text:
Talk:Sorbet

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Carolboat.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Popular culture
Does the section Sorbet in Popular Culture add anything? Bigturtle 20:36, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I’m rather saddened that you have removed my section about “Sorbets in Popular Culture”. I thought that it was an interesting juxtaposition between low culture and gourmet food.  It also provides an insight into how food stuffs that were once the preserve of the rich became incorporated into the popular diet.  I will await further comments before re-posting the section. Regained 13:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Italian
I am living in Italy (I am from it.wiki, as you can see from my italian user page) and honestly I don't agree with the sentence: Italians often refer to Sherbet as gelato, and the two terms are often used interchangeably in the United States. I think the part concerning Italians should be removed as it's not true. Daphoenyx 01:49, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Also this description contradicts the page on gelato. 69.109.165.100 05:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I live in the states, and I've never heard Sorbet used to mean Gelato. Gelato in my area is used to refer to the expensive imported Italian ice creams that are generally very delicious. As I recall, Sorbet/Sherbet (interesting point: in the US we often mispronounce it as Sherbert) is made of fruit juices unlike ice cream. 70.137.149.233 00:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Sherbet/sorbet articles merged

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Article "Sorbet" merged into article "Sherbet (U.S.)". Now article "Sorbet" redirects to article "Sherbet (U.S.)"; other language links added.87.168.74.187 20:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

That was a mistake IMO - it would have been better to use Sorbet. It's an unambiguous term which avoids confusion with Sherbet - and is the only name used in the UK at least, since in the UK Sherbet = Sherbet, and never the frozen dessert. Conversely it seems that Sorbet is at least understood in the US, even if Sherbet (U.S.) is used more commonly there. FlagSteward 17:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Requested move
Sherbet (U.S.) → Sorbet — Unregistered user merged Sherbet (U.S.) and Sorbet into Sherbet (U.S.) - this is a global product, the name Sorbet is used globally, and avoids confusion with the fizzy powder —FlagSteward 17:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Survey

 * Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with  or  , then sign your comment with  . Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's naming conventions.

 * Oppose Sorbet and sherbet are not fully synonymous in American English, and sherbet is the common name. Already disambiguated, and, given the (apparently complete) national differentiation, it should stay dabbed. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 03:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. And reverse merge too. Agree with Septentrionalis. Legal definitions don't define real language. Rmhermen 18:38, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - for the removal of the brackets Reginmund 19:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - While WP:ENGVAR calls for status quo, in this case I'd urge American wikipedians for a "concession" (I'm lazy to look which page is older). The chosen disambiguator is plain ugly, and creates a false impression that it's a uniquely American product, while it's not. I don't know which page came first, but moving it to more international name would greatly help to reduce confusion. Duja ► 14:56, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - I know what sorbet is, and I know what sherbet is (and what sherbert is), and hated both words as a kid, because I saw both equally in the freezer aisle of the grocery store, and thought they were two completely different things for the longest time. The current title (Sherbet (U.S.)) confused me too -- foods have country qualifiers?  This title makes it seem like Sherbet should be a location, or person, or something, anything but food.  I'd say move the dessert to Sorbet, make sure there's a hatnote at Sherbet to direct (possibly) confused Americans to the right page, and it should fix both problems. -Bbik ★ 16:32, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Support My Oxford Concise says that that sorbet is "flavoured water-ice", while it calls sherbet an an "Eastern cooling drink of diluted fruit juices", and says they are synonyms. FWIW, I've heard and read about "sorbet" much more often than "sherbet", and google seems to concur, 4.15M hits vs 1.74M. --Victor falk 20:12, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Support In North America sherbet is just a sorbet made with milk, it's a special instance of a sorbet.

Discussion

 * Any additional comments:

Having entered the un-lazy mode, article Sorbet dates from November 2003, while this one was created as a split from Sherbet on May 2006. Duja ► 15:01, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the . Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Sherbet (US) contains milk or milkfat while Sorbet does not
This article and/or the merge are inaccurate, as "Sherbet" in America contains milk or milkfat, while "Sorbet" is a non-dairy product. Yermo (talk) 02:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

 * I think I agree if that is correct. To me the article has become confusing (FDA classification is meaningless to the rest of the world) as it would apprear US Sherbet contains dairy where as in the rest of the world Sorbet does not.
 * In this instance whether the US understanding of Sherbet should have it's own article may be a valid point if there are some core differences between US Sherbet and Sorbet (i.e dairy).
 * I have some questions for US editors.
 * 1) What do you generally call a frozen dessert made from sweetened water flavored with iced fruit (typically juice or puree), chocolate, wine, and/or liqueur which DOESN'T contain any dairy (milk, milk fat, cream etc etc)?
 * 2) What do you generally call the above when it DOES contain dairy?
 * For the majority of the world Sorbet does not contain any dairy and it is the absense of dairy which is the definitive difference between Sorbet and Icecream.
 * I think a headed classification section for the US and a seperate one for the rest of the world would be helpful and clear this up if both are to remain on the same article  GQ sm Talk 21:59, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
 * This article caused a minor stir in my office today, because sorbet and sherbe[r]t are definitely not the same thing. Sherbert, as everyone I've ever heard talking about it calls it, is always dairy, and is generally considered a type of ice cream.  I just went and looked at the ingredients on a tub of Edy's Berry Rainbow Sherbet in the freezer, and the first thing in the list is "Skim milk".  It's delicious. :-)  It is also not sorbet.  In response to GQsm's questions:
 * Generally such things are not eaten, but when they are, they're usually called things like "frozen puréed apricots" or whatever. Some people will call this a sorbet.  Others call it a slurpee. [[Image:Teeth.png]]
 * We call this ice cream. The difference between ice cream and sherbert is that the sherbert is "lighter", generally softer it seems, and definitely fruitier.
 * Reporting live from Eau Claire, this has been Tomertalk 23:31, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
 * There seems to be a lot of debate over whether this is pronounced/spelled "sherbet" or "sherbert". Most Americans are die-hard about it being "sherbert" and will swear up and down that that's the only way they have ever seen it spelled. However, you will not find a SINGLE product in the store labelled that way: it is and always has been "sherbet". The misspelling stems from the fact that there is a NAME "Sherbert" ( http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0374_0398_ZO.html ) -- and knowing how the mind associates words, if there was a new or imported product called "Alexandia", you could probably count on people calling it "Alexandria" (especially in a time before things like cell phones, internet, TV, etc. connected people, which explains why people say things like "swimming in the crick", or "eating a sammich", or "warsh your clothes". There are/were WHOLE REGIONS where this happens!). The point is that, sure people say "sherbert", and if that is how it is SAID, then fine. But it is correctly spelled "Sherbet", and you will never find a mass released product that says "sherbert" on the label. I have found an article which admits that the spelling is widely accepted enough to make it into various works and even some dictionaries ( http://grammarist.com/spelling/sherbet-sherbert/ ), but it (the "grammarist") directly refers to it as "this misspelling") (it is a commonly accepted misspelling). You will also note that the works that use the misspelling are journals, books, etc. -- media where its proper to use colloquialisms. There is an entry for Sherbert at Dictionary.com, but that website as based on the concept of something being a word because of how it is commonly USED (colloquialisms, regardless of erroneous development) (see http://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/language/t54.html and http://dictionary.reference.com/help/faq/misc/#error ). Sources like the following do not prove correctness, though they do verify that this mispelling is so viral that people will even swear that "sherbert" is the only way they have ever seen it spelled on products ( http://comeseptember.livejournal.com/152191.html ) -- which is only true in one's head (test it out; and remember that a handwritten labels are written by anybody). As a final source, consider a dictionary from a website devoted to food ( http://www.epicurious.com/tools/fooddictionary/entry/?id=4541 ). I am not saying that it is wrong to say "sherbert" anymore than it is wrong to say "warsh" or "I HAFF to go" or "down the crick"; but those words are most definitely spelled "sherbet", "wash", "have", and "creek". If there is any difference, some are just accents (which are never "wrong"), but words like "sherbert" and "haff" and idioms like "would OF done it" (versus the correct "would HAVE done it") stem from misunderstandings rather than it JUST being how it is said somewhere (e.g. people really think the word IS "sherbert", or they sincerely think the phrase is "would of" because of lazy speech, and they are repeating a learned IDIOM).

Removed promotional link
The external link to Dolcefine, a sorbet wholesaler, is inappropriate here. Maybe if it were in the context of a list of the top five sorbet companies in the US/World, etc, but even then it would still be unencyclopedic. Eeblet (talk) 01:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Future developments
This section looks both in breach of NPOV and WP:CRYSTAL.Autarch (talk) 10:40, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

'Sherbet' (the unique US dairy product) needs its own page
It's a unique frozen dessert. I'm sorry if you disapprove of its origins, or think it's merely bastardized 'sorbet' (or a bastardized use of the term 'sorbet,' or an incorrect use of the British 'sherbet'). The fact is, 'sherbet' (as the term is used in the US) is a unique frozen dessert (i.e., a "light" form of ice cream with a bit of tartness, a unique texture [likely due to the addition of gelatin, or similar product, mentioned by the Encyclopedia Britannica entry, below] and almost always in fruit flavors - I'm saddened and amazed that the classic/quintessential "orange sherbe(r)t" and even "rainbow sherbe(r)t" aren't mentioned ANYWHERE on Wikipedia, even as brief mentions in any article) that deserves its own page. (As, of course, 'sorbet' and British 'sherbet' do, with cross references to the American sherbet page, as appropriate.) I'm getting the sense these days that to a lot of non-US (and even a lot of US) Wikipedia editors, anything culturally American is so evil and repugnant that its very acknowledgement must be quashed/suppressed.

 * I agree. Sherbet is not Sorbet. If Sherbet had its own page and was merged into this one, I have to call into question the integrity of the editor who did that, and the administrators who upheld it. -Artificial Silence (talk) 07:25, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

In the US, we also have 'sorbet,' of course (which is a non-dairy product), and, obviously, ice cream (with varying amounts of cream/milkfat).

I STRONGLY suggest that the merge be reversed. What is wrong with plain 'Sherbet' for the British beverage (yes, with Persian origins), and 'Sherbet (US)' for the frozen dessert? Add a disambiguation page if necessary. Our primary goal here is ACCURACY, not giving some British Wikipedia editors some psychopathological feeling of power over 'American cultural imperialism.'

Also, FYI - the online Encyclopedia Britannica has an entry for American sherbet. Here it is:

"Sherbet (frozen dessert): frozen dessert usually flavoured with fruit, made from water, sugar, flavourings, and milk or cream. Egg white or gelatin may be added to ensure a fine texture. Sherbets may also be flavoured with wine or liqueurs. By U.S. federal regulation, sherbets must contain a minimum of 1 percent and a maximum of 2 percent butterfat. Water ice, called in French sorbet and in Italian granita, is similar to sherbet but contains no dairy ingredients."

I'm afraid that the authoritativeness of Wikipedia is being ever more frequently called into question, and this issue is just one of many thousands of recent examples. Seethaki (talk) 17:12, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

 * I agree Sherbet is not a type of Sorbet. Sorbet, as the article defines, is made ONLY with sweetened water and fruit while Sherbet has additional ingredients.Sir Robert "Brightgalrs" Schultz de Plainsboro (talk) 03:21, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

 * I agree with the above posts and made the differentiation page 'sherbert' quite a bit more explicit. I even added a couple sources to prove we're not crazy for wanting to be able to find information on this popular treat. Many a hot summer day in my youth were made bearable by enjoying some orange or rainbow sherbert (and I've NEVER heard it called 'sherbet', 'sorbet', or 'ice cream'.. not even to this day. People who grew up in America with sherbert know what it is and how to pronounce it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.168.44.192 (talk) 19:10, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed, completely, with all the sentiments expressed here. Sherbet is a unique (and very popular) product in the United States and Canada, and ought to be designated as such. For God's sake, the instances of sherbet lemon in Harry Potter had me convinced Dumbledore was an ice-cream lover, until I saw the hack job that the wiki has apparently done at "disambiguating" these terms. --SchutteGod (talk) 01:10, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

I agree with this sentiment as well, it seems to me like the significance and uniqueness of the American sherbe(r)t is not being considered, either because of neglect or maybe someone's snobbery. In any case, it definitely deserves ITS OWN article. -zepimpja — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.106.46.23 (talk) 01:11, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I agree as well and would like to see inclusion of material on the production of sherbet; specifically I would like to understand how sherbet (as opposed to sorbet) can blend such acidic fruit extracts with milk without curdling the milk. Does the egg somehow shield the milk or bind with the acid? Ray921 (talk) 04:22, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

This is one of the most garbled Wikipedia entries ever. It is clearly not possible to merge the pages on 'Sorbet' and 'Sherbet' and one wonders why it was ever attempted. The article could be much clearer if all mention of the mispronunciation 'sherbert' were omitted. And talking of pronunciation, if not mispronunciation: why on Earth is the affected, pseudo-French pronunciation 'sorbay' given rather than the perfectly correct 'sor-bet' as spelled? Queryit (talk) 00:00, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

 * I agree, this article is a mess. The American dairy product 'sherbet' has no place here, and neither does the British children's candy 'sherbert'. Whoever merged this stuff together hadn't got a clue. BTW, sorbet is usually pronounced as 'sorbay' in the French manner in British English, which is correct given that it's a French loanword. I've no idea what the Yanks do. --Ef80 (talk) 19:25, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

I agree with this request to unmerge these as well. Is anyone going to do anything about it? SuperSlacker (talk) 02:46, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Wow this article kind of sucks - it really confused me because it conflates two different things. Sorbet and Sherbert are not the same thing. If they are, then I'd like to see a merge on Milk and Water. 184.155.10.215 (talk) 19:36, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Came here to add another vote for this. Yes, the etymologies are the same but in today's parlance sherbet and sorbet are very distinct things. Sherbet's have dairy (~2% milkfat as opposed to ~10% for ice cream.) while sorbet's are completely dairy free. The FDA has official standards on the milkfat percentages. If sherbet does not get its own page, the FDA definitions of sorbet, sherbet and ice cream should be clearly spelled out in a table. Thanks. DavidRF (talk) 13:36, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Homemade sherbet does not always include dairy. I think a separate article could be created but it should not be created until someone has sourcing and content to add to it. There are a lot of food articles that are created and then left along for years. These mergers are temporary but do not prejudice recreation of the article. FDA regulations change over time and require too much constant maintenance to check for changes, so rather then a table we should follow what secondary sources say. Seraphim System  ( talk ) 23:47, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

There seems to be consensus to unmerge in the above discussion. If there is no current objections I will do the unmerge in a few days. Spudlace (talk) 07:20, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Just here to add another voice in favor of unmerging these two pages. Sherbet is definitely not the same thing as sorbet in the US, both in terms of regulation and everyday language. An anonymous user also recently removed the link to the section on sherbet in the US in this article from the Sherbet disambiguation article, making this all the more confusing. I certainly wouldn't look at this article to find information on the dessert that is legally distinct from sorbet in the US. CherryT~enwiki (talk) 10:22, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

No actual definition
The first section contains everything but an actual definition of "sorbet." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.242.72.225 (talk) 17:19, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Merge proposal: Rainbow sherbet to Sorbet
The vast majority of the Rainbow sherbet article covers sherbet in general, with only a single paragraph specifically devoted to the rainbow variety.

It might- or might not- be the case that sherbet dessert warrants its own article separate from Sorbet, but rainbow sherbet on its own belongs to that regardless. Ubcule (talk) 16:19, 30 April 2017 (UTC)

 * Agreed. I have added merge templates. Clearly rainbow sherbet is an utterly trivial variant. --Macrakis (talk) 19:54, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose We shouldn't merge unreferenced articles. Haven't found any RS for the content about Emanuel Goren. I would suggest prodding it or turning it over to AfD. I don't think this is notable. Spudlace (talk)
 * I basically agree. It's pretty easy to find sources for the existence of a three-colored "rainbow sherbet", but it's pretty clearly not notable enough for its own article. It might or might not be notable enough to be mentioned in this article. The Goren story was added by an anon with a handful of edits in 2009, sounds dubious, and never had a source, so I'm removing it. Anyway, one way or another, a stand-alone rainbow sherbet article is unnecessary. --Macrakis (talk) 21:01, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

I disagree on the merge as sorbet and rainbow sherbet are two different things, but also would like to propose something as well. I think that it may be a good idea to simply change the rainbow sherbet article back to a long version covering sherbet in general, but change the title and reword a few parts to make it about sherbet in general. This way the two different desserts are differentiated and cover their own respective topics. JPaul Getty ptoductions (talk) 21:40, 9 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Huh? The old version has zero sources for either sherbet in general or rainbow sherbet in particular. The external link to "History of Ice Cream" says nothing specific about sherbet. So what exactly is there in the rainbow sherbet article that's worth saving? --Macrakis (talk) 21:51, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

 * Merge Rainbow sherbet to Sherbet (frozen dessert). That's the right topic; sorbet is not the same. —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 19:32, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

Background
Hey, thanks for your input. I may have missed some point, but as far as i can see that's what the cited sources say : source number 4 : "Birthplace of ice cream: Persians are believed to have introduced the art of frozen desserts" source number 5 :"A favorite use of this stored ice was in one of the earliest frozen desserts; the forerunner of all ice creams and sorbets" source number 6 seems to deal with sharbat/sherbet, not sorbets and thus, can be removed from this article. Given what i said above, it seems that none of the sources support sharbat as being the precursor of modern sorbet while two sources supoort what i wrote in the article before your last edits, i.e. early frozen desserts originated in Persia and were the precursor of what we know today as ice cream and sorbet. Please let me know if you think i'm mistaken. Best. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  18:57, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Your changes are not correct. There were other frozen desserts in China that are unrelated to sorbet. You made these changes based on the headline of the article without even reading the source. Don't do that. Source 4 says: "It is believed that Arabs who had conquered Persian Empire at the time took the age-old Persian refreshment called Sharbat and enriched the existing mix of fruit syrup and snow chilled honey with milk and sugar." Why are you removing this when it's directly supported by all reliable sources? Spudlace (talk) 05:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

 * I did read the sources, and i still don't get where it is said that sharbat is the precursor of sorbet. Thus, i suggest we go by what the sources really say. Besides, source 5 says that one of the earliest frozen desserts was created in Persia and that it is the forerunner of all ice creams and sorbets. That seems cristal clear to me. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  10:28, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Other sources exist that dispute whether sharbat is the forerunner of all frozen desserts. So, it is not only outside the scope of the article but it puts too much weight on one source (Gil Marks) who we use a lot when we lack better sources, but not where it conflicts with better quality sources. Gil Marks never cites his sources so, if anything, we should be reducing the weight on this source. Since there are better sources available, Marks should probably be removed because it is not needed. Spudlace (talk) 10:46, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

 * That is not the answer to my question, where is it said that sharbat is the precursor of sorbet and ice creams ? it's you who wrote that in the article without any source to back it up. What i suggest to write is what i wrote before your last edits and that is supported by the sources (no problem with changing it into "one of the earliest frozen desserts oringinated in Persia and has been described as the forerunner of ice creams and sorbets"). As to the quality of the sources, if you have better ones, i suggest you bring them here. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  10:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * This article doesn't say anything about ice creams. You should be more careful about making false accusations. I'm not going to respond to an editor that does that. I think you may want to edit the frozen dessert article instead. Spudlace (talk) 18:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

 * I'm not editing Frozen desserts, i'm editing this article, but it seems that it's owned by you unfortunately. I don't get well why you behave like that with me, i am trying to improve this article and i engaged with you here in a polite manner while you were aggressive from your first answer. I am not making false accusations, you were the one who said that sharbat is the precursor of modern sorbet, not me and you did not provide any source for that. Now, you reverted me when i asked you to wait for the thread to conclude and you keep editing it as you want, ignoring the fact that another editor has also the right to contribute. Your behavior is not in accordance with WP:BRD and WP:OWN. I have no problem with the removal of "ice cream" (my above proposal was just an example of the kind of sentence that could be included, not a strict wording). I will make a last attempt to find a compromise with you, i suggest to leave the background section in and write "one of the earliest frozen desserts oringinated in Persia and has been described as the forerunner of sorbets", this article contains roughly nothing about Persia while that empire greatly contributed to the creation of sorbets (among others, yakhchals are Persian, Faloodeh too), this is misleading for our readers. ---Wikaviani  (talk)  (contribs)  19:29, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I need better sourcing for it than Gil Marks. If Gil Marks is the only source we usually attribute. Don't be so defensive. I reverted was about frozen desserts in general. Your response "I'm not editing Frozen desserts, i'm editing this article" was not helpful. Your revised version is better but most sources do not mention Persia as a definite origin, only an etymology. I've checked three or four sources so far and none of them support this change. Ping me again if you find something better that supports the language you want to add. Spudlace (talk) 20:04, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

"Your response "I'm not editing Frozen desserts, i'm editing this article" was not helpful." : Sorry, but it's not your call to decide which article fellow wikipedians edit, please focus on content, not contributors. Just take another look at how you behaved with me in your above comments and in the history of edits of the article, where you ignore my remarks and you will get better why i'm "so defensive". I'm a quite well experienced editor, i have been editing here for about 4 years with 10+K edits, i know Wiki guidelines quite well too, thus i can tell you that your successive edits to this article while another editor is trying to reach a consensus here, on the talk page, were truly uncalled for. Gil Marks is a food writer and historian, he is used as a source in many articles on Wiki, that sounds like a reliable source to me and saying that "one of the earliest frozen desserts oringinated in Persia and has been described  as the forerunner of sorbets" with the sources that are, actually, doing so, seems like a good practice to me, as per WP:IC. If you want, we also can can write something like "according to Gil Marks, one of the earliest frozen desserts oringinated in Persia and has been described  as the forerunner of sorbets". ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  20:40, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Not unless he says which of the desserts that originated in Persia is the precursor. Gil Marks is generally reliable but not the best source because where it is vague and because he doesn't cite his sources. Please don't ping me about this again. I don't have anything more to add to this but other editors may support your proposal. Spudlace (talk) 21:24, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

 * I restored the quote and its sources since they were part of the long-standing version of the article, the onus is on you to achieve consensus if you want to remove them. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  21:45, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Note that I restored the long-standing version in its entirety. It's entirely lame to pretend to restore the long-standing version and then not actually do it. Edit warring should stop until consensus is reached. I'm not really happy with the long-standing version either, but we'll let it stand for now until consensus is reached. Spudlace (talk) 21:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

 * The one who is edit-warring is you, not me, i made a single revert, thus your "warning" on my talk sounds like harassment. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  22:12, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Italian ice into Sorbet
It is a synonym for sorbet Spudlace (talk) 19:14, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Support : that's a kind of sorbet. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  19:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Not yet -- needs analysis There seems to be a continuum of closely related frozen desserts: sorbet, granita, slushy, snow cone, shaved ice, Italian ice. It's not clear from our current articles what defines each of these things, and whether the names unambiguously define the food. For example, I get pretty much the same results when I Google [granita machine] and [slushy machine]; Slurpee appears to be simply a 7-Eleven brand for the same thing based on carbonated beverages.

In fact, as far as I can tell, there are three kinds of product: I'm not sure which category "Italian ice" is in, and my guess is that it means different things to different people (perhaps depending on the region). The same may be true of some of the other names. I don't think we should rush into mergers until we have a clearer idea of all this. --Macrakis (talk) 02:38, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Semi-liquid products made in a horizontal rotating cylinder and dispensed from a tap. I think of these as granita and slushy.
 * Semi-solid products made in a vertical rotating cylinder and served by scooping. I think of these as sorbet.
 * Products made by putting crushed or shaved ice into a cup and pouring syrup on top. I think of these as snow cones and shaved ice.
 * I've never had granita dispensed from a machine but that is a discussion for another time. I was able to find several sources specific to the cultural significance and history of Italian ice that would justify a second article. I'm tempted to forego the merger and expand the article. Spudlace (talk) 10:04, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I would recommend forgoing the merger as well. The desserts are different enough for it to be notable; Italian ice also has its own history and significance, as stated by Spudlace above. -- Categorically Not (🗪) 06:06, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Oppose, it does not appear to be a synonym. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 16:49, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Why is rainbow sherbet being merged with this page
Shouldn't rainbow sherbet be merged with the sherbet page - 9Bdyea (talk) 18:32, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Closing, given the objection, but started the obvious alternative proposal! Klbrain (talk) 14:38, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

Merger proposal
For too long, we've been confusing our readers with two articles about the same thing. According to the Oxford English dictionary, sherbet means sorbet :. Thus, i propose to merge Sherbet (frozen dessert) in Sorbet. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  15:33, 26 June 2023 (UTC)

 * Comnent: Are you allowed to support your own nomination? — the Main Logan  (t•c) 09:58, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I think it'd be fine as he cannot single handedly tip consensus in his favour. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  22:34, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Support : Per nom. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  15:34, 26 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose, I think that sherbet and sorbet are different things. The article itself mentions that sherbet is made from dairy. Also, I don't think that the OED should be the thing that decides the difference. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  22:31, 16 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The article says that, but this claim is unsourced. Also, i don't get well why OED is not relevant here according to you. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  01:22, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It is not unsourced because of me and I don't feel like the OED should be the one to define who doesn't get an article because they don't focus on food. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  02:37, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I get you, but i cannot agree with your rationale about OED, which is a dictionary, thus, exactly what we need here. We don't need a cookbook here, but a reliable source about the meanings of the words sorbet and sherbet. Best. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  11:26, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The citation I added to the Sherbet article states that while they are similar, sherbet involves dairy while sorbet does not. Britannica also has an article on sherbet and they are generally a lot more restrictive than us. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  15:42, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Britannica is not a reliable source, all we have, is some blogs/self published sources saying that the difference between sherbet and sorbet is dairy products, but OED, which is a reliable source, does not say that. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  01:42, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Who says that Britannica is not a reliable source? In fact, this discussion (which is from 2010) really only mentions that Britannica has biases and can be wrong, which is a given. The latest one I could find Britannica being discussed are editors saying that is gets its statistics from other sources, which also makes sense as it is an encyclopedia.  ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  15:26, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * According to wp:BRITANNICA, the unreliable portion comes from the fact that it is a tertiary source and that it has accepted some online suggestions. I do not think that their article on Sherbet was suggested as it was never edited in the window they were accepting suggestions. Also, it still proves that it exists along with stating the difference between sherbet and sorbet (which it groups with granita), the inclusion of dairy. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  17:23, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Tertiary sources are reliable, when they qualify as such. I think you got me wrong, Britannica is not a reliable source : and check section number 21, it has been discussed long time ago. As far as i've seen, the difference between sherbet and sorbet is only supported by some blogs/self published cookbooks, nothing that could challenge a high quality source like OED. ---Wikaviani  (talk)  (contribs)  20:30, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * From what I can tell, the OED is pretty much the only source that says the two are the same. The only other times that I see sherbet described without dairy is when it isn't being compared at all. Also, when I look up sorbet and sherbet I get different results. I also have two other dictionaries supporting me, Dictionary.com and Marriam-Webster. Marriam-Webster is a bit confusing though as usage 1 (used in 1603, not long after the British landed in NA) only says it is a cold fruit juice. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  22:07, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Those dictionaries are all but comparable to Oxford. You can see by yourself the hard time you have trying to find a single high quality source that supports you ... By the way, OED is far from being the only source that says the two sweets are the same, please take a look at linguee where sherbet is translated as sorbet in french and Collins dictionary where it's said that "Sherbet is like ice cream but made with fruit juice, sugar, and water.", i.e. exactly the same definition than sorbet : "Sorbet is a frozen dessert made with fruit juice, sugar, and water.", all these dictionaries are high quality sources. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  03:45, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I want to know who says that MW is in a lower tier than Oxford. Also, two of your sources, OED and Collins, that support you are based on Great Britain, the other, Linguee is in Cologne. The sources I have used all come from the United States (Britannica is currently in Chicago). I believe the reason for this is because in most of the world, the two words are the same, while in North America they are different. If you can get a pretty decent American source that can back you up, then I'll fold; but right now, you only have shown me couple of in .  ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  14:58, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I must confess that i'm a bit baffled by your above response, firstly, MW does not clearly support you and, to answer to your question about who says that MW is in a lower tier than Oxford, i would say, please check the owner of MW, it's Encyclopedia Britannica ... Secondly, you keep speaking about Britannica while that source is not reliable. Last but not least, why should we use north american dictionaries instead of European ones ? If, as you said, there is only a difference between those two words in north America while in the rest of the world, they are the same, then we should merge the two articles and only mention in the article a part about the (very little) difference between the two words in north America. Anyway, the OED link i posted is in American English, not British English, and it says that sherbet and sorbet are the same : and so do Collins and Wordreference which give the meaning of sherbet (the frozen dessert) in American English :  ,.
 * Also, in the UK, sherbet is not a frozen dessert, it's sugar powder (see the Collins link, which gives the definition of sherbet in British English and in American English. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  17:28, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * MW straight up mentions dairy or poultry usage in sherbet. And I'm pretty sure the owner of the dictionary does not matter all that much as long as the source itself is reliable. The reason I want North American dictionaries is because it is a North American dessert. Wordreference also says that sherbet and ice cream are the same so I don't trust their comparison to sherbet and sorbet. And I feel like the too similar argument falls through because of Italian Ice and Granita. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  18:07, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ok, fine by me, i think then the merge should be done with sharbat instead of sherbet. Thoughts ? ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  20:27, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * No, you shouldn't keep proposing merges based on similarities and etymologies. Sharbat is a pretty decently fleshed out article about a beverage, not a dessert item. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  21:03, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose Sherbet and sorbet are different deserts., , , -- Jayron 32 12:00, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 * As an admin, i think that you certainly noticed that your links are not considered reliable, don't you ? first link is not relevant as it does not say anything interesting about this matter, the two others are blog-like websites, how can you compare these "sources" to OED or Collins or Linguee ? ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  17:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I couldn't immediately find anything for or against BR or F&W. The first source (Food Network) is still functioning for me. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  17:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, all 3 sound like random blog-like websites, that's enough for me to discard them, you can take them at WP:RSN if you want. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  19:48, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * All three have Wikipedia articles; BR is a restaurant and Food Network is a very large broadcaster. F&W is the least notable, but once again, it at least has an article. None of this guarantees reliability (just look at Fox News and CNN) but it does say something without any previously set precedent. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  22:37, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Despite the OED not distinguishing, it is clear that some sources do treat sorbet and sherbet as distinct but related concepts, as in e.g. the sources provided by Mitch and Jayron. I guess one could argue that they are closely enough related that they should be treated in a single article, but it's not clear to me that Sherbet (frozen dessert) is more closely related to sorbet than e.g. granita or Italian ice is, and they get their own articles. (And in the land of dairy-based frozen desserts, we distinguish between ice cream, gelato, semifreddo and frozen yogurt). The fact that sherbet and sorbet are etymologically close to one another is not compelling: Sharbat (beverage) and Sherbet (powder) are equally etymologically similar and yet they are clearly different concepts which deserve separate articles.  Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 13:46, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I guess after having sorbet myself (Haagen-Dazs from my local supermarket), it and sherbet are more similar than I thought and less to Italian ice. But, I still think that they are separate enough for their own articles. However, this whole thing might be violating wp:OR to some extent. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  16:26, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Please note that nobody, except you, said that we should merge the two articles on the ground that they are "etymologically close to one another". Also, while the arguments provided by Mitch have, to some extent, convinced me to drop the stick, the ones provided by you two are not at all. Have you checked the so-called "sources" linked by Jayron ? ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  17:07, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * If you don't like the sources cited by Jayron, Frozen Desserts by Francisco Migoya defines sherbet and says (p.54) explicitly that it is not the same thing as sorbet; Ice Cream by Marshall, Goff, and Hartel has an entire chapter on "Sherbets, Sorbets, and Ices" which distinguishes between sherbet on the one hand, and sorbets/water ices/Italian ices on the other. Though I think you will struggle to convince anyone that Food Network is merely a "random blog-like website" and therefore not reliable. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Those are better sources than the previous ones, indeed, however, you can see that the differnces between these two sweets are not so obvious. Now i have a question for you all, if the difference between sherbet and sorbet is dairy products, then what's the differences between sherbet and ice cream ? ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  11:38, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Sherbet has less milk and can incorporate eggs. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  16:04, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * This argument is rather subjective, what's the threshold of dairy products ? 1% ? 10% ? 30% ? anyway, as i said above, i'm convinced to some extant by your rationale and i think we're done here. Thanks for the collegial discussion, Best. ---Wikaviani  (talk) (contribs)  20:19, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your civility. For your question, Im not sure of the exact number but I think it is somewhere in the range of 2-8%. ✶Mitch 199811  ✶  01:02, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment, The reliability of some sources here have been discussed at wp:Reliable sources noticeboard. ✶Mitch  199811  ✶  17:19, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Strongly oppose. The dictionary linked by the nominator is not the OED, but rather the Oxford Advanced American Dictionary, a learners' dictionary intended for people who are still learning English. We shouldn't be citing learners' dictionaries for fine distinctions between similar words. In contrast, the Oxford Dictionary of Food and Nutrition, a specialized dictionary, gives this definition (paywalled but available through The Wikipedia Library) for sherbet: "In the USA a frozen dessert containing 1–2% milk fat, 2–5% dairy solids; as opposed to sorbet, which contains no dairy solids." —Mx. Granger (talk · contribs) 20:45, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sorbet


text:
Talk:Recorder (musical instrument)

Baroque Recorder range
Is it true that the standard range for Baroque recorders is only two octaves and a tone? Telemann, Bach and Vivaldi at least regularly use notes beyond this range; it is true that few such works are available in modern editions, but that is because of the false belief in the restricted range: the Urtext editions reveal the use of the high notes as a matter of course. Telemann uses a full two octaves and a fifth, with the top note in a piece aimed at amateurs: his Sonata in F from 'Der getreuer Musikmeister' .AdgeOldtown (talk) 01:03, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * While it is true that Telemann writes one high C in the F Major sonata, it may be significant that he does not include any of the notes between it and the G below (the "normal" top note for the alto recorder in F). There is also a high A in the F major concerto, but that work proves to be a transposition, made by another hand (possibly Graupner) of a flute concerto originally in D major. Are there any other examples from Telemann? If not, I would say that Telemann does not "regularly" write these notes. Can you tell me which works of Vivaldi and Bach exceed the range of two octaves and a tone? I cannot think of any examples from these composers.—Jerome Kohl (talk) 01:11, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you mean by 'standard', but most any off-the-shelf "baroque recorder" will give you two octaves and a third (e.g. c4-e6). 2003:EF:2F02:3100:4545:6392:9684:AA1F (talk) 15:43, 26 June 2020 (UTC) KMPfeiffer

The Telemann F major concerto is controversial, surely. But in any case Telemann uses top f# frequently; for instance in "Der Geduldige Sokrate" the recorder soloist frequently uses top F# and there may be a high A - I believe the reading is disputed. Bach - yes, I think Bach is an error on my part: it arose from overlooking the pitch difference between his organ and instruments. Vivaldi uses for instance a high f in his Flautino Concerto which is for 'descant' recorder in D - that corresponds to high Ab in the recorder.AdgeOldtown (talk) 15:05, 30 April 2020 (UTC)AdgeOldtown (talk) 14:05, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

German fingering
Can this really be correct? (Ask I as a player who uses recorders in both German and Baroque fingering)

'Unfortunately, however, this makes many other chromatic notes too out of tune to be usable.[40]'

Not to my ear, if you use the correct standard German fingerings. If you use baroque fingering for everything except f/b flat, yes, but why should one use baroque fingering on a German fingering instrument? The main problem with German fingering (if you ask me) is that upper b (on the alto), with an isolated little finger in the right hand, is rather uncomfortable for small hands and tricky to always get perfectly right, especially in fast jumps, also, the sound quality of that note isn't good (murky and can't be modulated much). I am not an expert so I don't dare to change this on my own, please can someone better qualified have a look.

178.4.212.250 (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
 * As you observed, that sentence is sourced to Rowland-Jones, unfortunately without a page number. If you find a source supporting your statement, please insert it. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 00:51, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Sizes of recorders, &c.
Earlier in my life, I was an amateur player, semi–pro for CDSS dances in NYC; also quite interested in them as well. While I have read only perhaps ⅓ of the article (it's rather an online book, a wondrous magnum opus!), I did try to discover all sizes of modern instruments, and concluded some decades ago that there are about ten in the C F series. Herewith: Sub Contrabass in F ? Contrabass (?) in C (Fading memory!) Contrabass in F (?) (Paetzold/Kuenath?) Great bass in C Bass (Basset, according to one or more sources) Tenor Alto Soprano Sopranino in F Exilent, also Garklein Flötlein) in C [     ] (name forgotten), iirc in F Sorry, it's been more than a decade since I even thought about these. The exilent was made of ABS plastic, brand name Aulos; I still own one. The last was an octave above the sopranino, made in Europe for a short while, around 1990 by (iirc a Dutch) couple. I saw and played it at the makers' booth at a Boston Early Music Festival (&) Exhibition, perhaps around 1992. Have forgotten makers' names and what they called it. IIrc, it covered a full two octaves (not sure)., possibly even chromatics, not just diatonic. Fingers were interleaved! Hole 1, left index; hole 2, right index, etc. Thumb hole, of course. Nevertheless finger patterns for each hand were familiar, creating lots of forked patterns for a common diatonic scale. That was really surprising. Thanks be, my fingers are fairly narrow, and gaps between minimal. ••••• I still own von Huene tenor #362, iirc, made to (best guess) A=432, and retuned (well) to A=440. Its upper octave speaks with perceptible difficulty, and the thumb hole bushing's outer edge just meets the head joint. The latter was bored deeper, and the tenon extended. Apparently, the Yamaha ABS plastic tenor design is based on that of the von Huene tenors. Best recollection is that they collaborated. My tenor was made to an odd pitch before makers realized that doing so was a bad idea. They courteously and honorably "disown" it,  not even telling me what pitch it was made to. (I bought it from its original owner.)

Regarding plastics, ABS has been, and may well still be the best (except for 3–D printing!) It's acrylonitrile butadiene styrene, and proportions of its constituents can be tailored to its application.

User:nikevich (son of Nicholas Bessaraboff) 100.0.210.214 (talk) 15:38, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Recorder (musical instrument)


text:
Michael Heidelberger

Michael Heidelberger (April 29, 1888 – June 25, 1991) was an American immunologist, often regarded as the father of modern immunology. He and Oswald Avery showed that the polysaccharides of pneumococcus are antigens, enabling him to show that antibodies are proteins. He spent most his early career at Columbia University and comparable time in his later years on the faculty of New York University. In 1934 and 1936 he received the Guggenheim Fellowship. In 1967 he received the National Medal of Science, and then he earned the Lasker Award for basic medical research in 1953 and again in 1978. His papers are held at the National Library of Medicine in Bethesda, Maryland.

Early life
Heidelberger was born in 1888 in New York City to a Jewish couple, David and Fannie Campe Heidelberger, a traveling salesman and a homemaker respectively. An older brother had died shortly after birth; a younger brother, Charles, was born 21 months after Michael. His paternal grandfather, also named Michael, was a German Jew who had emigrated to the United States in the early 1840s.

Heidelberger's father had only an elementary school education, and was on the road for six months out of the year selling window curtains. It fell to Heidelberger's mother to take charge of the household and of Michael's education. She had attended a private girls' school in Norfolk, Virginia, and after graduation had stayed with relatives in Germany for a year. Until Michael was twelve, she taught him and his younger brother at home. They attended classical concerts, had to speak German at the table, and were taught French by a nanny during outings to nearby Central Park. Later in life he came to appreciate his early training in languages that were central to scientific discourse during the first half of the twentieth century.

Heidelberger decided at age eight that he wanted to be a chemist, for reasons he could never quite articulate or recall, but which he later judged no more than a "pigheaded idea". He experimented at home by mixing medicines and the very basic ingredients included in children's chemistry sets of the time, until he began his formal training in botany, zoology, physics, and chemistry at the Ethical Culture School, a private high school on New York's Upper West Side founded by the Ethical Culture Society, a Humanist religious movement of which his parents were members. He maintained a connection with the school throughout his life, inviting student groups to visit his laboratory every year.

Heidelberger loved music and started playing the clarinet in the high school orchestra. Heidelberger was talented enough that concert musicians encouraged him to consider a professional career in music. Instead, it became his "chief relaxation." He played the same two handmade wood instruments, a B flat and an A clarinet, all of his life, taking them with him wherever he went to join in chamber music performances at conferences or at the homes of friends.

Education and early research career
When Heidelberger entered Columbia University in 1905, his family moved to the Upper West Side so that he could live nearer to the school. He resided there for the rest of his long life. He received all of his academic degrees from Columbia, culminating with a Ph.D. in organic chemistry in 1911. His dissertation dealt with quinazoline analogs, alkaloids that his adviser, Marston Taylor Bogert, hoped—wrongly, as Heidelberger proved—would produce useful dyes when combined with phthalic acid. As a student he supported himself by selling Virginia hams to hotels and wholesale grocers around the city on Friday afternoons, earning up to $50 per week, and by teaching analytical chemistry under Irving Langmuir at Stevens Institute in Hoboken, New Jersey.

Urged on by his parents, Heidelberger after graduation with his Ph.D. arranged for a visit with his former family physician, Samuel J. Meltzer, who had seen him through typhoid fever as a young child and who had since become the first chair of the Department of Physiology at the newly founded Rockefeller Institute of Medical Research. Meltzer curtly advised Heidelberger that he ought not to go into science, because "science is no profession for a poor man's son." Heidelberger quickly realized that Meltzer was testing his commitment to science, and he insisted that he wanted to become a chemist. Meltzer relented, and sent him on to meet with the institute's chemists, Phoebus A. T. Levene, Donald D. Van Slyke, and Walter A. Jacobs, whom Heidelberger found assembled over tea. They advised him to go to Europe for postdoctoral training, then a requirement for any scientist who wanted to find a position at a leading research university in the United States.

Heidelberger took their advice and in 1911 went to Zürich to work for a year in the laboratory of the organic chemist and future Nobel Laureate Richard Willstätter at the Eidgenössische Technische Hochschule. There he perfected the synthesis of cyclooctatetraene, an important intermediate in organic research. Willstätter helped his somewhat impecunious American student by sharing the cost of laboratory supplies with him, arranging that when expensive materials, such as silver nitrate, were to be bought, it was his turn to pay, while Heidelberger took turns buying cheaper materials like sulfuric acid. "Better training than that you couldn't have," Heidelberger summed up his experience with Willstätter. They remained friends for three decades, through Willstätter's flight from Germany in 1938 and until his death in Switzerland in 1942.

While visiting relatives in Germany on his return from Zürich, Heidelberger received a telegram from his father relating an offer of a position of Fellow of the Rockefeller Institute, conditional upon a personal interview and approval by the institute's director, Simon Flexner.

Rockefeller Institute
Heidelberger passed muster, and in September 1912 began working in Walter Abraham Jacobs' laboratory on a derivative of hexamethylene tetramine, a complex that seemed to prolong the life of monkeys suffering from polio, and that Flexner hoped could be adapted for use in humans. Results appeared promising at first, but Heidelberger and Jacobs later attributed them to loss of virulence of the virus.

In the summer of 1915, after attending officer training camp in Plattsburgh, New York, for a proposed volunteer army (an outgrowth of the movement to prepare the United States for entry into World War I) and earning a commendation as a marksman, Heidelberger traveled to Lake Kezar in Maine for a vacation. After performing Pergolese's Nina there, his piano accompanist exclaimed, "meet Nina," and in walked a young lady, Nina Tachau. They were married in 1916 to the strains of a wedding march composed by Heidelberger. She was a writer and activist for the New York chapter of the League of Women Voters and, during the 1940s, for the American Association for the United Nations. After her death from cancer in 1946, Heidelberger continued her work on behalf of the United Nations, and was a member of the U.S. delegation to meetings of the World Federation of United Nations Organizations in Prague, Bangkok, and other cities. He met his second wife Charlotte Rosen at a concert. She was the violist in a Mozart trio in which Heidelberger performed. They married in 1956. For ten years prior to her death in 1988, he took care of her at home while she suffered from Alzheimer's disease.

After the United States declared war on Germany in April 1917, Heidelberger was commissioned in the Sanitary Corps and assigned to the Rockefeller Institute. He continued to work with Jacobs, a collaboration that lasted more than nine years and produced 44 papers. They synthesized many chemotherapeutical drugs, namely aromatic arsenicals, for the treatment for infectious diseases, in particular syphilis and African sleeping sickness. In 1919 they developed a variant of Paul Ehrlich's "magic bullet" for syphilis, Salvarsan, which proved effective against trypanosomes, the parasites that cause African sleeping sickness. Variants of tryparsamide, as Flexner named it, continue to be administered today. In 1953 the king of Belgium, colonial ruler of parts of Africa in which African sleeping sickness had been endemic, honored Heidelberger and Jacobs for their discovery.

In 1921 Heidelberger transferred to the laboratory of Donald D. Van Slyke at the Rockefeller hospital, where he spent the next two years developing a method for preparing large quantities of purified oxyhemoglobin, with its oxygen-carrying capacity intact, for Van Slyke's studies of the uptake and release of oxygen in the blood. When Karl Landsteiner, the famous Austrian immunologist and discoverer of human blood groups, arrived at the institute in 1922, Heidelberger embarked with him on studies of the antigenic properties of different types of hemoglobin. Throughout his life Heidelberger was proud to state that he first learned immunology from Landsteiner.

During this time Heidelberger was approached by the bacteriologist Oswald Avery to help him elucidate the chemistry of the "specific soluble substance" Avery and Alphonse R. Dochez had found in the spherical capsule that envelops pneumococcus and many other species of bacteria. In 1923, Heidelberger and Avery reported that this capsular substance, which determined the specific type of pneumococcus and, with it, its virulence, consisted of polysaccharides, carbohydrate molecules made up of more than three monosaccharide units. Their discovery for the first time established a relationship between chemical constitution and immunological specificity of antigens, thereby putting the field of immunology on a firm biochemical footing. It also disproved prevailing assumptions among scientists that only proteins could act as antigens.

Heidelberger devoted the rest of his career largely to pursuing the consequences of his and Avery's seminal discovery. He identified and analyzed the structure of different pneumococcal polysaccharides—over one hundred have since been found—as well as of other microorganisms, and studied their role in immune reactions. In 1927 he left the Rockefeller Institute to become head of the chemical laboratory at Mount Sinai Hospital. A year later he moved to the Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Columbia University
His role as consulting chemist in its department of medicine suited his generous temperament. The door to his office, which he likened to "42nd Street and Broadway" because of its traffic, was open for anyone, especially junior researchers, to stop by, discuss matters of science or politics, and seek his advice. During his 27 years there he used his unique knowledge of polysaccharide antigen chemistry to develop methods, in particular the precipitin reaction, for isolating pure antibodies, which he proved were protein and which he measured in absolute units of weight for the first time.

He and his collaborators Forrest E. Kendall (1899–1987) and Elvin A. Kabat formulated a quantitative theory of precipitin and other immune reactions, which showed that such reactions unfolded in three distinct stages and which posited that antigens and antibodies were bi-or multivalent, meaning that they could combine in varying proportions. These findings enabled Heidelberger to develop a much more potent antiserum to meningitis in infants, as well as a simple but effective vaccine against several forms of pneumonia, which was successfully tested among Army Air Force recruits in 1944.

Later life
Upon his retirement from Columbia in 1954, Heidelberger moved to the Institute of Microbiology at Rutgers University, and in 1964 to the New York University School of Medicine. There he continued his research on pneumococcal polysaccharides and their cross-reactions with various types of antisera, always in pursuit of his lifelong objective to relate chemical structure to immunological specificity, working full-time until the age of 100, and then part-time until his death in 1991 at the age of 103.

Heidelberger received fifteen honorary degrees and 46 medals, citations, and awards for his work, including two Albert Lasker Awards in 1953 and 1978, the Louisa Gross Horwitz Prize in 1977, the National Medal of Science from President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1967, and the Bronze Medal of the City of Paris in 1964. He was a member of the National Academy of Sciences and the New York Academy of Medicine, as well as an officer of the Légion d'honneur of France. He served twice as president of the American Association of Immunologists, in 1947 and 1949. Both times his presidential addresses urged scientists to resist nuclear armament and restrictions on free exchanges among scientists across national boundaries imposed in the name of national loyalty and security. He was also a member of both the American Academy of Arts and Sciences and the American Philosophical Society. He published a scientific paper in every decade of the 20th century. Each year, Columbia University hosts a lecture in honor of Heidelberger and Elvin A. Kabat, his first PhD student.

title: Michael Heidelberger


text:
Talk:Black-crowned night heron

Untitled
They have long necks but keep it coiled up. They make a "Kwok!" and if you hide and call out "Kwok!" like a bird, it may "Kwok!" back at you. If one sees a Human it may fly off. SD

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 20:41, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Picture of stuffed bird is terrible
The picture of the stuffed heron is not representative of what they look like the the wild - when standing the neck is shorter and the bird is more vertical than horizontal. The stuffed bird looks like a duck with heron coloring! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.132.203.192 (talk) 00:53, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Birds have a lot of postures, it's not that bad! But we have lots of better ones of live birds (see the Wikimedia Commons link), so I've replaced it, and you can change this too. —innotata 02:00, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Great Blue Heron which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 16:00, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Great blue heron which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 21:00, 4 May 2014 (UTC)

File:Bihoreau Gris.jpg to appear as POTD
Hello! This is a note to let the editors of this article know that File:Bihoreau Gris.jpg will be appearing as picture of the day on June 25, 2015. You can view and edit the POTD blurb at Template:POTD/2015-06-25. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. Thanks! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:21, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Capitalization
I have not looked into the spelling convention, or past consensus, but Black-crowned night heron is a specific type of heron and thus a proper noun, necessitating capitalization of the first word. Otr500 (talk) 15:51, 19 March 2017 (UTC)

Range
"a medium-sized heron found throughout a large part of the world, except in the coldest regions and Australasia"

This seems a somewhat bold statement if you compare the map. The bird is found only in very few places in Europe, it is not found in large parts of Asia, it is not found in half of Africa. Would you consider all these regions "the coldest regions"? --87.150.9.21 (talk) 12:33, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

I agree and I have changed it accordingly. Aythya affinis (talk) 15:58, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

heron
bawal ba ito hulihin 130.105.183.225 (talk) 18:16, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Black-crowned night heron


text:
Talk:Chacha Cricket

Untitled
This article was nominated for deletion, but KEPT due to lack of consensus. See Votes for deletion/Chacha cricket. Sjakkalle 13:54, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

====

Why delete this article? It is about a relatively famous man in the cricketing world. Most people who follow cricket would have seen Pakistan play and if you've seen Pakistan play you've seen this guy. We have articles here for Big Brother winners and losers why not one for him?
 * I agree entirely. Especially about the BB losers; I can't see how they can possibly deserve their own page unless they become notable in some other way, but so many people create them now that it's a losing battle trying to say that. Loganberry (Talk) 23:15, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

So
I equally think it is a complete "no-brainer" to delete this - there is a lot of rubbish on wikipedia, but this is by no means some of it. Would we delete Ronald McDonald's article? No, so why delete the article of a far more positive figure. Is Ronald McDonald the public face of an entire nation's recreational activities (actually, don't answer that).
 * Ahkayah cuarenta y siete 17:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Why delete his article when this guy is quite a popular figure in the Sub continental cricket ....and is also the official mascot of the Pakistani cricket team. If this article gets deleted while wikipedia upholds some of the articles on the western world's much lesser known figures ...I will have no doubts on the nuetrality of the wikipedia's policies

Hussain 07:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ChacaCricket.jpg
Image:ChacaCricket.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 14:23, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Removed copyvio material
I believe material added by User:115.167.122.251 was a WP:COPYVIO and have removed it and added a proper reference to the plagiarized article. Here is the edit in question. Jason Quinn (talk) 01:31, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chacha Cricket


text:
ROTS

Rots or ROTS may refer to:
 * Rots, Calvados, a commune in Basse-Normandie, France
 * Daan Rots (born 2001), Dutch professional footballer
 * Esther Rots (born 1972), Dutch film director
 * Renewed Order of the Solar Temple
 * Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith, a 2005 American epic space opera film

title: ROTS


text:
Ernest Augustus

Ernest Augustus or Ernst August may refer to:

House of Hanover

 * Ernest Augustus, Elector of Hanover (1629–1698), father of King George I of Great Britain
 * Ernest Augustus, Duke of York and Albany, Prince-Bishop of Osnabrück, son of the previous
 * Ernest Augustus, King of Hanover (1771–1851), son of King George III of the United Kingdom
 * Ernest Augustus, Crown Prince of Hanover, (1845–1923), son of George V of Hanover
 * Ernest Augustus, Duke of Brunswick (1887–1953), son of the previous
 * Prince Ernest Augustus of Hanover (born 1914) (1914–1987), son of the previous
 * Prince Ernst August von Hannover (born 1954), son of the previous
 * Prince Ernst August of Hanover (born 1983), son of previous

House of Wettin

 * Ernest Augustus I, Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach (1688–1748)
 * Ernest Augustus II, Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach (1737–1758), son of the previous

Other

 * Ernst August (ship), a ship named after Ernest Augustus, King of Hanover

title: Ernest Augustus


text:
David Barr Kirtley

David Barr Kirtley (born 1977) is an American short story writer and the host of the Geek's Guide to the Galaxy podcast.

Early life & education
He is the son of physicist John R. Kirtley and grew up in Katonah, New York.

From 1996-2000, he attended Colby College in Waterville, Maine, where he majored in government, with a minor in creative writing. In 1997, he won the Dell Magazines Award for undergraduate science fiction. In 1999 he attended the Clarion Workshop at Michigan State University. In 2009 he received an MFA in fiction and screenwriting from the University of Southern California.

Writing
His short fiction appears in magazines such as Realms of Fantasy and Weird Tales, in online magazines such as Orson Scott Card's InterGalactic Medicine Show and Lightspeed, and on podcasts such as Escape Pod, Pseudopod, and The Drabblecast. In 2003, he was selected for the anthology New Voices in Science Fiction. In 2008, his story "Save Me Plz" was chosen for the anthology Fantasy: The Best of the Year. He was profiled in the 2008 Novel & Short Story Writer's Market as part of "Speculative Fiction: The Next Generation."

Podcasting
Kirtley co-hosted the Geek's Guide to the Galaxy podcast along with fantasy and science fiction editor John Joseph Adams. Kirtley is now the sole host, though Adams makes guest appearances.

Magazines

 * "Beauty," Lightspeed, March 2012
 * "The Ontological Factor," Cicada, September/October 2011
 * "Cats in Victory," Lightspeed, June 2010
 * "Red Road", Orson Scott Card's InterGalactic Medicine Show, Issue 9, July 2008
 * "Transformations", Realms of Fantasy, December 2007
 * "Save Me Plz", Realms of Fantasy, October 2007
 * "Blood of Virgins", Realms of Fantasy, October 2006
 * "The Trial of Thomas Jefferson," Cicada, July/August 2003
 * "Seeds-for-Brains," Realms of Fantasy, June 2003
 * "Seven Brothers, Cruel," Realms of Fantasy, December 2002
 * "The Disciple," Weird Tales, Summer 2002
 * "The Second Rat," On Spec, Spring 2002

Anthologies

 * "Power Armor: A Love Story," Armored, Baen Books, March 2012
 * "Three Deaths," Under the Moons of Mars, Simon & Schuster, February 2012
 * "The Disciple," New Cthulhu, Prime Books, November 2011
 * "Family Tree," The Way of the Wizard, Prime Books, November 2010
 * "The Skull-Faced City," The Living Dead 2, Night Shade Books, September 2010
 * "The Skull-Faced Boy", The Living Dead, Night Shade Books, September 2008
 * "Save Me Plz," Fantasy: The Best of the Year, 2008 Edition, Prime Books, July 2008
 * "The Black Bird," The Dragon Done It, Baen Books, March 2008
 * "Veil of Ignorance," All the Rage This Year, Phobos Books, September 2004
 * "The Black Bird," New Voices in Science Fiction, DAW Books, December 2003
 * "The Prize," Empires of Dreams and Miracles, Phobos Books, September 2002
 * "They Go Bump," Empire of Dreams and Miracles, Phobos Books, September 2002

title: David Barr Kirtley


text:
Category:East Cushitic languages

Articles relating to the Lowland East Cushitic languages, a group of roughly two dozen diverse languages of the Cushitic branch of the Afro-Asiatic family. Its largest representatives are Somali and Oromo.

title: Category:East Cushitic languages


text:
Langfang

Langfang is a prefecture-level city of Hebei Province, and was known as Tianjin Prefecture until 1973. It was renamed Langfang Prefecture after Tianjin became a municipality and finally upgraded into a prefecture-level city in 1988. Langfang is located approximately midway between Beijing and Tianjin. At the 2020 census, the population of Langfang was 5,464,087, of whom 1,147,591 lived in the built-up (or metro) area made of Guangyang and Anci districts; its total area is around 6417.28 km². Langfang borders Baoding to the southwest, Cangzhou to the south (both prefecture-level cities of Hebei), Beijing to the north and Tianjin to the east. Sanhe City and Dachang Hui County are now conurbated with Beijing, so that they form part of the same built-up area. Langfang is the smallest prefecture-level city of Hebei Province by land area.

Administrative divisions
Langfang consists of 2 county-level districts, 2 county-level cities, 5 counties, 1 autonomous county, and one economic development zone (开发区).

Development area:
 * Langfang Economic and Technological Development Area (廊坊经济技术开发区)

Geography
Considering Langfang's position between these two prominent cities, it is a relatively green city. Every 300 to 500 m along the city's major streets are parks where local people stroll and take exercise. Langfang's five-kilometer long pedestrian street is now the longest in China. On the other hand, air pollution is a severe problem and in 2013 it was ranked among the 10 worst cities in China for air pollution, along with 6 other cities in Hebei including Xingtai, Shijiazhuang, Baoding, Handan, Hengshui and Tangshan, are among China's 10 most polluted cities.

The "Northern Three Counties" Exclave
The "Northern Three Counties of Langfang City" exclave, separated from the rest of the province, is a part of Langfang City. The exclave comprises Sanhe County-level city, Xianghe County, and Dachang Hui Autonomous County and is located between the municipalities of Beijing and Tianjin.

History
On June 26, 1900, during the Boxer Movement, belligerent European forces heading towards Beijing were stopped by Boxers at the Battle of Langfang, and were defeated and forced to turn back to Tianjin. The Chinese forces were victorious.

It was the site of another battle during the Second Sino-Japanese War.

Economy
Langfang's economy emphasizes computers and technology and manufacturing. To that effect Langfang is home to an Export Processing Zone, an area for factories, and the Oriental University City, a 4-billion yuan investment that began construction in 1999, where some 30 universities enroll about 50,000 students.

There are two national oil and gas companies based in Langfang. The China Petroleum Pipeline Bureau, the primary builder of pipelines in China, and the ENN Group, a natural gas company, are both based in the city.

Development Zone
The Langfang Export Processing Zone (Langfang EPZ) was established by the State Council in 2005. It has a planned area of 0.5 km2 and commenced operation in October 2008. It is the only state-level development zone in Langfang. Langfang EPZ is located in the Langfang Economic and Technical Development Zone (Langfang ETDZ), which is a province-level development zone. It is 38 km from Beijing's third ring-road, and 50 km from down-town Tianjin. It is 60 km from Beijing Capital International Airport, and 70 km from Tianjin Binhai International Airport, airports which are China's first and twelfth largest airports in terms of cargo transport, respectively. The nation's fourth largest seaport, Tianjin Port, is 105 km from Langfang EPZ.
 * Langfang Export Processing Zone

Transport
Part of the Beijing Daxing International Airport is located in Guangyang District of Langfang. It is also only a one-hour drive from Beijing Capital International Airport and the Tianjin New Port.

The Guangyang railway station serves the older Beijing–Shanghai railway, while the newer Langfang railway station opened in July 2011 as the penultimate stop on the Beijing–Shanghai high-speed railway.

title: Langfang


text:
Metamorphoses (disambiguation)

Metamorphoses is a themed work of poetry composed by Ovid.

Metamorphoses may also refer to:

Cinema

 * Métamorphoses (1946 film), directed by Charles Dekeukeleire
 * Metamorphoses (1978 film), a 1978 anime film produced by Sanrio
 * Métamorphoses (2014 film), directed by Christophe Honoré

Music

 * Métamorphoses (album), a 2000 album by Jean-Michel Jarre
 * Six Metamorphoses after Ovid, a piece for solo oboe by Benjamin Britten
 * Metamorphosen, a work for 23 solo strings in 1945 by Richard Strauss

Literature

 * The Golden Ass, by Lucius Apuleius
 * Metamorphoses (play), by Mary Zimmerman based on Ovid's work
 * Metamorphoses, by Antoninus Liberalis

Other uses

 * Metamorphoses (TV series), a Brazilian telenovela television series starring Paolla Oliveira
 * Ovid's Metamorphoses (sculpture), a 1889 sculpture by Auguste Rodin
 * Metamorphoses, 1952 ballet choreographed by George Balanchine

title: Metamorphoses (disambiguation)


text:
Bush Stadium

Owen J. Bush Stadium was a baseball stadium in Indianapolis, Indiana, United States. It was home to the Indianapolis Indians from 1931 to 1996. It was also home to a few Negro league teams, as well as a Continental Football League team, the Indianapolis Capitols, who won the league's final championship in 1969.

History
The stadium was commissioned by Norm Perry, owner of the Indians, in 1931. He named it Perry Stadium as a memorial to his brother Jim, the former owner of the club who had died in plane crash during a solo flight from Schoen Field on the eastside of Indianapolis in 1929. The $350,000 stadium was designed by Osborn Engineering of Cleveland, Ohio. The firm also built Yankee Stadium and constructed or renovated nearly 25 steel and concrete stadiums across America. Bush stadium was built by William P. Jungclaus Company of Indianapolis. Construction began in late May of 1931 and Perry set the inaugural game for September 5, 1931. By late August much remained to be done: The grandstand roof was incomplete. The 13,000 grandstand seats and right field bleachers were not completed until the week before the first game. The game was held despite the main entrance, lobby, and administrative offices not being finished until a few weeks later. Initially there was no stadium lighting because the lighting that had recently been installed at Washington Park was to be moved to the new stadium. The Indians lost to the Louisville Colonels, 3–4. The formal dedication was held on July 1, 1932, in which the Indians again lost to Louisville, 6–11.

It was renamed Victory Field on January 21, 1942, in response to the onset of World War II. The name was the winning entry of a fan contest held by the club's new owners. The day of its renaming, the Indianapolis News stated that the renaming was chosen "because of its timeliness with current affairs; its popularity among [contest] proposals; and its possibilities for elaborate public displays". While Perry sold the baseball club to Frank E. McKinney and former player Donie Bush that year, he retained ownership of the stadium.

In 1967, the ballpark was sold to the city of Indianapolis, who leased it back to the Indians. On August 30, 1967, it was renamed for Bush, who had served as president of the Indians from 1955 to 1969.

English ivy was planted on the brick outfield walls of Perry Stadium prior to its opening. P. K. Wrigley liked the appearance of the ivy, and subsequently instructed the iconic Wrigley Field ivy in Chicago to be planted. The ivy in Indianapolis remained after the stadium became Victory Field and then Bush Stadium, but was discontinued in 1996, when the Indians moved to the current Victory Field ballpark downtown.

During the 1930s, Perry Stadium was home to many Negro league teams. These included the ABCs (1932, 1938, and 1939), American Giants (1933), Athletics (1937) and Crawfords (1940). Later, it would be home to the Indianapolis Clowns, a barnstorming team that was well known for "comical antics". The Clowns won the Negro American League championship in 1952, with the help of Hank Aaron. They played in Indianapolis from 1944 to 1962. Later, the Clowns featured Toni Stone, the first female Negro leagues player in history. Even after the Indianapolis Indians integrated in 1952, the Clowns continued to play at the stadium.

In 1987, Bush Stadium was dressed up in different ways to be used as the stand-in for both Comiskey Park and Crosley Field during the filming of Eight Men Out, which was about the "Black Sox Scandal", the throwing of the 1919 World Series.

Indianapolis also hosted the Pan Am Games in 1987, and the baseball tournament was held at Bush Stadium.

Starting in the 1980s, maintenance problems became more pronounced as the stadium's physical structure deteriorated. In 1985, the city studied what would be needed to upgrade the ballpark in order to attract a Major League team. The initial study indicated that the size and condition of the playing field were adequate, but that seating would need to be increased to at least 40,000, and that the ancillary areas (dugouts, bullpens, concession stands, and ticket booths) would eventually need to be upgraded. A second study that looked at the issue of parking said that between $9.8 million and $52.3 million would be needed for additional parking, with another $22 million for street improvements to handle the additional traffic. On May 9, 1985, Mayor Bill Hudnut recommended to the parks board that it not move ahead with the project, citing the cost and the disruption to the neighborhoods around the stadium.

By 1990 the conditions at the stadium were dire. There were numerous plumbing and water problems among other issues. In a June 15, 1985, letter, the team's chairman of the board described the "terrible state of Bush stadium" and asked that control of the stadium be transferred from the parks board to the city's Capital Improvement Board.

In August 1993, the National Association of Professional Baseball Leagues warned that either major repairs needed to be done or a new stadium constructed; failure to do so could result in the transfer of the team to another city. A study by the Capital Improvements Board estimated that repairs to Bush Stadium would cost $16.3 million while a new stadium downtown would cost $18 million. A downtown stadium was projected to double attendance and add millions to the downtown economy, so that option was taken.

The 1995 season of the Indians was marketed as the "Bush Stadium Sunset Season". The final game was played on July 3, 1996, and the first game at the new Victory Field at White River State Park was played on July 11.

In 1997, Tony George, president of the nearby Indianapolis Motor Speedway, leased the property and converted it into a dirt track named the 16th Street Speedway for midget car auto racing. The ivy was removed from the outfield walls around this time. As happened with a similar venture involving Philadelphia's Baker Bowl several decades earlier, the auto racing venture failed (after two years). The property closed and the stadium fell into disrepair, with no apparent future. The Indy Parks Department had control of the land, which was zoned as a park. At the time, it was estimated that renovations, which would include removal of asbestos and lead paint, could cost around $10 million.

Between 2008 and 2011 the Stadium was used as a storage site for cars traded in as part of the Cash for Clunkers program. In 2011, it was proposed that the stadium be turned into an apartment complex, and on March 15, 2012, demolition began on portions of the 81-year-old structure. The 138 loft units were completely leased when the complex opened on July 27, 2013. The dirt portion of the infield has now been paved with stamped red concrete, but the lights that lit up the field at night still stand. Much of the exterior façade has been preserved, and many of the historic features, such as the owner's suite and the ticket booth, have been incorporated into the loft apartments. There are studio, one, and two-bedroom units in the complex. The cost of the project was $13 million, of which the city funded $5 million. The Stadium Lofts complex includes both the loft apartments within the former stadium building and newly constructed flats.

Dimensions
Original

 * Left Field – 350 ft
 * Left Center Field – 365 ft
 * Center Field Corner – 500 ft
 * Right Center Field – 365 ft
 * Right Field – 350 ft

1945 (home plate moved about 20 feet toward center field)

 * Left Field – 335 ft
 * Left Center Field – 350 ft
 * Center Field Corner – 480 ft
 * Right Center Field – 350 ft
 * Right Field – 335 ft

1967 (inner fence constructed across center field)

 * Left Field – 335 ft
 * Left Center Field – 350 ft
 * Deep Left Center – 405 ft
 * Center Field Inner Fence – 395 ft
 * Deep Right Center – 405 ft
 * Right Center Field – 350 ft
 * Right Field – 335 ft

title: Bush Stadium


text:
Ernest I

Ernest I or Ernst I can refer to:
 * Ernest I, Duke of Swabia (reigned 1012–15)
 * Ernest I, Prince of Anhalt-Dessau (died 1516)
 * Ernest I, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg (1497–1546), Ernest the Confessor
 * Ernst I, Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Altenburg (1601–1675), Ernest the Pious
 * Ernst I, Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (1784–1844), father of Prince Albert, the consort of Queen Victoria
 * Ernst I, Prince of Hohenlohe-Langenburg (1794–1860)
 * Ernest Augustus I, Duke of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach (1688–1748)
 * Ernest Frederick I, Duke of Saxe-Hildburghausen (1681–1724)
 * Ernest Günther I, Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Augustenburg (1609–1689)
 * Ernst Ludwig I, Duke of Saxe-Meiningen (1672–1724)

title: Ernest I


text:
Jane Gallop

Jane Anne Gallop (born May 4, 1952) is an American professor who since 1992 has served as Distinguished Professor of English and Comparative Literature at the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee, where she has taught since 1990.

Education
Gallop earned a B.A. at Cornell University in 1972, and a Ph.D. in French literature in 1976 at the same institution, as part of the Ford Foundation Six-Year Ph.D. Program. She taught in the French department at Miami University in Ohio. She was Herbert S. Autrey Professor of Humanities at Rice University, where she founded the women's studies program and chaired the Department of French and Italian. She has also taught or served as a visiting professor at Gettysburg College, Emory University, the University of Minnesota, Dartmouth College, Johns Hopkins University, and the Chicago Psychoanalytic Center.

Career
Gallop is the author of ten books and nearly 100 articles. In addition to psychoanalysis, especially Jacques Lacan's psychoanalytic theory (particularly in the context of the American and French feminist responses to it), she has written on psychoanalysis and feminism; the Marquis de Sade; feminist literary criticism; pedagogy; accusations of sexual abuse; photography; queer theory; and ageing. She has said her writing can be understood "as the consistent application of a close reading method to theoretical texts." She has taught this method of close reading theory to her students for the past 35 years.

Writings
Gallop's most controversial book addresses the issue of sexual harassment. In Feminist Accused of Sexual Harassment she documents her experience of being accused of sexual harassment at her workplace, and formulates a feminist response to the emotional episode.

Gallop also writes about her personal and professional experiences in Anecdotal Theory. She uses personal narrative as a starting point for critical essays in the hopes of producing a "more literary theory."

Living with His Camera (Duke University Press, 2003) focuses on the relationship between photography as art and photography as family history. Gallop explores how the photography of her longtime partner, University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee film professor Dick Blau, chronicles their relationship and also relationships between them and their two children, Max and Ruby. On the basis of black-and-white photographs of them that Blau regularly took, Gallop became interested in the implications of being the photograph's subject. Blau's talent for finding the perfect picture in the mundane moment is combined with Gallop's commentary as a subject and as a scholar. Each chapter involves analysis of an influential book concerning photography—including Roland Barthes's Camera Lucida and Susan Sontag's On Photography in relation to Blau's photographs. Gallop's analysis of what she finds in the photographs focuses on male/female relationships, childhood, sibling rivalry, intimate and erotic moments, and how the camera both captures and distorts these moments. Her conclusion is that the camera has become a "third person" in her relationship with Blau, creating the triangle of photographer, camera, and subject. Then too, the camera is able to show new angles, insights, flaws, and wonders that the individual people cannot themselves see without the camera's ability to freeze and frame moments and experiences in time.

Gallop's critical interest in time is further explored in The Deaths of the Author: Reading and Writing in Time (Duke University Press, 2011). In this book Gallop revisits a familiar concept in literary criticism, the so-called "death of the author", and considers not only the abstract theoretical death of the author but also the writer's literal death. Through close readings of the literary theorists Roland Barthes, Jacques Derrida, Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, and Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, she argues that the death of the author is best understood as a relation to temporality for both the reader and writer. She adds new connotations to the phrase and concept by connecting an author's theoretical, literal, and metaphoric deaths.

Bibliography of book-length works

 * Intersections: A Reading of Sade with Bataille, Blanchot, and Klossowski. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1981.
 * The Daughter's Seduction: Feminism and Psychoanalysis. London: Macmillan Press; and Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1982.
 * Reading Lacan. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1985.
 * Thinking Through the Body. New York: Columbia University Press, 1988.
 * Around 1981: Academic Feminist Literary Theory. New York: Routledge, 1991.
 * Pedagogy: The Question of Impersonation. (ed.) Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1995.
 * Feminist Accused of Sexual Harassment. Duke University Press. 1997.
 * Anecdotal Theory. Durham: Duke University Press, 2002.
 * Living with His Camera. Durham: Duke University Press, 2003.
 * The Deaths of the Author: Writing and Reading in Time. Durham: Duke University Press, 2011.
 * Sexuality, Disability, and Aging: Queer Temporalities of the Phallus. Durham: Duke University Press, 2019.
 * "What Happened in the 80s? On the Rise of Literary Theory in American Academia", Gallop in conversation with H. Aram Veeser, Anthem Press, December 23, 2020.

Personal life
Gallop is a fan of the Milwaukee Bucks. She received some media coverage for a November 2013 incident when she and her husband gave player Giannis Antetokounmpo a ride after noticing him running on foot to the Bradley Center before a game on an 18 °F day.

title: Jane Gallop


text:
Effective half-life

In pharmacokinetics, the effective half-life is the rate of accumulation or elimination of a biochemical or pharmacological substance in an organism; it is the analogue of biological half-life when the kinetics are governed by multiple independent mechanisms. This is seen when there are multiple mechanisms of elimination, or when a drug occupies multiple pharmacological compartments. It reflects the cumulative effect of the individual half-lives, as observed by the changes in the actual serum concentration of a drug under a given dosing regimen. The complexity of biological systems means that most pharmacological substances do not have a single mechanism of elimination, and hence the observed or effective half-life does not reflect that of a single process, but rather the summation of multiple independent processes.

Radionuclides
When radionuclides are used pharmacologically, for example in radiation therapy, they are eliminated through a combination of radioactive decay and biological excretion. An effective half-life of the drug will involve a decay constant that represents the sum of the biological and physical decay constants, as in the formula:

 * $${\lambda_e} \, = {\lambda_p} \, + {\lambda_b} \,$$

With the decay constant it is possible to calculate the effective half-life using the formula:

t_{1/2} = \frac{\ln (2)}{\lambda_e} $$

The biological decay constant is often approximated as it is more difficult to accurately determine than the physical decay constant.

Alternatively, since the radioactive decay contributes to the "physical (i.e. radioactive)" half-life, while the metabolic elimination processes determines the "biological" half-life of the radionuclide, the two act as parallel paths for elimination of the radioactivity, the effective half-life could also be represented by the formula:

\frac{1}{t_{1/2e}} = \frac{1}{t_{1/2p}} + \frac{1}{t_{1/2b}}$$, or $$ t_{1/2e} = \frac{t_{1/2p}\cdot t_{1/2b}} {t_{1/2p} + t_{1/2b}}$$.

title: Effective half-life