text:
Mick Mackey

Michael John Mackey (12 July 1912 – 13 September 1982) was an Irish hurler who played as a centre-forward at senior level for the Limerick county team.

Born in Castleconnell, County Limerick, Mackey first arrived on the inter-county scene at the age of seventeen when he first linked up with the Limerick minor team, before later lining out with the junior side. He made his senior debut in the 1930–31 National League. Mackey went on to play a key part for Limerick during a golden age for the team, and won three All-Ireland medals, five Munster medals and five National Hurling League medals. An All-Ireland runner-up on two occasions, Mackey also captained the team to two All-Ireland victories.

His brother, John Mackey, also shared in these victories while his father, "Tyler" Mackey was a one-time All-Ireland runner-up with Limerick.

Mackey represented the Munster inter-provincial team for twelve years, winning eight Railway Cup medals during that period. At club level he won fifteen championship medals with Ahane.

Throughout his inter-county career, Mackey made 42 championship appearances for Limerick. His retirement came following the conclusion of the 1947 championship.

In retirement from playing, Mackey became involved in team management and coaching. As trainer of the Limerick senior team in 1955, he guided them to Munster victory. He also served as a selector on various occasions with both Limerick and Munster. Mackey also served as a referee.

Mackey is widely regarded as one of the greatest hurlers in the history of the game. He was the inaugural recipient of the All-Time All-Star Award. He has been repeatedly voted onto teams made up of the sport's greats, including at centre-forward on the Hurling Team of the Century in 1984 and the Hurling Team of the Millennium in 2000. In 2021, the trophy given to the winning Munster Senior Hurling Championship team was named in Mackey's honour.

Club
Mackey was just fourteen years-old when the Ahane club was formed in 1926. Deemed too young to play at the time, he made his club debut in September 1928 in a junior championship defeat of Fedamore. It was a successful campaign that ended with the county final on 16 June 1929. A 5–1 to 2–2 defeat of Kilmeedy gave Mackey a junior championship medal.

1929 also proved to be a successful year for Mackey. A 1–8 to 1–2 defeat of Cappamore gave him an intermediate championship medal.

Mackey continued his winning ways in 1930, winning a minor championship medal following a victory over Doon. He had earlier won a minor championship medal with Clonlara when he briefly played in Clare.

In 1931 Mackey was a key part of the Ahane team that reached the final of the senior championship. A 5–5 to 1–4 trouncing of Croom gave Ahane their first senior title, while it also gave Mackey his first championship medal.

Ahane failed to retain their title, however, Mackey's team returned to the championship decider once again in 1933. A 1–7 to 1–1 defeat of Croom gave him his second championship medal. It was the beginning of a run of success, as Ahane went on to dominated club hurling in Limerick for the rest of the decade. Back-to-back defeats of Kildimo in 1934 and 1935, followed by four successive defeats of Croom brought Mackey's championship medal tally to eight.

Eight-in-a-row proved beyond Ahane, as Croom triumphed in 1940 and 1941.

During this time Mackey also starred with the Ahane senior football team. Five successive final victories between 1935 and 1939 gave him championship medals in the other code also.

Ahane hurlers bounced back in 1942 to reach a tenth successive county decider. A 7–8 to 1–0 defeat of Rathkeale gave Mackey an eight winners' medal in the hurling championship. This victory set Ahane off on another great run of success. Further defeats of Croom (twice), Rathkeale (twice), Granagh-Ballingarry and St. Patrick's yielded another seven championships in succession. These victories brought Mackey's championship medal to a remarkable fifteen.

Mackey's last appearance for Ahane was in 1951 in a championship semi-final defeat by Treaty Sarsfield's. The game was not an eventful one for Mackey as he was sent off.

Minor and junior
Mackey made his inter-county debut with Limerick in the minor provincial championship in August 1929. It was an unsuccessful start as Waterford were the winners.

As well as lining out for the Limerick minor team again in 1930, Mackey was also a member of the Limerick junior team. Once again, success was not forthcoming as Tipperary put Limerick out of the provincial championship after a thrilling draw and a replay.

Beginnings
By this stage Mackey had joined the Limerick senior team. In spite of just turning seventeen, he was listed as a substitute for the provincial championship campaign in 1929.

After being dropped from the team in 1930, Mackey's senior debut came about in unusual circumstances. In a National Hurling League game against Kilkenny on 16 November 1930, Limerick were unable to field a full team and resorted to looking for players in the crowd. Mackey, who had gone to the game as a spectator, was asked to play and duly made his senior inter-county debut.

Dominance
In 1933 Limerick emerged as a major force after a decade in the doldrums. Mackey lined out in his first Munster decider that year, as Limerick faced Waterford. With eight minutes left in the game, some spectators invaded the pitch and the match was abandoned. Since Limerick were winning by 3–7 to 1–2, the Munster Council declared them the champions and Mackey collected his first Munster medal. The subsequent All-Ireland final on 3 September 1933 saw a record crowd of 45,176 travel to Croke Park to see Limerick face Kilkenny. After being level at the interval, the game remained close in the second half until a solo-run goal by Johnny Dunne sealed a 1–7 to 0–6 victory for Kilkenny.

A successful league campaign throughout 1933–34 saw Limerick reach the decider against Dublin. In spite of home advantage, Limerick had to battle hard for a 3–6 to 3–3 victory. It was Mackey's first National League medal. The subsequent provincial championship saw Limerick reach the decider, where they played Waterford for the second year in-a-row. The result was much the same, with Mackey collecting a second Munster medal following a 4–8 to 2–5 victory. The All-Ireland final on 2 September 1934 was a special occasion as it was the golden jubilee final of the Gaelic Athletic Association. Dublin were the opponents and a close game developed. After leading by a point at the interval, Limerick went five clear with time running out. Dublin fought their way back to secure a remarkable draw. The replay on 30 September turned out to be an even closer affair, with both sides level with two minutes to go. Points from Mackey and Jackie O'Connell and a remarkable four goals from Dave Clohessy secured a 5–2 to 2–6 victory for Limerick. The win gave Mackey an All-Ireland medal.

Mackey added a second National League medal to his collection in 1935, as Limerick retained their title in a straightforward league format. Limerick dominated the provincial series of games once again, and lined out in the decider against Tipperary. Mackey was singled out for particular praise, and collected a third Munster medal following a 5–5 to 1–4 victory. Kilkenny were Limerick's opponents in the subsequent All-Ireland final on 1 September 1935 and, once again, the game was a close affair. Limerick were the red-hot favourites as a record crowd of over 46,000 turned up to watch a hurling classic. In spite of rain falling throughout the entire game both sides served up a great game. At the beginning of the second-half Lory Meagher sent over a huge point from midfield giving Kilkenny a lead which they would not surrender. The game ended in controversial circumstances for Mackey when Limerick were awarded a close-in free to level the game. Jack Keane issued an instruction from the sideline that Timmy Ryan, the team captain, was to take the free and put the sliotar over the bar for the equalising point. As he lined up to take it, Mackey pushed him aside and took the free himself. The shot dropped short and into the waiting hands of the Kilkenny goalkeeper and was cleared. The game ended shortly after with Kilkenny triumphing by 2–5 to 2–4.

Limerick began 1936 by retaining their league title, having won seven of their games and drawing one. It was Mackey's third National League medal. The team later embarked on a tour of the United States where they defeated a New York team made up of Irish expatriates. As a result of the tour Limerick were awarded a bye into the Munster final, however, Mackey, who was now captain of the side, sustained an injury to his right knee during the American tour. Tipperary provided the opposition in the provincial final and any sign of weakness from Mackey would be pounced upon. The Limerick selectors then hit on the novel idea of putting a large bandage on their star player's uninjured left knee in an effort to confuse the Tipp players. The switching of bandages worked perfectly as Mackey scored a remarkable 5–3 as Limerick trounced the opposition. After scoring his final goal, he taunted the Tipperary fans with gestures, and finally turned his back to them and dropped his togs exposing his buttocks. Galway fell to Limerick in the subsequent All-Ireland semi-final, however, the men from the West lost the game after walking off the pitch with fifteen minutes left. They were not impressed with the rough tactics of their opponents. For the third time in four years the lure of a Kilkenny-Limerick clash brought a record crowd of over 50,000 to Croke Park for the All-Ireland decider on 6 September 1936. The first half produced a game that lived up to the previous clashes, and Limerick had a two-point advantage at half-time. Jackie Power scored two first-half goals, while a solo-run goal by captain Mackey in the second-half helped Limerick to a 5–6 to 1–5 victory. Mackey had won a second All-Ireland medal, while he also had the honour of lifting the Liam MacCarthy Cup.

Final success and decline
In 1937 Mackey captained Limerick to yet another National League title, his fourth overall. Limerick's bid for a record-equalling fifth successive Munster crown came to an end in the provincial decider when Tipperary were victorious.

Limerick entered the record books in 1938 as the first team to win five consecutive National League titles. It is a record which has never been equalled. Mackey played a key role in all five of the victories.

A period of decline followed for Limerick, with many people believing that the team's best days were behind them. This certainly seemed the case in 1940 when it took two late goals from Jackie Power and a storming display by Mackey to level the Munster semi-final with Waterford. Another late rally gave Limerick a victory in the subsequent replay. Mackey's side put in another excellent performance in the Munster final to draw the game with Cork. At half-time in the replay Limerick looked like a spent force. Held scoreless for the entire thirty minutes, Mackey got the recovery underway in the second-half with a point from a seventy. He later moved back to the defence where Cork were running riot with goals. A pitch invasion scuppered the game for ten minutes, however, Limerick held on to win by 3–3 to 2–4 and Mackey collected a fifth Munster medal. The subsequent All-Ireland decider on 1 September 1940 brought Kilkenny and Limerick together for the last great game between the two outstanding teams of the decade. Early in the second-half Kilkenny took a four-point lead, however, once Mackey was deployed at midfield he proceeded to dominate the game. Limerick hung on to win the game on a score line of 3–7 to 1–7. The win gave Mackey his third All-Ireland medal, while he also joined an elite group of players who collected the Liam MacCarthy Cup more than once as captain.

Limerick took a back seat to Cork and Tipperary in the Munster series of games for the next few years.

Mackey played no championship hurling with Limerick in 1941, as he withdrew from the panel due to the death of his younger brother Paddy.

In 1944 Limerick squared up to Cork in the provincial final as the Leesiders were aiming for a fourth consecutive All-Ireland final victory. Mackey was a veteran hurler by now, however, he still seemed to be playing better than ever. Cork took an early lead, however, the Ahane man kept his team in with a chance by scoring points from almost impossible angles. He later powered past Con Murphy to score two quick goals and put Limerick in the driving seat once again. Cork came back, however, to draw the game on a remarkable 4–14 to 6–7 score line. In the last fifteen minutes of the subsequent replay Limerick were up by four points. Mackey broke through the Cork defence to score another inspiring goal, however, he was deemed to be fouled as he went through and the goal was disallowed. A free was awarded instead but it was missed. With minutes left in the game both sides were level and Mackey launched one last attack for the winning point. His shot hit the outside of the post and dropped wide. Only seconds remained when Cork's Christy Ring caught the sliotar and fired a fierce shot into the net to win the game. Many regard this dramatic passage of play as the moment that the mantle of hurling's star player passed from Mackey to Ring.

Following a defeat by Cork in the Munster decider in 1946, Mackey effectively retired from inter-county hurling. He was, however, coaxed back as a substitute for the 1947 Munster final defeat by Cork.

Inter-provincial
Mackey also lined out with Munster in the inter-provincial series of games, and enjoyed much success during a twelve-year career.

He made a winning debut in 1934, as a 6–3 to 3–2 defeat of Leinster gave Mackey his first Railway Cup medal.

After back-to-back defeats over the next two years, Mackey was captain of the Munster team in 1937. A 1–9 to 3–1 defeat of Leinster in the decider, gave Mackey a second Railway Cup medal. It was the first of four successive final defeats of Leinster, with Mackey playing a key role in all of these victories.

Five-in-a-row proved beyond Munster and, after a year of not playing any hurling, Mackey was back with Munster in 1943. A narrow 4–3 to 3–5 defeat of old rivals Leinster gave him a sixth Railway Cup medal.

Mackey finished off his inter-provincial career by winning back-to-back Railway Cup medals in 1945 and 1946, following respective defeats of Ulster and Connacht.

Recognition
As the first superstar of hurling, Mackey came to be regarded as one of the greatest players of all-time even during his playing days.

P.D. Mehigan, a contemporary Gaelic games journalist and historian, said of him: "...most elusive forward, and greatest playboy that ever handled ash, son of the great Tyler, schoolboys love him, hurling fans admire him; opposing backs fear him. A loveable man, full of the joy of life, still hurling well."

Ned Maher, the former Tipperary goalkeeper of the 1890s said: "Mick Mackey was the greatest hurler ever and I saw them all."

The arrival of Christy Ring as a hurling force brought a new challenger for pole position in the pantheon of hurling greats. Clare hurling legend Jimmy Smyth offered his view on the rivalry between Ring and Mackey:"With Mick Mackey, I saw him playing, but not at his best. A lot of people I met back in Clare always reckoned that Mackey was the best. But, you can’t decide. They were totally different people, personality-wise and hurling-wise."

Former Wexford All-Ireland winner Billy Rackard wrote: "When it comes to selecting the greatest exponent the game has ever seen, measured opinion sees one name out of reach – above all others. That name is Christy Ring of Cork. The nearest challenger is seen to be Mick Mackey of Limerick."

In 1961 Mackey was presented with the Caltex Hall of Fame award for being the outstanding personality in hurling of all-time. That same year he was chosen in the half-forward line when journalist P.D. Mehigan picked "the best men of my time".

Two years after his death, Mackey received the ultimate honour during the GAA's centenary year in 1984 when he was chosen at centre-forward on the Hurling Team of the Century. He retained that position on the Hurling Team of the Millennium in 2000.

In 1988 the main covered stand in the Gaelic Grounds in Limerick was named the Mackey Stand in his honour, while the main playing field of the Ahane club is named Mackey Park. This is a tribute to the entire Mackey family for their contribution to the game.

In 2013 a bronze statue in memory of Mackey was unveiled in his native Castleconnell. Around the same time the Munster Council turned down a Limerick motion to name the province's senior hurling trophy in honour of Mackey. In 2021, a proposal from the Limerick County Board to have the Munster Cup named in honour of Mackey was approved by the Munster Council.

Personal life
Mackey was born in Castleconnell, County Limerick on 12 July 1912, the eldest son to John "Tyler" and May Mackey (née Carroll). His younger siblings were John, Ester, Sadie, Paddy, Maureen, James "Todsie" and Breda.

Born into a family that was steeped in the traditions of the game of hurling, his grandfather and namesake, Michael Mackey, was involved in the promotion of Gaelic games even before the establishment of the Gaelic Athletic Association in 1884. He was captain of the Castleconnell team in the infancy of the association and was a member of the very first Limerick hurling team that played in the inaugural championship in 1887. His father, "Tyler" Mackey, ranked among the leading hurling personalities of the first two decades of the twentieth century. In a career that lasted from 1901 until 1917 he captained Limerick in the county's unsuccessful 1910 All-Ireland title bid when Wexford were victorious by a single point.

Educated at Castleconnell National School, Mackey received no secondary schooling and subsequently joined the Electricity Supply Board where he spent forty-seven years as a van driver with the company at Ardnacrusha, County Clare. He also spent five years as a member of the Irish Army.

Mackey was married to Kathleen "Kitty" Kennedy (1914–2003) and the couple had five children: Paddy, Michael, Greg, Audrey and Ruth.

In declining health for some years, Mackey suffered a series of strokes towards the end of his life. He died on 13 September 1982.

Team

 * Ahane
 * Limerick Senior Hurling Championship (15): 1931, 1933, 1934, 1935, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939, 1942, 1943, 1944, 1945, 1946, 1947, 1948
 * Limerick Senior Football Championship (5): 1935, 1936, 1937, 1938, 1939

 * Limerick
 * All-Ireland Senior Hurling Championship (3): 1934, 1936 (c), 1940 (c)
 * Munster Senior Hurling Championship (5): 1933, 1934, 1935, 1936 (c), 1940 (c)
 * National Hurling League (5): 1933–34, 1934–35, 1935–36 (c), 1936–37, 1937–38

 * Munster
 * Railway Cup (8): 1934, 1937 (c), 1938, 1939, 1940, 1943, 1945, 1946

Individual

 * Honours
 * Hurling Team of the Millennium: Centre-forward
 * Hurling Team of the Century: Centre-forward
 * GAA All-Time All-Star Award: 1980
 * Caltex Hall of Fame Award: 1961
 * The 125 greatest stars of the GAA: No. 5
 * GAA Hall of Fame Inductee: 2013

title: Mick Mackey


text: User talk:83.235.103.230

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

title: User talk:83.235.103.230


text:
Springfield Township, Summit County, Ohio

Springfield Township is one of the nine townships of Summit County, Ohio, United States. The population was 14,162 at the 2020 census.

Geography
Located in the southeastern part of the county, it borders the following townships and cities:
 * Tallmadge - north
 * Brimfield Township, Portage County - northeast corner
 * Suffield Township, Portage County - east
 * Lake Township - southeast
 * Green - south
 * Coventry Township - west
 * Akron - northwest

Several municipalities are located in the original boundaries of Springfield Township:
 * Part of the city of Akron, the county seat of Summit County, in the northwest
 * Part of the village of Mogadore, in the northeast
 * The village of Lakemore, in the center

It is about 14.7 sqmi in size (Springfield Township, 2003-2004).

Name and history
It is one of eleven Springfield Townships statewide. It was part of the Connecticut Western Reserve. It is named after the Connecticut River Valley city of Springfield, Massachusetts.

Government
The township is governed by a three-member board of trustees, who are elected in November of odd-numbered years to a four-year term beginning on the following January 1. Two are elected in the year after the presidential election and one is elected in the year before it. There is also an elected township fiscal officer, who serves a four-year term beginning on April 1 of the year after the election, which is held in November of the year before the presidential election. Vacancies in the fiscal officership or on the board of trustees are filled by the remaining trustees.

Education
Springfield Local School District encompasses Springfield Township and the village of Lakemore. Portage Lakes Career Center is the vocational school for Springfield. (Summit County Fiscal Officer, 2005) The school district has faced serious financial difficulty; at the current time, the district's student transportation is at state minimum, and the district is actively cutting staff.

Springfield's original high school had been annexed by Akron in 1929, requiring construction of the older building of the former high school which was replaced in 2014 in the same location. The original building became part of Akron Public Schools, at first Ellet High School, and later Ritzman Elementary. That building was also recently demolished, and a new school was built upon its site.

Notable residents

 * Art Arfons, land speed record holder
 * Walt Arfons, land speed record holder and half brother of Art Arfons
 * Ernest Angley, Christian evangelist


text:
Walter Paepcke

Walter Paepcke (June 29, 1896 – April 13, 1960) was an American businessman and philanthropist who was prominent in the mid-20th century. A longtime executive of the Chicago-based Container Corporation of America, Paepcke is best noted for his founding of the Aspen Institute and the Aspen Skiing Company in the early 1950s, both of which helped transform the town of Aspen, Colorado into an international resort destination and popularize the sport of skiing in the United States.

Biography
Walter was born to Hermann, an immigrant from Mecklenburg, and Paula (Wagner) Paepcke, the daughter of German immigrants, in Chicago, Illinois. Hermann owned a lumber mill and box-making company, and young Paepcke grew up in an upper-middle-class home. He was a 1913 graduate of the Latin School of Chicago. He then began working for his father, and eventually took over the company, the Chicago Mill & Lumber, Co. After his father's death in 1922, Paepcke began producing cardboard containers and paper.

After acquiring several other manufacturing and box companies, Paepcke formed the Container Corporation of America in 1926. The company was highly successful and made boxes for Procter & Gamble, Sears Roebuck, and General Electric, among others. CCA emphasized quality products and artistry, making their boxes stand out.

Paepcke's wife, Elizabeth Paepcke, was the sister of American diplomatic figure Paul Nitze.

Involvement with Aspen
In 1949 Paepcke made Aspen the site for a celebration of the 200th birthday of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe. Albert Schweitzer, José Ortega y Gasset, Thornton Wilder, and Artur Rubinstein all attended the celebration. The next year, Paepcke created what is now the Aspen Institute. Walter and Elizabeth founded the Aspen Music Festival and School in 1949, and Walter served as the festival's director until 1954 when he appointed baritone Mack Harrell to take over.

Paepcke hired Bauhaus designer Herbert Bayer and brought him to Aspen to promote the project through poster design and other design work; Paepcke was also the patron of fellow Bauhaus figure László Moholy-Nagy by financing the rebirth of the American New Bauhaus in Chicago in 1939. The New Bauhaus also had links to the Armour Institute of Technology.

International Design Conference in Aspen
In 1951 he founded the seminal International Design Conference in Aspen (IDCA) to provide a forum for discussion on design, "where the human spirit can flourish." The primary IDCA objective was to connect culture with commerce by inviting both international business and industry leaders together with representatives from various commercial design fields such as industrial design, graphic design and architecture, as well as those in the fine arts and fields such as psychology, filmmaking and literature. The first conference, in June 1951, brought together over two-hundred and fifty designers and business leaders.

Speakers at the conference included business leaders Stanley Marcus, Andrew McNally III, Harley Earl, and Hans Knoll; and from the design and architecture side, Josef Albers, Louis Kahn, Charles Eames, George Nelson, Elliott Noyes, Leo Lionni, Ben Shahn, Achille Castiglioni, Lella and Massimo Vignelli, Herbert Bayer, as well as the architect and architecture critic Peter Blake. The annual conference format included keynote speakers, workshops, panel discussions and informal, social gatherings. These activities naturally integrated those from commerce and culture into settings that stimulated dialogue, debate and insights. The existence of IDCA established a key collaborative forum on the topic on managing design within corporations for the benefit of society, as well as adding value to business. IDCA was held every June in Aspen from 1951 to 2004.

title: Walter Paepcke


text:
Talk:Gilles Thomas

Untitled
This article is based on a translation:
 * Article: fr:Gilles Thomas
 * Corresponding English-language article: Gilles Thomas
 * Worth doing because:
 * Originally Requested by: Diderot
 * Status: Completed. SteveW | Talk 16:33, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Other notes

Rename the article
Hello,

I just renamed the article to Julia Verlanger in the French Wikipedia, and I suggest to do it here too: recent reedition of her books have been published under that pseudonym, and the price is named "Prix Julia Verlanger". -Ash_Crow (talk) 10:33, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gilles Thomas


text:
Category:Philatelic literature

This is the category of articles relating to philatelic literature.

title: Category:Philatelic literature


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Punch My Crotch

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:05, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Punch My Crotch
Pure dicdef, with, I think, no potential for growth. Has been transwikied already (see Wiktionary:Transwiki:Punch My Crotch). Needs to be deleted. --Dmcdevit 16:35, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete dic def. Mgm|(talk) 21:11, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Punch article creator 24.220.78.66's crotch, er, I mean, delete as dicdef without potential for encyclopedic expansion, already transwikied. Barno 03:17, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, dictionary definition. Megan1967 04:25, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for above reasons DDerby 01:21, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text: Category:Stuttgart

title: Category:Stuttgart


text:
Allocation group

An AG or allocation group is a subvolume in a file system which maintains its own track of free blocks and file data.

This makes simultaneous file operations possible; only one write can happen to an AG at any time, but multiple operations can be performed on the file system, each happening in a different AG. In SMP systems, multiple CPUs can write to different AGs, enabling physically concurrent disk operations on a single file system.

Whereas a single hard disk is not capable of reading or writing to multiple places simultaneously, a file system or partition that utilizes a scheme such as RAID or logical volume management may encompass multiple physical disks. In this case, the use of allocation groups may grant additional file system throughput.

Allocation groups are used by these file systems:
 * XFS from SGI, an XFS AG can have a max size of 1TiB
 * Btrfs
 * JFS
 * ext2, ext3 and ext4 use block groups

title: Allocation group


text: Category:University Athletic Association


text:
Talk:International Klein Blue

CMYK
The sources of information about IKB that I consulted all have the same RGB value, but different CMYK values (,  and ). I suppose there is not an exact conversion. Also, the range is different, because it seems that Wikipedia uses a value between 0 and 255, and not between 0 and 100. I will convert the first CMYK value I've found to this range (0-255). Please, if I'm wrong please correct the article. Thanks. --suruena 16:36, 2005 Apr 9 (UTC)

 * I've updated the color specs, referring to images at link is now dead and and my own memory:

 * Hex triplet #002199
 * RGB (0, 33, 153)
 * CMYK (100, 95, 12, 5)
 * HSV (227°, 100%, 60%)

 * I was unable to find actual specifications for the color but there should be some since it's a patented color. The physical properties of the paint beyond its color are in part responsible for its luminous appearance and are impossible to reproduce and difficult to estimate.  I think the values I've chosen are a good representation, although I'm a little concerned that it's too dark; rather than second guess my intuition, I've tried to err on the side of accuracy to the above sites.

 * As a saturated blue, CMYK cannot reproduce IKB well. The values given are Photoshop 8's conversion from Adobe RGB (1998) -> U.S. Web Coated (SWOP) v2 with Perceptual intent and would produce only a poor approximation of IKB. Is there a wikipedia policy regarding giving color values for out-of-gamut colors?

 * If I were forced to pick a PMS color (comparing swatches to just my memory, now) I would go with 293, which PS calls (0, 73, 178) and (100, 77, 12, 2). PS calls my choice closest to Reflex which makes me wonder again if it's too dark. But that, too, is a physical thing, not a display screen one.  On screen, it's definitely a better choice.  VermillionBird 21:42, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Hm, it looks a little dark to me too... Anyway, googling a little I found that the patent number in France is 63471. The patent application is supposed to be in the book Yves Klein by Sidra Stich. Maybe if someone has that book. Or if anyone knows how to find old patents... --RE 22:47, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I had accidentally made the image at Yves Klein slightly lighter; I've updated this article so the two colors match. I'll now leave it alone unless I can find a definitive source. VermillionBird 15:14, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

How about details on the sythetic resin and the recipe for combining the pigment and resin? I was fortunate to see a Klein exhibition in Australia in 1998, and more than the exact shade of blue, it was the application of the blue that seemed mesmerizing. The "powdered" appearance of the pigment, with the barely perceptable shadows of the tiny pigment granules, gave the surfaces of his blue canvases their power. I'd love to know how one applies pigment in the way that Klein did. I've found this online so far:

http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/49066 "Klein realized that pigments always tended to look richer and more gorgeous as a dry powder than when mixed with a binder, and he wanted to find a way to capture this appearance in a paint. In 1955 he found his answer: a new synthetic fixative resin called Rhodopas M60A, which could be thinned to act as a binder without impairing the chromatic strength of the pigment. This gave the paint surface a matt, velvety texture.

Klein collaborated with a Parisian chemical manufacturer and retailer of artists' materials named Edouard Adam to develop a recipe for binding ultramarine in the resin mixed with other organic chemicals. To protect this wonderful new paint from misuse that would compromise the purity of his idea, he patented it in 1960."

and this:

http://insearch.typepad.com/notes/2004/04/peter_wollen_on.html

"THE MONOCHROME ADVENTURE

Yves Klein started painting blue monochrome works in 1955. He had started talking about International Klein Blue (IKB) around 1957 or early 1958 and patented the actual process of making the paint itself in 1960. In essence, IKB is a slab of ultramarine pigment suspended in a clear commercial binder, Rhodopas. The effect is to preserve the granularity of the pigment and to seal it so that a thickness of pure pigment can be hung vertically on the wall, like an upended tray. The origins of IKB, according to Klein himself, are twofold, and both significant for Jarman's re-use of this particular medium. First, the idea of monochrome came to Klein while he was playing a jazz improvisation based on the thought of Max Heindel, a Rosicrucian philosopher, or cosmogonist, who profoundly influenced Klein. Heindel, in his exposition of Rosicrucian beliefs, claimed that blue was the highest of the colours, that of spirit freed from material form. Klein believed that his IKB monochromes symbolically presented the prospect of release from materiality and entry into a world of pure spirit. In art-theoretic terms, Klein considered that art should consist simply of pure colour and that the invention of drawing and image-making, the rival tradition to that of pure colour, represented, in effect, a fall from paradise. Historically, painting had begun with pure pigment. Others, like Malevich, had shown the way back to colour, but were still bedevilled by the idea of composition. Only Klein himself, however, fully understood the true meaning and role of monochrome.

In conjunction with his mystical belief in the spiritual power of monochrome, Klein also derived his insistence on pure pigment from his intense personal experience of the materiality of paint. In 1949, aged 21, he had worked for about a year in London, in the Old Brompton Road frame-shop of Robert Savage, a friend of his father. There he experienced w hat he called 'the illumination of matter'. As he wroter later,

I disliked colours ground in oil. They seemed dead to me; what pleased me above all were pure pigments, in powder, such as I saw them in the windows of retail paint-sellers. They had brightness and extraordinary, autonomous lives of their own. This was essential colour. Living tangible colourmatter. It was depressing to see such glowing powder, once mixed in a distemper, or whatever medium intended as a fixative, lose its value, tarnish, become dull. One might obtain effects of paste but after drying it wasn't the same; the effective colour magic had vanished.

Traditionally, ultramarine was the most precious of pigments, which for centuries could be obtained only from lapis lazuli quarried at a single mine in Afghanistan, shipped to Europe via Venice or Aleppo. The mine was first described in the west in 1837, by which time it was exhausted. To IKB Klein later added gold leaf, which he had worked with in the same frame-shop, when gilding frams for Savage, and then rose, to complete his colour repertoire, as a tribute to the Rose Cross. Klein's approach to colour and pigment combined many elements: an obsession with its spiritual meaning, an optical delight in its intensity and granularity, an occult interest in its symbolic interpretation, a fascination with the precious and the antique...."

 * I hate to make a nusiance of myself but there are bits of this article I don't like. Firstly the speculation '(the color effectively becoming the art)' which is not wholy accurate, also 'Klein painted models' naked bodies' implies he painted them, he didn't its common knowledge that he worked in a tux and white gloves and distanced himself from the paint, lastly the phrase 'more conventional single-color canvases.' implies that these were ordinary art for the time of painting, however they were not conventional hence the reason they were not accepted by the salon and that they were controvercial. I would change the article, but last time I did I got in trouble with the wiki authorites, anyway I'm doing an artist study for A-level and when I saw this article thought it needed some clearing up! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.6.108.182 (talk) 21:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

There are no references to the apparent patent granted to Klein or his chemist collaborator. I'm going to assert that there is no patent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.196.82.42 (talk) 03:49, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

I did a websearch for IKB in RGB and found the following specs:

 * RGB (0, 47, 167)
 * CMYK (98, 84, 0, 0)

Source: http://facweb.cs.depaul.edu/sgrais/international_klein_blue.htm

I hope this helps anyone's research. Unidyne (talk) 07:38, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Bullring
IKB encompasses both a method and a hue. Since Selfridges is painted not in a pigment suspended in a clear resin, but, rather, in a conventional opaque surface coating, it cannot be said to be IKB. The referencing may need to be tidied up, but the linked article details the surface coating used.

Architects' Journal building study 88.104.114.87 (talk) 10:13, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The linked article reads like an advertisement and spam...Modernist (talk) 11:32, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I've undone your edit, since it is wholly inaccurate. IKB's formulation is a critical part of Klein's artwork and that a shade which echoes it is not itself IKB. The linked article, from a respected architectural journal, details the choice of shade for Selfridges and the product used.

If you feel this is inappropriate, the whole Selfridges section could be removed, but the article itself is neither spam nor advertising. 88.104.114.87 (talk) 12:09, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I am going to remove the article as a link, and reinclude it as reference to the Selfridges section. As an external link it reads as spam...Modernist (talk) 12:20, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I think that's a sensible approach, thanks. The referencing may need to be tidied up, but the linked article details the surface coating used. ;) 88.104.114.87 (talk) 12:24, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it works better now...:)...Modernist (talk) 12:45, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Another good edit war ruined ;) 88.104.114.87 (talk) 14:49, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Monitors
The article currently claims that the color is "outside the gamut of computer displays." That's quite an extraordinary claim, and has been tagged [citation needed for a while], so I removed it. --75.205.154.113 (talk) 06:42, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

 * Yep, IKB is well outside typical computer display gamut. Why does that claim seem extraordinary? Computer displays have quite limited gamut compared to the natural world. Unfortunately I can’t find any good colorimetric measurements of Klein’s paintings online. –jacobolus (t) 23:56, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, perhaps it only seems extraordinary because I have a very poor understanding of computer monitor technology! :)  I found a possible citation here, but to be honest they might have been relying on wikipedia for that info--certainly the sentence structure was identical to that on this page.  A secondary problem is this possibility: that it once was outside the gamut, but as monitor technology has improved and their gamuts expanded, it might be possible on some higher-end displays.  I found some diagrams of the gamuts of certain monitors, but have no idea how to find out where IKB is located on the graph.  --75.205.154.113 (talk) 02:42, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

 * In re: “might be possible on some higher-end displays”, I don’t believe it is. Have you ever seen any of Klein’s work? The blue is really something else. –jacobolus (t) 02:56, 15 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Computer displays can only attempt to synthesise a colour's RGB equivalent. This may be in the gamut of a display yet when seen the effect is not the same a the real thing. The extent to which RGB can reproduce real colours which are spectra of many wavelengths is often questioned. There are other things such as saturation, lighting and texture which cannot be reproduced. Also the sheer size of the pieces has effects that can't be reproduced on a small monitor. It is also noted that the background is a gold colour for the statue in the illustration. This is also very bright and saturated. So standing in front of it you will get the Blue/Yellow complementary colour effect. QuentinUK (talk) 20:37, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Hue v. effect

It is of course possible to reproduce the hue on a computer monitor or a film or, say, on a photograph taken of an Yves Klein artwork. But as the optical effect is absolutely dependent on the resin binder, which none of these media use, the effect quite obviously cannot be reproduced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:4DD5:316E:0:D9AA:6030:4435:174D (talk) 18:25, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Patent
Many people refer to the patent when there was no such thing, this is just the easiest translation without also explaining what a Soleau envelope is, a system peculiar to France, so many people just say patent. "On May 19, 1960, Yves Klein registered his paint formulation under the name International Klein Blue (IKB) at the Institut national de la propriété industrielle. It received the Soleau envelope number 63471."

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=ia9V2mls3K4C&lpg=PA149&ots=wDiyjHAruZ&dq&pg=PA149#v=onepage&q&f=false

This also includes a photo of said Soleau envelope. Although I cannot read all the details of YK's handwriting it is clear that this is a paint formula.

The patent: It is called "Procédé de décoration ou d'intégration architecturale et produits obtenus par application dudit procédé"

Found the translation here, not so hard to find when you press the right button: http://translationportal.epo.org/emtp/translate/?ACTION=description-retrieval&COUNTRY=FR&ENGINE=google&FORMAT=docdb&KIND=A&LOCALE=en_EP&NUMBER=1258418&OPS=ops.epo.org&SRCLANG=fr&TRGLANG=en

This is a totally different document. So there are two documents after all. QuentinUK (talk) 21:38, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:37, 1 January 2023 (UTC)
 * L'accord bleu (RE 10), 1960.jpg

title: Talk:International Klein Blue


text:
Starfighter

Starfighter, star fighter or starfighters may refer to:

Film

 * The Last Starfighter, a 1984 science fiction film
 * The Starfighters, a 1964 film about F-104 pilots
 * Starfighter: Sie wollten den Himmel erobern, a 2015 German film about the investigation of F-104's accidents in mid 1960s in West Germany

Video games

 * Starfighter (video game), 1979
 * Star Fighter (video game), 1994
 * Star Wars: Starfighter, 2001

Vehicles and transportation

 * Lockheed F-104 Starfighter, a combat aircraft of the U.S. Air Force
 * Canadair CF-104 Starfighter, a variant of the Lockheed F-104
 * Starfighters Inc, a civilian organization that flies F-104 Starfighters
 * VF-33 "Starfighters", a disestablished US Navy fighter squadron

Fictional

 * A fighter spacecraft in science fiction
 * List of Star Wars starfighters
 * X-wing starfighter

Other uses

 * Starfighters (band), a musical group
 * Sailor Star Fighter, a character in Sailor Moon

title: Starfighter


text:
Talk:John Dominic Crossan

Untitled
The controversial field is not identified (and linked?): "New Testament criticism"? Whatever y'all prefer. --Wetman 16:37, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * It was identified by implied reference to Crossan as a Biblical scholar. Evidently that was not sufficient, so it has been corrected and amplified.  Thank you for pointing this out.  --Blainster 02:28, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Unsourced? Have you not read Crossan?  (I will source them better for you.  He does call the Rapture "Crapture.")Eschoir 18:28, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Christian?
Is it safe to put him in a Christian category at the bottom? I think this is relevant seeing that the subject of the article deals greatly about Christianity. -anon. "And because I am myself a Christian, I have a responsibility to do something about it. My reconstruction of the historical Jesus, for example, must be able to show why some people wanted to execute him but others wanted to worship him, why some thought him criminal but others thought him divine." Crossan -Westar Institute Bio

Source?
"...but is dismissed by those critical of his historical methodology." Source? Ejectgoose 03:05, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Lima & OR
Synthesis of published material serving to advance a position

Policy shortcut: WP:SYN Editors often make the mistake of thinking that if A is published by a reliable source, and B is published by a reliable source, then A and B can be joined together in an article to advance position C. However, this would be an example of a new synthesis of published material serving to advance a position, and as such it would constitute original research.[1] "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published this argument in relation to the topic of the article.

Here is an example from a Wikipedia article, with the names changed. The article was about Jones:

Smith says that Jones committed plagiarism by copying references from another book. Jones denies this, and says it's acceptable scholarly practice to use other people's books to find new references.

That much is fine. Now comes the unpublished synthesis of published material. The following material was added to that same Wikipedia article just after the above two sentences:

If Jones's claim that he consulted the original sources is false, this would be contrary to the practice recommended in the Chicago Manual of Style, which requires citation of the source actually consulted. The Chicago Manual of Style does not call violating this rule "plagiarism." Instead, plagiarism is defined as using a source's information, ideas, words, or structure without citing them.

This entire paragraph is original research, because it expresses the editor's opinion that, given the Chicago Manual of Style's definition of plagiarism, Jones did not commit it. To make the paragraph consistent with this policy, a reliable source is needed that specifically comments on the Smith and Jones dispute and makes the same point about the Chicago Manual of Style and plagiarism. In other words, that precise analysis must have been published by a reliable source in relation to the topic before it can be published in Wikipedia. Eschoir 16:20, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Drawing conclusion C from A and B ("A and B, therefore C") is Original Research. Quoting reliable source E, which contradicts source D, is not Original Research. To do so is not merely legitimate, but laudable, in that it ends the pushing of only one particular point of view.  Lima 17:01, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Repeat after me: To make the paragraph consistent with this policy, a reliable source is needed that specifically comments on the Smith and Jones dispute and makes the same point. None of your sources reference Crossan or his book. You are the source of the comments. You are doing original research.Eschoir 05:53, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * What Smith and Jones dispute? What is in question is what the article says about titles allegedly used by Octavian.  Aren't the Encyclopaedia Britannica and Pat Southern's biography reliable sources?  These and other reliable sources contradict statements contained in the article, and thus raise doubts about the article's accuracy. Lima 07:34, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

And they are nice reliable sources, and they are not allowed in that format because they violate the new synthesis rule at wiki. I will repeat Wiki rules:

"Editors often make the mistake of thinking that if A is published by a reliable source, and B is published by a reliable source, then A and B can be joined together in an article to advance position C. However, this would be an example of a new synthesis of published material serving to advance a position, and as such it would constitute original research.[1] "A and B, therefore C" is acceptable only if a reliable source has published this argument in relation to the topic of the article," i.e., Crossan's BOOK! Eschoir 21:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Eschoir continues to misread this passage. The passage says one may not use reliably sourced statement A along with reliably sourced statement B as proof of unsourced statement C. It does not forbid inserting reliably sourced statement B in an article that contains statement A.  This is what I have done.  I have not said: "A and B, therefore C."  I have made no new synthesis.

No, that is Original Research. Quintessentially. Eschoir 13:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

 * If Eschoir has misread this passage, is it possible that he has also misread Crossan? Did Crossan really say of Octavian what Eschoir has made Wikipedia attribute to him in this and other articles?  Lima 05:35, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Buy the book and see for yourself. But even if I was lying about the source, you would have to use a published source congruent with your position vis a vis Crossan to support your thesis.Eschoir 13:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Why? Aren't the published sources I have quoted good enough?  Aren't they congruent with what I say of them?  Anyone can consult them directly, and check not only that they do say what is attributed to them, but also that what they do say is highly relevant to the claims that the article attributes to Crossan.

The sources are good enough, I would guess, as good as any and certainly extensive. The problem with the sentence is that YOU are forwarding them into a discussion of Crossan, and we as editors at WIKI are not authorized to make original argumentation using original research howsoever worthy  in articles we edit. You've been warned about doing this before, by higher authority than me.Eschoir 21:15, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Of course, I have not accused and do not accuse Eschoir of bad faith. I take his understanding of Crossan's thought to be genuine and sincere.  But if his understanding is correct, then what these sources say about those elements of Crossan's thought that are expounded in the article is even more relevant to this article on Crossan than if they concerned instead a mere misunderstanding of Crossan's thought. Lima 13:26, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Of course they are relevant. But inadmissible, as we lawyers are fond of saying. Find a published source that takes on Crossan, or get published yourself, and you have standing to take on Crossan. But your work here is original research, and out of bounds.Eschoir 21:15, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If one source has made a particular claim and another source has made a contradictory statement either before or after the first source made its claim, why on earth do you say the second source is "inadmissible" unless written as a rebuttal of the first? Why on earth cannot the second source be quoted, making clear that the first source's claim is not a universally accepted idea and thus preventing Wikipedia being used as a vehicle for personal points of view?  Lima 04:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Because first, the second source has to be referring to the first source, in this instance Crossan, rather than the content of crossan's research. Second, the source of the rebuttal cannot be YOU, an unpublished Editor. It might be reasonable, it might be correct, but your footnotes promote YOUR PERSONAL POINT OF VIEW about Crossan, and thus are inadmissable in an article on WIKI.Eschoir 05:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a paraphrase of your last paragraph would be illustrative: "Why on earth cannot the second source be quoted by me, in the course of expressing my personal point of view, making clear that the first source's claim is not a universally accepted idea and thus preventing Wikipedia being used as a vehicle for personal points of view?"

Does that express the point? If Luke Timothy Johnson published the exact same critique, it would be permisible to create a section called, say, Critics of Crossan, and quote him. But you must agree that you could not pool your footnotes and come up with a paragraph starting "Here's where I think Corssan goes wrong." That would not be permissible. It is not NPOV. Well you can't sneak in the back door writing footnotes that first express your disagreement and second bolster the argument using sources that don't reference Crossan. Have you even read WP:OR?Eschoir 05:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * The cited sources concern claims about titles used by Octavian/Augustus. They do not concern Crossan.  They do not say Crossan is wrong (nor, actually, do I).  They say the claims are wrong, regardless of who may or may not make them.  An article that includes the claims loses its NPOV character every time you remove from it the information that important reliable sources consider the claims unfounded.  Please do not keep unbalancing the article.  Lima 07:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Please don't accuse fellow editors of censorship without very good reason - I suggest you read our policy on assuming good faith. For what it's worth, I am by no means a fan of Crossan at all - in fact, I completely disagree with most of his stuff on Jesus and early Christianity that I have read.  I think your point is a very interesting one that could be very effectively raised in another forum.  For example, were I still studying New Testament at university, I suspect it would get me good marks if I were to propose it properly and write an essay around it.
 * However, we cannot admit points in the Crossan article which do not mention either Crossan or the argument he uses. It is contrary to the rules of wikipedia, as Eschoir has explained thoroughly. You suggest that the article loses its NPOV character every time it is removed - I suspect that may be because you aren't quite clear about what NPOV means on wikipedia (it has quite a technical meaning), and I suggest you read the document explaining NPOV.
 * It's an interesting point, but if other sources don't mention it in relation to Crossan's work, then it is inadmissable on wikipedia. It may, however, be the case that someone has already made the point somewhere in the academic literature - in which case, all it would require for the argument to be included would be for you to do a literature search and find someone making the argument yourself. TJ 11:52, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you Theology John. There are plenty of published critics of Crossan, Luke Timothy Johnson comes to mind. The lead of this ariticle cites unnamed critics. Let's get them all in there, but keep Lima and all other personal editor's views out.Eschoir 13:26, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Since the word "censorship" is considered offensive, I apologize for using it. I only meant by it exclusion of other views, which is how I saw what Eschoir was doing.  I was and am assuming good faith on his part, as I expressly stated above, and I did indicate why I thought excluding views that disagreed with the claims Eschoir inserted in the article (what I unfortunately called "censorship") was making the article unbalanced.  I by no means suggested that the exclusion was being done in bad faith: I know he has a sincerely held point of view different from mine on what constitutes balance.
 * I made no comment on Crossan's "argument" and the conclusion he draws. I made no comment even on the statements that the article says Crossan made and on which he then built an argument. I merely inserted other statements that disagreed with those statements and I let readers take their choice between the conflicting statements.  This, I thought - but it seems I did so mistakenly - was a way of ensuring NPOV.
 * I apologize also for not having discerned in WP:NPOV the prohibition against quoting reliable sources that make statements in disaccord with statements already in this article. I thought Eschoir's quotation about a new synthesis inapplicable, since I made no new synthesis.  Perhaps it was in some other way that has hitherto escaped me that Eschoir "explained the matter thoroughly".  I would be grateful for a pointer to the part of WP:NPOV that I need to study more thoroughly.
 * In view of TJ's phrase, "we cannot admiss points in the Crossan article ...", I beg enlightenment also on whether TJ intends what he says to apply only to the Crossan article or also to the other articles in which Eschoir has inserted the same Crossan-attributed claim about Octavian's titles, a claim contradicted by the sources I quoted.
 * Thanks. Lima 13:58, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

(added later than two below comments, one by Eschoir and one by Lima) I have absolutely no idea about the other articles in which Eschoir has inserted this claim. If in those articles, the claim is about Octavian's titles, then you are entitled to give multiple sources ("Crossan says this, and the encyclopedia brittanica says this") according to WP:NPOV, without stating that either is right. You are not entitled to use Encyclopedia Brittanica as a counter-argument to Crossan (unless it itself argues against Crossan) - but you are allowed to use it as source for what it itself says.

In response to your question asking me to explain why I think this is Original Research, I'll explain that.

WP:NOR states that edits which "introduce original ideas" are Original Research. This edit either a) introduces an original idea (an argument critical of Crossan) based upon the fact that Encyclopedia Brittanica says certain things, which Crossan contradicts, or b) is off-topic for this article. It doesn't matter whether the original idea is implicit or explicit (although by starting with "In reality", that looks pretty explicit), if the argument cannot be sourced against Crossan or his work, then the argument should not be used. It is either off-topic for this article, or original research. TJ 18:25, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

 * But you did make comments. When you start a footnote "In reality . . " you are stating your opinion that your reality is operationally, functionally correct, and the article's not.  That's your opinion, which you bolster with impressive and inadmissible quotes.  That's what I see as the new synthesis. Your opinion is the new synthesis.

And it's pointless to insert reqeusts for the source of a quoted assertion, I didn't write the quote. You will have to look at the book (I highly recommend it!) It is my thought that you will have to find sources that take on Crossan to attack the quote in the SOn of God article, especially when you segregate the passage and call it "John dominic Crossan's Interpretation."Eschoir 14:21, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I am uninterested in taking on Crossan. Only in balancing points of view given prominence in Wikipedia.  This is my good-faith intention, even if I have, it seems, used ill-chosen expressions like "In reality" and "censorship", which I am quite prepared to correct, or to let others correct.  Best wishes.  -  Before closing, I find a thought has struck me: if I have bolstered something with impressive quotes, that something clearly isn't just my opinion.  And I still do not understand what two (or more) things that opinion is supposed to be a synthesis of.  Lima 15:29, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I accept TJ's decision. I may not grasp it fully, but at least it doesn't make statements that I think are obvious nonsense.  Lima 18:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm late to this discussion, but I'd like to note that the counterpoints to Crossan in Lima's notes – and if they aren't intended to imply the falsity of Crossan's claims they're simply irrelevant – seem to focus very narrowly on the official religion of the city of Rome itself, when one can find higher "levels" of divinity attributed to Augustus in many other cases at province-, city- and household-level cult (including during his lifetime, and sometimes encouraged by authorities like provincial governors). I can't vouch for all the titles Crossan mentions, but even if we consider only Augustus' lifetime he's on firm ground with "god" (theos, the same word as used by Christians) and "son of god" (theou huios, the regular first-century Greek translation for divi filius, and a phrase also used by Christians). It's misleading IMO to undermine the second by noting only how the (later) Vulgate translates theou huios. Of course, the titles mean different things to Jews or Christians than they would to others, but I doubt Crossan is denying that. Including this kind of critique of someone's scholarship in an article, besides being original research, has the potential to cause unjust harm to a subject's reputation among readers who treat Wikipedia as if it were written by experts. EALacey 09:32, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

POV in "Career" section
I believe that many portions of the Career section are not POV. However, I'm coming at the issue from an opposing theological standpoint, so I'd like the neutral (ha) Wikipedia judges to guide me here. POV sections italicized in the small paragraph quoted here:

 * He challenges those who would debate whether Jesus "really" walked on water to recognize that, whether history or parable, the larger issue is the meaning of the anecdote. He proposes the historical probability that, like all but one known victim of crucifixion, Jesus' body never made it to a tomb, but was scavenged by animals.

The whole section is full of statements like this. It sounds like the author is actually writing a favorable review of Crossan's work rather than simply stating what Crossan's views are. Also, note the scare quotes in there. If the author is quoting Crossan in the "challenge" section, he should quote him, but otherwise, Wikipedia should not be used as a ground for declaration of a challenge for debate.

Furthermore, nothing is cited.

Also, I think that perhaps "Views" would be a better name for the section, rather than "Career". HorridRedThings (talk) 14:47, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

 * What about this to replace the quote above? The citation is #3; you didn't copy the citation here, but it's clearly included. I'm not sure why you missed it.

 * He argues that the meaning of the story is the real issue, not whether a particular story about Jesus is history or parable. He proposes that it is historically probable that, like all but one known victim of crucifixion, Jesus' body was scavenged by animals rather than being placed in a tomb.

 * I agree that "challenges" isn't neutral language, and the scare quotes can go. We can say that Crossan argues, proposes, or claims something. While in many cases those are words to avoid, Crossan makes controversial claims that make those word choices appropriate. I think the goal here should be to make it clear that this is what Crossan says. Do you think that the above makes it clear that Crossan says it was historically probable, rather than simply saying that it is historically probable? WeisheitSuchen (talk) 16:21, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

 * Re: Views vs. Career, what if we moved the first 4 paragraphs of this section to a "Views" section, but left the section starting "Crossan writes books for both academic and popular audiences" as Career? That part seems more of a career section to me. A split might make it clearer. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 16:24, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

 * Since there's been no discussion on this for months, I made the changes I previously proposed and removed the neutrality tag. WeisheitSuchen (talk) 20:09, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Biblical revisionist
This guy is a Biblical revisionist, what some people would describe as a "left wing radical" or "liberal". This is a social construct, which is why I haven't inserted it, but it should be debated for inclusion. 129.180.139.17 (talk) 10:01, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

 * I disagree with using the term 'liberal' to describe him, because the promotion of liberty cannot be attributed to only those adopting his position. Indeed, one could argue his position is contrary to liberty insofar as it obligates people to work towards various specified goals (hence a kind of moral enslavement).
 * It is also not clear to me what 'left wing' means here. Certainly I think he can be called a radical insofar as he appears to deny the bodily resurrection of Christ without a coherent reason (listening to his discussion with N.T. Wright, available on youtube). -- Newagelink (talk) 01:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Let's use AD/BC, not the foolish euphemisms for them.
My recent removal of the dating euphemism from this article was undone and I was accused of violating wp:era, apparently because I didn't create a talk section discussing it first. So here is the requested talk section. Let's remove the foolish euphemism for dates -- there appear to be only two of them, so it seems a simple problem to solve.

If you want to remove Jesus from the dating system, if that is your reason for using "CE" etc, them come up with a new dating system (e.g. the establishing of the United Nations). Using a euphemism is intellectually dishonest. For this reason, let's remove the euphemism (CE, BCE) and call the date what it actually is (AD, BC). -- Newagelink (talk) 01:33, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

 * From WP:ERA, "Do not change the established era style in an article unless there are reasons specific to its content. Seek consensus on the talk page before making the change. Open the discussion under a subhead that uses the word "era". Briefly state why the style is inappropriate for the article in question. A personal or categorical preference for one era style over the other is not justification for making a change." Editor2020, Talk 20:02, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Right, thank you for quoting the background for this discussion. As you can see, I've done as that section requests here. If Editor2020 thinks further clarification is needed: Crossan favors intellectual exercise and the pursuit of knowledge, and is partial to Christianity such that many consider him a Christian. It is therefore inappropriate to engage in intellectually dishonest euphemisms such as "Common Era" while using the 'Anno Domini' dating system, and, as if that weren't enough, it is more appropriate to mention the Lord he so often discusses (and for whom he took priestly vows). -- Newagelink (talk) 09:02, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The Era style used in this article is BCE/CE. If you would like to change it, you can open a discussion here on the Talk page about changing it. If you are able to reach wp:consensus that BC/AD is more appropriate to this article then it can be changed. Editor2020, Talk 03:48, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

removed old tag
I deleted material that was challenged and not verified, and I added material referenced to top-notch sources. The page could use more detail, and the lead could use reorganization, but there's no need for this tag. Jonathan Tweet (talk) 23:01, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Atheism
I removed the claim that Crossan had affirmed his non-belief in God. The YouTube video does not reliably support this. I was expecting something from Crossan himself but, instead, it's William Lane Craig relating a second-hand, fragmentary account of his conversation with Crossan and his own rather negative interpretation of Crossan's beliefs.

William Lane Craig was referring to a debate that he'd had with Crossan, the narrative of which is included in the book "Will the real Jesus please stand up", referenced in the books appended to the main article. The YouTube video merely recounts the debate and indirectly the book. Crossan denies there is a God in the orthodox sense preferring to believe God is a mere construct of the human psyche. To all intents and purposes Crossan is an atheist in the sense that he does not believe in an entity that exists separately from the human mind. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.179.7.164 (talk) 13:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:John Dominic Crossan


text:
User talk:KickAir8P~

Welcome!
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! - UtherSRG 16:39, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

Fixing vandalism by reverting
Hi and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for fixing the vandalism on The Matrix - good job! I have a comment/tip for you though. In your edit summary you put "revert to 17:22, 2005 Apr 8 to correct anon vandalism" which is actually less helpful than it seems: the history page dates and times are based on each user's local time, e.g. it took me a while to work out that for me this edit was actually, for me, the 00:22, 9 Apr 2005 version. It's more helpful to put "revert to version by (username)", or even just "reverted vandalism" as it's usually clear that the vandal was the previous edit, as it's less confusing for people who edit the article after you.

I hope that this doesn't sound like a criticism because that's not how I intended it (probably just sounds like rubbish - I don't seem to be having a very eloquent day). Please carry on editing Wikipedia and I hope you enjoy it! SteveW | Talk 22:50, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Until there is evidence that significant numbers of people follow religions inspired by Star Wars or The Matrix, any references to such religious movements are not encyclopedic and thus do not belong in Wikipedia. There is little to no such evidence. Philwelch 08:16, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

New religious movement
I expanded more on the Jedi census movement in the article, but left Matrixism out. It's pretty clearly not significant enough to warrant mention. I think my edits make the section more accurate as well. Philwelch 08:30, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * "I think my edits make the section more accurate as well."

 * It's certainly more readable.

 * "Until there is evidence that significant numbers of people follow religions...any references to such religious movements are not encyclopedic and thus do not belong in Wikipedia."

 * Gotta disagree with this -- such references are encyclopedic in the proper context, such as examples of NRMs in the article on NRMs, or examples of fiction-based NRMs in the section on fiction-based NRMs. (Please note that one of the defining characteristics of a New Religious Movement is that it's new, and therefor its followers may number considerably fewer than would otherwise be considered significant.)  Unless the NRM article itself isn't encyclopedic, in which case you would've submitted it for deletion rather than updating it.

 * Look, it wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if it turned out that Matrixism was a hoax or a lark. But if I tried to prevent all Wikipedia references to it simply because I couldn't believe that anyone could sincerly follow something as silly or obviously untrue as Matrixism, I'd be engaging in blatant religious bigotry, which also doesn't belong on Wikipedia.

 * By the way, 66.81.143.52's last attempt to add Matrixism to The Matrix artcle said in the summary "(→Impact - minor edit (don't forget this page receives re-directs for "matrixism")" Except it doesn't anymore - when I added the section on Fiction-based NRMs (which included Matrixism as one of the examples of such), I repointed the redirect to the NRM article, which now no longer mentions Matrixism, so now what?  KickAir8P~ 05:26, 2005 Apr 18 (UTC)

title: User talk:KickAir8P~


text: User:DavidBrooks/classic.css

title: User:DavidBrooks/classic.css


text:
Talk:Durkin Opening

Old talk
The Oxford Companion to Chess doesn't have much information on Robert Durkin, so I tried googling for him. All I could find is that according to one widely copied chess timeline created by Bill Wall, he was born on May 9, 1923 in Milwaukee. The Oxford Companion agrees with the birth year but places him in New Jersey, presumably where he live(s/d) as an adult. There is much confusion about Robert Durkin because there were two. One, Robert Durkin from Wisconsin, played in the Ventnor NJ tournaments of the 1940s. The other was Robert T. (1.NQR3) Durkin who grew up in Baltimore and eventually moved to New Jersey--Ventnor of all places! This led to further confusion. Robert T. went on to have a successful career in open tournament play. He beat such notables as Anthony Santasiere, John Collins, Lisa Lane, Weaver Adams, Irving Chernev and Mike Valvo. — Preceding unsigned comment added by American Chess Magazine (talk • contribs) 17:58, 8 August 2023 (UTC)

On the Durkin Opening itself, Bill Wall says it is sometimes called the Sodium Attack from Na, the chemical symbol for sodium. (Wall's geocities site is frequently unavailable, so I got it from the google cache searching for cache:http://www.geocities.com/siliconvalley/lab/7378/wallna3.htm). There is some google support for this amusing name, and apparently Eric Schiller's Unorthodox Chess Openings also mentions it. (I don't have Schiller's book, but you can search inside it at amazon.com.) Quale 16:40, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Michael Amper : Durkin was a long-time member of the Ventnor Chess Club, which met at the Ventnor Public Library (or, possibly, Community Center) in Ventnor, NJ, just south of Atlantic City. My father, Rodolfo Ylaya Amper, MD, who at one time was a relatively highly-rated chess player, enjoyed many games with Mr. Durkin. I have a copy of a club photograph that was taken sometime in the 1970's which includes, my father, my brother, and myself (making a silly face), as well as Mr. Durkin, along with the members of the club. Unfortunately, some 30 years later, I cannot recall which of the people in the photograph is Mr. Durkin, but I do remember that Mr. Durkin was one of the best players in the club.

It would be interesting to get some games played by Mr. Durkin featuring this opening. (There are 3 at Chessbase (http://www.chesslive.de/. In all three he answers 1...e5 with 2. Nc4, although he also played other moves.) (More at http://www.chess.com/blog/Keyif/durking-opening-or-just-add-salt & you can find others online. mrh 5/6/14) Are there any records from the Ventnor Chess Club around? Is Mr. Durkin still alive? Cjpuffin 20:07, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC) --Durkin died several years ago. I had long been considering writing a new book on 1. Na3 & wanted to have read his; unfortunately, i could never find a copy. At once time i had an ad in Chess Life, & thought i was about to get one when i was answered from a correspondent in NJ who claimed to have it. But after a single exchange he never answered my letters. --graywyvern (PS i have collected a dozen or so of his games, & intend to make them available eventually, but too many other projects have intervened. I am, however, still playing 1. Na3 religiously at http://www.letsplaychess.com)(5/6/14 i now play at chess.com & i have discovered a copy of Knightmare-1, which i will eventually upload to archive dot org...)(5/23/14: it is here: http://www.pearltrees.com/graywyvern/knightmare-1-robert-durkin/id11717223 )

 * Is it true that 1.Na3 is the most rarely played of all White's possible moves? 84.69.191.87 14:25, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
 * According to http://www.chessgames.com/perl/explorer, it is. 88.122.16.225 18:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Middle name
I changed the middle name from T. to James as is documented in the USCF records. The only Robert Durkin registered in New Jersey, where chess documentation claims Robert Durkin played, is listed as Robert James Durkin. According to USCF records, his last rated event was April 9, 2010. His rating appears to have ended down at 1651. I'm not sure if this extra information adds any extra details for the opening, but if we are going to list the middle name, we should use the one recorded.

The Robert E. Durkin mentioned on this talk page seems to be registered with a different ID in Wisconsin. Since other sources on chess mention the Durkin associated with the opening played in New Jersey, I believe the similar name is a coincidence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koor der (talk • contribs) 23:47, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

 * I think T. was probably correct. See for example . Though it's a bit strange that the USCF doesn't have any record of a Robert T. Durkin in the relevant area. (But do their records actually go back far enough?) --Zundark (talk) 19:58, 6 November 2015 (UTC)

Bio Info
The Social Security Death Index lists three Robert Durkins born in 1923, none of them on May 9 or in WI. It seems probable that he's still alive, since nearly everyone who lives and works in the USA for a long time gets social security death benefits. US Search (ussearch.com) lists 24 by that name around the right age, but none in NJ. I'll keep looking. Dynzmoar (talk) 12:57, 11 September 2008 (UTC)

Robert E. Durkin, who was born in Milwaukee WI on May 9, 1923, was my stepfather. He died recently, on February 27, 2014. He was a very good chess player - I have seen press clippings of his winning citywide tournaments in Milwaukee as a teenager, and playing and beating six simultaneous opponents, while blindfolded. To my limited knowledge he did not have a specific opening named after him, and I don't know that he lived in New Jersey for any significant time. David J Grindrod (talk) 00:40, 21 March 2014 (UTC)David Grindrod

Schiller and his silly made-up names
I don't think there is any source for "Sodium Attack" before Schiller; it is proper to credit 1.Na3 to Durkin who played it often and published a short monograph on it. As for "Celadon Variation" and "Chenoboskian Variation", there are zero games in the databases with either "variation". Bloggers and chess.com posters can indulge Schiller and his silly made-up opening names if they want but wikipedia shouldn't. MaxBrowne (talk) 10:02, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree. Schiller's invented names are a scourge.  This isn't even among the worst examples—Reagan's Attack is obnoxious.  I'm no fan of Ronald Reagan, but that's beyond stupid and Schiller's political insults aren't worthy of encyclopedic notice. Quale (talk) 02:50, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Durkin Opening


text:
User talk:62.243.152.26

Nomination of Empty Spaces for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Empty Spaces is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Empty Spaces until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Binksternet (talk) 17:09, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:62.243.152.26


text:
Talk:Objectivist epistemology

Administrative query
This page is frequently defaced by an anonymous individual (or, less likely, individuals) who gets here from various public-access IP numbers and erases key contributions to the article. Would it be possible to restrict editing of this page to registered users? This would require the unidentified vandal to do more work, and thus might have a discouraging effect.

Attributions
"Reason consists in forming concepts through the use of logic, what Objectivism defines as "the art of noncontradictory identification"."

In actual fact, that definition was originated by Aristotle.

Contradiction?
These two paragraphs seem to contradict each other:

"It is also an error to identify a concept too fully with one of its referents, i.e., to fail to generalize properly. In the Objectivist view, one who is thus 'concrete-bound' (i.e. whose thinking is fixed at the level of concrete entities) is unable to use concepts properly. To be concrete-bound is to fail to achieve a fully conceptual consciousness."

"Many contemporary philosophers claim that, while the proposition '1 + 1 = 2' is 'necessary' because true in all possible realities, the proposition 'the atomic mass of hydrogen is 1' is 'contingent' because it is not constant across possible worlds. Objectivism would reply that the second proposition is just as 'necessary' as the first: if the atomic mass differed, the substance in question would not be hydrogen."

Specifically, Objectivism seems to be “concrete-bound” with regard to the atomic mass of hydrogen. I’m not criticizing Objectivism, but rather pointing out that the article in my opinion fails to address this contradiction (or apparent contradiction), leaving me wondering which part I have failed to understand. — Daniel Brockman 06:01, 28 January 2006 (UTC) (point addressed in subsequent edit by Adam Reed.)

It doesn't address it because your question isOriginal ResearchWikipedia:No_original_research of a sort I highly recommend finding a webforum full of Objectivists who will be all too happy to have fun with it (lemme know, as I was highly tempted to address it  before I remembered that policy)Darkmusashi 03:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Bold text

Criticism?
Given that this entry was probably written by objectivists themselves, wouldn't a criticism section be helpful? Acumensch 21:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Probably would, but as an Objectivist who is constantly on the lookout I've never really come across any criticisms that directly address the episeomology of objectivism. Ethics, politics, metaphysics yes, but not much for epistemologyDarkmusashi 03:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Canvassing alert
An objectivist group is canvassing its members to edit Ayn Rand related articles. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Turnsmoney (talk • contribs) 18:54, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
 * How 'bout that.TheJazzFan (talk) 14:33, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

= Blank-out and re-direct to section in Objectivism (Ayn Rand) =

See Objectivist politics and Objectivist metaphysics. Any objections? --Karbinski (talk) 21:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not entirely happy with the redirecting of Objectivist metaphysics – I think these articles could be valuable once referenced. This is of the same standard (in terms of citations) as Objectivist metaphysics, however, so for consistency's sake I don't object. Skomorokh  21:36, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

 * I am very much in favor of blanking and redirecting these articles. I know Wikipedia has unlimited space, but since the material, even if properly referenced, can only be repetitive (unless we blank Objectivism), I feel they just waste the reader's time.KD Tries Again (talk) 16:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)KD Tries Again

 * The idea is that, having read the Objectivism (Ayn Rand) article and its short epistemology section, the reader can proceed to the Objectivist epistemology article for a more detailed account of the sub-topic. The latter article has twice as much readable prose as the former, so I don't think it's accurate to say that it is redundant. For comparison, see individualist anarchism, which is summarised in anarchism. Skomorokh  16:06, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Objectivist epistemology


text: User talk:81.137.227.45

title: User talk:81.137.227.45


text:
User:Allen Olson

I have used Wikipedia for years and I would like to find a way to start contributing. I firmly believe in what Wikipedia is doing from its open source to its NPOV. I think it is a great educational tool and an amazing example of community.

title: User:Allen Olson


text:
File:InsideTheUmmayadMosque.JPG

Inside the Umayyad Mosque in Damascus

Here is a link to a gallery with over 30 images I have captured solely on the Umayyad Mosque. Some of them dating April 2007 and shot with a wide angle lens.

Many more images of Syria are available on my web site.

Being the creator of this work I hereby publish it under the following licenses: Creative Commons, Some Rights Reserved --Zelidar 06:16, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

title: File:InsideTheUmmayadMosque.JPG


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Underwhelming

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. - Mailer Diablo 13:11, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Underwhelming
This is just a dicdef of the word. I can't see any potential for growth here, or any necessary redirects. It has been transwikied (Wiktionary:Transwiki:Underwhelming) and should now be deleted.--Dmcdevit 16:46, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * delete, not a real thing, can't see any potential for growth. Kappa 17:40, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete underwhelming dic defs. Mgm|(talk) 21:13, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)

 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
List of Scottish governments

This is a list of all Scottish Parliaments and Governments (called the Scottish Executive from 1999 until 2008) the time of the introduction of devolved government for Scotland in 1999.

List
{| class="wikitable"
 * colspan="8" |

1st Parliament
!Term !style="width: 90px"|Ministry !colspan="2"|First Minister !colspan="2"|Deputy !colspan="2"|Parties !rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | !rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | !rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | !rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | !rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | !rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " |
 * - style="text-align: center; background: #efefef; border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * rowspan="2"|1999–2000
 * rowspan="2"|Dewar
 * rowspan="2"|Dewar
 * rowspan="2"|Donald Dewar
 * rowspan="2"|Jim Wallace
 * Labour
 * -style="border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * Liberal Democrats
 * rowspan="2"|2000–01
 * rowspan="2"|McLeish
 * rowspan="2"|McLeish
 * rowspan="2"|Henry McLeish
 * rowspan="2"|Jim Wallace
 * Labour
 * - style="border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * Liberal Democrats
 * rowspan="2"|2001–03
 * rowspan="2"|1st McConnell
 * rowspan="2"|1st McConnell
 * rowspan="2"|Jack McConnell
 * rowspan="2"|Jim Wallace
 * Labour
 * - style="border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * Liberal Democrats
 * - style="text-align: left; background: #efefef; border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * colspan="8" |

2nd Parliament
!Term !style="width: 90px"|Ministry !colspan="2"|First Minister !colspan="2"|Deputy !colspan="2"|Parties !rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | !rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " |
 * - style="text-align: center; background: #efefef; border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * rowspan="2"|2003–07
 * rowspan="2"|2nd McConnell
 * rowspan="2"|2nd McConnell
 * rowspan="2"|Jack McConnell
 * rowspan="1"|Jim Wallace
 * rowspan="1"|Labour Party
 * - style="border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * rowspan="1"|Nicol Stephen
 * Liberal Democrats
 * - style="text-align: left; background: #efefef; border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * colspan="8" |

3rd Parliament
!Term !style="width: 90px"|Ministry !colspan="2"|First Minister !colspan="2"|Deputy !colspan="2"|Parties ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " |
 * - style="text-align: center; background: #efefef; border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * 2007–11
 * 1st Salmond
 * 1st Salmond
 * Alex Salmond
 * Nicola Sturgeon
 * Scottish National Party
 * - style="border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * colspan="8" |

4th Parliament
!Term !style="width: 90px"|Ministry !colspan="2"|First Minister !colspan="2"|Deputy !colspan="2"|Parties ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " |
 * - style="text-align: center; background: #efefef; border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * 2011–14
 * 2nd Salmond
 * 2nd Salmond
 * Alex Salmond
 * Nicola Sturgeon
 * Scottish National Party
 * - style="border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * 2014–16
 * 1st Sturgeon
 * 1st Sturgeon
 * Nicola Sturgeon
 * John Swinney
 * Scottish National Party
 * - style="border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * colspan="8" |

5th Parliament
!Term !style="width: 90px"|Ministry !colspan="2"|First Minister !colspan="2"|Deputy !colspan="2"|Parties ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " |
 * - style="text-align: center; background: #efefef; border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * 2016–2021
 * 2nd Sturgeon
 * 2nd Sturgeon
 * Nicola Sturgeon
 * John Swinney
 * Scottish National Party
 * - style="border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * colspan="8" |

6th Parliament
!Term !style="width: 90px"|Ministry !colspan="2"|First Minister !colspan="2"|Deputy !colspan="2"|Parties ! rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | ! rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | ! rowspan="2" style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! rowspan="1" style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " | ! style="background-color: " |
 * - style="text-align: center; background: #efefef; border-bottom: 2px solid gray;"
 * rowspan="2" |2021–23
 * rowspan="2" |3rd Sturgeon
 * rowspan="2" |3rd Sturgeon
 * rowspan="2" |Nicola Sturgeon
 * rowspan="2" |John Swinney
 * Scottish National Party
 * Scottish Greens
 * rowspan="2" |2023–24
 * rowspan="2" |1st Yousaf
 * rowspan="2" |1st Yousaf
 * rowspan="2" |Humza Yousaf
 * rowspan="2" |Shona Robison
 * Scottish National Party
 * Scottish Greens
 * 2024
 * 2nd Yousaf
 * 2nd Yousaf
 * Humza Yousaf
 * Shona Robison
 * Scottish National Party
 * 2024–present
 * Swinney
 * Swinney
 * John Swinney
 * Kate Forbes
 * Scottish National Party
 * }

title: List of Scottish governments


text:
File:MSN Spaces.PNG

Summary

Fair use rationale for

 * This image is needed to show the layout of the page
 * This image will not affect the earnings of the Wikimedia Foundation
 * This image will not affect the earnings of the Microsoft Corporation or related affiliates

title: File:MSN Spaces.PNG


text: User talk:70.243.41.98

title: User talk:70.243.41.98


text:
User:JeremyMcCracken

{|style="background-color:transparent;" School in 2002, and am currently a student at the University of Akron. I have one brother, Josh, who is also a Wikipedia editor: User:JoshMcCracken. I'm also on Wikibooks. While you're here, take a look at my portal.
 * valign=top|Hello, readers. I am a resident of Springfield Township, Summit County, Ohio. I graduated from Springfield High

What I do here
I spend a lot of time helping with impasses- third opinions, Requests for Comment, and the Mediation Cabal.

I also comment frequently in AfDs and RfDs. One of my biggest pet peeves in the process is the tagging of brand new articles. I go by WP:INSPECTOR (and very much like the idea of WP:HOTTIE). In that vein, I love doing this.

You might find me at Editor Assistance or WP:Reference desk/Computing.

Of course, I also do editing. I've tried to do some maintenance as well as requested articles. If I made a stub, and seriously misinterpreted something, it's probably because I know nothing about the topic, and was trying to write off of sources only. Wikipedia is all about the editors, so feel free to be bold and make the article better.

I support the right to edit by IP address. See WP:Welcome anonymous editing and the rejected proposal, Editors should be logged in users.

Oh yeah, and I'm briefly mentioned at WP:LAME. It was I who brought the map. Hey, I was just trying to help at an RfC! Actually, using a map constitutes an OR, but I was hoping to show that it was close enough to be indistinguishable- a print map would be the same way. Maybe "...on or near the border of..."

ContribsTab
I've made one technical contribution to wikipedia, ContribsTab. It's a user script; check it out.

What I'm proud of
I caught vandalism which ensured the survival of Kingdom of Humanity through its deletion discussion. It was IP vandalized; the IP then nominated it for deletion. The Kingdom is is in the area of China; after some digging, I found that a blocked user with an anti-China bias was making the mess. I exposed this, and the article stayed. A couple of people voted without looking for the pre-IP-vandalized version; always check these things! I was credited with "diligence", for which I'm flattered, and got some great help from some users. Later on, I grabbed some print sources and merged it into a beefed-up Republic of Morac-Songhrati-Meads.

Webby Awards had a nasty content dispute going on. Accusations of bad faith flew, and a couple of (too) quick-acting administrators were about to block one user as disruptive. It wound up at WP:AN/I and WP:EAR; I said it was a content dispute and not a single problem editor. After an article lockdown and discussion, a compromise edit was reached, and nobody got blocked. The power of compromise.

Uncredited articles
I've taken too long a few times and didn't get credit for an article I wrote. So, here they are:

 * The Del-Vikings, as User talk:172.153.43.63
 * The Manhattans, as User talk:172.148.87.131

My start on Wikipedia
I've tracked down my very first edits as two IPs:

 * 172.151.196.140
 * 172.141.62.115

If I'm remembering right, my very first edit was to create the Adventure Game Toolkit article. That's assuming I didn't do something before this, and can't remember it :-) It also seems that I created the article for my hometown and surname, neither of which I'd remembered doing. Looking back, the latter was mainly OR, and I'd mixed up some as well.

2008
I launched a prank that got reverted in less than half an hour. Does nobody have a sense of humor? Anyway, here is what I did:

Oh yeah- check out this other one that I put my two cents into.

 * valign=top|

 * }

2009
A little bit simpler this year; kept it in the talk space:

A few fictional characters appeared on Wikipedia:
 * Buzz Killington
 * Homer Simpson
 * Bender
 * Stanley Marsh
 * Big Bird

(Thanks to user:Dp76764 for cleaning up my mess, but don't worry, I'd have gotten them in about a half hour!)

Also, see my comments at:
 * Articles for deletion/Earth (2nd nomination)
 * Articles for deletion/Oscar Mayer

Pointless trivia
According to Village pump (proposals)/Archive 23, Wikipedia's overall 10 millionth article was the Hungarian version of Nicholas Hilliard. If you look at the English version, it was created by an IP (back when IPs could create articles). That IP is 195.188.152.16, the one now indef-blocked as that of one of the most well known Wikipedia vandals, User:Willy on Wheels. That blew my mind.

Links

 * Official home page
 * Email me
 * My Contributions
 * My edit count
 * Good list, check out the funny stuff

title: User:JeremyMcCracken