text:
Milliradian

A milliradian (SI-symbol mrad, sometimes also abbreviated mil) is an SI derived unit for angular measurement which is defined as a thousandth of a radian (0.001 radian). Milliradians are used in adjustment of firearm sights by adjusting the angle of the sight compared to the barrel (up, down, left, or right). Milliradians are also used for comparing shot groupings, or to compare the difficulty of hitting different sized shooting targets at different distances. When using a scope with both mrad adjustment and a reticle with mrad markings (called an "mrad/mrad scope"), the shooter can use the reticle as a ruler to count the number of mrads a shot was off-target, which directly translates to the sight adjustment needed to hit the target with a follow-up shot. Optics with mrad markings in the reticle can also be used to make a range estimation of a known size target, or vice versa, to determine a target size if the distance is known, a practice called "milling".

Milliradians are generally used for very small angles, which allows for very accurate mathematical approximations to more easily calculate with direct proportions, back and forth between the angular separation observed in an optic, linear subtension on target, and range. In such applications it is useful to use a unit for target size that is a thousandth of the unit for range, for instance by using the metric units millimeters for target size and meters for range. This coincides with the definition of the milliradian where the arc length is defined as $mm⁄m$ of the radius. A common adjustment value in firearm sights is 1 cm at 100 meters which equals $m⁄km$ = $1⁄1000$ mrad.

The true definition of a milliradian is based on a unit circle with a radius of 1|one and an arc divided into 1,000 mrad per radian, hence 2,000 π or approximately 6,283.185 milliradians in one turn, and rifle scope adjustments and reticles are calibrated to this definition. There are also other definitions used for land mapping and artillery which are rounded to more easily be divided into smaller parts for use with compasses, which are then often referred to as "mils", "lines", or similar. For instance there are artillery sights and compasses with 6,400 NATO mils, 6,000 Warsaw Pact mils or 6,300 Swedish "streck" per turn instead of 360° or 2π radians, achieving higher resolution than a 360° compass while also being easier to divide into parts than if true milliradians were used.

History

The milliradian (approximately 6,283.185 in a circle) was first used in the mid-19th century by Charles-Marc Dapples (1837–1920), a Swiss engineer and professor at the University of Lausanne. Degrees and minutes were the usual units of angular measurement but others were being proposed, with "grads" (400 gradians in a circle) under various names having considerable popularity in much of northern Europe. However, Imperial Russia used a different approach, dividing a circle into equilateral triangles (60° per triangle, 6 triangles in a circle) and hence 600 units to a circle.

Around the time of the start of World War I, France was experimenting with the use of millièmes or angular mils (6400 in a circle) for use with artillery sights instead of decigrades (4000 in a circle). The United Kingdom was also trialing them to replace degrees and minutes. They were adopted by France although decigrades also remained in use throughout World War I. Other nations also used decigrades. The United States, which copied many French artillery practices, adopted angular mils, later known as NATO mils. Before 2007 the Swedish defence forces used "streck" (6300 in a circle, streck meaning lines or marks) (together with degrees for some navigation) which is closer to the milliradian but then changed to NATO mils. After the Bolshevik Revolution and the adoption of the metric system of measurement (e.g. artillery replaced "units of base" with meters) the Red Army expanded the 600 unit circle into a 6000 mil circle. Hence the Russian mil has a somewhat different origin than those derived from French artillery practices.

In the 1950s, NATO adopted metric units of measurement for land and general use. NATO mils, meters, and kilograms became standard, although degrees remained in use for naval and air purposes, reflecting civil practices.

Mathematical principle
Use of the milliradian is practical because it is concerned with small angles, and when using radians the small angle approximation shows that the angle approximates to the sine of the angle, that is $$\sin \theta \simeq \theta$$. This allows a user to dispense with trigonometry and use simple ratios to determine size and distance with high accuracy for rifle and short distance artillery calculations by using the handy property of subtension: One mrad approximately subtends one meter at a distance of one thousand meters.

More in detail, because $$\text{subtension} \simeq \text{arc length}$$, instead of finding the angular distance denoted by θ (Greek letter theta) by using the tangent function

 * $$ \theta_\text{trig} = \arctan \frac \text{subtension} \text{range}$$,

one can instead make a good approximation by using the definition of a radian and the simplified formula:

 * $$ \theta_\text{rad} \simeq \frac \text{subtension} \text{range}$$

Since a radian is mathematically defined as the angle formed when the length of a circular arc equals the radius of the circle, a milliradian, is the angle formed when the length of a circular arc equals $1⁄2000\pi$ of the radius of the circle. Just like the radian, the milliradian is dimensionless, but unlike the radian where the same unit must be used for radius and arc length, the milliradian needs to have a ratio between the units where the subtension is a thousandth of the radius when using the simplified formula.

Approximation error
The approximation error by using the simplified linear formula will increase as the angle increases. For example, a

 * $1⁄5\pi$% (or $9⁄50\pi$ parts per billion) error for an angle of 0.1 mrad, for instance by assuming 0.1 mrad equals 1 cm at 100 m
 * 0.03% error for 30 mrad, i.e. assuming 30 mrad equals 30 m at 1 km
 * 2.9% error for 300 mrad, i.e. assuming 300 mrad equals 300 m at 1 km

The approximation using mrad is more precise than using another common system where 1′ (minute of arc) is approximated as 1 inch at 100 yards, where comparably there is a:

 * 4.72% error by assuming that an angle of 1′ equals 1 inch at 100 yd
 * 4.75% error for 100′, i.e. assuming 100′ equals 100 in at 100 yd
 * 7.36% error for 1000′, i.e. assuming 1000′ equals 1000 inches at 100 yd

Sight adjustment

Milliradian adjustment is commonly used as a unit for clicks in the mechanical adjustment knobs (turrets) of iron and scope sights both in the military and civilian shooting sports. New shooters are often explained the principle of subtensions in order to understand that a milliradian is an angular measurement. Subtension is the physical amount of space covered by an angle and varies with distance. Thus, the subtension corresponding to a mrad (either in an mrad reticle or in mrad adjustments) varies with range. Knowing subtensions at different ranges can be useful for sighting in a firearm if there is no optic with an mrad reticle available, but involves mathematical calculations, and is therefore not used very much in practical applications. Subtensions always change with distance, but an mrad (as observed through an optic) is always an mrad regardless of distance. Therefore, ballistic tables and shot corrections are given in mrads, thereby avoiding the need for mathematical calculations.

If a rifle scope has mrad markings in the reticle (or there is a spotting scope with an mrad reticle available), the reticle can be used to measure how many mrads to correct a shot even without knowing the shooting distance. For instance, assuming a precise shot fired by an experienced shooter missed the target by 0.8 mrad as seen through an optic, and the firearm sight has 0.1 mrad adjustments, the shooter must then dial 8 clicks on the scope to hit the same target under the same conditions.

Common click values

 * General purpose scopes: Gradations (clicks) of $54⁄5\pi$′, $1⁄1,000$ mrad and $10 mm⁄100 m$′ are used in general purpose sights for hunting, target and long range shooting at varied distances. The click values are fine enough to get dialed in for most target shooting and coarse enough to keep the number of clicks down when dialing.
 * Speciality scopes: $1⁄10$ mrad, $1⁄1000$′ and $1⁄1000$ mrad are used in speciality scope sights for extreme precision at fixed target ranges such as benchrest shooting. Some specialty iron sights used in ISSF 10 m, 50 m and 300 meter rifle come with adjustments in either $0$ mrad or $3.3$ mrad. The small adjustment value means these sights can be adjusted in very small increments. These fine adjustments are however not very well suited for dialing between varied distances such as in field shooting because of the high number of clicks that will be required to move the line of sight, making it easier to lose track of the number of clicks than in scopes with larger click adjustments. For instance to move the line of sight 0.4 mrad, a 0.1 mrad scope must be adjusted 4 clicks, while comparably a 0.05 mrad and 0.025 mrad scope must be adjusted 8 and 16 clicks respectively.
 * Others: $1⁄4$ mrad and $1⁄10$ mrad can be found in some short range sights, mostly with capped turrets, but are not very widely used.

Subtensions at different distances
Subtension refers to the length between two points on a target, and is usually given in either centimeters, millimeters or inches. Since an mrad is an angular measurement, the subtension covered by a given angle (angular distance or angular diameter) increases with viewing distance to the target. For instance the same angle of 0.1 mrad will subtend 10 mm at 100 meters, 20 mm at 200 meters, etc., or similarly 0.39 inches at 100 m, 0.78 inches at 200 m, etc.

Subtensions in mrad based optics are particularly useful together with target sizes and shooting distances in metric units. The most common scope adjustment increment in mrad based rifle scopes is 0.1 mrad, which are sometimes called "one centimeter clicks" since 0.1 mrad equals exactly 1 cm at 100 meters, 2 cm at 200 meters, etc. Similarly, an adjustment click on a scope with 0.2 mrad adjustment will move the point of bullet impact 2 cm at 100 m and 4 cm at 200 m, etc.

When using a scope with both mrad adjustment and a reticle with mrad markings (called a mrad/mrad scope), the shooter can spot his own bullet impact and easily correct the sight if needed. If the shot was a miss, the mrad reticle can simply be used as a "ruler" to count the number of milliradians the shot was off target. The number of milliradians to correct is then multiplied by ten if the scope has 0.1 mrad adjustments. If for instance the shot was 0.6 mrad to the right of the target, 6 clicks will be needed to adjust the sight. This way there is no need for math, conversions, knowledge of target size or distance. This is true for a first focal plane scope at all magnifications, but a variable second focal plane must be set to a given magnification (usually its maximum magnification) for any mrad scales to be correct.

When using a scope with mrad adjustments, but without mrad markings in the reticle (i.e. a standard duplex cross-hair on a hunting or benchrest scope), sight correction for a known target subtension and known range can be calculated by the following formula, which utilizes the fact that an adjustment of 1 mrad changes the impact as many millimeters as there are meters:

$$\text{adjustment in mrad} = \frac \text{subtension in mm} \text{range in m}.$$

For instance:
 * $1⁄2$ = 0.4 mrad, or 4 clicks with a $0.25⁄10$ mrad adjustment scope.
 * $1⁄8$ = 0.05 mrad, or 1 click with a 0.05 mrad adjustment scope.

In firearm optics, where 0.1 mrad per click is the most common mrad based adjustment value, another common rule of thumb is that an adjustment of $0.5⁄10$ mrad changes the impact as many centimeters as there are hundreds of meters. In other words, 1 cm at 100 meters, 2.25 cm at 225 meters, 0.5 cm at 50 meters, etc. See the table below

Adjustment range and base tilt
The horizontal and vertical adjustment range of a firearm sight is often advertised by the manufacturer using mrads. For instance a rifle scope may be advertised as having a vertical adjustment range of 20 mrad, which means that by turning the turret the bullet impact can be moved a total of 20 meters at 1000 meters (or 2 m at 100 m, 4 m at 200 m, 6 m at 300 m etc.). The horizontal and vertical adjustment ranges can be different for a particular sight, for instance a scope may have 20 mrad vertical and 10 mrad horizontal adjustment. Elevation differ between models, but about 10–11 mrad are common in hunting scopes, while scopes made for long range shooting usually have an adjustment range of 20–30 mrad (70–100 moa).

Sights can either be mounted in neutral or tilted mounts. In a neutral mount (also known as "flat base" or non-tilted mount) the sight will point reasonably parallel to the barrel, and be close to a zero at 100 meters (about 1 mrad low depending on rifle and caliber). After zeroing at 100 meters the sight will thereafter always have to be adjusted upwards to compensate for bullet drop at longer ranges, and therefore the adjustment below zero will never be used. This means that when using a neutral mount only about half of the scope's total elevation will be usable for shooting at longer ranges:

 * $$\text{usable elevation in neutral mount} = \frac\text{scope's total elevation}{2}$$

In most regular sport and hunting rifles (except for in long range shooting), sights are usually mounted in neutral mounts. This is done because the optical quality of the scope is best in the middle of its adjustment range, and only being able to use half of the adjustment range to compensate for bullet drop is seldom a problem at short and medium range shooting.

However, in long range shooting tilted scope mounts are common since it is very important to have enough vertical adjustment to compensate for the bullet drop at longer distances. For this purpose scope mounts are sold with varying degrees of tilt, but some common values are:

 * 3 mrad, which equals 3 m at 1000 m (or 0.3 m at 100 m)
 * 6 mrad, which equals 6 m at 1000 m (or 0.6 m at 100 m)
 * 9 mrad, which equals 9 m at 1000 m (or 0.9 m at 100 m)

With a tilted mount the maximum usable scope elevation can be found by:

 * $$\text{maximum elevation with tilted mount} = \frac\text{scope's total elevation}{2} + \text{base tilt}$$

The adjustment range needed to shoot at a certain distance varies with firearm, caliber and load. For example, with a certain .308 load and firearm combination, the bullet may drop 13 mrad at 1000 meters (13 meters). To be able to reach out, one could either:

 * Use a scope with 26 mrad of adjustment in a neutral mount, to get a usable adjustment of $0.5⁄10$ = 13 mrad
 * Use a scope with 14 mrad of adjustment and a 6 mrad tilted mount to achieve a maximum adjustment of $0.25⁄10$ + 6 = 13 mrad

Shot groupings
A shot grouping is the spread of multiple shots on a target, taken in one shooting session. The group size on target in milliradians can be obtained by measuring the spread of the rounds on target in millimeters with a caliper and dividing by the shooting distance in meters. This way, using milliradians, one can easily compare shot groupings or target difficulties at different shooting distances.

 * $$\text{group size in mrad} = \frac{\text{group size in mm}}{\text{range in m}}$$

If the firearm is attached in a fixed mount and aimed at a target, the shot grouping measures the firearm's mechanical precision and the uniformity of the ammunition. When the firearm also is held by a shooter, the shot grouping partly measures the precision of the firearm and ammunition, and partly the shooter's consistency and skill. Often the shooters' skill is the most important element towards achieving a tight shot grouping, especially when competitors are using the same match grade firearms and ammunition.

Range estimation with mrad reticles

Many telescopic sights used on rifles have reticles that are marked in mrad. This can either be accomplished with lines or dots, and the latter is generally called mil-dots. The mrad reticle serves two purposes, range estimation and trajectory correction.

With a mrad reticle-equipped scope the distance to an object can be estimated with a fair degree of accuracy by a trained user by determining how many milliradians an object of known size subtends. Once the distance is known, the drop of the bullet at that range (see external ballistics), converted back into milliradians, can be used to adjust the aiming point. Generally mrad-reticle scopes have both horizontal and vertical crosshairs marked; the horizontal and vertical marks are used for range estimation and the vertical marks for bullet drop compensation. Trained users, however, can also use the horizontal dots to compensate for bullet drift due to wind. Milliradian-reticle-equipped scopes are well suited for long shots under uncertain conditions, such as those encountered by military and law enforcement snipers, varmint hunters and other field shooters. These riflemen must be able to aim at varying targets at unknown (sometimes long) distances, so accurate compensation for bullet drop is required.

Angle can be used for either calculating target size or range if one of them is known. Where the range is known the angle will give the size, where the size is known then the range is given. When out in the field angle can be measured approximately by using calibrated optics or roughly using one's fingers and hands. With an outstretched arm one finger is approximately 30 mrad wide, a fist 150 mrad and a spread hand 300 mrad.

Milliradian reticles often have dots or marks with a spacing of 1 mrad in between, but graduations can also be finer and coarser (i.e. 0.8 or 1.2 mrad).

Units for target size and range
While a radian is defined as an angle on the unit circle where the arc and radius have equal length, a milliradian is defined as the angle where the arc length is one thousandth of the radius. Therefore, when using milliradians for range estimation, the unit used for target distance needs to be thousand times as large as the unit used for target size. Metric units are particularly useful in conjunction with a mrad reticle because the mental arithmetic is much simpler with decimal units, thereby requiring less mental calculation in the field. Using the range estimation formula with the units meters for range and millimeters for target size it is just a matter of moving decimals and do the division, without the need of multiplication with additional constants, thus producing fewer rounding errors.

 * $$\text{distance in meters} = \frac{\text{target in millimeters}}{\text{angle in mrad}} $$

The same holds true for calculating target distance in kilometers using target size in meters.

 * $$\text{distance in kilometers} = \frac{\text{target in meters}}{\text{angle in mrad}}$$

Also, in general the same unit can be used for subtension and range if multiplied with a factor of thousand, i.e.

 * $$\text{distance in meters} = \frac{\text{target in meters}}{\text{angle in mrad}} \times 1,000$$

If using the imperial units yards for distance and inches for target size, one has to multiply by a factor of $1.5⁄10$ ≈ 27.78, since there are 36 inches in one yard.

 * $$\text{distance in yards} = \frac{\text{target in inches}}{\text{angle in mrad}} \times 27.78$$

If using the metric unit meters for distance and the imperial unit inches for target size, one has to multiply by a factor of 25.4, since one inch is defined as 25.4 millimeters.

 * $$\text{distance in meters} = \frac{\text{target in inches}}{\text{angle in mrad}} \times 25.4$$

Practical examples
Land Rovers are about 3 to 4 m long, "smaller tank" or APC/MICV at about 6 m (e.g. T-34 or BMP) and about 10 m for a "big tank." From the front a Land Rover is about 1.5 m wide, most tanks around 3–3.5 m. So a SWB Land Rover from the side is one finger wide at about 100 m. A modern tank would have to be at a bit over 300 m.

If, for instance a target known to be 1.5 m in height (1500 mm) is measured to 2.8 mrad in the reticle, the range can be estimated to:

 * $$\text{distance in meters} = \frac{1500 \text{ mm}}{2.8 \text{ mrad}} = 535.7 \text{ m}$$

So if the above-mentioned 6 m long BMP (6000 mm) is viewed at 6 mrad its distance is 1000 m, and if the angle of view is twice as large (12 mrad) the distance is half as much, 500 m.

When used with some riflescopes of variable objective magnification and fixed reticle magnification (where the reticle is in the second focal plane), the formula can be modified to:

 * $$\text{distance in meters} = \frac{\text{size in mm}}{\text{angle in mrad}} \times \frac{\text{mag}}{10} $$

Where mag is scope magnification. However, a user should verify this with their individual scope since some are not calibrated at 10×. As above target distance and target size can be given in any two units of length with a ratio of 1000:1.

Mixing mrad and minutes of arc
It is possible to purchase rifle scopes with a mrad reticle and minute-of-arc turrets, but it is general consensus that such mixing should be avoided. It is preferred to either have both a mrad reticle and mrad adjustment (mrad/mrad), or a minute-of-arc reticle and minute-of-arc adjustment to utilize the strength of each system. Then the shooter can know exactly how many clicks to correct based on what he sees in the reticle.

If using a mixed system scope that has a mrad reticle and arcminute adjustment, one way to make use of the reticle for shot corrections is to exploit that 14′ approximately equals 4 mrad, and thereby multiplying an observed corrections in mrad by a fraction of $2⁄10$ when adjusting the turrets.

Conversion table for firearms
In the table below conversions from mrad to metric values are exact (e.g. 0.1 mrad equals exactly 1 cm at 100 meters), while conversions of minutes of arc to both metric and imperial values are approximate.

 * 0.1 mrad equals exactly 1 cm at 100 m
 * 1 mrad ≈ 3.44′, so $20 mm⁄50 m$ mrad ≈ $1⁄10$′
 * 1′ ≈ 0.291 mrad (or 2.91 cm at 100 m, approximately 3 cm at 100 m)

Definitions for maps and artillery
Because of the definition of pi, in a circle with a diameter of one there are 2000 $\pi$ milliradians (≈ 6283.185 mrad) per full turn. In other words, one real milliradian covers just under $50 mm⁄1000 m$ of the circumference of a circle, which is the definition used by telescopic rifle sight manufacturers in reticles for stadiametric rangefinding.

For maps and artillery, three rounded definitions are used which are close to the real definition, but more easily can be divided into parts. The different map and artillery definitions are sometimes referred to as "angular mils", and are:
 * $1⁄10$ of a circle in NATO countries.
 * $1⁄10$ of a circle in the former Soviet Union and Finland (Finland phasing out the standard in favour of the NATO standard).
 * $26 mrad⁄2$ of a circle in Sweden. The Swedish term for this is streck, literally "line".

Reticles in some artillery sights are calibrated to the relevant artillery definition for that military, i.e. the Carl Zeiss OEM-2 artillery sight made in East Germany from 1969 to 1976 is calibrated for the eastern bloc 6000 mil circle.

Various symbols have been used to represent angular mils for compass use:
 * mil, MIL and similar abbreviations are often used by militaries in the English speaking part of the world.
 * ‰, called "artillery per milles" (German: Artilleriepromille), a symbol used by the Swiss Army.
 * ¯, called "artillery line" (German: artilleristische Strich), a symbol used by the German Army (not to be confused with Compass Point (German: Nautischer Strich, 32 "nautical lines" per circle) which sometimes use the same symbol. However, the DIN standard (DIN 1301 part 3) is to use ¯ for artillery lines, and " for nautical lines.)
 * ₥, called "thousandths" (French: millièmes), a symbol used on some older French compasses.
 * v (Finnish: piiru, Swedish: delstreck), a symbol used by the Finnish Defence Forces for the standard Warsaw Pact mil. Sometimes just marked as v if superscript is not available.

Use in artillery sights
Artillery uses angular measurement in gun laying, the azimuth between the gun and its target many kilometers away and the elevation angle of the barrel. This means that artillery uses mils to graduate indirect fire azimuth sights (called dial sights or panoramic telescopes), their associated instruments (directors or aiming circles), their elevation sights (clinometers or quadrants), together with their manual plotting devices, firing tables and fire control computers.

Artillery spotters typically use their calibrated binoculars to move fired projectiles' impact onto a target. Here they know the approximate range to the target and so can read off the angle (+ quick calculation) to give the left/right corrections in meters. A mil is a meter at a range of one thousand meters (for example, to move the impact of an artillery round 100 meters by a gun firing from 3 km away, it is necessary to shift the direction by 100/3 = 33.3 mils.)

Other scientific and technological uses
The milliradian (and other SI multiples) is also used in other fields of science and technology for describing small angles, i.e. measuring alignment, collimation, and beam divergence in optics, and accelerometers and gyroscopes in inertial navigation systems.

title: Milliradian


text:
Talk:Antinous

Antinous Mandragone?
I have deleted the image captioned "Antinous Mandragone" for several reasons. Firstly, although it has some resemblance to Antinous images, the hair arrangement makes it fairly clear that it's a woman. Antinous may have been a catamite, but he wasn't a drag queen. Secondly, a Google image search for "Antinous Mandragone" does not turn up any independent verification of this work, nor does a search for "Antinous Louvre". A general search for "Antinous" turns up hundreds of images, but not this one. Thirdly, if this an Antinous bust in the Louvre, its striking qualities should make it at least as well known as the other Antinous busts in the Louvre, in the Vatican and at Delphi - and it isn't at all well known. Fourthly, I went through the Louvre looking specifically for Antinous images, and I certainly didn't see this one. Of course I may have missed it - it's a big place - and I may be quite wrong. But I'd like to see some sources for the assertion that this is Antinous. Adam 00:10, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm the author of this photograph. This bust stands in the new « salle du Manège » which was opened some months ago (immediately on your right when you come out of the escalator). This hall is dedicated to French copies or casts of Greek antiquities.
 * The hair arrangement doesn't strike me as particularly feminine, at least not more than other male statues. As for the caption, it's a mispelling. It's Mondragone, from the Mondragone Villa in Italy, near Frascati. 30 hits in Google with "antinous mondragone". Jastrow 00:00, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Disambiguation
The bit about the mythological character should be merged with Antinous son of Eupeithes. --LakeHMM 08:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I've moved the irrelevant material to Antinous son of Eupeithes. Will try and do the merging later. 62.31.128.13 03:59, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Did Hadrian and Antinous met in 123 or 124 for the first time?

Uncited section about modern 'worship'
I removed the following, as it is uncited and seems quite doubtful.

 * ''Today, many young Pagans and Wiccans (especially males with homosexual orientation) have revived the worship of Antinous. In Cyberspace, several virtual temples have been dedicated to him. In Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Houston, he is the main deity for several covens.

Please feel free to discuss and cite. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 12:28, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your action. Adam 21:34, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Actually, there are many pagans (of many ages) who are actively worshipping Antinous, but they are not Wiccans. You'll note the websites of several of these in the links which have been added.-Alfrecht 07:13, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I can say this that yes there are many Pagan's worshipping Antinous,I am one and everyone that I have met have not been Neo-Pagans but Recons. Remeber that Antionus' religion in the ancient past was Syncretistic just as it is today,but that did not make the ancient worshippers of him Neo-pagans or wiccans either,just as it does not make modern worshippers Neo-pagans or wiccans! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.191.102.20 (talk) 02:44, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

 * There is now occasion to revisit this topic, as what seems to be a reliable source was published by the University of California Press:

The New Cultus of Antinous Hadrian’s Deified Lover and Contemporary Queer Paganism Ethan Doyle White Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions, Vol. 20 No. 1, August 2016; (pp. 32-59) DOI: 10.1525/novo.2016.20.1.32 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.17.179.75 (talk) 20:32, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Images
We're using more space for images here than text. Rendering lots of media on a subject is the purvue of Wikimedia Commons. I think that four images here has passed "distracting" and well into "cluttered". Jkelly 01:33, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Agreed - but I think one image doesn't really describe the depth and breadth to which Antinous has been captured in various cultures. Perhaps something a bit more less drastic (2-3 images)? -- User:RyanFreisling @ 01:41, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

 * I wouldn't recommend going with more than two until we expand the text. I have a strong preference for Image:Antinous_Mandragone_profil.jpg (due to its being featured on Commons), and a mild preference Image:Antinous-osiris.JPG (to show that "depth and breadth" you mention).  Thoughts?  Jkelly 01:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Sounds good to me. I also have a liking for the photo I took, and consider it to be largely redundant with the bottom bust. So I'd prefer 3 images. -- User:RyanFreisling @ 01:48, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I have again deleted the Mondragone Antinous, since it appears from the above discussion, and other opinions I have been given, that it is a modern work. Adam 02:24, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Adam, have you read my answer to you? If you can read French, please read the Louvre cartel, which clearly states "ca. 130 CE". This bust is mentioned as an antique work in Winckelmann's work as well as in Haskell & Penny's  Taste and the Antique. Please clarify which opinions state otherwise. Jastrow 08:32, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Gallery
I think that having a twelve-thumbnail gallery here is excessive. That's what Wikimedia Commons is for. Jkelly 20:01, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree... why do we need so many images for such an unimportant person?

 * I don't - while we sadly lack data to elaborate the text, he happens to be an important theme in art, precisely because he's believed to be the most beautifull male mortal in all Antiquity, a 'real life adonis', and his life determined by this reputation : a subject simply crying out for images if ever there was one Fastifex 03:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Antinous unimportant? Are you kidding, he is possibly the most known face from antiquity.

I have removed a picture: Image:NAMA Antinoüs.jpg|From Patras, from Hadrian's Villa in Tivoli, because it cannot be both from Patras and from Tivoli, and the tag in the picture itself says the bust is from the NAM in Athens. --5telios 11:32, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Don't blank images or blank text: it puts you in bad company. I have returned the image, and corrected the caption, something which 5telios might easily have done. --Wetman 12:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I apologise for the blanking - unaware that it is frowned upon. I might easily have repaired the caption, had my knowledge of the statue's provenance been better. As it is I saw a picture labelled with two mutually exclusive labels, something any visitor to the page, regardless of specialist knowledge would find strange. --5telios 13:16, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

This gallery is incredibly valuable to those learning the subject. Please do not delete these, I even hope that more are added, as Hadrian had so very many, it is great to see as many as practical to comparison. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.189.11.59 (talk) 00:41, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

 * I agree with the proposal to delete the gallery. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_use_policy#Image_galleries very clearly states that galleries should not be put on article pages if they are just a collection of images that have nothing else in common except that they illustrate the subject of the article.  As for the gallery's usefulness to users, it can be moved to commons and made easily available as a link -- which is exactly what the policy calls for.   Strawberryjampot (talk) 19:25, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

 * I disagree with proposals to delete the gallery. His primary claim to fame is the large diversity of art works from antiquity representing him. Nothing portrays that diversity better than a gallery of pictures. Rwflammang (talk) 01:08, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Cinderello
"Another version has it that Hadrian had the empire searched for the most beautiful youth, and chose Antinous." Oh. Doesn't even the most gullible Wiukipedian recognize the Cinderella motif in this? Claptrap. --Wetman 22:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Hadrian's Lover
I agree with the above poster, in addition, it is not proven that they were lovers. It has been suggested that because of the frosty relations between Hadrian and his wife that Hadrian saw Antinous as a son he never had. All views and opinions should be presented, and the reader should be allowed to draw his own conclussions. In any case, personal relations should not figure into the introductory paragraph in my opinion, especially since it is a debated subject.MarcusAntoninus 20:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree. As for the IP's view below me (please sign your posts even if you are not registered user), perhaps you would like to prove that Antinous was indeed "H"adrian's lover? Who are you to say that there could not have been something else than romantic/-erotic relationship and call these possibilities as silly joke? --Kurt Leyman (talk) 12:16, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Antinoüs was a slave. If a Roman wanted to have an adopted son, he could only adopt a free man. It is obvious that the relation between Hadrian and Antinoüs was erotic. That's a silly joke to say that he was not Adrian's lover.

He wouldn't have been a slave, being younger and of a lower social position he would have been the Eromenos of the two and Hadrian the Erastes, but that doesn’t make him a slave. Their relationship would have followed the standard Greek pederasty tradition, likeiest the Athenian version to be specific, meaning the relationship would have been mutually consensual. Although if the emperor makes a pass at you its probably not a good idea to shoot him down.

 * Please sign your posts with ~ . If you have any sources for your statements, such as a scholar Dr. Jim Smith of This-or-That University, we would be grateful. Actually this discussion page is about the article content. ... said: Rursus ( m bork³ ) 21:13, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

This is pretty silly. A Roman who wanted a son adopted one, as did 4 of the 5 emperors of the Nerva-Trajanic dynasty. Indeed Hadrian adopted 2 sons, Lucius Aelius Caesar and Antoninus Pius. Antinous is nowhere described as a slave and in any case Roman law permitted manumission and permitted the adoption of freed slaves. It is, however, extraordinarily unlikely that the Roman elite would have accepted a provincial of Greek origins with no connections to the dynasty as an adoptive son because that would have made Antinous an at least presumptive successor.

On the death of Lucius Aelius Caesar, who actually was an adoptive son, Hadrian did none of the things, deification, city-naming, temple-building, that he did on the death of Antinous. The 'son he never had' theory fails. The vast majority of ancient and modern authors describe Antinous as a lover not a putative replacement son. The article should reflect this view. --Alan (talk) 01:50, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Gallery
Does any-1 know that galleries s*cxs? (! ! ! ) There are 19 images of that Antin-guy, in the gallery, about 16 too many. ... said: Rursus ( m bork³ ) 21:13, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

 * I added a call to Cleanup-gallery in section Gallery, more people like me hatesss galleriessss... (My precious!) ... said: Rursus ( m bork³ ) 21:26, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Leave the galleries alone. They enrich and add a very nice touch to the article,and let us come to our own conclusions about interpretations of 'the best known face from the ancient world'.If Hadrian loved his friend,so what? There is little enough love in the world,ancient of modern.Even the Vatican seems happy to leave a Roman emperor's gay lover in pride of place! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frglee (talk • contribs) 08:00, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Please see Image use policy, which notes, among other things:
 * Images are typically interspersed individually throughout an article near the relevant text ... Images in a gallery should be carefully selected, avoiding similar or repetitive images, unless a point of contrast or comparison is being made. ... However, Wikipedia is not an image repository. A gallery is not a tool to shoehorn images into an article, and a gallery consisting of an indiscriminate collection of images of the article subject should generally either be improved in accordance with the above paragraph or moved to Wikimedia Commons. ... One rule of thumb to consider: if, due to its content, a gallery would only lend itself to a title along the lines of "Gallery" or "Images of [insert article title]", as opposed to a more descriptive title, the gallery should either be revamped or moved to the Commons.  (emphasis added)

 * The gallery in this article very clearly is exactly the sort of gallery which Wikipedia policy discourages: it is "a collection of indiscriminate images of the article subject" titled just "gallery".  One may disagree with the policy, but currently it is the policy, and under it any editor should feel free to revamp or delete this gallery.  Personally, I feel it should be moved to Commons, though someone with the proper knowledge might be able to revamp it to, for instance, illustrate Antinous specifically being portrayed as various deities, along with expanding the text to explain the motives Hadrian had for portraying him this way.  Such a more limited and specific gallery, with a title something like "Antinous Identified with Gods", would, I think, be within policy.  Strawberryjampot (talk) 17:01, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Nerva–Antonine family tree
The Nerva–Antonine family tree would be a nice thing to have in some article in which it would serve a function, but it does not do so here. There is no blood relationship between Antinous and anyone in the family, which makes the family tree quite irrelevant to the subject of the article. I suggest it be moved to some article where it will be useful.
 * Yes, it's clearly out of place in this article, and since it's available in the article on the Antonines, I've just taken it out. Strawberryjampot (talk) 19:14, 11 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: Revert to 416592041
"The secrets of the imperial bedchamber must for ever to denied to us, and, in view of all the hideous and speculative publicity about their love, Hadrian and Antinous are surely entitled to keep this ultimate and intimate secret." Lambert, op, cit., p. 98. Fatidiot1234 (talk) 23:48, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

 * No doubt - but if Antinous has any notability at all, it's in his relationship with Hadrian. We can discuss that without getting into pornography. Incidentally, the fact that Lambert could describe homosexuality as "hideous" is enough to cast doubt on his objectivity. PiCo (talk) 04:15, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

 * I suspect that the "hideous" has to do with speculation that Hadrian had Antinous sacrificed. Murder, not nookie, is what bothers Lambert. Consider his attitude toward Trajan's drinking and boyfriends, which he he regards with impartial equanimity as weaknesses of the flesh. Fatidiot1234 (talk) 17:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

 * That's a relief. Now for suggestions: the sections heads references inn pagan sources and ditto Christian sources are not encyclopediac - we don't normally just collect great slabs of text from primary sources like that. What should be there is something about the reaction to deification (which didn't happen every day) in the ancient world. Antinous is at a turning point in history, with the Classical world-view still strong dominant but the new Christian world-view rapidly rising. We need to cover that, but as social history, not as a kind of scrap-book. What's your view?PiCo (talk) 23:38, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

 * That's OR, and besides, apart from the Fathers of the Church, there doesn't seem to have been any recorded reaction. As far as this place is concerned, we're finished except for warding off fools. Lambert read everything, of which there isn't much, so if it isn't in Lambert, it doesn't exist. Those "great slabs of text" rather annoy me; I don't think they belong here, but they do no harm so I haven't deleted them. Fatidiot1234 (talk) 23:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Ok if you want to leave them I won't argue. I see from earlier Talk that the gallery has been questioned. I rather like it, but I can see there's a point. The thing to do is probably to turn it into a review of the Antinous image-industry - actually discuss the images, don't just put them up for decoration. After all, these are supposed to be the last great original achievement of ancient plastic art - quite a claim to notability. (I could get a friend with more art-history knowledge to look at it). PiCo (talk) 01:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

 * The gallery is probably pointless, and I added an external link to Wikimedia Commons. In what seems liked the reign of Henry V I got an AB in History of Art from Yale. Fatidiot1234 (talk) 04:12, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

 * I concur with Fatidiot1234. I've read the Lambert; most of it is educated guess, and the author makes no mystery of it. I have access to articles about Antinous from a art history point of view. I can send them to anyone interested — it's been too long a time since I've researched the subject. Jastrow (Λέγετε) 15:14, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Time to prune back Ancient Literary Sources?
For someone who only has eight lines of biography, having almost eight screens worth of ancient literary sources mentioning him, copied out in full, seems excessive. How about a few choice passages, with further links, if available, to the rest? Rootlet (talk) 04:41, 2 December 2012 (UTC)

 * Actually, I came to this talk page to praise the complete coverage in this article. I think it is refreshing and illuminating to read the primary sources, rather than the hopelessly contemporary take of a consensus of editors. Rwflammang (talk) 01:13, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I concur to a degree ... Antinoos was a broad chested construct, so the appraisal of antiquity is the story. But we might organize and present them a bit better, and with the guidance of reliable secondary sources.  davidiad { t } 01:43, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * My impression, after 6 years of editing, is that this place is not about primary sources quoted in extenso. That has a slight flavor of OR. Fatidiot1234 (talk) 07:56, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

As should be clear from Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources, it is against Wikipedia's policy to include vast tracts taken directly from primary sources, whether they are copyrighted or not. Thus I have gone ahead, been bold, and deleted the masses of un-referenced quotation from Roman and early Christian texts that currently litter this article. I have also added in referenced information from secondary (academic) sources briefly describing these texts. However, that is not to say that we cannot re-introduce select sections of these sources in future, if they are of obvious utility. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:15, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

 * Bravo! Fatidiot1234 (talk) 23:43, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Era style
If you must add era tags, please keep the neutral "BCE" and "CE". I would prefer it in this form. Lupus Bellator (talk) 17:59, 4 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:ERA. You can't take a preemptive measure based on your personal preference. I haven't searched the edit history, so I don't know whether an era designation was ever established in the article. Cynwolfe (talk) 19:15, 4 December 2012 (UTC)

Hadrian's family tree
Why is Hadrian's family tree in an article about Antinous. Also, why is Antinous listed as Hadrian's spouse in that family tree? Regardless of the nature of their relationship, there is no evidence that they were ever considered spouses in the culture and society of their time, either by others or between themselves. 122.105.157.209 (talk) 13:15, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Agreed, it is basically irrelevent here. If there are no objections, I shall go ahead and remove it ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:46, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

Bisexuality the norm in the upper echelons of Roman society?
I think that it is entirely untrue that "bisexuality was the norm in the upper echelons of Roman society by the early 2nd century". Homosexuality, and "bisexuality", were entirely alien to Roman traditions, and certainly never the norm, or even common.Royalcourtier (talk) 08:20, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Source? Fatidiot1234 (talk) 20:01, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

 * Ancient Romans certainly didn't have modern sexual identity politics, so they wouldn't have identified themselves as homosexual, bisexual or even heterosexual in the sense of having identities based relationships with certain genders. Men were expected to marry women, but if an adult male had sex with a passive young male, particularly a slave, that was considered normal and just men being men. To our eyes, men who enjoy sex with males and females are bisexual.Gymnophoria (talk) 09:29, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
 * It's not about slaves or "young boys". Anyone who read the Satyricon, for example, would have no doubt that lots, perhaps a majority, of free adult men desired and had sex with each other. Male homosexuality in all its forms flourished among the Romans to an even greater extent than among the Greeks. Homophobic revisionism doesn't stand a chance against even a superficial reading of Roman sources or ruins. 2804:7F7:DC80:408C:0:0:0:1 (talk) 23:59, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Antinous. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121014100046/http://purl.pt/13961/2/l-78094-p_PDF/l-78094-p_PDF_24-C-R0150/l-78094-p_0000_capa-capa_t24-C-R0150.pdf to http://purl.pt/13961/2/l-78094-p_PDF/l-78094-p_PDF_24-C-R0150/l-78094-p_0000_capa-capa_t24-C-R0150.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130114074003/http://purl.pt/13967/2/res-4516-v/res-4516-v_item2/res-4516-v_PDF/res-4516-v_PDF_24-C-R0150/res-4516-v_0000_capa-capa_t24-C-R0150.pdf to http://purl.pt/13967/2/res-4516-v/res-4516-v_item2/res-4516-v_PDF/res-4516-v_PDF_24-C-R0150/res-4516-v_0000_capa-capa_t24-C-R0150.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/ladylever/collections/antinous.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:17, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Antinous. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100303232231/http://recherche.univ-montp3.fr/egyptologie/enim/index.php?page=cenim&n=1 to http://recherche.univ-montp3.fr/egyptologie/enim/index.php?page=cenim&n=1

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:05, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Anoos?
I'm not even trying to make a joke here. I was told somewhere that another spelling of this name is 'Anoos'. Maybe that was a joke? I don't know. Does anyone have any corroboration? --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 04:14, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

 * See section below ("Requested move 13 October 2020"). If Anoos was a significant alternate name, they would have discussed it. Threeorange (talk) 07:50, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 13 October 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved  (t · c)  buidhe  04:38, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Antinous → Antinoös – Antinoös is the proper translation of the name Ἀντίνοος. Antinoüs is also possible, as a Latinized form, but the present name "Antinous", is the worst of all worlds because, lacking a diaeresis, there's nothing to notify the reader that the two vowels at the end are not pronounced as a diphthong but as two separate sounds. This is mostly a typographic issue, but one where, unlike many published sources, we are not limited to avoiding diaereses by publishers' style guides which occasionally (and lazily) discard it. Indeed, Wikipedia guidance for Romanization of Greek recommends a diaeresis where such a one exists in Greek, as in this case.

These points were raised when the page Antinoöpolis was moved by consensus Talk:Antinoöpolis to its present name. The proposed change would also ensure uniformity not only with the Egyptian city where the youth was deified, but with articles with similarly doubled-omicron names, like Heroön, Boötes, Meröe, etc. In English-language academia the "-oös/-oos" is usually preferred to the Latinized "-oüs/-ous", and in either case the diaeresis going missing is an artefact of difficulties with printing with ink, a casual attitude to orthography, or an immersion in Italianate art-history, in which the Latinate "Antinous" is often used for statuary, etc. GPinkerton (talk) 18:47, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Survey

 * Support as nominator. GPinkerton (talk) 18:47, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Support "Antinoüs", as the more traditional form—English normally prefers Latinized Greek to direct transliteration of names. I checked Google Books for ngrams, and found that the current title is historically the most common, if not necessarily more correct without the diaeresis—difficulty with typesetting will have affected the occurrences.  Leaving the plain form out, "Antinoüs" is currently the most common, and historically was used at about the same frequency as "Antinoos", which I dislike for the same reason as the nominator, as well as the one I mentioned.  "Antinoös" is currently common, if less so than "Antinoüs", but hardly occurs in literature more than twenty years old.  Considering that 'u' spellings occur much more frequently overall and always have, "Antinoüs" would make more sense.  I note that the use of the 'u' is not inconsistent with the result at "Antinoöpolis", because "Antinoüpolis" is not a form that occurs in literature.  P Aculeius (talk) 19:40, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That's an Oppose then! Johnbod (talk) 19:55, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

 * Oppose per P Aculeius's well-argued case; I prefer the current name as the WP:COMMONNAME.  Obviously all should redirect & be bolded, which they are not at present.  Johnbod (talk) 19:55, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:USEENGLISH. We go by the most common name used in English sources, and that is the current title, as evidenced by the Google Ngrams. Rreagan007 (talk) 21:29, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

Discussion
pinging editors who contributed to the Antinoöpolis Request Move in January:,,. Also notifying WP:CGR
 * As usual with these topics, Ngram is emphatically not a good way of establishing the common name. How are you to distinguish this Antinous from the the other really famous one?GPinkerton (talk) 22:23, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Pretty sure whichever spelling we use should be the same for both—it's the same name and should be rendered the same way in English, unless practice clearly demonstrates otherwise. They'd need to be disambiguated some other way.  P Aculeius (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * That doesn't seem to be the case with such instances as Achilles and Achillius and Achilleus and Achilles and Achillios and Achillius and Achilleius. GPinkerton (talk) 23:15, 13 October 2020 (UTC)
 * But as I said, practice demonstrates otherwise. Each of these seems to be known primarily by a distinct variant in English.  "Antinous" and "Antinoüs" are interchangeable, and depend primarily on whether the writer is A) aware of the significance, B) easily able to produce the character, and C) willing to make the effort.  P Aculeius (talk) 01:42, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
 * In Wiki terms this one, with nearly 700 views daily, is much more famous than  Antinous of Ithaca (30 day avge 39 views), hence he gets the plain name, however it is spelled. Do you think the other should be moved?  Johnbod (talk) 14:36, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

"Critics"
The "Condemnation and Decline" section claims that Pausanias was a critic of the cult of Antinous, but the cited passages from him say nothing critical at all. It also claims that Lucian and Julian were critical, without giving any citation. Does anyone have corroboration for these claims? This seems to need a revision. --Uiscefada (talk) 21:37, 30 October 2021 (UTC)

Cause of death: suicide?
The part about his death lists several theories about his death, but suicide is not mentioned. While I might be expressing some modern (and layman) bias, I do find this rather peculiar—it sounds like the most obvious motivation for someone who is effectively a sex slave for the strongest man in the world, who is also about 35 years older than him. Is there no scholarship examining this? שונרא (talk) 23:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Roman sexuality
The article’s discussion of Roman sexuality, to say nothing of some of the comments on this talk page, need to be corrected and updated in light of the now-standard reference on the subject, Craig A. Williams’ Roman Homosexuality, 2nd ed. (New York: Oxford University Press, 2010). Antinoos69 (talk) 07:28, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * How should the article change? Furius (talk) 09:38, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Generally speaking, the current consensus, as reflected in Williams, is that male-male sex was in no way alien to the Romans, and class had little to do with that fact. So you can imagine the sorts of adjustments that need to be made, citing Williams. Antinoos69 (talk) 14:28, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * So, mostly the material discussed in the "Life of Hadrian" section? At the moment, that section discusses the chronological course of A & H's travels and discusses the nature of their relationship (largely on the basis of Lambert 1983). It seems to me that those two things should be separated and that the section on the discussion of their relationship should give some sense of how scholarly thought has developed and where there are differences of opinion or emphasis (this is far from my area of expertise, but I've definitely encountered post-2010 scholarship putting Hadrian and Antinous' relationship in the context of Hadrian's philhellenism and I see that C. Vout, Power and Eroticism in Imperial Rome 2007 takes the "Greekness" of the relationship as an open question). Further: I'm unclear on what the evidence is for H & A's relationship having been "controversial." The speculations about exactly how H & A's relationship had changed based on the depiction in the lion-hunt tondo seem odd to me. Furius (talk) 17:25, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm rather amazed that anyone could think that the article as it is suggests that 'male-male sex was alien to the Romans'. One point, re "If the statues have no pubic hair, it is just as likely that the artist thought clumps of hair were unattractive and either left them off or painted them in lightly after the sculpting was done as almost all Roman statues were painted" - or that A was represented as shaved, no? Johnbod (talk) 18:57, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I can see how "Such a societal institution of pederasty was not indigenous to Roman culture, although bisexuality was socially accepted in some of the upper echelons of Roman society by the early 2nd century." tends in that direction. Furius (talk) 20:23, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, but there's a lot going the other way. I did wonder which 2nd century was meant for a moment.... Johnbod (talk) 02:02, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Podcast
In June 2023 Hadrian and Antinous were the subject of the podcast The Rest is History by Tom Holland and Dominic Sandbrook. Sandbrook is a well-known British historian, author, columnist and television presenter. I think this podcast is notable and entirely reliable. 205.239.40.3 (talk) 13:33, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

What does “initiated” mean here?
''It was in Athens in September 128 that they attended the annual celebrations of the Great Mysteries of Eleusis, where Hadrian was initiated into the position of epoptes in the Telesterion. It is generally agreed, although not proven, that Antinous was also initiated at that time.'' What does this mean? BhamBoi (talk) 23:06, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

 * Look up the definition for "initiated". Unlimitedlead (talk) 23:08, 25 June 2023 (UTC)
 * When I first read the passage, I had missed the first sentence describing what he was initiated into, so was confused upon reading the word in its second instance. BhamBoi (talk) 23:40, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Antinous


text:
Toxin (character)

Toxin is a fictional character appearing in American comic books published by Marvel Comics. He has been depicted as a superhero and at times a supervillain. The character is the offspring of Carnage, the third major symbiote in the Marvel Universe, the ninth known to have appeared in the comics outside of the Planet of the Symbiotes storyline, and the first symbiote that Spider-Man considers an ally, despite several temporary alliances with Venom in the past. The Toxin symbiote's various hosts are former NYPD police officer Patrick Mulligan, Eddie Brock, and teenager Bren Waters.

Stephen Graham portrayed Detective Mulligan in the Sony's Spider-Man Universe films Venom: Let There Be Carnage and Venom: The Last Dance.

Fictional character biography
Carnage produced an offspring: a third symbiote. Carnage felt only dislike and hatred towards this new spawn, even before giving "birth" to it, both fearing that it could become much stronger, and being generally disgusted at the thought of giving birth. At the same time, Venom became aware that Carnage was "pregnant" and sought out Carnage to talk about this new symbiote. Carnage had resolved to kill this spawn as soon as it was born. Venom was doing the best to protect the new symbiote, with the intention of raising it to become a new partner. Venom was also concerned that, as the 1,000th symbiote of their line, the new symbiote could potentially become psychotic and violent because of genetic breakdown.

Patrick Mulligan
Patrick Mulligan was one of New York City's finest cops, yet troubled with various personal problems. His stressful job, along with the strain of his new family (his wife Gina was pregnant with their first son Edward) were taking their toll. One night while on duty, he came across the site where Carnage was giving birth to the new symbiote. Carnage, needing a host to hide the symbiote to keep it from Venom, bonded it to Mulligan. Carnage resolved to kill both Mulligan and the symbiote since they were not yet strong enough to manifest a super-powered costume like the Venom and Carnage symbiotes. Venom still hoped to use this new symbiote as a partner, and fought Carnage to a standstill to protect Mulligan and the symbiote, whom he christened Toxin, after himself. At first, Mulligan did not realize what had happened to him. Before long, the Toxin symbiote had matured enough to gain both conscious thought and the strength to form a symbiote costume on Mulligan's body. After Carnage attacked Gina and Edward at their home, Mulligan realized the Toxin symbiote was a danger to both himself and his family. During a subsequent confrontation between Venom, Carnage, and Toxin, Venom realized Mulligan was dedicated to a life of virtue, or as close as he could come under the symbiote's influence. When it became clear that Toxin was easily as strong as either of his predecessors, and was still growing, Venom and Carnage formed a temporary pact to destroy Toxin. Spider-Man stumbled into the final confrontation among the symbiote trio, and helped Toxin. After they fended off Venom and Carnage, Toxin had a conversation with Spider-Man, filling the latter in on what had happened. Spider-Man encouraged him, and Toxin resigned himself to a life of battling his base symbiote urges while trying to harness his power for good. He left his wife and child, and the police force, to try to come to terms with his new life.

In 2005, after Spider-Man joined the New Avengers, Marvel introduced a six-issue Toxin limited series, which followed Toxin's battles with various supervillains escaped from the Raft as a result of events at the beginning of The New Avengers series. The series also portrayed Mulligan's constant battle to keep the Toxin symbiote under control; as the host and symbiote minds had conversations and arguments with each other. Throughout the miniseries, he battled King Cobra, the Wrecker, Piledriver, and Razor Fist. At one point, trying to live with the Toxin symbiote became too much for Mulligan, who attempted suicide by throwing himself in front of a train. The Toxin symbiote intervened at the last moment, saving Mulligan and claiming that Mulligan did not really want to die. When Mulligan pressed the issue, it became clear that, unlike the Venom and Carnage symbiotes, Toxin is not sure it could survive on its own and find a new host. In the limited series, Razor Fist murdered Mulligan's father, but Toxin begins to show signs of a heroic behavior; he tracked Razor Fist down, but rather than slaughtering (as both the Toxin symbiote and Razor Fist himself urge), Toxin controls himself and turns Razor Fist over to the police. Mulligan reconciled with Gina by 'introducing' his estranged wife to the Toxin symbiote as a way of explaining why he walked out on his family. Mulligan and the Toxin symbiote co-operate peacefully with an agreement: Mulligan will be in complete control, if he allows Toxin two hours of "playtime" each night. But in those two hours, Toxin is not allowed to commit any acts of grand theft, arson, or homicide.

Mulligan is killed by Blackheart, resulting in the Toxin symbiote appearing in an underground lab in Las Vegas.

Eddie Brock
Afterwards, the Crime Master's underling Jack O'Lantern blackmails Venom into retrieving the Toxin symbiote. A fight with security personnel results in Jack O'Lantern taking the Toxin symbiote and fleeing. Blackheart is revealed to have bound pieces of the Toxin symbiote to clones of X-23, and also retained a small sample of the Toxin symbiote in a test tube because of needing an "alien's flesh" as an ingredient in a ritual to bring hell to Earth.

Along with Venom, Anti-Venom, Hybrid and his sister Scorn, Toxin is mentioned as being the next option to stop Carnage's rampage in the Midwest after the Avengers are defeated. However, the US military is unable to find Toxin, leaving it up to the hybrid symbiotes and Scorn to stop Carnage.

After killing Hybrid and Scream, Eddie Brock follows Venom into Crime Master's headquarters as part of his plan to destroy all symbiotes. During the ensuing fight between Venom and Crime Master's underlings, Crime Master locks Brock up and forcibly bonds him to the Toxin symbiote, making him the new Toxin. Brock joins the Savage Six to fight Venom, but is severely burned in the fight.

Eddie and the Toxin symbiote eventually track down Venom and discover a group of creatures called the "symbiote slayers" that are determined to destroy the symbiotes. Venom and Toxin have to team up to fight the "slayers". After this, Toxin agrees to leave Venom alone, and Brock as Toxin reclaims his title as the "lethal protector".

Brock and the Toxin symbiote appear once more in the All-New, All-Different Marvel miniseries Carnage, where Brock serves in a task force led by John Jameson, in hopes to entrap Carnage who was hidden in a mine-shaft. Toxin is considered "Plan B" to the force, and Brock's transformation into Toxin is manually controlled through a button. The Toxin symbiote's look has changed into resembling Agent Venom's, in which he sports red body armor. But at the end, Brock loses the suit.

Carnage has taken hold of the book known as the Darkhold, to resurrect Chthon, Eddie Brock ultimately sacrifices the Toxin symbiote in the final issue against Chthon.

Bren Waters
Toxin returns during the King in Black tie-in miniseries Planet of the Symbiotes. Toxin has now bonded with a new host, teenager Bren Waters, the son of the new Guardsman (Ozkar Waters); the two have a brief scuffle.

Powers and abilities
The Toxin symbiote possessed the special abilities of his two symbiote predecessors: he can stick to walls (which originally came from when Spider-Man was a host of the Venom symbiote), can change his identity to that of a completely different person, and also has unlimited webbing. With Patrick Mulligan as the host, Toxin is red from the abdomen up and black from the abdomen down. With Eddie Brock as the host, Toxin resembles a combination of Venom and Carnage but with the entire body red—light on the chest, and dark on the arms and lower body. Toxin can also blend in with his surroundings and become undetectable, an ability he gained from his grandfather Venom, and he can form solid weapons from his limbs, an ability first seen in his father Carnage. Toxin also seems to have some sort of quick-healing ability like his predecessors, as his wounds from his first battle with Razor Fist healed remarkably quickly. Unlike the others, Toxin can track anyone—not just other symbiotes or symbiote host—within the entire city of New York and possibly farther, as long as he has something to begin from.

Unlike many of the other symbiotes, Toxin did not try to take over the mind of his human host. Instead, the Toxin symbiote actually thinks and voices its opinions to the human host (as evidenced in Toxin's "Cut to the Chase" storyline). The Toxin symbiote usually speaks when the host is in his "human form", and acts very immature and childlike because of its nascent existence, once refusing to aid Pat in battle until he apologized for an earlier argument. In addition, he seems to have a stronger resistance to sonics and intense heat compared to Carnage, though this does not mean that Toxin is more resistant to violent urges: it can get carried away with violence and fighting crime, even if it is a petty crime. When he is not angry or fighting, Toxin is slim and smooth-lined, although still well muscled, closely resembling Carnage or Spider-Man's symbiote costume. When he becomes upset or aggressive, he grows into his much bigger and stronger form like Venom, with vicious fangs and long curving claws. The Toxin symbiote recently developed a venomous bite after bonding to Eddie.

Film

 * Patrick Mulligan appears in Venom: Let There Be Carnage (2021), portrayed by Stephen Graham. This version is a San Francisco Police Department detective who wears a hearing aid due to a past encounter with Frances Barrison while working as an officer. In the present, he attempts to use Eddie Brock to investigate Cletus Kasady, but is seemingly killed during a battle between the Venom and Carnage symbiotes and Barrison. However, he absorbs a piece of one of the symbiotes, which later revives him and causes his eyes to glow blue.
 * Graham will reprise the role in Venom: The Last Dance (2024).

Video games

 * The Patrick Mulligan incarnation of Toxin appears in Marvel: War of Heroes.
 * The Eddie Brock incarnation of Toxin appears as an alternate skin for Eddie Brock / Venom in Marvel Heroes.
 * The Toxin symbiote, renamed Carnom, appears as a playable character and boss in Lego Marvel Super Heroes 2. This version was created by Green Goblin 2099 using a shard of the Nexus of All Realities to fuse the Venom and Carnage symbiotes. Carnom is initially controlled by the Goblin, but he is defeated and freed by the heroes and starts chasing the Goblin in retaliation for his abuse.
 * The Patrick Mulligan and Eddie Brock incarnations of Toxin appear as playable characters in Spider-Man Unlimited.
 * The Bren Waters incarnation of Toxin appears as a playable character in Marvel: Future Fight.

Merchandise

 * The Patrick Mulligan and Eddie Brock incarnations of Toxin received figures in the Spider-Man Classics line.
 * The Patrick Mulligan incarnation of Toxin received a figure in the Marvel Heroclix line via the "Web of Spider-Man" sub-line.
 * The head and arm of the Toxin symbiote, packed with an Ultron figure, appear in Hasbro's "Marvel Mashers" line of figures.
 * The Patrick Mulligan incarnation of Toxin received a Marvel Fan Channel exclusive Marvel Legends figure.
 * Several accessories of Toxin have been produced, including a T-shirt.
 * Blankets and hats have also been produced, displaying the Patrick Mulligan incarnation of Toxin, but were mistakenly labelled as Carnage.

title: Toxin (character)


text: User talk:70.21.73.145

title: User talk:70.21.73.145


text:
Simplon

Simplon is the name of a region in the Alps, and can refer to:
 * Simplon Pass
 * Simplon Tunnel, close to the pass
 * Simplon (département), a former French département corresponding with modern Valais, Switzerland
 * Simplon, Valais, a Swiss municipality
 * Simplon (Paris Metro), a stop on the Paris Metro
 * Simplon, a farm and railway station in Namibia (see de:Simplon (Namibia))

title: Simplon


text:
Talk:Midnight Club

Untitled
Once there is more content added, get rid of the (br clear="all"/) code. I previewed it multiple times to get it to work! Or if anyone thinks it looks better removed, do so, but leave the infoboxes. Thunderbrand 22:00, May 4, 2005 (UTC)

Cleaned Up
I cleaned up basically the whole article, and added a summary of the series installments and a section on reception of the games. 174.110.168.148 (talk) 22:16, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Better In Mutiple Articles
Do it! and more info for gods sake!

go for it

 * Well, I'd say fill it with content first and think about splitting later. We don't need 3 or 4 new stubs. See Hitman (computer game) for an article about a cvg series which is loaded with content and noone yet suggested a split. Misza 13 T C 18:32, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, this is really in need of braking up into smaller articles. Stubs wouldn't hurt.  Stubs aren't needed on every version of the game.  Douglasr007 02:06, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Split sounds good to me. It's the way I've seen almost every other series.-Giant89 21:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Clean-up requested
There are many areas of this article that contain uncited/unorganized/awkwardly worded statements regarding various issues (bugs, popular areas of the game)

Edit from someone else: The comment in brackets about the Tokyo track for Midnight Club 3: Dub Edition Remix is incorrect. It implies that it is the same map as the one from Midnight Club 2, when it really isn't. There's a possibility the Midnight Club 2 track was used as a template, but numerous edits were made for Dub Edition Remix (for example, the industrial section where a lot of steel containers are scattered near a building that has a rectangular tunnel-like entrance is removed).

New Midnight Club name
Someone has to change that, it's not Brisbane, it's Los Angeles. someone's been fooling with it
 * You have the ability. M3Plus 02:35, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Wangan Midnight connection?
Comparing the Wangan Midnight logo to Midnight Club's previous one, they're way, way too similar to be a coincidence. Is there any kind of official connection between these two series or is Midnight Club's logo just a homage to/ripoff of Wangan Midnight? (Or are both logos derived from one used by the real Midnight Club?) Sengokucannon (talk) 17:35, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Midnight Club


text: User talk:67.68.36.121

title: User talk:67.68.36.121


text: Category:Canadian styles of music

title: Category:Canadian styles of music


text:
User talk:KingoftheDogs

Contact King of the Dogs at will for advice, review and/or general rhetoric about any Wikipedia related areas of discussion.

title: User talk:KingoftheDogs


text:
Lonestar

Lonestar (formerly known as Texassee) is an American country music group from Texas. The group consists of Drew Womack (lead vocals, acoustic guitar), Michael Britt (lead guitar, background vocals), Dean Sams (keyboards, acoustic guitar, background vocals), and Keech Rainwater (drums). Britt, Sams, and Rainwater co-founded the band in 1992 with original lead vocalist Richie McDonald and bass guitarist/vocalist John Rich. Rich exited the band in 1998 and went on to join Big Kenny as one-half of the duo Big & Rich. Since his departure, Lonestar has relied alternatingly on session and touring musicians for bass guitar accompaniment. McDonald exited the band in 2007 to record as a solo artist, and was replaced by former McAlyster vocalist Cody Collins before returning in 2011. McDonald left a second time in 2021 to join The Frontmen, with former Sons of the Desert lead vocalist Drew Womack replacing him.

Lonestar has charted more than 20 singles on the Hot Country Songs chart, including 9 that reached No. 1: "No News", "Come Cryin' to Me", "Amazed", "Smile", "What About Now", "Tell Her", "I'm Already There", "My Front Porch Looking In", and "Mr. Mom". "Amazed" also charted at No. 1 on the Billboard Hot 100, becoming the first country song to do so since "Islands in the Stream" in 1983. "Amazed" and "My Front Porch Looking In" were the top country songs of 1999 and 2003, respectively, on Billboard Year-End. The group has recorded seven albums, one EP, and a greatest hits package for the defunct BNA Records, and one album each for three different independent labels. Three of their albums have been certified platinum or higher by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). The band's first two albums were defined by honky-tonk and neotraditionalist country influences, but subsequent albums largely drew from country pop. Along with his work with the band, McDonald has co-written singles for Clay Walker, The Wilkinsons, Billy Dean, and Sara Evans, in addition to singing guest vocals on Mindy McCready's 1996 single "Maybe He'll Notice Her Now".

Foundation
Lonestar began in 1992 as a band named Texassee. This portmanteau name was derived from the fact that all five members were natives of Texas, and met in Nashville, Tennessee's Opryland USA theme park. The original lineup consisted of lead singer/rhythm guitarist Richie McDonald (Lubbock), lead guitarist Michael Britt (Fort Worth), drummer Randy "Keech" Rainwater (Plano), keyboardist/rhythm guitarist Dean Sams (Garland), and bass guitarist/lead and background vocalist John Rich (Amarillo). Before Lonestar's foundation, Rainwater and Britt were members of the group Canyon, which recorded two albums for the independent 16th Avenue Records and charted in the country top 40 with "Hot Nights" in 1989, as well as receiving a nomination from the Academy of Country Music Awards for Best New Vocal Duet or Group. Soon after foundation, Texassee changed its name to Lonestar. The band first played at a concert in Nashville in 1993 and signed to BNA Records in January 1995.

1995–96: Lonestar Live and Lonestar
Lonestar's first release for BNA was an extended play titled Lonestar Live, recorded at the Wildhorse Saloon in Nashville and issued in January 1995. Their debut single, "Tequila Talkin'", was released that August, peaking at No. 8 on the Billboard Hot Country Singles & Tracks (now Hot Country Songs) chart. It was included on their self-titled debut album, which was released that October. Its producers were Don Cook (best known for his work with Brooks & Dunn) and songwriter Wally Wilson, with whom Rich wrote the track "I Love the Way You Do That". Other contributing songwriters included former solo artists Bill LaBounty, Rick Vincent, and Larry Boone. The next single, "No News", became the band's first No. 1, holding that position for three weeks in April 1996. A physical single release of "Tequila Talkin'" and "No News" as a double A-side also went to No. 22 on Bubbling Under Hot 100 Singles. After these two songs, "Runnin' Away with My Heart" also went to No. 8 on the country charts. It was followed by "When Cowboys Didn't Dance" (co-written by McDonald), which failed to reach the top 40, and "Heartbroke Every Day", the only single to feature Rich on lead vocals, at No. 18. Both of these songs had previously appeared on the Lonestar Live EP. Their chart runs both overlapped with then-labelmate Mindy McCready's "Maybe He'll Notice Her Now" (from her debut album Ten Thousand Angels), which featured McDonald as a backing vocalist and peaked at No. 18 as well.

Lonestar was met with generally favorable reviews. Stephen Thomas Erlewine of Allmusic and Brian Wahlert of Country Standard Time both praised the band for having neotraditionalist country influences in their sound, with Wahlert also stating that the use of both Rich and McDonald on lead vocals gave the album "versatility". Rick Mitchell of New Country magazine was less positive, calling the band's sound "lite rock with a twang". In 1996, Lonestar won the Academy of Country Music award for Top New Vocal Group/Duet.

1997–98: Crazy Nights and departure of John Rich
Lonestar's sixth chart single was "Come Cryin' to Me", which Rich and Wilson co-wrote with "No News" co-writer Mark D. Sanders. The song became the band's second No. 1 single in August 1997, two months after the release of its corresponding album, Crazy Nights. As with Lonestar, it was produced by Wilson and Cook. The next single, "You Walked In", was co-written by rock producer and songwriter Robert John "Mutt" Lange. It peaked at number 12 on the country charts and became the band's first entry on the Billboard Hot 100, peaking at number 93. "Say When" and "Everything's Changed" followed it, with respective peaks at thirteen and two on the country music charts in 1998. The latter also went to number 95 on the Hot 100. Boone and Paul Nelson co-wrote both of these songs, collaborating with Rich on the former and McDonald on the latter. Also included on the album was a cover of Pure Prairie League's "Amie". Thom Owens gave the album a mixed review, saying that "Come Cryin' to Me" and the "Amie" cover were "solid", but criticizing the rest as "slick and bland".

Shortly after the release of "Everything's Changed", Rich left the band, as they and their advisors felt that having two lead singers would be confusing to fans. Late in 1998, Keith Harling charted with "Coming Back for You", a song which Rich co-wrote with Wilson. Rich later charted two solo singles for BNA between 2000 and 2001, and recorded an album for the label titled Underneath the Same Moon, although it was not released at the time. In 2003, Rich began recording with Big Kenny as the duo Big & Rich, in addition to serving as a songwriter and producer for other country artists.

1999–2002: Lonely Grill, This Christmas Time, and I'm Already There
After Rich departed from the band, the other four members began performing "unplugged" shows which included acoustic renditions of their songs. The band members also expressed a desire to "reinvent" their sound. They chose Dann Huff as their new producer, and added three members to their touring band: Robbie Cheuvront (bass guitar), Kurt Baumer (fiddle), and Jeremy Moyers (steel guitar).

Lonely Grill was released in 1999. Huff produced all of the album, except for an acoustic version of "Everything's Changed", which Sam Ramage and Bob Wright produced. In Rich's absence, Cheuvront and session musician Mike Brignardello (with whom Huff previously recorded in the rock band Giant) alternated as bassists on the album. Although lead-off single "Saturday Night" failed to make the Top 40, its followup "Amazed" spent eight weeks at number 1 on the country charts. It would later reach number 1 on the Billboard Hot 100 as well, becoming the first song to top both the Hot Country Songs and Hot 100 charts since Kenny Rogers and Dolly Parton's "Islands in the Stream" in 1983. The song also peaked at number 2 on the Hot Adult Contemporary Tracks chart. In addition, "Amazed" was the number-one song on the 1999 Billboard Year-End chart for the country music format.

All of the other singles from Lonely Grill ("Smile", "What About Now", and "Tell Her") reached the top of the country charts as well, and the album was certified double-platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America. Erlewine found the album an improvement over Crazy Nights due to its combination of pop and country influences. "Smile" also achieved its number 1 peak on Hot Country Songs the same week that "Amazed" topped the Hot 100, making for the first time in Billboard chart history that an act had held the number one position on two different charts with two different songs. "Amazed" was also released as a single in England following its success in the States. Also in this album's timespan, McDonald co-wrote Clay Walker's "She's Always Right" and The Wilkinsons' "Jimmy's Got a Girlfriend", which were respectively released in 1999 and 2000. He worked with "No News" co-writer Phil Barnhart and Ed Hill on the former, and "What About Now" co-writers Ron Harbin and Anthony L. Smith on the latter. "Amazed" also gave the band its first Country Music Association nominations, for Single of the Year and Group of the Year.

Lonestar's first Christmas album, This Christmas Time, was released in September 2000. It featured seven traditional Christmas songs, plus three original compositions: "If Every Day Could Be Christmas", "Reason for the Season", and the title track. The latter two songs were co-written by McDonald and Sams, respectively. The renditions of "Winter Wonderland", "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas", "Santa Claus Is Coming to Town", and "The Little Drummer Boy" included on this album all made the country charts in late 2000 based on Christmas airplay. Allmusic criticized the album as "an unfortunately slick and forgettable collection of holiday tunes, cloyingly done in a soulless pop-country style."

I'm Already There, Lonestar's fourth album, was released in 2001. The same year, the band won the Country Music Association's award for Vocal Group of the Year. Serving as the lead single was the album's title track, which McDonald wrote with Gary Baker and Frank J. Myers. The song was inspired by McDonald's son, Rhett. It spent six weeks at number 1 on the country charts between June and July 2001, in addition to reaching number 24 on the Hot 100 and number 2 on the Adult Contemporary charts. After it, "With Me" peaked at number 10, "Not a Day Goes By" reached number 3, and the Mark McGuinn-penned "Unusually Unusual" went to number 12. The album received a platinum certification. Maria Konicki Dinoia of Allmusic compared the album favorably to the ballads on Lonely Grill, also praising McDonald's "vocal prowess." Alanna Nash of Entertainment Weekly was less favorable, saying that Huff's production was "generic". Also in 2001, the band announced a 30-date international tour with Jamie O'Neal and Blake Shelton.

2003–05: From There To Here: Greatest Hits and Let's Be Us Again
BNA released Lonestar's first greatest hits package, From There to Here: Greatest Hits, in 2003. Three new songs were recorded for this album: "My Front Porch Looking In" (written by McDonald, Myers, and Don Pfrimmer), a cover of Marc Cohn's "Walking in Memphis", and "I Pray". The first two of these were both released as singles; "My Front Porch Looking In" went to number 1 and became the top country hit of 2003 on the Billboard Year-End charts, while the "Walking in Memphis" cover peaked at number 8.

Let's Be Us Again was released in May 2004. This album produced three singles, all co-written by McDonald. The title track was the first, reaching number 4 on the country charts in mid-2004. "Mr. Mom" followed it, becoming their final number 1 by the end of the year. After it, "Class Reunion (That Used to Be Us)" peaked at number 16 in early 2005. Huff produced the entire album except for the closing track "Somebody's Someone", which the band produced by itself; although never released as a single, this song charted at number 53 on the country charts in mid-2004 due to unsolicited airplay. Also included on this album was "Let Them Be Little", co-written by McDonald and Billy Dean. Dean recorded his own version of the song for his 2005 album of the same name for Curb Records, and his version peaked at number 8 on the country charts in early 2005. Another track on Let's Be Us Again, "From There to Here", featured a guest vocal from Alabama lead singer Randy Owen. Erlewine praised the album for containing more up-tempo songs than its predecessors. Jeffrey B. Remz was less favorable, writing in Country Standard Time that "everything tends to have the same typical anthemic feel making it all sound so radio ready."

2005–06: Coming Home
Coming Home followed in 2005. For this album, McDonald noted that Huff had told the band that he "didn't want to produce us anymore", so McDonald began searching for a new producer. In doing so, he purchased fifteen different albums at a Walmart to help in seeking a new producer, and chose Justin Niebank after hearing a demo that he produced for another group called BrittonJack. On July 19, 2005, Lonestar previewed the album at Sony Music Nashville's offices, accompanied by Moyers, Cheuvront, fiddler Rob Tyler, and BrittonJack member Jack Sizemore, who also co-wrote the track "Doghouse" on it. Only two singles were released from this album: "You're Like Comin' Home", which reached number 8, and "I'll Die Tryin'", which became their first single since "Saturday Night" to peak outside the top 40. Both of these songs were co-written by songwriter and producer Jeremy Stover, and both were previously recorded by Canadian country band Emerson Drive on their 2004 album What If? Erlewine wrote in Allmusic that Coming Home was a "perfectly dull set of songs of happy homes." Michael Sudhalter of Country Standard Time noted the presence of ballads comparable to the preceding albums, but also felt that most of the other content was comparable to the band's debut album.

In early 2006, Sara Evans released the single "Coalmine" from her album Real Fine Place, which McDonald co-wrote with Roxie Dean and Ron Harbin. At a December 2006 concert in Corpus Christi, Texas, McDonald was unavailable while recovering from back surgery, so Josh Gracin sang lead vocals in his absence.

2006–11: Mountains, Party Heard Around the World, and departure of Richie McDonald
Mountains was the band's final album for BNA. Released in late 2006, it was produced by Mark Bright, whose other production credits include Blackhawk, Rascal Flatts, and Carrie Underwood. Its title track, co-written by Larry Boone, went to number 10 on the country charts, while followup "Nothing to Prove" peaked at 51. Erlewine criticized the band for taking "fewer risks than ever" on the album. Billboard writer Ken Tucker praised the album for containing positive messages in the singles, while also noting the use of vocal harmony and country-rock instrumentation. Jeff Lincoln of Country Standard Time criticized some of the songs for overly "sensitive" lyrics, but felt that "Always in the Band", a song about a singer attempting to balance his career and family life, was "personal".

In March 2007, Lonestar was dropped from BNA's roster due to declining sales. Guitarist Michael Britt attributes the group's commercial downfall in the mid-2000s to the label's choices in singles, saying in an interview with CMT, "I think we painted ourselves into a corner... They started putting out a bunch of family-type songs. I think that really pigeonholed us. The majority of the band didn't really want to continue doing that same thing. But that's what kept getting put out." McDonald also announced that he would be leaving the group at the end of 2007 to begin a solo career. Cody Collins, who had previously been the lead singer of the band McAlyster in 2000, was confirmed as his replacement. Lonestar's first release with Collins as lead singer was the 2007 Christmas music compilation titled My Christmas List, available exclusively at the restaurant and gift shop chain Cracker Barrel. Dan MacIntosh of Country Standard Time reviewed this album favorably, calling Collins' voice a "comfortable fit" while also praising the variety of arrangements given to traditional Christmas carols on the album.

McDonald also released a Christmas album in late 2007, titled If Every Day Could Be Christmas. It was followed a year later by I Turn to You, a contemporary Christian music album released via Stroudavarious Records (later known as R&J Records). After this album, he had two chart singles in 2009, both peaking at number 51: "How Do I Just Stop" and "Six Foot Teddy Bear". The former appeared on his third solo album, Slow Down, which was released via Loremoma in 2010.

The group's first single to feature Collins on lead vocals was "Let Me Love You", which was released in early 2008 on Saguaro Road Records. It is the first single from the album Party Heard Around the World, released on April 27, 2010, and produced by the band itself. A review in Country Standard Time criticized Collins' vocals as being too similar to those of Keith Urban, while also saying that it had "[a] lot of songs about love, life and relationships. The usual clichés you find in today's pop-country." Erlewine found little difference in the band's sound following the change to Collins, saying that "they're still gunning for a wide audience because commercialism simply is in their bones. The Lonestar name means nothing if the band isn't big, slick, and crowd-pleasing."

2011–2021: Life As We Know It and Never Enders
Collins left in 2011 and McDonald returned to the group. To honor both his rejoining and the band's 20th anniversary, they began an international tour in 2012. Their first single after his rejoining was "The Countdown", released via 4 Star Records. It peaked at number 52 on the country charts in late 2012. The song is included on an album titled Life as We Know It, released on June 4, 2013. Erlewine was mixed toward the album's content, writing in Allmusic that it was "filled with bright, shiny songs about romance...infused with a genial fondness for everything that comes their way...All this sounds sweet enough in theory, but in execution, the calculation is a bit too apparent." Henry L. Carrigan Jr. of Country Standard Time wrote that it "is all about singing it loud, with one song barely distinguishable from another musically or thematically".

In 2014, duo Haley & Michaels released "Just Another Love Song", which they wrote with McDonald. The song contains lyrical references to "Amazed", and features McDonald singing its chorus. Never Enders, Lonestar's tenth album, came out in 2016. The album's lead single and title track was delivered to country radio on March 17. Never Enders was released and distributed through Shanachie Entertainment on April 29. Erlewine was more positive toward this album than its predecessors, noting that "The songs may not be grabbers, but they're sturdy, melodic constructions given a lift by an enveloping, polished production that effectively softens the rougher edges of McDonald's voice; he's hardly gravelly, but he is nicely weathered." The album received a mixed review from Lincoln, who found some of the songwriting formulaic but also praised the melody of the title track and McDonald's singing voice.

2021–present: Richie McDonald's second departure
On March 5, 2021, McDonald announced that he would again be departing Lonestar to pursue a career as a member of The Frontmen, which also consists of former Little Texas lead singer Tim Rushlow and Restless Heart lead singer Larry Stewart. McDonald was succeeded by Drew Womack, the former lead singer of Sons of the Desert, as Lonestar's new lead vocalist. In 2023, the band announced they would begin a new tour with Womack and would also release a new album titled Ten to 1. This album will feature all of the band's greatest hits re-recorded with Womack's vocals. The first such re-recording, of "Amazed", was issued in March 2023.

Musical style
Early on, the band's sound drew from honky-tonk and neotraditional country influences, but shifted more toward a country pop sound with subsequent albums. Erlewrine noted in a review of Let's Be Us Again that "Toward the end of the '90s, Lonestar decided to move firmly into the mainstream of contemporary country, leaving behind any hardcore country influences they may have had in favor of sweet anthemic ballads and poppy country-rockers." He had previously compared their debut album to Merle Haggard and George Jones, while a review of the same in Country Standard Time said that the band seemed "very similar to Shenandoah — energetic and fun, but not spectacular." The same review praised the same album for having "clever wordplay" on "No News" and prominent fiddle and steel guitar on "Runnin' Away with My Heart". Allmusic writer Thom Owens found the second album "veering toward smooth, Eagles-influenced contemporary country". Of Lonely Grill, Erlewine also stated that "Lonestar began as a fairly straight-ahead country band, indebted to pure honky tonk. With their second record, they moved themselves toward pop and, ironically, it didn't pay off in great dividends, even if it spawned a Top 10 single. For their third album, Lonely Grill, they take a middle ground, moving back toward hardcore country while retaining elements of the pop sheen of Crazy Nights." That album's "Amazed" also became a popular choice for fans to play at their weddings, while also becoming their first song to enter Adult Contemporary playlists.

Dinoia noted that I'm Already There continued to emphasize the band's focus on "passionate ballads" as exemplified by "Amazed", while Jeffrey B. Remz of Country Standard Time described the same album's sound as "satisfactory music that is squarely in the country light category, but never really goes beyond that." He also noted in a review of Let's Be Us Again that the "big sound" achieved on that album and the ones immediately before it was the result of Huff's production style. For the Coming Home album, the band members said that they wanted to achieve a sound with more "edge" and less influenced by such ballads. As is typical of country music bands, most of their albums featured session musicians instead of having the individual members play most of the instruments themselves. New Country magazine's review of their debut album criticized the band's sound for this reason, while Andrew W. Griffin of Country Standard Time also noted the effect on the band's overall sound: "McDonald's voice made Lonestar. It's a good voice. Full of passion and country-embracing enthusiasm. As for his band mates, Lonestar relied way too much on sidemen to have developed a discernible sound of their own."

Television appearances
McDonald competed on one episode of the television game show Wheel of Fortune recorded at the Grand Ole Opry house in Nashville and aired in February 2003. The episode was part of a special week that paired contestants with country music singers, who made donations to charity equivalent to their respective contestants' winnings. For his episode, McDonald donated to Habitat for Humanity. All four members of Lonestar appeared on separate episodes of the same game show that aired in February 2007, during another week with identical gameplay and payouts. McDonald and Britt both won the bonus round, respectively donating $61,000 for St. Jude Children's Research Hospital and $59,350 for Adopt-a-Platoon, while Sams and Rainwater won $10,000 each for charities. The group also appeared on The Price Is Right, serving as the house band on the episode that aired June 17, 2010. They performed the show's theme song, along with a sample of songs from Party Heard Around the World.

Personnel

 * Current members
 * Drew Womack - lead vocals, acoustic guitar (2021-present)
 * Michael Britt (born June 15, 1966) - electric guitar, acoustic guitar, background vocals (1992–present)
 * Dean Sams (born August 3, 1966) - keyboards, acoustic guitar, harmonica, background vocals (1992–present)
 * Randy "Keech" Rainwater (born January 24, 1963) - drums (1992–present)

 * Former members
 * Richie McDonald (born February 6, 1962) - lead vocals, acoustic guitar, keyboards (1992–2008, 2011–2021)
 * John Rich (born January 7, 1974) - bass guitar, lead and background vocals (1992–1998)
 * Cody Collins (born June 1, 1984) - lead vocals, acoustic guitar (2008–2011)

 * Current touring musicians
 * Robby Wilson- bass guitar, vocals

 * Former touring musicians
 * Kurt Baumer - fiddle
 * Robbie Cheuvront - bass guitar
 * Jeremy Moyers - steel guitar

Albums

 * Lonestar (1995)
 * Crazy Nights (1997)
 * Lonely Grill (1999)
 * I'm Already There (2001)
 * Let's Be Us Again (2004)
 * Coming Home (2005)
 * Mountains (2006)
 * Party Heard Around the World (2010)
 * Life as We Know It (2013)
 * Never Enders (2016)

 * Number-one singles (Billboard Hot Country Songs)
 * "No News" (1996)
 * "Come Cryin' to Me" (1997)
 * "Amazed" (1999)
 * "Smile" (1999)
 * "What About Now" (2000)
 * "Tell Her" (2000-2001)
 * "I'm Already There" (2001)
 * "My Front Porch Looking In" (2003)
 * "Mr. Mom" (2004)

title: Lonestar