular source and it's the only source that uses the term, it is obscure. If you didn't follow this guideline, people could create articles on every tiny little news piece from every tiny paper on everyone and everything. You'd be flooded with tens of thousands of garbage articles every year that no one cares to read.

'that headline was potentially seen by 20% of the Internet'

That's a massive stretch.

'the term may have started off in a niche area it is rapidly gaining visibility.'

The burden of proof is on you to establish this. You can't just go around making any claims you want and not back them up.

-Nathan J. Yoder 12:39, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Big iron's recent edit seems to be the most appropriate solution to me. It doesn't elevate the term to the same level of importance as the seeming disambiguation style did.  It's a brief factual statement.  Some (not "all", "most", or even "many") people do use the term vole to refer to Microsoft.  I think it's been established here that the statement as worded is factual.  --Aranae 15:22, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

'However nowhere in the argument did anybody demonstrate that it was either non-notable or unverifiable.'

'' "The burden of proof is on those suggesting that it is notable to establish that it is. They already googled and there weren't that many hits. If you do a google search excluding references to the rodent on English language pages, you only get about 10k hits, mostly from the inquirer and blogs. That is not notable in the slightest." ''

Firstly let me say that there are well over 28,000 hits that refer to vole in the context of Microsoft ( and an unknown quantity of others that will not be counted because Microsoft is not be mentioned in the article at all as well as those not counted because i have only included results of pages written in English ) please see this link for verification: http://www.google.com/search?q=microsoft+vole+-powerpoint+-site:encarta.msn.com&hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&start=10&sa=N

If we use google hits as an indication of notability, perhaps one could come up with a notability index based on google hits however you would still have to have an agreed index of notability which would be subjective.

A quick survey of some googled wiki entries to see their score in hits sees the following:

Michael Servetus gets a score of 14,100 hits on google. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&q=%22Michael+Servetus%22&btnG=Search&lr=lang_en

Kruithof Curve gets a score of 937 http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&q=%22Kruithof+Curve%22&btnG=Search&lr=lang_en

Microsoft Vole gets a score of 28,000 hits http://www.google.com/search?q=microsoft+vole+-powerpoint+-site:encarta.msn.com&hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&start=0&sa=N

In this case you would argue that Microsoft Vole although scoring 28,000 hits has a low quality rating because it's mostly from The Inquirer and blogs ( by the way i didn't see that when when running the above google query). I would say that there would be a considerable debate as to why blogs are low quality since they are written by humans for humans, the very ones who may check wikipedia to find out what "The Vole" means. As for saying that the hits are mainly from the Inquirer i would have to disagree with that also. A search of google referring to vole in the context of Microsoft and not including The Inquirer is 22,700:

http://www.google.com/search?q=vole+microsoft+-powerpoint+-site:encarta.msn.com+-site:-theinquirer.net+-site:-theinquirer.org+-site:-theinquirer.co.uk+-site:-www.the-inquirer.com&hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&start=0&sa=N

If other entries, that scored less than the vole nickhname in google hits, are considered notable then ...

I think it could be argued that using a notability index would support the case for the inclusion of a link about the vole nickname.

I'm sure you find this unsatisfactory. I find the term not particularly useful in essence. Notability does seem to be a subjective thing. I suppose that estimating something as being "worthy of note" ( www.m-w.com ) is always going to be problematic. Worth in this context is not quantifiable ( as i hope the demonstration above showed). Perhaps one day a vote on notability could be organized by a statistically significant proportion of the wiki community ( although that is a self selecting community ). Then one could say categorically that this term is 'not notable to the current majority of the wiki community' - one could come up with a term that would be not wikinotable which would be a useful term. Until then i would say that notability in this case is not provable either way i.e. it cannot be proved to be non-notable.

'"...where Wikipedia is likely to be more authoritative than traditional encylopedias: new knowledge, obscure knowledge, and controversial knowledge."'

''You're misrepresenting what was meant by this quote. He was referring to obscure knowledge in general, not obscure slang. This is an   encyclopedia, not reference for every single slang term under the sun. Furthermore, slang is a matter for a dictionary, not an encyclopedia, unless you are writing something documenting the history of notable slang (an analysis that goes beyond a simple etymological description) or listing many slang terms.''

''The justification for obscure knowledge makes sense, because it's still knowledge even if it's not well known. This, however, is just a piece of slang, not something worthy of mention.''

It is not knowledge vs slang but instead knowledge of slang. It is true that the slang term 'The Vole' is not of itself 'knowledge'. Knowledge is defined as "The fact or condition of knowing something" ( www.m-w.com ). Based on this definition knowing what the term "The Vole" means counts as knowledge. Knowledge of a slang term is subset of knowledge. Thus the justification for obscure knowledge stands.

Perhaps it should be in the wikitionary slang category but then so should many wikipedia entries that cover slang. Really i just wanted to point to The Inquirer wikipedia page which already has some rudimentary knowledge of the term.

Although google news is "JUST A PORTAL" it is special since it's "front page" is viewed by an average of 20% of Internet users daily[...] So i would say that 'being on google news' is more significant than simply searching for a term in google search.

''As I already stated, google news indexes as many news sources as it can find, regardless of their prominence. This includes everything for all the tiny local gazettes to the biggest newspaper publications in the world. Thus, being in google news means only that Google recognizes the source as a news source and nothing else. Simply being a news source doesn't warrant inclusion, thus you must evaluate the news source on its own merits. Considering this is a less popular source and it's the only source that uses the term, it is obscure. If you didn't follow this guideline, people could create articles on every tiny little news piece from every tiny paper on everyone and everything. You'd be flooded with tens of thousands of garbage articles every year that no one cares to read.''

I'm not suggesting that the news sources ( currently 4500 ) selected by goole news are of any merit I am just saying that with or without merit to have an article on the news.google.com headline page has a huge reach. I can't tell you how many people came across the term The Vole that day via that article but i think it is safe to assume that it was probably a lot. To put forward as evidence of an article's reach the fact that it appeared on the news.google.com headliner page does not mean wikipedia will be flooded with tens of thousands of "garabage articles every year" that "no one cares to read". This is because just being a source doesn't mean that you get selected as a headline ( i've no idea why an article gets selected as a headline but the point is not every news source gets selected ). Currently to even be selected you would need to be one of the 4500 sources and then you would be required to submit an article to whoever was the editor ( even of a local gazette ) who would then determine whether it was worthy to publish and then it would need to be selected for a headline and finally the article would require reference to a term or concept that is currently not in wikipedia - so if one points out that an item gains additional exposure when appearing as a headline on news.google.com this does not, i think, open the flood gates for aforesaid "garbage ... that on one reads".

'that headline was potentially seen by 20% of the Internet'

That's a massive stretch.

Yes I agree that the use of 'potentially' is not helpful here. Let's just say that it was on news.google.com as a headline and that news.google.com has a reach of 20% of the Internet. ( http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?&range=3m&size=large&compare_sites=&y=r&url=news.google.com )

'the term may have started off in a niche area it is rapidly gaining visibility.'

''The burden of proof is on you to establish this. You can't just go around making any claims you want and not back them up.''

It is widely believed that the term began with the Inquirer in 2001 ( the year that wikipedia was founded ). Currently there are about 22,700 hits on google referring to "The Vole" in the context of IT that are from sources other than The Inquirer.

http://www.google.com/search?q=vole+microsoft+-powerpoint+-site:encarta.msn.com+-site:-theinquirer.net+-site:-theinquirer.org+-site:-theinquirer.co.uk+-site:-www.the-inquirer.com&hl=en&lr=lang_en&as_qdr=all&start=0&sa=N

Winston Smith 21:18, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Keep your responses brief, that response is way too long and spaced out.

Firstly let me say that there are well over 28,000 hits that refer to vole in the context of Microsoft

That's still not notable for a slang term.

Michael Servetus gets a score of 14,100 hits on google

False analogy. You're comparing slang to a person. Not just that, but you're comparing a person (and a term) who is recognized within their speciality. If you're dealing with something technical, like a specialty, the google test is negated if it's well recognized within that technical community. There's a big difference between a few people using a slang term and a term that is officially recognized and used within a scientific or other specialty.

This makes me doubt whether or not you understand the meaning of a google test.

I would say that there would be a considerable debate as to why blogs are low quality since they are written by humans for humans, the very ones who may check wikipedia to find out what "The Vole" means.

Everything on the internet is written by humans for humans, what's your point? That doesn't even make sense. Following your logic I can add anything to any wikipedia and it would automatically not be low quality since I'm human.

Blogs have long since been a big problem with google (see Google bombing) and this is why google is working on trying to seperate out blog pages from the rest of the web. Blogs are just a giant collection of idiots giving and reinforcing eachother's opinions.

They create an artificial impression that something is well recognized, when it isn't. If a single popular blogger writes about something, more than likely many thousands (at the least) other bloggers will automatically write about it. A popular blogger could make up a new term like 'mufasakasa' and within a few months it would get at least a couple thousand hits in google. Does that mean it should be included?

Furthmore, wikipedia is not a "blog slang" dictionary. If it's rarely used outside of blogs, then it's really just blog slang. Most people have never heard that term and that applies even within non-blog technical communities. That would fall under a similar principle to the "no original research" principle for wikipedia. If a bunch of bloggers write about some new theory another blogger came up with, should it then be included in wikipedia? No, clearly not. The same applies to slang.

'''It is not knowledge vs slang but instead knowledge of slang. It is true that the slang term 'The Vole' is not of itself 'knowledge'. Knowledge is defined as "The fact or condition of knowing something" ( www.m-w.com ). Based on this definition knowing what the term "The Vole" means counts as knowledge. Knowledge of a slang term is subset of knowledge. Thus the justification for obscure knowledge stands.'''

Now you're just arguing semantics to twist the guys words. When he was referring to knowledge, he wasn't referring to literally every single thing that every person could possibly know. "I just took a shit" is knowledge, but it's not something that should be included in wikipedia. In order for knowledge to be included in wikipedia, it must be something of interest and noteworthy either in the general population or within a well recognized (technical/scientific or otherwise) specialty.

I can't tell you how many people came across the term The Vole that day via that article but i think it is safe to assume that it was probably a lot.

No, it is most definitely NOT safe to assume that. The burden of proof is on you. At any given time there will be numerous headlines on the main page and they're changing constantly. There are roughly 20k people who view _any part_ of google news AT ALL. It's not safe to assume what they will actually look at, especially considering news stories quickly get pushed to the bottom of the page. Mosts people will just be using google for the news search anyway, not the headlines as they can use other sites that have humans select them. Not just that, it's not even relevent anyway. Slang inclusion would be determined by its use, not by how many people happened to skim past an article title.

To put forward as evidence of an article's reach the fact that it appeared on the news.google.com headliner page does not mean wikipedia will be flooded with tens of thousands of "garabage articles every year" that "no one cares to read".

Yes it does. You're settting a precedent here that it's ok to include something simply on the basis that it was a headline on a google news _subpage_ for some brief period of time. Therefore, if that is allowed, anyone following that precedent can post hundreds, if not thousands of articles on a given day on that basis.

( i've no idea why an article gets selected as a headline but the point is not every news source gets selected ).

How is that a valid point if you don't even know how they get selected. In order for that to be a valid point you _must_ know the selection process. I could make a news page that selected news totally at random, but following your logic it wouldn't matter that that's the case because the point is that "not every news source gets selected."

You are arguing that it is somehow mertitious because it's included as a headline on the sci/tech page for a brief period of time. In order for that to be a valid point, you must establish that google's method for choosing news is representative of actual popularity and what people want to see. I've looked at the sci/tech page just now and see many technical articles that are of no interest to most people, even within technical circles. Google news is not that great at selecting technical articles.

Frankly, you'd have to naive to overlook the fact that there are many news sources that practically no one has never heard of showing up as headlines on the sci/tech page. Right now I can see them from Softpedia, I.T. vibe, WebProNews and some local news sources. I've never heard of any of those, have you? Google obviously has problems picking good sources for headlines.

 Let's just say that it was on news.google.com as a headline and that news.google.com has a reach of 20% of the Internet

Why would you say that except to mislead? Google news and its subpages go through hundreds of "Headlines" per day, with most people just skipping the headlines to do a search. And stop saying that error, google news does NOT reach 20% of the internet. Alexa ranks it as having around 20-25k visitors per day, that's hardly 20% of the internet

 Currently there are about 22,700 hits on google referring to "The Vole" in the context of IT that are from sources other than The Inquirer.

Having 22.7k hits after 4 years hardly qualifies as 'rapidly gaining popularity.'

-Nathan J. Yoder 23:13, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

See, you ARE causing problems. Now someone else just got the idea to add "pit of voles" as a slang term to the article, which has even elss hits, about 2k in google. Congratulations on trying to set bad precedent. -Nathan J. Yoder 01:38, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Gosh imagine! Someone added this while we were having this very discussion - that's quite a coincidence!!! However i think it's unlikely that this anonymous user put in the entry just because they saw the reference to the Microsoft Vole nickname. If someone has an intention to add something, I think they are going to do it anyway. I don't think if the Microsoft Vole reference was missing they would have done nothing! Also the entry is very unusual. Someone searching for 'Pit of Voles' instead of typing 'Pit of Voles' must have instead typed vole. Anyhow the reference that they put in should be under the "Pit of Voles" article. Perhaps someone can tell them that they need to create a page ( maybe i will if I can be bothered ). However let's deal with one issue at a time since dealing with all points at once takes up a lot of time ( for me ).

I have a question that would really help this discussion - please can you tell me what you consider to be the minimum number of google hits that would qualify a word to be considered slang? Winston Smith 21:52, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Proposal for Disambiguation
I propose that we move the main vole article to vole_(animal) or vole_(rodent) and create a disambiguation page for the other meanings. This should solve some of the edit/revert battles that are going on and frankly would remove unnecessary information that doesn't correspond to the bulk of this article. Proponents of the other meanings (mostly anonymous users apparently) would be free to flesh out full articles about the slang meanings of the word without diluting the main article.

Very few articles on wikipedia have other meanings paragraphs, this style of supplying definitions is more appropriate for a dictionary. Encyclopedias (Wikipedia included) tend to have full articles for each individual meaning of a subject.

I'd be happy to create the necessary topics and move information around if this would be an acceptible solution, although it might be easier if someone with more wiki-skills than I did it. Suppafly 21:38, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I think the rodent vole should still go here, but an alternate meanings section could be added to the top. See mouse, rat, hamster, squirrel, etc.  These alternate meanings all derive from the animal vole, and the animal is far and above the principle meaning of the word.  Alternately, the code  could be added to the top of this page and a vole (disambiguation) page could be set up to account for the alternate meanings.  See firefly for an example.  I really disagree with having the page  vole  be the disambiguation page instead of the page for the rodent.  --Aranae 00:24, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree that, that would probably be a better solution. What's the best way to proceed? Suppafly 18:31, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I've made the changes mentioned above. Please feel free to edit or completely overhaul these.  --Aranae 01:49, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Looks good! Suppafly 20:51, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Vole/Mole?
Is it worth adding as section regarding he confusion between the two animals, and distinctions? Neither article has such a section, but I've many times heard people confuse the two or use the terms interchangably. ThuranX 04:58, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

They're COMPLETELY different, not even related!! Dora Nichov 11:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Containment
The how-to recommendations in this section aren't encyclopedic. Should be rephrased as abstract info, not instructions addressed in the second person.

Salmonidae (a fish) prey on voles?
This claim is unsourced, and on the surface seems very unlikely. I'm not an authority on voles or Salmonidae, but I'm suspicious this is vandalism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 156.34.223.61 (talk) 18:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC).

merger proposal
the Vole Clock page is less than one paragraph. It could easily fit into the main article as a section. Strongly suggest merger. Northfox (talk) 12:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

 * They are totally unrelated, that doesn't make sense. Adding Vole Clock to an article about archeological dating and referencing it in the Vole article makes more sense, if vole clock is so unremarkable that it doesn't deserve a page. 65.169.210.66 (talk) 21:31, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

 * That proposal is a joke, right? Or do you really think we would merge a non-notable unrelated stub into this page?--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 22:00, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
 * PS: IMO the stub needs to be expanded and references with more than one source so articles like this here can link to it.--The Magnificent Clean-keeper (talk) 22:10, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

females are larger but males are larger?
In the "Description" section, it is stated that "Females tend to be larger. Males tend to be larger sometimes though." How does that work and is there any reason it should be there? Petgoldfishesed (talk) 21:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Liverpool
In Liverpool and elsewhere, they are known as "field mice". They are known as cheeky little animals. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.253.48.190 (talk) 11:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

Odd sentence
The article currently says "Voles can create and will oftentimes utilize old abandoned mole tunnels thus confusing the land owner into thinking that moles are active." What's that supposed to mean? Surely voles cannot create old abandoned mole tunnels. If a vole has just created it it's not old, it's not abandoned and it's not a mole tunnel. J IM ptalk·cont 05:35, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I removed that section. It's trivial and does little to improve the article, so if it is causing problems it should just be cut. -- LWG talk 18:19, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Vole Clock
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vole_Clock redirects here but is not mentioned. I therefore suggest to introduce a section It might be that there was a paragraph on this (with missing citations) which can still be found on pages that obviously copied the wikipedia article (see http://www.enotes.com/topic/Vole ) and which for whatever reason was removed from the wikipedia article. I guess, this indicates the presence of wikipedians with strong preferences on whether or not a section on vole clocks/archeology belongs here - this is why I put this on the discussion page instead of directly introducing the section into the article.

If for whatever reason it is decided that this does not belong here, the redirect from Vole_Clock should be removed. --Y4cy (talk) 15:47, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Since someone cut the vole clock info from this article, I've reverted the old Vole Clock article to its pre-merger state. -- Gordon Ecker, WikiSloth (talk) 07:07, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

Geographic Distribution
A section or content describing the geographic distribution of the different members of Arvicolinae needs to be added. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dosware (talk • contribs) 12:51, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

 * Some research on urban voles might be appropriate here. I have seen them in the mowed grasslands along the highways in my city and I believe there have been studies on them. Voles run away from a person and jump into a burrow, as I have seen, which might lead a person to think they are uncommon in a city. They are not. Wastrel Way (talk) Eric

Range?
What is the range of the vole(s) in North America? 108.190.152.66 (talk) 14:52, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

Add language Dutch
I can't find a way to edit this on my phone but the Dutch version of this exists and is called "Woelmuizen". Bart (talk) 02:25, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

 * What is the language code for Dutch? - UtherSRG (talk) 11:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Vole


text:
Talk:Jules Henry

Untitled
This is the Jules Henry talk page. We're concerned that he's only put in the psychology category. He should also be in educational anthropology categories, though that would sound a bit to educated for me, so nevermind.

It's a long time since I read Pathways to Madness but I am surprised that it is largely ignored in current literature reviews concerning the evolution of Family Therapy. As I recall, this work was based on direct observation of families and the forces at work in precipitating the manifestation of psychiatric disorders. I would welcome any signposts to recent appraisal of Henry's work. Ta. Trishula 07:45, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

 * That is right, Henry's work has been ignored during the last decades and it should be put into the front line. He did real ethnography getting into direct contact to people and his researchs contain some of the deepest and most relevant ingihgts about the destiny of our current civilization. Culture Agianst Man is a research book that should be reappaised not only in Human Sciencies faculties and universities but also in highschools in the USA and Hispanic America. 181.61.204.38 (talk) 07:44, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

My deepest gratitude to Jules Henry
Mister Henry, I appreciate all the insights you gave me when I discovered your book Culture Against Man, since then you changed the way I see this world. I promise I will create an article about you in Wikipedia in Spanish. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.61.204.38 (talk) 07:46, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jules Henry