text:
Talk:Opus Dei/Archive 2005-1

The founder's name was Josemaria Escriva, not "Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer": the title was an affectation.

 * Why do you say that "Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer" wasn't his name.  It was his name.  The official page of the vatican for the canonization calls him Josemaria Escriva de Balaguer. So who has a problem with reality?  Even people that are memebers of the Opus Dei (like many of my friends) know that.

I'm surprised that there is no mention of the him been the Marques de Peralta, a nobility title he fought for and got from the spanish crown. Truth is the title was used by his ancestors, and that some people say that he got it restituted so that he could give it to his brother (which he actually did). well probably this should be under his name and not here.. oops..

Anyway, people, when you make comments try to sign them. thanks Cjrs 79 05:11, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC) Cjrs 79 22:04, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

"Pope John Paul II made them his personal prelature". What does that mean? S.

 * Ordinary Catholic dioceses are organized within a specific physical location; they have one particular church as their bishop's seat, and their jurisdiction is limited to their delineated geographic area -- only those Catholics living within that area are subject to the bishop's authority. Personal prelatures -- Opus Dei is the only such organization, as far as I know -- are not limited by geography or tied to physical locations; a member might live in Poland or Peru, but s/he is subject to the authority of the prelature's leader (Javier Echevarria, in Opus Dei's case) who, like other bishops, reports directly to the Pope. (Should this be mentioned in the article, or would it be better placed under a separate heading, such as Personal Prelature?) Further inspection indicates that the relevant information is available in the prelate article; I have redirected the personal prelature link to prelate.

This page is so dreadfully long winded and unobjective that it is completely unreadable. It reads like cult literature. Mike D. in Los Angeles [unsigned]

It would appear that it is essentialy impossible to present any view other than what Opus Dei wants to appear. It seems that they monitor this site quite closely; when something critical appears, it is removed immediately. Unfortunately, due to the open nature of the Wikipedia, it will be virtually impossible to maintain the neutrality of this topic. Matt in NYC [unsigned]

Someone (presumably an Opus Dei supporter) has replaced the previous article text with an entirely pro-Opus Dei article. Concatenating old and new versions for NPOV editing. [unsigned]

As this article has been edited, it appears to move closer and closer to the position that Opus Dei is a blameless, harmless, organization. Can we re-emphasize some of the anti-Opus-Dei POV, please? [unsigned] It seems to me that "re-emphasizing" the anti-Opus Dei point of view wouldn't be a "neutral" point of view. [unsigned]

Of course it would, if the article expresses both sides. And yes this article is seriously biased pro Opus Dei. But then devotees of Opus Dei don't like criticism, so any attempt to criticise the organisation is guaranteed to be edited into becoming a pro Opus Dei fan club. (A friend of mine who runs a bookshop once had two thirds of a pile of a book criticising the organisation vandalised by Opus Dei members. And yes they were Opus Dei members, he caught two of them, one was the ringleader who set up the vandalism and both were not so much Opus Dei members as fanatics who threated him with external damnation for stocking the book. Their method of vandalism was simple; take the book of the shell, stick chewing gum onto its side, put it back, and when it dried the book could not be opened and stank of gum. In his thirty years in the book trade, no other book about no other organisation was so systematically vandalised. But five books on Opus Dei published over 8 years were each attacked and apparently the same thing happened in other shops in other cities to the same books. STÓD/ÉÍRE 01:11 Mar 12, 2003 (UTC)

Jtdirl, can you tell me how the article is so biased in favor of Opus Dei? It seems someone took out all the pro-Opus Dei links and replaced them with anti-Opus Dei links. Is that "neutral"? Is that the only valid point of view? If I'm being biased in favor of Opus Dei, tell me how. If you can make a good case for it, I'll fix it. Either that, or fix it yourself. If you take a minute to review the history of the article, you'll notice that I pretty much left untouched the clearly negative criticisms in the article. [unsigned]

Excuse me. My last edit said "minor changes" but I commented several things out. Why? Because they were
 * a) irrelevant because they were included in the criticisms section
 * b) saying "The Organization states" and quoting its Statutes is a subtle way of assuming malice.
 * c) The section on "Members" was SO BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORING I decided to comment out quite a few paragraphs and redistribute it a bit.

Anyway, I think I am going to add some more items in the "Activities", because it is not enlightening. Pfortuny 07:47, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I have reverted the previous edit, which was not a minor change, and totally changed the structure of the article. The current structure is:
 * introduction: Opus Dei in its own words (holy workers for God, working for love and peace worldwide)
 * introduction: Opus Dei in its critics' words (sinister pain-obsessed cult)
 * pro-Opus Dei case in detail,
 * critical case in detail

Please let us know what your proposed alternative article structure might be before making further changes, still less marking them as "minor edits". -- Karada 13:11, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Sorry for marking it as minor (really sorry, I realized it after committing). Now I think
 * a) As for criticisms in the introduction... well, it is my opinion but I guess it is quite normal to postpone these things to the latter part of any article.
 * b) In any case, I'd rather change the "The organizatio states" to "Its aims" because that is what its statutes say and the introduction "They say" is -as you are aware- a subtle POV.
 * c) The section members is really boring and contains lots of uninteresting stuff (it can be summarized a lot, which is what I intended).

I want to stress that my marking it as minor was really a mistake (assume stupidity). Sorry again. Pfortuny 13:55, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

The entry (at 30-11-03) claims that Cardinal Hume "criticised... infiltration of organisations, both secular and religious". That is not correct. His 'guidelines' say nothing about infiltration. Furthermore, claiming that they do, gives a specious weight to the allegation itself.

The entry also says Hume was a "vocal critic". This is incorrect. His guidelines, which might be taken as (implicit) criticism, end with an explicit warning precisely against taking them that way. He said and wrote nothing else that could be taken as criticism at all. Also, the guidelines make no mention of "unacceptable behaviour", so it is hard to defend the use the entry makes of that phrase.

All this will have to be edited to get the weighting right. (Edit now made)

The entry (as at 15-12-03) contains a sentence giving the names of three people in the USA who are supposedly members: Louis Freeh, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. For the record, none of them are.

The least confusing NPOV solution would be to delete that particular sentence – which I propose doing unless another simpler NPOV solution is found. (Edit now made)
 * All three are thought to be members (Google turns up a number of allegations); none have explicitly confirmed or denied such rumors. The stories about Freeh are somewhat credible, though Opus Dei denies them, but the stories about Scalia and Thomas are just tinfoil hattery: there's nothing to suggest a connection besides the fact that both Justices are, like Opus Dei, conservative and Catholic. I think it's fair to note the rumors, but it would then be necessary to state clearly that they are rumors, nothing more. (There's also a certain Opus Dei priest who is closely connected with a number of conservative politicians; if the other conspiracy theories are to be mentioned, perhaps this fellow should also be in the article.) --MIRV 19:30, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

But Louis Freeh has denied being a member. When asked whether he was a member, he replied that the questioner had been informed incorrectly. That's quite apart from the repeated denials issued by Opus Dei, so how can the rumour still be credible? As it's a conspiracy theory it should either be called such, or simply cut out. And including 'tinfoil hattery' about Scalia and Thomas here is just absurd. The paragraph still needs redrafting or cutting in the first half, which I propose doing unless a simpler NPOV solution is suggested. Asoane 16:54, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to calling conspiracy theories what they are. If you think the rumors about Freeh, Scalia, and Thomas are crackpottery, feel free to label them as such -- though a more formal term, such as "unsubstantiated", would be preferable. --MIRV 17:01, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Personally I think they are fantasy. However, I doubt whether a NPOV approach can survive the inclusion of unsubstantiated rumours, even if the denials are also noted. I think you need to separate out the wheat from the chaff and eliminate the latter. The supposed membership of these three people is a good example. Asoane 17:54, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

---

Just for the record, I was a member of a religious group for ten years. The congregation was founded in Spain. The practice of corporal mortification as described in much of the literature about Opus Dei and religious orders within the Roman Catholic Church are indeed accurate. I can attest to having taken many a discipline on a Friday night as well as the daily wearing of a "chain", as we called it. The marks were real and remained with me for months after I left the convent. It people want to really know the truth, they need to merely research church history. It's all there if we are willing to look. Along with my own former congregation, I can name others. Contrarly to what the public would like to believe, it's a much more common practice than not. Members are taught to not speak of it because it is "something that the world would not understand."

Criticism?
A cursory line-count in the section about "criticisms of Opus Dei" shows that:

- there are 33 lines in the section;

- from these, 12 (36%) are outright praise (popes' remarks);

- 4 others are denials of charges;

- finally, 5 lines state neutral things, not criticism.

So, in the "criticism" section, 16 lines (48%) are actually praise or denial, and 5 others (15%) are "nothing", for a grand total of 21 lines (63% !!) of non-criticism!! And this is the criticism section!! (I will not comment on the global line-count, it would be overkill).

If this is NPOV, I won't like to see a biased one!

 * Yeah, this article is a mess. Unfortunately there are more zealous advocates for Opus Dei than knowledgeable critics of it.—Eloquence 05:44, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)

Hmmm. Balance should not be abandoned if the subject of a particular section happens to be 'criticisms'.

And I wouldn't necessarily agree that 37% criticism versus 48% defense is biased towards the defense - it usually takes more space to answer questions than it does to ask them. Asoane 20:58, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

from the section on The Da Vinci Code
 * The book was actually heralded by some Opus Dei members because it featured passages from The Way and the book was like a promotional ad for the organisation.

Opus Dei's official response to the book was negative; they thought that Brown's portrayal was full of errors, not a promotional ad. Can anyone confirm that anyone in Opus Dei had a high opinion of the book? —No-One Jones 08:11, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Astroturfing
I am amazed by the shameless way in which criticisms of Opus Dei, and even links to critical websites, are regualarly edited out of this article. Olny the mildest criticisms are allowed to remain (for example, that they are not conservative enough!). These edits are consistent with Opus Dei supporters going against the NPOV policy this encyclopedia relies on. Come on, Opus Dei members! Unification Church members and Scientologists can work together with other contributors under the NPOV principle, surely you can too? -- The Anome 10:23, 27 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * It's just peer review by other contributors. Asoane 11:11, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

...who consistently remove criticisms of Opus Dei. NPOV means acknowledging all points of view. There are two extreme POVs about Opus Dei -- Now, current Opus Dei members assert the first. Many opponents of Opus Dei, including ex-members of Opus Dei, assert the second. The fact that these assertions are made can be reported here uncontroversially, without deciding on which one is true.
 * 1) "An organization of self-sacrificing people working selflessly for the glory of God within the Catholic Church"
 * 2) "A kinky pain-loving religious cult with links to right-wing politica and worse"

We can also report as fact anything which is agreed by both Opus Dei's supporters and detractors: they are a personal prelature of the Pope, they have a lovely big HQ building, and so on. What we should not do is put forward a picture of Opus Dei as an uncontroversial organization in the intro. It is controversial, even within the Catholic Church, where some regard it as an "entryist" organization taking the Church over from within.

I suggest the following structure: Note that I'm being scrupulously fair by stating the OD cases before the criticism, at both levels. If you take out mention of criticism at the top, the casual reader won't read down the page to see it covered in detail -- which would be misleading. -- The Anome 11:14, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Intro: Opus Dei, broad perceptions, for and against
 * 2) Opus Dei: uncontroversial facts (prelature, HQ buiding, etc)
 * 3) Opus Dei: views of supporters
 * 4) Opus Dei: views of critics

 * Your fellow contributors both remove and add depending on the facts of the matter. In the previous version before your changes both POV you mentioned were clearly stated and referenced. There is no need to patronise users of the Wikipedia, as your final sentence appears to do. Asoane 12:15, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The table of contents - at the top of the article! - clearly shows that there is a criticism section. The "casual reader", should he want to read criticisms, can click there. There is no need for criticisms in the introduction. Quodlibetarian 12:36, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * I hope that we are all "fellow contributors" here, regardless of our differences of view. Please don't simply revert my edits before making changes: instead, discuss changes here if we are having problems coming to a consensus. As well as throwing out big edits you didn't like it also had the effect of removing tiny edits like the addition of the word "controversial" in the first sentence; something which I would regard as unexceptional. I'd also question the citation of CESNUR as an authority: it's hardly an uncontroversial organization itself.  -- The Anome 12:41, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Until recently I used to propose alterations here first as you have just suggested, but with little effect. The direct methods of the anti-POV were more effective. However, having just removed a paragraph I would like to float an idea with you. A simple reference to criticisms in the opening section might be reasonable, but what is causing the problem is the insistence on specifying what they are, thus repeating them. Maybe an acceptable compromise is a balanced sentence at that point which says that Opus Dei has been criticised, and 'see below'. Asoane 14:40, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Well, I hope we can work together, even though we have quite different opinions. I agree, we don't need to repeat ourselves. Here's what I want to do, in the first instance:

In the "criticism" section:
 * far more details of the "cult" criticism, and allegations of links to right-wing politics
 * explicit, detailed, mention of the practices of self-mortification, and Saint Josemaría's personal self-mortification in particular, within the criticisms section, and only a mention of this in the intro

In the intro:
 * a brief reference to both of these, without going into detail

In the first sentence:
 * to keep the word "controversial"

At the same time, I hope you will have noticed that I have not removed any positive comments about Opus Dei, although I have added attributions to some of them as being the views of Opus Dei supporters, and removed the passive voice where appropriate.

-- The Anome 15:52, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * For my taste,

 * 1) the "right-wing politics" is empty of true content as it is now. Either delete or include real allegations.
 * 2) Saint Josemaria's mortification etc... ought to be included in his article, and here just comment it (as he is supposed to have said that his followers must not imitate him in that aspect... any source for this?). I doubt -doubt- this is worth appearing in the introduction of this article, but this is just my oppinion.
 * 3) It is obvious that it is controversial, so it should be stated in the introduction unless we find a better wording (however, almost any organization is controversial, so this word is losing its sense and becoming a weasel term, for my taste).
 * 4) There was an inquest at the Italian Parliament which should appear in the article (at least one country took the "cult" and "secret" allegations seriously, made an inquest and found they were not true...). I have not the proper sources, but it may be enlightening.
 * BTW I changed the "made a saint" for "canonized" because saints are not made...
 * In any case, the article is, for my taste, too verbose (even garrulous).... Pfortuny 07:31, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The Anome's proposals might be workable :-)

My comments are:

I concede 'controversial' of course, but not as the very first word of the description. I propose to put instead it in the table of contents, so section 4 is to be called 'Controversies'. The word 'controversial' also appears in the third paragraph of the intro, so it would not be missing from the opening text.

On points by Pfortuny:
 * It is true that members of Opus Dei do not imitate St Josemaria's mortifications, so I propose to add in brackets that members do not imitate him in this.
 * The Italian parliament investigated Opus Dei in 1986, and cleared it of being a secret society. So I propose to add that, simply at the end of the relevant section (this could be said to cut both ways, but it is information).

Apart from the changes above I propose to make only the following minor modifications:
 * 1. To rename section 4.5 'Other criticisms', and sort out that section, which is really a mixed bag.
 * 2. To reorder the points in the 'Other criticisms' section, moving the criticisms from ultra-conservatives to the end of the section. The section would begin: Some critics have alleged that Opus Dei was looked upon with suspicion (etc).
 * 3. To simplify a response to say that supporters state that men and women are equal in Opus Dei, with half the leadership positions being held by women.
 * 4. To remove from the 'Catholic politics' section near the end the claim about several prominent members in the judiciary and law being members. This is not really a removal, because it appears almost verbatim already in the 'secret society' section. It is merely the repetition that is to be removed, while the follow-on about reports in the Boston Post is to be kept.

The changes to be put through presently. Asoane 10:06, 30 Jul 2004 (UTC)

To say that Opus Dei is a secret society only because it does not reveal its members is crazy. I mean, I think no religious organization would do that. Andries

Please be objective when stating who supports an opinion
When some concept is defended by members and many non-members, please do not simply state "members" say, because it is completely misleading. Thanks. Pfortuny 15:40, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Categories
Why does this have to clutter the main Roman Catholic category as well as RC Lay Societies and RC Prelatures? Can't we just take it out and leave it in the subdirectories like most other Catholic topics (eg Benedictines or St Patrick's Cathedral)?

JASpencer
 * Yes we can, and I have done so. If something is part of a subcategory, it doesn't need to be in the higher-level categories as well. —No-One Jones (m) 14:45, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Controversial How could it not be valid to call Opus Dei controversial Do a google search on Opus Dei  and 4 of the top five pages are critical of Opus Dei. It is unsupportable to disagree that Opus Dei is controversial according to any dictionary definition.

--Peacenik 01:42, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Look a few lines up: we had this discussion before. The entry already calls Opus Dei 'controversial' several times. It does so in the intro. It has a great big section called 'controversies', so it even appears in the index. But not as the first word of the description. Asoane 16:57, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I know, but someone removed it from it's agreed place in the intro. That is what I was commenting on. --Peacenik 21:39, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * I think it's still there in the third paragraph, where it settled back in July. It was removed from the first paragraph on 25 November, but presumably only because someone had added it in there earlier the same day. Asoane 16:55, 27 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Maybe split it ?
Maybe splitting the article into a Pro Opus Dei and Anti Opus Dei stands and ask people to restrain from editing the other's article ?, I studied for 9 years in an Opus Dei school in Venezuela and I can tell first hand that they are not a harmless institution. However for some people I've met they think it is and currently serve as numeraries, maybe splitting it would make it better ?

Dementia Manifested
It upsets me that The Church, or a sect of The Church would not only turn a blind eye to self mortification, a practice as demonic as the Iron Maiden or the Rack of Inquistion time, but induldge in it, promote it, INFLICT IT!!!      SICK, SICK, SICK.

 * I suppose indulge, and promote can be argued, but not inflict! --Peacenik 00:34, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Decoding Opus Dei
Decoding Opus Dei A Vatican writer discusses the Roman Catholic Church’s most controversial organization—and how it was misrepresented in ‘The Da Vinci Code’ WEB EXCLUSIVE By Edward Pentin Newsweek URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7288539/site/newsweek/ Updated: 5:58 p.m. ET March 24, 2005

March 24 - In Dan Brown’s best-selling thriller, “The Da Vinci Code,” Opus Dei is depicted as a dark and mysterious cult within the Roman Catholic Church, a secretive society of men and women who have sought political power to further the interests of a wealthy elite. Yet the true nature of Opus Dei, Latin for the "Work of God," is more prosaic, say those who have studied the organization.

Founded in 1928 by Spaniard Josemaria Escrivà, who was made a saint by Pope John Paul II in 2002, the 85,000-member organization has a simple aim: to provide a structure for lay Catholics so they can better live their journey of faith while fully immersed in the world. For a few celibate members, that road includes self-mortification, wearing a strap with spikes on it. But it is not, they say, of the exaggerated and bloody sort depicted in Brown’s book.

John Allen, the Vatican correspondent for the National Catholic Reporter, is the author of a new book on the mysterious organization due to be published by Random House later this year. Allen—who says he is not a member of Opus Dei—spoke with NEWSWEEK's Edward Pentin in Rome.

NEWSWEEK: Why is Opus Dei so controversial? John Allen: The first is the Spanish background to this. In the 1930s and '40s [Opus Dei] experienced some enormous, extremely bitter rivalries with the Jesuits [because] some young Spanish men were deciding not to become Jesuits and signed up with Opus Dei instead. And this was, I think, the initial source of tension, that there was this perception that Opus Dei was kind of poaching ... Some Jesuits began circulating, from my point of view, really outlandish charges against Opus Dei, things like they had secret tunnels under their centers, they were engaging themselves in bizarre rituals like crucifying themselves on crosses in Opus Dei centers.

What other causes have made Opus Dei a magnet for controversy? A second force shaping all of this [is that] there's a natural tendency to identify Opus Dei [with] Pope John Paul II and vice-versa. So those people who don't like Pope John Paul II don't like Opus Dei. They see Opus Dei as the sort of "shock troops of this ultraconservative, restorationist papacy." The third factor is [that] Opus Dei is a new thing—it's an organic body of laity and clergy, men and women sharing the same vocation which, canonically speaking, has never existed in Catholicism. And [when] something new is born in the church, there is always opposition to it.

Has Pope John Paul II and his support for Opus Dei had a moderating influence? I would say the pope has, but the church has also had a moderating influence. Opus Dei's clear choice has been to survive, which means that over the years they have moderated—they're much more open today than they were 50 years ago.

Some say that the organization is still far too secretive. How true is this? I'm not sure that today you can make an argument that Opus Dei is secretive in the sense that people normally mean it. One needs to distinguish between some Opus Dei members and Opus Dei corporate policy. It is certainly true that you will find some people in Opus Dei today who practice a kind of excessive practice of what's traditionally been called discretion.

Is that primarily a personal motivation? It's partly a spiritual rationale—the avoidance of self-aggrandisement. That is, one should be humble. I think part of it, too, is that, historically, because a lot of people didn't like Opus Dei, there was just a sense that it would be better not to be too upfront because you're just inviting hostility. A lot of that has given way. Their offices, their headquarters are a matter of public record—the information office puts out information about budgets and membership and all that kind of stuff. So I wouldn't say it was secretive.

A lot of media attention was paid last year when Ruth Kelly—who has connections with Opus Dei—was appointed as Britain's new secretary of state for education. Why was she reluctant to reveal her association with the group? Opus Dei takes the position that for supernumeraries [married members of the organization,] it's up to them whether or not they want to disclose their membership. In the case of public figures like Ruth Kelly, what this creates is a situation when journalists go to Ruth Kelly and ask, "Are you or aren't you in Opus Dei?" [and] she says, "I don't want to answer." So they go to Opus Dei, and Opus Dei have this position which says, "We're not going to 'out' our members," and so they're reduced to saying things like, "Well she's in touch with us." Again, if you follow the chain of reasoning, from their point of view you can understand why they end up saying things like that. But to the outside world that just looks like dissembling, it looks like a cover-up.

This also applies to property, doesn't it? Why are their schools, universities, for instance, not easily identifiable to the outside world? Their logic for that is, again, secularity. They don't want to be a religious community, and they don't want to run specifically religious enterprises—they want to run secular enterprises that have a Christian spirit. Therefore they don't want to be distinct from the rest of the world. That's one reason they don't wear habits.

Ruth Kelly's appointment heightened some people's concerns that Opus Dei is has a political agenda. How true is it that the organization is very political? There's a cardinal principle behind Opus Dei, and this goes back to Escrivà himself, that Opus Dei can never take political positions—corporately, it can never take political positions. On spiritual grounds it would compromise the notion of secularity—that political thinking is something for lay people to do, not for a church organization to do. Therefore, on questions that don't deal with faith and morals of the Catholic Church, there's great pluralism.

So there's no "Opus Dei plan," as some speculate, to infiltrate the European Parliament in Brussels? Based on my experience, moving around in this world, I just don't think it works like that. I just don't think there's an Opus Dei plan for European politics or anything else. I think there's a sociological reality, that the kind of people attracted to Opus Dei tend to be extremely hard working, tend to be pretty smart and pretty talented, and tend to be conservative, theologically and politically. Put these together and it's no surprise.

Why is work so important to them? The prime directive of Opus Dei is the sanctification of work … they’ll use that work as a means of redeeming the world, bringing a distinctively Christian approach to law or politics. Part of what that means in their approach to things is a real emphasis on meeting the highest standards of excellence in whatever occupation they’re in because you can’t redeem a work if, in the first place, you don’t do it well.

A common criticism of Opus Dei is that it appears to be a cliquey and elitist organization. Is it? There is some truth to that. Your point of departure has to be that this is a group that has been savagely attacked for decades, so there is a tendency for them to feel comfortable with one another than with outsiders. As far as the elitism goes, again I think there's no corporate policy that they want to be elitist. I went to nine countries for this book [and in] every country I would go to—every one—in addition to seeing top officials, Opus Dei would also get me to see a bus driver, barber or a mechanic because they know there is this perception of elitism and they want you to understand that there are also blue-collar people, which is true. But on the other hand I would say that, again, going back to the sociology, inside the Catholic Church, particularly for young practicing Catholics, it's a little bit like the Marines—you know, "the few, the proud." They tend to attract very driven, idealistic, hard-working, smart people, and therefore there probably is an overrepresentation of what you would consider elites inside Opus Dei which is not their fault, I just think it's the reality of what their market is. And frankly, even the bus drivers and barbers I met, these were damn hardworking bus drivers and barbers. © 2004 Newsweek, Inc.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7288539/site/newsweek/

NPOV Policy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutral_point_of_view 1. The neutral point of view policy states that articles should be written without bias, representing all views fairly. The policy says that we should fairly represent all sides of a dispute, and not make an article state, imply, or insinuate that any one side is correct. It is crucial that Wikipedians work together to make articles unbiased. 2. The basic concept of neutrality At Wikipedia, we use the terms "unbiased" and "neutral point of view" in a precise way that is different from the common understanding: Articles without bias describe debates fairly rather than advocating any side of the debate. Since all articles are edited by people, this is difficult, as people are inherently biased.

3. The original formulation of NPOV A general purpose encyclopedia is a collection of synthesized knowledge presented from a neutral point of view. To whatever extent possible, encyclopedic writing should steer clear of taking any particular stance other than the stance of the neutral point of view. The neutral point of view attempts to present ideas and facts in such a fashion that both supporters and opponents can agree. Of course, 100% agreement is not possible Perhaps the easiest way to make your writing more encyclopedic is to write about what people believe, rather than what is so. If this strikes you as somehow subjectivist or collectivist or imperialist, then ask me about it, because I think that you are just mistaken. What people believe is a matter of objective fact, and we can present that quite easily from the neutral point of view. --Jimbo Wales, Wikipedia founder 4. Why should Wikipedia be unbiased? Wikipedia is a general encyclopedia, which means it is a representation of human knowledge at some level of generality. How can we solve the problem of endless "edit wars" in which one person asserts that p, whereupon the next person changes the text so that it asserts not-p? A solution is that we accept, for the purposes of working on Wikipedia, that "human knowledge" includes all different significant theories on all different topics

We should, both individually and collectively, make an effort to present these conflicting views fairly, without advocating any one of them, with the qualification that views held only by a tiny minority of people should not be represented as though they are significant minority views, and perhaps should not be represented at all. 5. What is the neutral point of view? Unbiased writing presents conflicting views without asserting them. Unbiased writing does not present only the most popular view; it does not assert the most popular view is correct after presenting all views; it does not assert that some sort of intermediate view among the different views is the correct one….Writing unbiasedly can be conceived very well as representing disputes, characterizing them, rather than engaging in them.One can think of unbiased writing as the cold, fair, analytical description of debates 6. Now an important qualification: 6.a. Articles that compare views need not give minority views as much or as detailed a description as more popular views. We should not attempt to represent a dispute as if a view held by only a small minority of people deserved as much attention as a majority view. That may be misleading as to the shape of the dispute. If we are to represent the dispute fairly, we should present competing views in proportion to their representation among experts on the subject, or among the concerned parties. None of this, however, is to say that minority views cannot receive as much attention as we can possibly give them on pages specifically devoted to those views. There is no size limit to Wikipedia. But even on such pages, though a view is spelled out possibly in great detail, we still make sure that the view is not represented as the truth. 6.b. From Jimbo Wales, September 2003, on the mailing list: ·	If a viewpoint is in the majority, then it should be easy to substantiate it with reference to commonly accepted reference texts; ·	If a viewpoint is held by a significant minority, then it should be easy to name prominent adherents; ·	If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it doesn't belong in Wikipedia (except perhaps in some ancillary article) regardless of whether it's true or not; and regardless of whether you can prove it or not. 6.c. Re important qualification: more explanation from the NPOV Tutorial: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:NPOV_tutorial Space and balance Different views don't all deserve equal space. Articles need to be interesting to attract and keep the attention of readers. For an entry in an encyclopedia, ideas also need to be important. The amount of space they deserve depends on their importance and how many interesting things can be said about them. One measure of a view's importance is the credibility of the experts who hold that view. What makes an expert credible? Some criteria include: ·	the reputation of the expert, the reputation of the tradition within which he or she works, the reputation of the group or institution for which the expert works ·	whether the expert uses the common methods of the field or completely different ones ·	whether the expert has or has not failed to respond to criticisms ·	whether the expert has reputable supporters of his or her claims ·	whether the expert's point of view belongs in a different article (e.g. evolution vs. creationism)

6.d. In other words, an idea's popularity alone does not determine its importance. Few people may know that a belief is wrong, but sometimes that is because most are unaware of the evidence against it. If you are not an expert in a subject yourself, your intuition that an article is biased may not be reliable. Keep an open mind and ask others about the evidence.

7. The vital component: good research Many POV battles would be made much easier through the practice of good research. Facts are not points of view in and of themselves. So an easy way to avoid making a statement that promotes a point of view is to find a reputable source for a fact and cite the source. This is an easy way to characterize a side of a debate without promoting a view. The trick is to find the best and most reputable source you can. Try the library for good books and journal articles, and look for the most reliable online resources. A little bit of ground work can save a lot of time in trying to justify a point later. The only other important consideration is that while a fact is not POV in and of itself, adding facts, no matter how well cited, from only one side of a debate is a POV problem. So work for balance. Find facts that aren't from one side or the other and cite the source. 8. Fairness and sympathetic tone If we're going to characterize disputes fairly, we should present competing views with a consistently positive, sympathetic tone. Many articles end up as partisan commentary even while presenting both points of view. Even when a topic is presented in terms of facts rather than opinion, an article can still radiate an implied stance through either selection of which facts to present, or more subtly their organization — for instance, refuting opposing views as one goes along makes them look a lot worse than collecting them in an opinions-of-opponents section. We should, instead, write articles with the tone that all positions presented are at least plausible, bearing in mind the important qualification about extreme minority views.Let's present all significant, competing views sympathetically. We can write with the attitude that such-and-such is a good idea, except that, on the view of some detractors, the supporters of said view overlooked such-and-such a detail. 9. Giving "equal validity" Please be clear on one thing: the Wikipedia neutrality '''policy certainly does not state, or imply, that we must "give equal validity" to minority views. It does state that we must not take a stand on them qua encyclopedia writers; but that does not stop us from describing the majority views as such; from fairly explaining the strong arguments against the pseudoscientific theory; from describing the strong moral repugnance that many people feel toward some morally repugnant views; and so forth.'''

Accuracy policies
1. Degrees of verifiability There are degrees of verifiability. At the one end, there are facts that can be verified fairly quickly by most editors, requiring only resources available over the internet, or at the local library. At the other end of the scale are facts that can only be verified by subject matter experts. If you are writing on a well-studied field, then it's possible that most of the editors will be reasonably acquainted with the topic, and you can be a bit more relaxed about verifiability. However, if you are writing about a more obscure topic, then you may find that many of the editors have never previously heard of the thing you are writing about, and you should take this into account. 2. Checking verifiability There are several reasons you might want to verify something in an article: ·	The author has a record of contributing inaccurate or misleading information. ·	The author has a conflict of interest. ·	There are other errors in the article, and the entire thing needs to be checked. ·	The article is the subject of an accuracy dispute. ·	The subject area is one where errors are frequent. ·	The statement is implausible on its surface. ·	The statement is key to the entry as a whole. ·	The statement is overly vague. 3. Dubious sources For an encyclopedia, sources should be unimpeachable. An encyclopedia is not primary source material. Its authors do not conduct interviews nor perform original research. Hence, anything we include should have been covered in the records, reportage, research, or studies of others. In many, if not most, cases there should be several corroborating sources available should someone wish to consult them. Sources should be unimpeachable relative to the claims made; outlandish claims beg strong sources. Sometimes a particular statement can only be verified at a place of dubious reliability, such as a weblog ("blog") or a tabloid newspaper. If the statement is relatively unimportant, then just remove it - don't waste words on statements of limited interest and dubious truth. However, if you must keep it, then attribute it to the source in question. For example: According to the weblog Simply Relative, the average American has 3.8 cousins and 7.4 nephews and nieces. Remember that it is easy for anybody to create a web site and entitle oneself to be an expert in an area, or to start an "expert group", "human right group", church or other type of association. Svereal million people have created their own blogs in the last few years. Thus, one must assess whether the source is verifiable. In the case of a source of facts: is the source a noted expert in the area? Does the source write blatant errors? Has the source followed journalistic or academic standards of ethical investigation? In the case of a source of opinion: is the source notable? Does it stand for a large group of people?

Amount of citation detail http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Cite_sources A citation should include enough information to allow a reader to find your sources. In particular, be sure to give page numbers or section numbers of a lengthy work if only a small portion is referenced (and it's not immediately obvious where to look). Sometimes, you may want to give a more complete explanation of how you know something, or why your sources are credible. If the issue is important, please consider discussing that in the article itself. After all, other readers may need that information as well. Otherwise, you can leave a note on the article's talk page. This won't necessarily help readers, but it can help later Wikipedians trying to improve the article. Marax 03:18, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Prominent Opus Dei Members
If we have names of "confirmed" Opus Dei members, should they be added? Admittedly, the only one I can find right now is Ruth Kelly, the new United Kingdom Education Secretary, which is hardly prominent internationally, but The Times confirmed here that she is a member. Her general scientific views have been attacked but not her membership of Opus Dei. --MJW 23:55, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Although I am not a supporter of Opus Dei, I do not have a vendetta and think people should not be harrassed because of their membership of Opus Dei. However, I think it is okay to list known members of Opus Dei as long is there is clear and documented evidence of their membership. --Peacenik 00:33, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Ruth Kelly certainly has links with Opus Dei but membership has not been confirmed by either Kelly or Opus Dei. Her brother, Ronan, is a member and she has attended meetings of the group.  My hunch is that she is a suporter rather than a numerary, but that is only a hunch JASpencer

I find this article to be scandal mongering. No proof is presented for many of the charges made and hashing up gossip should not be the purpose of an encyclopedia article. Should all the spurious charges against John Kerry be put in an encyclopedia? This very much resembles the antiCatholic slurs prevalent on the 19th century.

 * You pick a bad example. Wikipedia does indeed report quite a few spurious charges against John Kerry. JamesMLane 05:23, 10 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ruth Kelly
How a far right group like Opus Dei can infiltrate New Labour is a good sign of the extent to which they have degenerated. They will be recruiting from the BNP next.

"Blessed be pain. Loved be pain. Sanctified be pain. . . Glorified be pain!" (Josemaria Escriva, founder of Opus Dei The Way, 208).

The idea of putting someone with such backward views on gay people (for example) in charge of the education of our children is disgusting. (this contribution by Derekmcmillan)

I thought the gay community would be against people being discriminated against because of their beliefs about sexuality. This language sounds very like what was being said about gay teachers forty years ago. DJ Clayworth 18:16, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Just so everybody is aware, user 66.20.28.21 is subject to a decision by the arbitration committee banning him from making POV edits, or edits to specific articles. This is not one of the prohibited articles, but any POV edits area subject to restriction. DJ Clayworth 14:53, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

POV tag
Can someone summarize why is the POV tag being left at the top of the article? In my opinion it could be removed now. --Eleassar777 17:09, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I removed it now. --Eleassar777 08:36, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Ruth Kelly doesn't deserve more than a summary sentence in this article. More discussion should go in her article. And remember, we write what we know, not what we speculate about or think might be the case. DJ Clayworth 15:25, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Norms
maybe it would be a good idea to add some info about norms the members are supposed to fulfill every day? But I don't know the Work very well so I am not capable to write sth dowm...--Macronyx 22:57, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Opus Dei/Archive 2005-1


text:
Talk:Lowry Centre

where did the name come from - 81.134.105.60 11:41, 20 Apr 2005

 * The arts centre is named after the artist L. S. Lowry who is famous for his paintings of Salford and the surrounding area. The Lowry Centre contains a permanent exhibition of his work, as well as a changing programme visiting exhibitions. -- Solipsist 11:24, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Lowry Centre


text: Category:Rivers of Korea

title: Category:Rivers of Korea


text:
Hudson Gardens

The Hudson Gardens & Event Center is a botanical garden and event venue located in Littleton, Colorado, 12 miles southwest of Denver. The property is composed of thirty acres of garden exhibits, trails, natural terrain, and event venues.

The gardens opened to the public in June 1996. In 1999, the venue began to hold its annual "Hudson Gardens Summer Concert Series". The concert series is held at the 3,250-seat Hudson Gardens Concert Amphitheater, a temporary stage located on the Grassy South Lawn.

History
The Gardens began in 1941 as the private garden of Colonel King C. and Evelyn Leigh Hudson. While living on the property, which was originally just five acres of land, the couple owned and managed the Country Kitchen to great success. The Hudsons also took care of large gardens on their property and were particularly fond of traveling extensively, closing the Country Kitchen during the winter season. Evelyn created "The King C. Hudson & Evelyn Leigh Hudson Foundation, Inc." before her death in 1988. Hudson Gardens became open to the public in 1996.

Currently, a portion of Hudson Gardens is under construction due to Phase I of the River Integration Project, which is slated to be completed in June 2019. This project will open up access points from the property to the South Platte River Trail.

Hudson Gardens offers a summer concert series each year, as well as a holiday lights display, A Hudson Christmas.

Gardens
They contain varied grounds ranging from high, dry prairie to river wetlands, and feature plants that thrive in the dry Colorado climate. The gardens include: Conifer Grove, Deciduous Woodland, Garden Canopy, Herb Garden, Iris Bed, Mary Carter Greenway, Ornamental Grass Garden, Oval Garden, Rock Garden Canyon, Rose Garden,  Secret Garden, Shade Garden, Water Garden, Wetlands, Songbird Gardens, Vegetable Garden, Pumpkin Patch, and a Xeriscape Garden. Other garden features include a g-scale model railroad and honeybee apiary.

Hudson Gardens & Event Center offers 3 venues, including the Rose Garden, Monet's Place, and The Inn, for weddings, celebrations of life, and other ceremonies. Hudson Gardens also hosts corporate meetings, annual races, and more.

Facilities

 * Gardens
 * Oval Garden
 * Rose Garden
 * Honeybee Garden
 * Herb and Vegetable Garden
 * Water Gardens
 * Songbird Garden
 * Welcome Garden

 * Venues
 * The Inn at Hudson Gardens
 * The Garden Canopy
 * Garden Pavilion
 * Concert Amphitheater
 * The Overlook

 * Attractions
 * Victoria Water Lily Pond
 * Garden Railroad
 * Aquatic Plant Holding Pond
 * Monet's Place
 * The Island

title: Hudson Gardens


text:
Talk:Electronegativities of the elements (data page)

This page is intended as an authoritative data collection with citation of sources, that may be cited as a central reference by other articles (such as for the chemical elements). Femto 11:21, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Discrepancy in the Pauling scale
Wikipedia is prompting readers to use the wrong values of electronegativity on the Pauling scale for several elements, i.e. Tc, Lu, W, Ir to Bi, and U to Pu. I believe this is wrong for the following reasons; I will mention only gold here to make the argument simpler but the same argument holds for all the above elements

α) Pauling sets the electronegativity of gold to 2.4, on page 93, of his book "The nature of the chemical bond" 3rd Ed. (1960).

β) Wikipedia cites Allred, J. Inorg. Nucl. Chem., 1961, 17, 215 to justify the 2.54 value, but what is not mentioned in this paper, is that Allred took the arithmetic mean to extract the bond energy while Pauling takes the geometric mean! As a result, Allred's value of 2.54 should not be related to the Pauling scale and the value that readers need to be prompted to is the 2.4 value, not the 2.54.

γ) The CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 96th Ed. (2016), as well as the Royal Society of Chemistry prompt to the use of 2.4 for gold on the Pauling scale.

So, overall, for the Pauling scale, I believe that readers should be prompted to follow CRC, not Allred. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiphysicsgr (talk • contribs) 13:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

Meaning of "use" column
The Pauling-values table has a column entitled "use". After reading "Notes" second item ("The suggested values are all taken from WebElements as a consistent set."), I assume that "use" is the WebElements values. There are other columns, listing values from other sources, allowing one to see that some sources do differ slightly and that some sources are not complete (hence advice to use the set that is most complete for self-consistency). However, one of these other sources is...WebElements! And sometimes the "WEL" value is "same" as "use". Why is "use" a separate column if it's the same value as "WEL", and why does "WEL" not have actual values? I think this table would be clearer if the "use" column were nuked and values merged into the "WEL" column. Tht way, the data values are assigned to their actual source. Other columns that agree could still say "same" (or could have the actual numbers too?). Then the second "Notes" is clearer too: because the values can vary depending on how one interprets things, use any one column for self-consistency, and the WEL column is the most complete so it's probably the best choice. DMacks (talk) 18:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Merger proposal
There is a List of Allen electronegativity page that seems like it should be part of the Electronegativities of the elements (data page), or else these two pages should be renamed for a consistent page title/disambig scheme. I tagged that other page for merger into the page here, since that page also has other types of electronegativity values listed (albeit with less explanation and completeness than the page here). Should we have one unified table here, i.e., just add a column for the Allen values to the existing table, or have separate sections for each type (seems like that was the original intent here, given that the table is in a section entitled "Electronegativity (Pauling scale)")? DMacks (talk) 18:57, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

Best way to put in a new reference?
The electronegativity of astatine is actually below 2.2 (Pauling wasn't quite correct), according to: What's the best way to put this in as a new reference? Thanks! Allens (talk | contribs) 13:58, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Lawrencium
The periodic table image gives it a value of 1.3, but it is not listed in the data lists below. I asssume it is likely theoretical, like all of the strangely consistent values of 1.3 past Cm. Double sharp (talk) 15:54, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Mcardlep (talk) 09:33, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Lr's EN is 1.291. Alfa-ketosav (talk) 20:19, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Allen Electronegativities
The values for three elements have been corrected old values in parenthesis: Se 2.424 (2.434), Ne 4.787 (4.789), Pd 1.58 (1.59) The references to three papers by Allen and Allen et al. which are the primary sources for the data in the Allen table have been added.Mcardlep (talk) 09:33, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Discrepancy between Americium values in periodic table and table beneath
Periodic table indicates an electronegativity of 1.13 for Am, whereas the table beneath indicates an electronegativity of 1.3. My suspicion is that one of the values is the result of a manual copying error, but I am not sure which value is 'correct.' — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pdanese (talk • contribs) 13:55, 19 August 2019 (UTC)

Table value mismatch with "use" value for radon
The table shows a value of 2.2 for radon on the Pauling scale, but the table below says to use 2.2 and has no values from any source for radon's electronegativity. Lucent (talk) 16:34, 23 September 2021 (UTC)


text: Hardnesses of the elements (data page)

title: Hardnesses of the elements (data page)


text:
Zbigniew Zaleski

Zbigniew Zaleski (29 April 1947 in Rogoziniec – 31 August 2019 ) was a Polish politician and was a Member of the European Parliament (mep) for the Lublin Voivodship with the Civic Platform, part of the European People's Party and sat on the European Parliament's Committee on International Trade.

Zaleski was a substitute for the Committee on Development and a member of the Delegation for relations with Israel.

Education

 * 1994: Masters (1972), Doctorate (1978) and titular professor of Psychology

Career

 * since 1974: School psychologist (1973–1974) and lecturer at the John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin
 * 2002-2004: Regional Councillor of the Voivodship of Lublin
 * since 1992: Member of the American Psychological Association
 * since 2003: Founder and Chairman of the European Cooperation Association

title: Zbigniew Zaleski


text:
Talk:Hardnesses of the elements (data page)

This page is intended as an authoritative data collection with citation of sources, that may be cited as a central reference by other articles (such as for the chemical elements). Femto 11:22, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Badly compiled
This tabe is compiled, mostlu from G. V. Samsonov (auth.), G. V. Samsonov (eds.) - Handbook of the Physicochemical Properties of the Elements-Springer US (1968), but without much brain. Ranges of hardness are useless if you just want to know how hard is something. 188.252.198.43 (talk) 16:45, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

United States of Hardness
The three tables should be united into one, with side-by-side Vickers, Brinell, Rockwell and megapascal values. 82.131.210.162 (talk) 10:47, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, done. Values should be taken as very approximate. I personally do not trust them. Materialscientist (talk) 07:43, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Hardness of Gold
The Brinell Hardness of gold seems to high. The stated Brinell value fpr gold is about 5 times that of iron, and about the same as for tungsten. I find this extremely difficult to believe. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.209.73.77 (talk) 11:25, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * A misprint corrected. Materialscientist (talk) 07:43, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Hardness of Cryo-solids
I'm not an expert but aren't hardness measurements non-dependent of temperature? I don't know how useful or practical it would be but perhaps we could include more than just the elements that are solid at or near room temperature. That is, if anybody has bothered to measure them. 65.80.178.227 (talk) 05:30, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Hardness is temperature dependent, but is conventionally measured at ambient conditions. Spreading the temperature range would bring too much details (phase transitions, etc.), which are of little use to non-specialists. Materialscientist (talk) 05:34, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

HI,

WHY THREE TYPES OF HARDNESS REQUIRED (VICKERS,BRINELL,ROCKWELL) & WHICH IS BETTER?

DEEPAK —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.110.7.240 (talk) 06:08, 21 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Please don't write in capitals. There are different ways to test hardness and they have they own specificities. Materialscientist (talk) 06:15, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

The third column is completely wrong
That third column dataset seems to be based on bad data that's been put out by Wolfram, since the same table is on Wolfram alpha and copied around the web. Lead is not harder than tin and silver. This is pretty basic stuff. The 4th column seems more accurate. Even worse, all the articles on the elements seem to use this bad data in their infoboxes. What a mess. Gigs (talk) 20:09, 11 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I know the problem, but can't find a consistent replacement set. Hardness depends on pretreatment (see ref. 2) and form (say, iron). Thus I came out with set 4 and changed some infobox values accordingly (tin - now, some others before, but not all, as there is some rough agreement between sets 3 and 4). Any help is welcome, especially with finding a dataset. Materialscientist (talk) 00:09, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

Comparison with other Wiki pages
I'm struggling to see how the values here compare to the other values in wikipedia.

e.g, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardness_comparison has all integer values for hardness, ranging from a minimum of 80ish. There are no SI units listed on this page (that I could work out), so perhaps a little note indicating the conversion? (I know very little materials science, so maybe I'm just showing my ignorance, if so, please suggest some reading for me) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.219.253.46 (talk) 04:36, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Hardnesses of Phosphorus allotropes are missing. --Anoop Manakkalath (talk) 04:46, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Is this a joke?
one ref listed for this chart is a book dated from 1968. A lot of updated info is now available. As for webelements.com, I don't see how this could be considered as a valid source, it's a private webpage owned by Mark Winter, and even though he is a university professor, he did not measure personally the values he presents on his webpage nor did he participate in the tests to find the said hardness values, by the way this site is only a project and many values are missing. Better rely on recent materials handbooks than such websites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.240.163.245 (talk) 05:34, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

 * okay 68.99.144.121 (talk) 22:22, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

 * Agreed, to a certain point. The problem with stuff like this is that someone needs to compile everything. Apparently, no one after Samsonov did that in one place. I am just reading the book, and it is crazy complex.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hardnesses of the elements (data page). 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/20150402123344/http://ihtik.lib.ru/2011.08_ihtik_nauka-tehnika/2011.08_ihtik_nauka-tehnika_3560.rar to http://ihtik.lib.ru/2011.08_ihtik_nauka-tehnika/2011.08_ihtik_nauka-tehnika_3560.rar

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) 04:40, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Ytterbium is messed up
What in the world kind of hardness does ytterbium have right now? thats like 6 million at least. Periodicpro18 (talk) 01:47, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
 * Tx for the heads up. Vandalism; now reverted. Sandbh (talk) 22:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC)

Mercury vs bromine
Since Mercury is listed, why not bromine? Also, how does the concept of hardness apply to liquids? 74.135.194.87 (talk) 20:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

 * That would be frozen Hg. Chances are nobody has thought to check the hardness of frozen Br. —- Sandbh (talk) 05:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The original source referred to by Samsonov should be Povarennykh, A. S., Hardness of Minerals. Izd. AN UkrSSR (1963). Unfortunately, I don't have access. Double sharp (talk) 07:19, 3 March 2024 (UTC)


text: User talk:204.219.170.4

title: User talk:204.219.170.4


text:
Elastic properties of the elements (data page)

Elastic properties describe the reversible deformation (elastic response) of a material to an applied stress. They are a subset of the material properties that provide a quantitative description of the characteristics of a material, like its strength.

Material properties are most often characterized by a set of numerical parameters called moduli. The elastic properties can be well-characterized by the Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio, Bulk modulus, and Shear modulus or they may be described by the Lamé parameters.


text:
Talk:Elastic properties of the elements (data page)

Comments
This page is intended as an authoritative data collection with citation of sources, that may be cited as a central reference by other articles (such as for the chemical elements). Femto 11:23, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

The Young's modulus of Si is much too low. It is anisotropic, varying between 130 and 185 GPa (http://www.ioffe.ru/SVA/NSM/Semicond/Si/mechanic.html).NIMSoffice (talk) 00:12, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


text:
Mauro Zani

Mauro Zani (born 22 November 1949) is an Italian politician.

Mauro Zani was born in Sala Bolognese (province of Bologna, Emilia-Romagna). He has been Regional councilor in Emilia-Romagna, municipal and provincial councilor of Bologna, President of the Province of Bologna (1985–1987), Member of the Chamber of Deputies (1994–2004) and Member of the European Parliament for the North-East constituency (2004–009).

Career

 * Diploma in technical subjects
 * 1972-1975: Secretary of Italian Communist Youth Federation (FGCI) of Bologna
 * 1988-1991: Secretary of the Bologna Federation of the Italian Communist Party and Democratic Party of the Left (PDS)
 * 1991-1992: Regional Secretary of the PDS for Emilia-Romagna
 * member (1992-1994) and coordinator (1994-1997) of the national secretariat of the PDS
 * 1999: Secretary of the Bologna Federation of the DS
 * 2000-2002: Emilia-Romagna Regional Secretary of the DS
 * 1976-1980: Member of the Regional Council of Emilia-Romagna
 * 1990-1992: Member of the Bologna Provincial Council (1980-1990) and of Bologna Municipal Council
 * 1985-1987: Vice-Chairman and then Chairman of the Council of Bologna Province
 * 1994-2004: Member of the Chamber of Deputies of Italy
 * 1996-2001: Vice-Chairman of the DS-Ulivo parliamentary group
 * 2001-2004: Vice-Chairman of the permanent committee on European Union policies

title: Mauro Zani


text:
Cross pattée

A cross pattée, cross patty or Pate, or cross paty, also known as a cross formy or cross formée (croix pattée, Tatzenkreuz) or Templar cross, is a type of Christian cross with arms that are narrow at the centre, and often flared in a curve or straight line shape, to be broader at the perimeter. The form appears very early in medieval art, for example in a metalwork treasure binding given to Monza Cathedral by Lombard queen Theodelinda (died 628), and the 8th-century lower cover of the Lindau Gospels in the Morgan Library. An early English example from the start of the age of heraldry proper (i.e. about 1200) is found in the arms of Baron Berkeley.

Etymology
The word pattée is a French adjective in the feminine form used in its full context as la croix pattée, meaning literally "footed cross", from the noun patte, meaning literally foot, generally that of an animal. The cross has four splayed feet, each akin to the foot, for example, of a chalice or candelabrum. In German it is called Tatzenkreuz from Tatze, foot, paw. Planché provides a dubious suggestion that the term comes from the Latin verb pateo, to lie open, be spread. He states it to be discernible on the standard of King Stephen (1135–1154).

Variants
Several variants exist as follows:

Use in crowns
Many crowns worn by monarchs have jewelled crosses pattées mounted atop the band. Most crowns possess at least four such crosses, from which the half arches rise. Some crowns are designed so that the half-arches can be detached, allowing the circlet to be worn separately on occasion.

A cross pattée is particularly associated with crowns in Christian countries. It is often heavily jewelled, with diamonds and precious stones. The Koh-i-Noor diamond is set in a cross pattée on the Crown of Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. The British Imperial State Crown has a base of four crosses pattée alternating with four fleurs-de-lis. A cross pattée on the Imperial State Crown holds the Black Prince's Ruby. The cross pattée also features in many of the other British Crowns including the St Edward's Crown, used for coronations, and the Imperial Crown of India created for George V as Emperor of India to wear at the Delhi Durbar of 1911.

Teutonic Knights
This cross is often associated with the Crusades. The heraldic cross pattée was sometimes used by the Teutonic Knights, a Crusader order, though their more usual emblem was a plain straight black cross on white field..

Iron Cross
In 1813, King Frederick William III of Prussia established the Iron Cross as a decoration for military valor, and it remained in use, in various forms, by Prussia and later Germany until 1945. A stylized version of the Iron Cross is used to date by the German army (Bundeswehr) as its symbol of nationality, and is found on vehicles, aircraft and publications.

Prussian and Imperial German Landwehr and Landsturm troops used a Cross Pattée cap badge to distinguish them from regular army troops. A stylized version of the Cross Pattée is used by the modern German military as its symbol of nationality, and is found on vehicles, aircraft and publications, with no border of any kind at the ends of each arm (as was the case with the Balkenkreuz used on German aircraft in 1918-1945).

Belarus
The cross pattée is adopted in several municipal coats of arms of Belarus.

Canada
The cross pattée, a traditional Royal symbol in Canada, has been incorporated into official national symbols, provincial symbols and the insignia of various national armed forces. The Arms of Canada, numerous provincial coat of arms and the badges of the Canadian Forces feature St Edward's Crown; that displays four cross pattée and four fleur-de-lys, supporting two dipped arches topped by a monde and another cross pattée. Numerous orders, decorations, and medals of Canada are designed with a cross pattée, including the nation's highest civilian honour, the Order of Merit and the Victoria Cross of Canada the highest military honour that is derived from that of the British original Victoria Cross.

France
The cross pattée can be found on coats of arms of various French communes.

Georgia
The Bolnisi cross (ბოლნისის ჯვარი bolnisis ǰvari) is a cross symbol, taken from a 5th-century ornament at the Bolnisi Sioni church, which came to be used as one of the oldest national symbol of Georgia. It was used on the flags and coat of arms of the Kingdom of Georgia and the current Republic of Georgia, with its various organizations and administrative divisions.

Montenegro
The Montenegrin cross-flag (Krstaš-barjak) has been used in Montenegro since medieval times to represent the state, and lately its military divisions. Use of this flag was first recorded in 1687. During the 1990s, it was used as a symbol of Montenegrin independence movement, most notably by the Liberal Alliance of Montenegro. Nowadays, Montenegro's Royal Capital City Cetinje uses krstaš flag as its flag. It is also used as an unofficial alternate Montenegrin flag, as well as by local trademarks and societies related to Montenegro.

Portugal
The Portuguese heraldry makes a very common use of three variants of the cross pattée, the standard form (also as a variant of the Maltese cross proper, associated with the Knights Hospitaller), the Alisee form (associated with the Knights Templar) and the Order of Christ cross (associated with this order of chivalry and also used as one of main the National symbols of Portugal). These crosses are often present on the arms of the municipalities located in former domains of these orders.

Russia
The cross pattée is adopted by Russian Border Service, it is also found on coats of arms of some Russian regions.

Sweden
In Sweden, the term "Saint George's Cross" sometimes refers to the cross pattée used by Swedish Freemasons. For example, the cross of the Swedish Order of Freemasons was defined by the King of Sweden in 1928 to be a "red St George's cross with triangular arms".

Ukraine
In Ukraine, the "cossack cross" was used historically in banners by cossacks, installed on their graves, and nowadays part of emblems of a number of Ukrainian state bodies connected with security, including the Armed Forces of Ukraine.

Other uses
The cross pattée is also placed before the name of the bishop who issues a Catholic imprimatur, and is occasionally found as a map symbol indicating the location of a Christian site.

It appears in the insignia of:
 * The Victoria Cross
 * The Distinguished Flying Cross (United States)
 * The Bundeswehr Cross of Honour for Valour
 * The Badge of Honour of the Bundeswehr
 * The Order of St. George
 * The Order "For Merit to the Fatherland"
 * The Order of Bohdan Khmelnytsky
 * The Order of the Dannebrog
 * The Portuguese Football Federation
 * F.C. Paços de Ferreira, a Portuguese football club
 * C.F. Os Belenenses, a Lisboeta football club
 * Casa Pia A.C., a Portuguese sports association
 * Mira Mar SC, a Portuguese football club
 * CR Vasco da Gama, a Brazilian sports club
 * Vasco da Gama (South Africa), a South African sports club
 * Flag of Asturias, a Spanish Principality
 * Toulouse FC, a French football club
 * The Sir Knight, Geneva Glen Camp's Highest rank in the orders
 * The Knights of Columbus, designed in 1883, and called a "cross formée"
 * Independent Truck Company, a manufacturer of skating equipment (in the alisée form, with the ends of the arms in the shape of arcs of an enclosing circle)
 * The Crossmen Drum and Bugle Corps
 * Schneider Cams, a speed equipment manufacturer
 * Neath RFC, a Welsh rugby club
 * The Eaton House Group of Schools
 * FC Volyn Lutsk, a Ukrainian football club
 * Black Label Society, a heavy metal band
 * Flag of the Hispanic People
 * The Fifth Corps, a unit of the Union Army of the Potomac during the American Civil War from 1862–1865.

Firefighters, especially in the United States, commonly use a version with triangular arms for patches and medals, though the cross pattée and the cross of St. Florian are both commonly mistaken for the Maltese cross. The cross pattée is used on the Marksmanship Badge in the United States Army, and United States Marine Corps.

Encoding
In Unicode, a Cross pattée character is encoded under the name "Maltese Cross" in the Dingbats range at code point U+2720 ( ✠ ).

The character "X" is rendered as a cross pattée in the Microsoft Wingdings font.

title: Cross pattée


text:
Condeep

Condeep is a make of gravity-based structure for oil platforms invented and patented by engineer Olav Mo in 1972, which were fabricated by Norwegian Contractors in Stavanger, Norway. Condeep is an abbreviation for concrete deep water structure. A Condeep usually consists of a base of concrete oil storage tanks from which one, three or four concrete shafts rise. The Condeep base always rests on the sea floor, and the shafts rise to about 30 meters above the sea level. The platform deck itself is not a part of the construction.

The Condeep is used for a series of production platforms introduced for crude oil and natural gas production in the North Sea and Norwegian continental shelf.

Following the success of the concrete oil storage tank on the Ekofisk field, Norwegian Contractors introduced the Condeep production platform concept in 1973.

This gravity-based structure for a platform was unique in that it was built from reinforced concrete instead of steel, which was the norm up to that point. This platform type was designed for the heavy weather conditions and the great water depths often found in the North Sea.

Condeep has the advantage that it allows for storage of oil at sea in its own construction. It further allows equipment installation in the hollow legs well protected from the sea. In contrast, one of the challenges with steel platforms is that they only allow for limited weight on the deck compared with a Condeep where the weight allowance for production equipment and living quarters is seldom a problem.

Troll A
The Troll A platform is the tallest Condeep to date. It was built over a period of four years, using a workforce of 2,000, and deployed in 1995 to produce gas from the enormous Troll oil field. With a total height of 472 m, Troll A was the tallest object that has ever been moved to another position, relative to the surface of the Earth. Many sources incorrectly state that it was also the largest structure of any kind to be moved but the Gullfaks C was in fact heavier. The total weight of the Troll A Condeep when launching was 1.2 million tons. 245,000 m³ of concrete and 100,000 tons of steel for reinforcement were used. The amount of steel corresponds to 15 Eiffel towers. The platform is placed at a depth of 300 meters. For stability, it is dug 35 meters into the sea floor.

Gullfaks C
Gullfaks C rests 217 m below the sea surface and has a total height of 380 m. Gullfaks C was the heaviest object that has ever been moved to another position, relative to the surface of the Earth with a total displacement between 1.4 and 1.5 million tons.

Condeep platforms

 * The original concrete structure of Sleipner A sank during trials in the Gandsfjord on August 23, 1991. A new structure was built, and deployed in 1993.

title: Condeep


text:
Stefano Zappalà

Stefano Zappalà (6 February 1941 in Aci Bonaccorsi – 15 April 2018 in Latina) was an Italian politician and Member of the European Parliament for Central with the Forza Italia, part of the European People's Party and is vice-chair of the European Parliament's Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs.

He was a substitute for the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, a member of the Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council and a substitute for the Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia.

Education

 * 1959: Secondary school-leaving certificate in classical subjects

Career

 * 1960–1962: Military Academy of Modena
 * 1962–1964: Artillery College (Turin)
 * 1971–1973: higher technical course (Rome)
 * 1964: graduate in strategic sciences
 * 1973: degree in mathematics
 * 1976: degree in civil engineering
 * until 1979: Officer in the Italian army
 * 1980–1994: self-employed engineer and businessman
 * since 1994: Deputy coordinator for Forza Italia, Lazio
 * 1997–2002: Member of Latina City Council
 * 1995–2000: Member of Lazio Regional Council
 * 2002–2005: Mayor of Pomezia, Rome
 * since 1999: Member of the European Parliament

title: Stefano Zappalà


text:
Teresa Kok

Teresa Kok Suh Sim (Pha̍k-fa-sṳ: Kwo̍k Su-tshim; born 31 March 1964) is a Malaysian politician who has served as Deputy Chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) since July 2024 and the Member of Parliament (MP) for Seputeh since November 1999. She served as the Minister of Primary Industries in the Pakatan Harapan (PH) administration under former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad from July 2018 to the collapse of the PH administration in February 2020 and Senior Member of the Selangor State Executive Council (EXCO) in the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) state administration under former Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim as well as Member of the Selangor State Legislative Assembly (MLA) for Kinrara from March 2008 to May 2013. She is a member of the Democratic Action Party (DAP), a component party of the PH coalition.

Early life and education
Born and raised in Kuala Lumpur, Teresa is a third generation Malaysian of Chinese descent. Kok is a member of the Hakka dialect group and her ancestors were from Huizhou, Guangdong Province, China. She commands Malay, English and Chinese Languages with fluency in Hakka and Cantonese dialects. Kok is a Catholic by religion.

She graduated with a Bachelor of Communication from Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) in 1990, and obtained a Master of Philosophy from University of Malaya. Her thesis was on United Malays National Organization (UMNO), titled "Factionalism in Umno During Dr Mahathir's Era (1981–2001)".

Kok writes in weekly column for Chinese newspaper Sin Chew Daily. In 2004, she published a book compiling articles she wrote for the then Chinese daily.

Political career
Kok was political secretary to Opposition Leader Lim Kit Siang from 1990 to 1995. In 1995 general election, she contested the Ipoh Barat Parliamentary seat on a DAP ticket but was defeated by the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA) candidate. Kok resigned as political secretary after that to further her studies and worked part-time at the Secretariat of the Political Leaders Network Promoting Democracy in Burma (PD Burma) from 1996 till 1998.

In the 1999 general election, Kok won the Parliamentary seat of Seputeh in Kuala Lumpur with a majority of 5,200 and was re-elected in 2004 with a majority of 12,895, the largest winning margin among the 13 elected DAP MPs.

In the 2008 general election, Kok retained the Seputeh seat with a majority of 36,492, the largest majority in any constituency and won the Kinrara seat in Selangor State Legislative Assembly at the same time. She was elected in the new Selangor State Executive Council, and was named senior executive councillor who was put in charge of investment, trade and industry to ensure all funds are directed to Malaysians.

In 2013 general election, she won re-election to Parliament, garnering over 86 percent of the formal votes cast in her Seputeh constituency.

Kok was re-elected to Seputeh seat for the fifth term in the 2018 general election but on the ticket of People's Justice Party (PKR) as the move of Pakatan Harapan using a common symbol in the election.

In view of the bad market of palm oil, she launches few palm oil drinking campaign to boost the market demand on the palm oil and further inviting local tour guide to become the ambassadors for palm oil.

Advise mosque to not use speaker
In 2008, she was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA). Under the act, the police have no obligation to disclose the alleged offence if any at all. The Malay newspaper Utusan Malaysia had reported she had "advised" a mosque in Puchong not to use loudspeakers while making the azan. She denied the allegation. It was found out later that a faulty loudspeaker system was the reason why the mosque did not broadcast the azan. Furthermore, while there was a petition sent to the mosque, the petition requested for the mosque to lower the volume during 'ceramah' or sermons and not during the azan. The administrator of the mosque, as well as the petitioners, confirmed that Kok was not involved in the petition. She was released on 19 September 2008. On 27 September, two Molotov cocktails were thrown into the compound of her family residence, accompanied by a warning letter. No one was hurt.

Seditious speech
In May 2014, Kok was charged with sedition for making a Chinese New Year video posted on YouTube which allegedly contained seditious elements. Kok was among the first of several other opposition politicians to be caught in a nationwide sedition dragnet.

Threat on police
On 26 February 2022, during a speech for the 2022 Johor state election, Kok asked the police to allow them to speak for 30 more minutes. Due to the Covid-19 restrictions, speeches in the electoral campaign can only be 2 hours. Kok stated that they started the speech late at 8:30pm, so they should have 2 hours till 10:30pm, but the police in charge of the speech rejected her request. After that, she said that if Pakatan Harapan is the government, they won't set such restrictions and "warned" the police to be careful. On 2 March 2022, she stated that the MCA dinner nearby had disrupted them, therefore making them starting the speech 30 minutes later Also, she stated that the police refused them to extend the speech for 30 minutes as they are the opposition.

Palm oil activism
Despite the criticism from activists back home, Teresa Kok kept up with her palm oil activism despite narrow scares at the ballot box. The palm oil industry reciprocated her support by providing indirect campaign support and this drew further brickbats from critics. She admonished member states of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), should support one another against outside threats to an industry as important to the region as palm oil. Teresa Kok also opposed World Health Organization (WHO) advice to adult to avoid palm oil in their diet during the Covid-19 outbreak and use alternatives such as olive oil.

Others

 * Kok, Teresa (2002). "Government Should Not Send The Rohingya Refugees Who Broke Into The UNHCR Office Back To Burma". Retrieved 5 November 2005.
 * Kok, Teresa (2005). "Teresa Kok Suh Sim". Retrieved 29 October 2005.

title: Teresa Kok


text: User talk:65.95.92.216

title: User talk:65.95.92.216


text:
Stephen Gwynn

Stephen Lucius Gwynn (13 February 1864 – 11 June 1950) was an Irish journalist, biographer, author, poet and Protestant Nationalist politician. As a member of the Irish Parliamentary Party he represented Galway city as its Member of Parliament from 1906 to 1918. He served as a British Army officer in France during World War I and was a prominent proponent of Irish involvement in the Allied war effort. He founded the Irish Centre Party in 1919, but his moderate nationalism was eclipsed by the growing popularity of Sinn Féin.

Family background
Stephen Gwynn was born in Saint Columba's College in Rathfarnham, south County Dublin, where his father John Gwynn (1827–1917), a biblical scholar and Church of Ireland clergyman, was warden. His mother Lucy Josephine (1840–1907) was the daughter of the Irish nationalist William Smith O'Brien. Stephen was the eldest of ten children (eight brothers and two sisters). Shortly after his birth the family moved to Ramelton in County Donegal to the parish where his father had been appointed parson; he later became Regius Professor of Divinity at Trinity College Dublin.

Early years
Stephen Gwynn spent his early childhood in rural County Donegal, which was to shape his later view of Ireland. He went to Brasenose College, Oxford, where, as scholar, in 1884 he was awarded first-class honours in classical moderations and in 1886 literae humaniores. During term holidays he returned to Dublin, where he met several of the political and literary figures of the day.

Professional life
After graduating Gwynn spent ten years from 1886 tutoring as a schoolmaster, for a time in France, which created a lifelong interest in French culture, as expressed in his Praise of France (1927). By 1896 he had developed an interest in writing, becoming a writer and journalist in London focused on English themes, until he came into contact with the emerging Irish literary revival, when he served as secretary of the Irish Literary Society.

This was the beginning of a long and prolific career as a writer covering a wide range of literary genres, from poetry and biographical subjects to general historical works. The eighteenth century was his particular specialism. He wrote numerous books on travel and on the topography of his own homeland, as well as on his other interests: wine, eighteenth-century painting and fishing.

Gwynn returned to Ireland in 1904 when he entered politics. In a by-election in November 1906 he won a seat for Galway Borough, which he represented as a member of the Irish Parliamentary Party until 1918. During this period he was active in the Gaelic League and was one of the few Irish MPs to have close links to the Irish literary revival. Along with Joseph Maunsel Hone and George Roberts he founded the Dublin publishing house of Maunsel and Company. He was opposed to the demand for Irish as a compulsory subject for matriculation. He supported the campaign which won the establishment of a Catholic university when he served on the Irish University Royal Commission in 1908. During the debate on the third Home Rule Bill, Gwynn at the request of his party leader John Redmond wrote The case for Home Rule (1911) and was in charge of much of the party's official publicity and its replies to criticism from Sinn Féin.

Great War
On the outbreak of World War I in August 1914 Gwynn strongly supported Redmond's encouragement of Irish nationalists and the Irish National Volunteers to support the Allied and British war effort by enlisting in Irish regiments of the Irish Divisions, especially as a means to ensure the implementation of the suspended Home Rule Act at the end of an expectedly short war. Gwynn, now over fifty, enlisted in January 1915 with the 7th Leinster Regiment in the 16th (Irish) Division. In July he was commissioned as a captain in the 6th (Service) Battalion, Connaught Rangers and served with them on the Western Front at Messines, the Somme and elsewhere.

He was one of five Irish Nationalist MPs who enlisted and served in the army, the others being J. L. Esmonde, Willie Redmond, William Redmond and D. D. Sheehan, as well as former MP Tom Kettle. Together with Kettle and William Redmond he undertook a recruitment drive for the Irish divisions, co-operating with Kettle on a collection of ballads called Battle songs for the Irish Brigade (1915). Gwynn was made a chevalier of the Légion d'honneur in July 1915.

In 1916 he was appointed to the Dardanelles Commission.

Recalled to Ireland in late 1917 to participate in the Irish Convention chaired by Sir Horace Plunkett, he sided with the Redmondite faction of the Irish Party in supporting a compromise with the southern unionists in an attempt to reach consensus on a Home Rule settlement which would avoid partition. On the death of Redmond in March 1918, Gwynn took over as leader of the moderate nationalists in the Convention. He opposed the threat of compulsory military service during the Conscription Crisis of 1918, though as a member of the Irish Recruiting Council he continued to support voluntary recruitment, encountering intense opposition led by Sinn Féin.

Latter years
Stephen Gwynn formed the Irish Centre Party in 1919 and stood unsuccessfully as an Independent Nationalist for Dublin University in the December general elections. The party merged with Plunkett's Irish Dominion League to press for a settlement by consent on the basis of dominion status, but Gwynn subsequently broke with Plunkett due to his willingness to accept partition as a temporary compromise. The polarities which divided Ireland during the Anglo-Irish War and Irish Civil War increasingly sidelined Gwynn's brand of moderate cultural nationalism. Although he supported the newly emergent nation he equally condemned some of the excesses, such as the burning of houses belonging to Free State senators.

Gwynn's personal life also became complicated at this stage and around 1920, he had a romantic association with married artist Grace Henry who was perhaps the best known female artist in Ireland at the time. During this period Gwynn and Grace went travelling in France and Italy and at various stages in his life Henry painted portraits of Gwynn including a very distinguished looking Gwynn in his late 60s or early 70s. Their relationship contributed significantly to the separation of Henry from her artist husband Paul Henry in 1930.

During the 1920s, Gwynn also devoted himself to writing, covering political events as Irish correspondent to The Observer and The Times. Later in his career he wrote some substantial works, and together with his son Denis Gwynn (The Life of John Redmond, 1932) did much to shape the retrospective image and self-justification of John Redmond. In the mid-1930s he authored three books with a connecting theme of fishing with the artist Roy Beddington serving as illustrator: The Happy Fisherman (1936), From River to River (1937), and Two in a Valley (1938). In a review in The Guardian of the latter work, critic Gilbert Thomas wrote: "'Two in a Valley'—a handsome quarto—is the sketch-book of a successfully 'atmospheric' artist in black and white. Mr. Gwynn's accompanying letterpress, setting down the impressions of a comparative stranger in the Coln Valley, is slight, and sometimes, quite irrelevantly, he follows a red herring—or more precisely a trout! But even when most discursive he is good company... He brings both freshness and penetration of observation to the Cotswold scene, where as much as anywhere on our island, the works of Nature and man are one."

Stephen Gwynn was awarded an honorary D.Litt. by the National University of Ireland in 1940, and a Litt.D. by the University of Dublin in 1945. The Irish Academy of Letters awarded him the Gregory Medal in April 1950. In his literary writings he stood for a humanism and tolerance, which qualities, due to political upheavals, were relatively rare in the Ireland of his day. He died on 11 June 1950 at his home in Terenure, Dublin and was buried at Tallaght cemetery, south County Dublin.

Family
Stephen Gwynn married his cousin Mary Louisa (d. 1941), daughter of Revd. James Gwynn. She later converted to Catholicism. They had three sons and two daughters who were brought up in her religion, of whom Aubrey (1892–1983) became a Jesuit priest and professor of medieval history at University College Dublin. Their second son Denis Rolleston (1893–1971) was professor of modern Irish history at University College, Cork.

Stephen Gwynn's brother Edward John (1868–1941) became provost of Trinity College and another brother Robin (Robert Malcolm) became its senior dean. His sister Lucy Gwynn was the first woman registrar of Trinity. A third brother, Charles, had a successful career in the British Army and retired as a Major General. Younger brothers Lucius and Jack were noted cricketers.

Works

 * Memorials of an Eighteenth Century Painter (James Northcote) (1898)
 * Highways and Byways in Donegal and Antrim (1899)
 * Tennyson (1899)
 * The decay of Sensibility (1900)
 * The Old Knowledge (1901)
 * The Queen's Chronicler (1901) (collection of poems)
 * Today and Tomorrow in Ireland (1903)
 * Henry Grattan and his Times (1904; reissued 1971)
 * The Masters of English Literature (1904)
 * Thomas Moore (1905)
 * The fair hills of Ireland (1906; second edition 1914)
 * A Holiday in Connemara (1909)
 * Robert Emmet: a historical romance (1909)
 * The case for Home Rule (1911) (introduction by John Redmond)
 * Beautiful Ireland: Pictured by Alexander Williams; described by Stephen Gwynn (1911)
 * Battle Songs for the Irish Brigade (1915), (collected, with Tom Kettle)
 * "A memoir of the author" in Mabel Dearmer, Letters from a field hospital. With a memoir of the author by Stephen Gwynn. (1915)
 * For Second Reading: Attempts to Please (1918)
 * John Redmond's last years (1919)
 * The Irish Situation (1921)
 * History of Ireland (1923)
 * Collected poems (1923)
 * Ireland (1924)
 * Experiences of a Literary Man (autobiography) (1926)
 * In Praise of France (1927)
 * The Scholar's Treasury: a Book of Irish Poetry (1927)
 * The Charm of Ireland (1927)
 * Captain Scott (1929)
 * The Letters and Friendships of Sir Cecil Spring Rice (1929)
 * Ulster, Munster, Leinster (1930)
 * Burgundy; with chapters on the Jura and Savoy (1930)
 * The Life of Mary Kingsley (1930; reissued 1932), for which Gwynn was awarded the James Tait Black Memorial Prize
 * Sir Walter Scott (1930)
 * The Life of Horace Walpole (1932)
 * The life and friendship of Dean Swift (1933)
 * The Charm of Ireland (revised edition) (1934)
 * Oliver Goldsmith (1935)
 * Ireland in Ten Days (1935)
 * Irish Literature and Drama in the English Language (1936)
 * The Happy Fisherman (1936),
 * From River to River (1937)
 * Two in a Valley (1938)
 * Dublin Old and New (1938)
 * Robert Louis Stevenson (1939)
 * Salute to Valour (1941)
 * Aftermath (1946)
 * Memories of Enjoyment (1946)

Biographical sources

 * Biography in The long Gestation, Irish Nationalist life 1891–1918 P. Maume (1999), pp. 229–230
 * A Dictionary of Irish History since 1800, D. J. Hickey & J. E. Doherty, Gill & MacMillan (1980)
 * A Dictionary of Irish Biography, 3rd ed. Henry Boylan (1998)
 * Oxford Directory of Biographies (2004), vol.24
 * Spiritually Hyphenated: Stephen Gwynn and his Family Background, Roger Gwynn, Acre Press (2019)
 * Spiritually Hyphenated: Stephen Gwynn and his Family Background, Roger Gwynn, Acre Press (2019)

title: Stephen Gwynn


text:
Maximiliano Gómez

Maximiliano Gómez Horacio "El Moreno" (May 5, 1943 – May 23, 1971) was the leader of the Maoist Movimiento Popular Dominicano (MPD), a militant organization opposed to the Joaquín Balaguer government and to U.S. presence in the Dominican Republic. Commended by some, repudiated by others, the controversial figure of Maximiliano Gomez is part of the political heritage of the Dominican Republic. He oriented his limited efforts during a short period of time to battle Joaquin Balaguer's regime. Maximiliano Gomez was killed by poison by his lover-many claim that she did so by orders of Balaguer-and in turn she was found killed and dismembered, possibly by the same people who ordered her to poison Maximiliano Gomez.

title: Maximiliano Gómez


text:
St Leonards Warrior Square railway station

St Leonards Warrior Square railway station is on the Hastings line in the south of England and is one of four stations that serve Hastings, East Sussex. It is 61 mi down the line from London Charing Cross. The station is operated by Southeastern but is also served by trains operated by Southern.

History
The station building and house, still in existence today, were constructed in 1851 by the South Eastern Railway (SER). The competing London, Brighton and South Coast Railway (LBSCR) trains were not allowed to stop here until December 1870. Between 1851 and 1882, it was named Gensing Station. The two companies maintained separate booking offices until 1923 when they both became part of the Southern Railway. The station is constructed in a narrow valley with higher ground east and west, so that trains arrive and depart either end of the platform through tunnels. This restricts the number of carriages which have direct access to the platform to 8 cars.

Services
Services at St Leonards Warrior Square are operated by Southern and Southeastern.

The typical off-peak service in trains per hour is:

Southern

 * 1 tph to London Victoria via Gatwick Airport
 * 1 tph to Brighton (semi-fast)
 * 1 tph to Eastbourne (stopping)
 * 2 tph to Hastings of which 1 continue to Ore
 * 1 tph to Ashford International

During the peak hours and on Saturdays, the station is also served by an additional hourly semi-fast service between Brighton and Ore.

Southern services at St Leonards Warrior Square are operated using EMUs and  DMUs.

Southeastern

 * 2 tph to London Charing Cross via Tonbridge (1 semi-fast, 1 stopping)
 * 2 tph to Hastings

Southeastern also operate a number of peak hour services to London Cannon Street and Ore.

Southeastern services at St Leonards Warrior Square are operated using EMUs.


text:
User:Alberrosidus

Joined: April 19, 2005.

Residence: California.

Pages I've Started

 * Hammond-Leffler Postulate
 * Intermembrane space
 * Apollo Alliance
 * European Climate Exchange
 * Palcho Monastery
 * Drigung Monastery
 * James J Smith
 * Freddie Wong

Pages to which I've added references

 * Meiji Restoration: Added 6 references.

Other stuff I've added

 * Syrian military withdrawal from Lebanon.

Projects to which I contribute

 * English Wikipedia
 * Spanish Wikipedia
 * Wikibooks
 * Wikitree

The first article I edited was Pope Benedict XVI. I added a quote he had made at a pre-conclave mass about what he called a "dictatorship of relativism."

title: User:Alberrosidus