text:
Talk:Misha

Untitled
Only the coolest girl in the world, ever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.221.0.178 (talk • contribs)

Misha is not a girl, if that´s what you mean. However, Misha is the best olympic mascot ever. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.24.216.10 (talk • contribs)

I used to read the magazine when I was a kid - any links to their publication house? I wonder if they are still in business. The last issue I saw of Misha magazine was in 1987. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.161.74.241 (talk • contribs)

For me, the section "Origines of the name Misha" has nothing to do with the subject of the article. I think, it should be deleted or moved somewhere else--83.237.108.148 05:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

The article starts: "Misha (Миша) is the name of the Russian Bear and the Iranian goat, ..." I don't understand what "the Iranian goat" (?) has to do with it 193.164.229.102 12:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

A few things:

1. "Михаил Потапыч Топтыгин in full" - wrong. Михаил Потапыч Топтыгин is a typicall name of a Russian fairy tale bear. However the olympic mascot bear does not have a full name.

2. It is necessary to explain to English speakers that Misha is a male name in Russian.

3. The mascot is widely known and refered to as Mishka or "the Olympic Mishka", not just "Misha". If no one replies to this in a month I'll edit the article. Might want as well to rename it to "Oympic Mishka" --68.7.86.218 (talk) 02:27, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * This bear goes by "Olympic mishka". Not "Mishka" with capital, not "Misha" or "misha", cz it's not a name. The fact that term mishka meaning bear is somehow related to name Mikhail/Mishka/Misha is totally irrelevant in context of Olympic mishka (read Olympic bear). Olympic bear doesnt have a name, so article shuld be name "Olympic mishka", not "Misha" or "Mishka". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.21.11.95 (talk) 21:00, 15 November 2018 (UTC)

"Михаил Потапыч Топтыгин in full" is right. The article explains that both "Misha" (or "Mishka") and "Михаил Потапыч Топтыгин" are traditional Russian folk names for the bear, and "Misha" is viewed by Russians as the diminutive of "Mihail Potapovich Toptygin" (in "Mihail" the letters "a" and "i" are pronounced separately, in "Toptygin" "g" sounds like in "give". The Olympic Mishka's name doesn't have a full form, really; but the point is that for a Russian it REFERS to the bear's traditional full folk nickname. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.146.246.9 (talk) 21:08, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Misha. 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/20071125180428/http://olympic-museum.de/mascot/mascot1980.htm to http://olympic-museum.de/mascot/mascot1980.htm

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) 03:21, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Misha


text:
User:Daderot

Hello world.

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

title: User:Daderot


text:
Sometimes They Come Back... Again

Sometimes They Come Back... Again is a 1996 film directed by Adam Grossman and starring Michael Gross, Alexis Arquette, and Hilary Swank. It is the straight-to-video sequel to the 1991 horror film Sometimes They Come Back.

Plot
Psychologist Jon Porter learns that his mother has just mysteriously fallen to her death. Jon and his teenage daughter Michelle return to Jon's hometown of Glenrock for his mother's funeral. Once there, painful memories return. Thirty years earlier, when Jon was a child, he witnessed the brutal murder of his older sister Lisa, who was stabbed to death in a cave by a greaser named Tony Reno and his two friends Vinnie and Sean, who were attempting a demonic ritual which Jon stopped by throwing an electrical wire into a puddle of bloody water they were standing in, killing all three of them.

Michelle becomes friends with mentally handicapped gardener Steve, as well as two girls, boy-crazy Maria, and Maria's psychic best friend, Jules, who used to clean her grandmother's house. The night after the funeral, they invite Michelle to go to the diner with them, saying they would like to get to know her before she goes home for her 18th birthday. At the diner, the girls are greeted by a boy who looks a lot like Tony Reno, even with the same name. While Maria develops a crush on him, he seems to be attracted to Michelle. He gives Michelle an old pocket watch as an early birthday present, then leaves.

Meanwhile, Jon is pestered by Father Archer Roberts, a priest he came to when Lisa was murdered. He tells Jon his mother's death was not an accident.

It is revealed that Tony is the same thug that killed his sister and also killed his mother in order to bring himself back from the dead. Tony kills Steve with his lawnmower and uses his body parts to perform a ritual in order to bring Vinnie back. At the diner, Vinnie pretends to scare Tony away, making Maria fall in love with him. While they're making out in the forest, Vinnie turns into a Demon and kills Maria in order to use her body parts to bring Sean back. Jules, whose psychic abilities upset Tony, while searching for Maria is taken to a dam by Tony, Vinnie and Sean, who were disguised as the Sheriff and her deputies. Tony kills Jules by slashing her with her own tarot cards. Father Roberts is later killed by Tony while trying to do a ritual to banish Tony and his friends back to Hell and Michelle is kidnapped in order to be used in Tony's ritual.

In the end, Jon reenacts the events of the murder of Lisa but saves Michelle and is able to use Father Roberts' ritual to banish Tony and his friends back to Hell. Sometime later, Jon is having a session with one of his patients and suddenly has a hallucination with Tony but quickly returns to normal.

After the credits, Tony re-appears in Jon's office to announce that he's back.

Cast

 * Michael Gross as Jon Porter
 * Michael Malota as young Jon Porter
 * Alexis Arquette as Tony Reno
 * Hilary Swank as Michelle Porter
 * Bojesse Christopher as Vinnie Ritacco
 * Glen Beaudin as Sean Patrick
 * Jennifer Elise Cox as Jules Martin
 * Jennifer Aspen as Maria Moore
 * W. Morgan Sheppard as Father Archer Roberts
 * Gabriel Dell Jr. as Steve Pagel
 * Leslie Danon as Lisa Porter

Sequel
The video was followed by another straight-to-video sequel in 1998 titled, Sometimes They Come Back... for More.

title: Sometimes They Come Back... Again


text:
Old Rope

Old Rope is a compilation album by British folk metal band Skyclad, composed of tracks from the band's first five albums.

Track listing

 * 1) "The Widdershins Jig"
 * 2) "Skyclad"
 * 3) "Spinning Jenny"
 * 4) "Alone in Death's Shadow"
 * 5) "Thinking Allowed?"
 * 6) "The Wickedest Man in the World"
 * 7) "Earth Mother, the Sun and the Furious Host"
 * 8) "Cardboard City"
 * 9) "Land of the Rising Slum"
 * 10) "The One Piece Puzzle"
 * 11) "Just What Nobody Wanted"
 * 12) "Brothers Beneath the Skin"
 * 13) "The Present Imperfect"
 * 14) "The Cradle Will Fall"
 * 15) "The Declaration of Indifference"
 * 16) "Ring Stone Round"
 * 17) "Men of Straw"

title: Old Rope


text:
Supreme Court of Tasmania

The Supreme Court of Tasmania is the highest State court in the Australian State of Tasmania. Together with the Magistrates Court, it forms the judiciary in Tasmania. In the Australian court hierarchy, the Supreme Court of Tasmania is in the middle level, with both an appellate jurisdiction over lower courts, and decisions made by Court to be heard on appeal by the High Court of Australia.

The ordinary sittings of the Court occur in Hobart, Launceston and Burnie in Tasmania. The Court's Appeal division sits only in Hobart.

History of the Court
The Supreme Court of Van Diemen's Land (as Tasmania was then known) was established by The Royal Letters Patent of 13 October 1823 and commenced activities on 10 May 1824. The Court is the oldest Supreme Court in Australia and predates the Supreme Court of New South Wales, if only by a period of just ten days. The supreme courts of Tasmania and New South Wales were initiated through the New South Wales Act 1823, and this gave those courts jurisdiction over New Zealand. Sir John Pedder, after whom Lake Pedder is named, was the first Chief Justice of the court.

The first counsel to appear before the Court was Joseph Tice Gellibrand, who was appointed Tasmania's first Attorney-General, and took his oaths on the first day of the new Court. The first case before the Court was the trial of William Tibbs, who was found guilty and sentenced for manslaughter, receiving 3 years transportation.

Jurisdiction of the Court
It has unlimited jurisdiction within the state in civil matters and hears the most serious criminal matters. It is around the middle of the Australian court hierarchy. The Supreme Court consists of a Trial Division (also known as Original Jurisdiction) and an Appeal Division (or Appellate Jurisdiction). When sitting in its appellate jurisdiction in civil matters it is the "Full Court"; for criminal matters it is the "Tasmanian Court of Criminal Appeal".

Appeals from the Appeal Division of the Court are to the High Court of Australia. It was previously possible to appeal decisions of the Court of Appeal or the Court of Criminal Appeal (both parts of the Appeal Division) to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London, but this ceased in 1986 when the Parliament of Australia passed the Australia Act 1986, which terminated all such appeals to the Privy Council from Australian courts, except for those cases pending at that time.

Civil matters involving consent orders, or for disputes involving less than $50,000, are dealt with by the Magistrates Court except in exceptional circumstances.

The Court receives appeals from Magistrate Courts in Tasmania in both criminal and civil matters. Committal proceedings, which are used in criminal matters to establish whether there is sufficient evidence against an accused person to warrant the time and expense of a trial, were abolished in Tasmania in 2000 with the amendment of the Justices Act 1959 (Tas). The Justices Act 1959 now provides that where there has been a plea of not guilty by an accused, there must be an order committing them for trial in the Supreme Court.

Unlike some other Australian states, Tasmania does not have an intermediate court division between the Supreme Court and the Magistrates Courts (such as a "District Court" or a "County Court").

Composition of the Court
The Supreme Court of Tasmania is composed of up to seven judges appointed by the Governor on the advice of the Executive Council, a body of senior ministers including the state Premier. the judges of the Supreme Court of Tasmania are:

The Associate Judge, a lower-ranking judicial officer previously called the Master, has responsibility for largely procedural matters in civil and criminal proceedings, and for some work in assessing the damages (amounts claimable) in civil proceedings.

title: Supreme Court of Tasmania


text:
Nicolò Brancaleon

Nicolò Brancaleon (c.1460 – after 1526) was a painter born in Venice, who adopted the art style in Ethiopia from the reign of Baeda Maryam onwards. During his lifetime in Ethiopia, he was commonly called "Marqorewos".

Evidence of his life before arriving in Ethiopia has not been found, according to Paul B. Henze. E. A. Wallis Budge, in his preface to the second edition of his translation of the Kebra Nagast, claims that Brancaleon was a monk who had come to Ethiopia to convert Emperor Zara Yaqob and debated Abba Giyorgis several times on religious matters; (Wallis Budge may have misremembered James Bruce's statement about Abba Giyorgis's opponent in that religious debate, "We are not informed of the name of Abba George's antagonist, but he is thought to have been a Venetian painter, who lived many years after in Abyssinia, and, it is believed, died there"—explicitly identifying him as Brancaleon in a footnote. ) Francisco Álvares, who met Brancaleon while accompanying the Portuguese ambassador on his mission to Lebna Dengel in the 1520s, wrote that "they say he was a monk before he came to this country".

Brancaleon arrived in Ethiopia between 1480 and 1482, according to an account of Francesco Suriano, who had visited the country, written in the latter year. When he arrived at the court of the Emperor (who was at the time encamped at Barar, which O.G.S. Crawford located to the southwest of modern Addis Ababa), Suriano found 14 Europeans residing at the court, among whom was "Master Nicolo Branchalion".

By the time Álvares met Brancaleon, the painter was very wealthy and well known in Ethiopia — although forbidden by the Emperor to ever leave the country. By this time, he had founded a studio and was unchallenged in his skill at painting icons, illustrating books, and decorating churches. "Brancaleon's images of the martyrdom of Saint George and of the miracles of the Virgin Mary remained fashionable until the eighteenth century."

His best known work was a painting of the Madonna and Child that decorated the church of Atronsa Maryam, which caused much controversy. Beckingham and Huntingford, in their notes to their translation of Álvares account, repeat the account from the Paris Chronicle that Brancaleon's work

 * gave great offense to the Ethiopians because the Child was held in His Mother's left arm, the left being considered to be of lower status than the right. (But there are many Ethiopian pictures in which the Child is carried in the left arm, and it may be that in this case He was really shown in the right arm, which seen from the front might be described as the "left".)

The painting, however, survived for several centuries until it was destroyed in 1704, along with the church, by an Oromo raid.

In 1973, the traveller Diana Spencer discovered some examples of Brancaleon's works at Wafa Yesus and at the nearby monastery of Getisamani in the Goncha Gorge, including a work by a previously unknown Ethiopian apprentice. Henze reports that he and Stanislaw Chojnacki verified that these works survived the Derg era. "Though much has been learned about Ethiopian religious art in recent decades, it is still a challenging field where important new discoveries are likely to be made."

Brancaleon is one of the few 15th century artists from Ethiopia whose name is known, in addition to ethiopian painter  Fere Seyon

title: Nicolò Brancaleon


text:
Talk:Sue Thomas: F.B.Eye

old comments
We just recieved word that the show is returning...on Animal Planet!! I think it will first be reruns, then if the show gets decent ratings Animal Planet might sponsor new episodes! So guys, spread the word! Thumbsprint (talk) 22:06, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

The show is listed on TV Tome as being "Canceled/Ended." PAX has not, at least to my knowledge, released any official information about the reason it was canceled. I'm assuming it was canceled as the storyline ended far too abruptly to have been planned this way. DOC was canceled last year because the "international distributor pulled funding" (according to PAX)--perhaps Sue Thomas met a similar fate?

The last frame at the end of the season finale said, "The End...For Now." Perhaps there are plans to recreate the series under a different name or on a different network...

cluth 02:47, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't know. It's been almost 2 years since the show ended; so if they want to do it before everybody gets tied up in other (possibly long-term) projects, they had better hurry. WAVY 10 00:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Needs Updating
This article needs to be updated with information from season 4, and with info on the ending. I can do a section on the ending but am not as familiar with all of the plot details of the last season. Also still needs some minor cleanup for incomplete sentences & such. --Hetar 18:30, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

The Main Team
No offense, but I cannot read this section without cringing. This is probably because most of it is mere opinion, probably violating WP:NOR and WP:NPOV. This section needs to be rewritten and cleaned up. Obviously, the description of Myles is accurate in that he thinks highly of himself, but the sections on Jack, Bobby, and others are just... blah. EdGl 04:22, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Volunteering for cleanup
So it wasn't only me that read through this once and thought "we're not a little biased toward certain characters, are we?" I'd be happy to help clean up. I did a little spell-checking and added a fact here or there...

I found redeeming qualities, along with some very real human failings, in all of the characters on the show. My only complaint ever was that the writers didn't take advantage of that.

Anyway - if I can help, I'd sure like to.

And yes, STFBE did lose its funding, just like Doc. It's my understanding that it took some fan-pleading just to get the last three or four episodes. The Johnson Brothers continue to say that they have not given up the idea of STFBE entirely, but if it is ever resurrected, it will likely not be with the same cast. Just too much time has passed. (JMHO, not fact)

Red Pen 05:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Incorrect Info in article opening
Sue Thomas, in real life, was NEVER a Special Agent for the FBI. She was an Investigative Analyst, something VERY different. Even though the show occasionally called her "Agent," she was strictly a surveillance specialist and never did a tenth of the stuff portrayed on the show, in terms of "action."

I would fix it, but don't know how, since an "edit" is not offered in that section.Red Pen 16:53, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Also... pic problem...
The image that is up for this show has been cut off - and one cast member, Ted Atherton, is missing from the picture. I do not know how to fix this, either.Red Pen 16:55, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Never Mind...
I found what I was looking for in both previous comments. Red Pen 17:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Preview Ads
In the weeks leading up to the series premier, PAX ran quite a major ad campaign. Most of the ads were general preview stuff and in keeping with the general feel of the show, but I remember one particular series which consisted soley of the line, "She Doesn't Know the Devil... but the Devil Knows Her". Does anyone else remember this? Does anyone have any clue what this was all about...? Thanks... Korossyl 04:49, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Cultural significance
In the section about the show's cultural significance it incorrectly states that Sue Thomas was the first deaf lead character to have a regular job. However in 1991 Marlee Matlin played a deaf Assitant District Attorney a lead character on a show called Reasonable Doubts. This would actually be the first time a deaf lead character had a "regular job". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhshoula (talk • contribs) 22:57, August 3, 2006 (UTC)
 * The article does not claim it is the first, only that it is one of the "only" to do so. --  Sarrandúin  [ Talk +  Contribs  ] 02:19, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Jack - a lawyer?
Does anyone have documented evidence that Jack Hudson was a lawyer? I know that he played one on The Kiss, but he was undercover, assuming one of his friend's identities. I never remember him being referred to as a lawyer. E. Novachek (talk) 21:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Question about Sue Thomas (character)
I just watched a rerun of this show: A Blast from the Past, Season 1, Episode 5. Since I don't know what's going on, I thought I'd ask here. Is the character Sue Thomas totally deaf? Partially deaf? Cochlear implant?

The episode and time frame is 2002 or earlier.

1. Early in the episode, Sue Thomas says that she will take a call from an informant who called for someone else who was unavailable (Gans?). Was there technology available in pre-2002 for a deaf person to "hear" a phone call from someone not using specialized equipment (teletype, etc.)? How did Sue "hear" the informant, Dugan, on the phone call? Even if her personal desk phone was specially equipped, voice to text wasn't very good back then. How did she "hear" the informant?

2. Towards the end of the episode, at the hotel, Sue is using her cell phone to communicate with the other agents about the hostage situation. There is something attached to her cell phone, but I can't tell what it is. She speaks into her phone when held to her face (ear) and also from a distance, as in speakerphone mode. How did Sue communicate by sell phone with her colleagues? (They were not texting, they were speaking.)

TV shows and movies have to take STEM shortcuts. I'm OK with that. I'm just wondering about Sue Thomas's hearing ability and the technologies available in 2002. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdderUser (talk • contribs) 09:36, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Episodic Descriptions
The episodic descriptions are basically definitions of the titles not a quick synopsis of the episodes. I have updated season one. I will update the rest as time allows.Telymanbws (talk) 20:51, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sue Thomas: F.B.Eye


text:
Talk:Wilhelm Steinitz

Tap dancing
I would revert but I don't think that statement was true either. 130.63.18.225 made the edits about tap dancing and was reverted by 172.176.128.120. Unless evidence can be brought that he tapdanced I suggest we leave the new edits be. Falphin 02:48, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Contradiction
The article states that Steinitz didn't earn money playing chess. However, it also says that Lasker was very keen to keep the championship title to avoid poverty. Shouldn't it be explained why Steinitz got no money and Lasker tried to earn all his money from Chess? The current wording is confusing. MJGR 09:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The simplest answer is: Lasker was not Steinitz, and his business ability was better. Just because he has seen Steinitz' fate, Lasker wanted more money for play and knew that the champ title helps him in it.--Ioannes Pragensis 10:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Steinitz/God
The "story" has often been told that Steinitz claimed to be able to win a match at odds with God or that he claimed to have actually played a match with God. (There is more than one version of this legend.) However, nobody has ever found a record of such a story before the Reuben Fine book on the psychology of the chessplayer. This book was written decades after the death of Steinitz by an author who made no claims about having a verifiable source. Page 42: "One story says that [Steinitz] claimed to be in electrical communication with God, and that he could give God Pawn and move." It seems quite possible that Fine had incorrectly remembered something he had read on page 9 of Irving Chernev's book, The Bright Side of Chess: "Steinitz had enough [confidence] to say once that he did not believe even God could give him Pawn and move odds!" (Irving Chernev gave no source for his version of the story either.) Sadly, many authors have repeated and apparently embellished the "story" from the Fine book without considering the uncertainty about its origin. It would be nice if Wikipedia did not contribute to this unfortunate trend. - Louis Blair (September 24, 2006)

I agree 100%. an encyclopedia can not present crazy rumors and non-referenced facts and expect to keep any sort of reputation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Azzy7 (talk • contribs) 03:34, August 26, 2007 (UTC)

George Henry Mackenzie notations
New International Encyclopedia states that George Henry Mackenzie won the world championship at Frankfort in 1887. That must have been a "disputed" title, though. GhostofSuperslum 01:24, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * :-) NIE is really a worthy source in this regard . There is an article called Errors in the New International Encyclopedia that have been corrected in Wikipedia, you may add your discovery there.--Ioannes Pragensis 20:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * What occurred at Frankfort in 1887 that caused New International encyclopedia to print their statement? Did more than one "world chess champion" exist in 1887?  In the modern world several "World Heavyweight Boxing Champions" exist side-by-side because there are several organizations that crown a "Champion."  I am refraining from saying that the statement is an error because it is possible that a "dispute" existed in 1887.  GhostofSuperslum 11:15, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Suppose that Steinitz did not compete at Frankfort in 1887. His absence from the contests may have caused some people to claim that he had not defended his title (and thereby had forfeited his title).  I am unsure of his status in 1887 and 1888.  What did he do at that time to permit him to remain the "undisputed" champion?  New International Encyclopedia states that he defeated Anderssen in 1866 (yes, 1866) for the world's championship.  Another statement is: "At the London tournament of 1872 he won every game."  Also:  "After 1883 he lived in the United states, and (1884-91) was editor of the International Chess Magazine.  He published Book of the Sixth Chess Congress of 1889 and The Modern Chess Instructor (1889)."  I may add these statements into his page on Wikipedia.  Does everyone trust New International Encyclopedia well enough to allow my edits to remain where I place them?  I'm not thrilled when other people summarily expunge my edits.  The 1911 Encyclopædia Britannica also contains errors (and an errors page which served as the model for the errors page that accompanies New International Encyclopedia).  GhostofSuperslum 14:22, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * You know, NIE is 1) a tertiary source (not worth citing if you have good secondary sources) and 2) an old one. Since then, many books about chess history have been written, and you should cite these sources now. It is well possible that a small minority of US chess players called Mackenzie "world champion" in 1890, but this did not make Steinitz' title disputed in the eyes of world chess public.--Ioannes Pragensis 19:37, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Errors in the Encyclopædia Britannica that have been corrected in Wikipedia is an article that reveals errors in another encyclopedia. New International Encyclopedia contains errors that seem to have been made because the contributors were experts who hastily submitted information.  There were no higher authorities than those experts, therefore their information was printed.  GhostofSuperslum 03:10, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

New stuff for first two sections
In the intro I added the point that Steinitz and Morphy are widely considered the founders of modern chess. Cited Lasker but you can find the same evaluation in virtually any chess text. I also changed "held in high regard" to "further developed" to get across the idea of an organic development of chess theory.

In "Life" section I added some description of Steinitz's unusual physique and difficult temperament, citing Harold Schoenberg's entertaining history of chess masters. Doubtless there are more meticulously researched sources but I think Schoenberg is pretty reliable. In addition, it's a book that will hold the interest of high school and college students, who seem to be the biggest users of Wikipedia.

I reworded the Lasker quote because the version given wasn't sourced, and I found a different wording in my translation of Lasker's Manual of Chess.

Comments welcome.

Eldred 05:52, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Series of Reverts of sourced statement that Wilhelm Steinitz was Jewish, and his sourced comments on Jewish chess players as a group
In the interest of resolving this on the discussion page, rather than join others such as Ioannes Pragensis in their endless series of reverts on this and other pages over the past two day, I move this discussion for the moment to this talk page.

Pragensis has suggested that zionism and judaism are the same thing. In the article on Wilhelm Steinitz, Pragensis based his revert of the fact that Steinitz was Jewish as "second-hand zionist ideology."

When I pointed out in discusson on the history page that he was confusing two separate issues, he again RVd while taking the position that the citations were "dubious." His characterization was not supported by anything other than his POV.

After Pragensis had already engaged in 3 reverts, EliminatorJR (upon solicitation from Pragensis) RVd the page, despite my request that edit warring and reverts be ceased, and that discussion be had instead on the talk page.

I might point out that this series of reverts by Pragensis parallel those that he has made over the past two days in a number of other articles. Pragensis has now for example also asserted in the Mikhail Botvinnik article that Jews should not be reflected as such if they are Soviet or Communists. Similar problems have been caused by RVs these past two days in the articles on Reuben Fine, Samuel Reshevsky, Aron Nimzowitsch, and Aron Nimzowitsch.

Since this is part of a series of similar instances, relating to other Jewish chess players, I suggest that discussion be had on the talk page of Reuben Fine, where I have initiated discussion with a more fullsome analysis of the arguments presented.

This is a problem, I would submit, that goes beyond this article. It continues, as Pragensis continues to strip these mentions out of Wiki bios, despite discussion and multiple citations (his answer to the citations is to delete them).

2. I would suggest that the RVs that I have pointed out by others are bereft of basis or citations.

Therefore, I would ask that they undo their RVs of the sourced material while this discussion takes place on this page.

Furthermore, for the above reasons, I believe that the original language should remain permanently.

3. I would be grateful for suggestions as to both how to fix this issue on this page, and in general.

Thanks.--Epeefleche 20:59, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Chess and the Jews
I removed the whole section "Chess and the Jews" which was based on a single citation (n.b. not a sentence published by Steinitz himself in one of his works but only an indirect citation). It shows Steinitz as a Jewish racist, which may be true, but it does not deserve a mention here, because it has nothing in common with real Steinitz' chess merits, and therefore is hardly notable; even if Steinitz really believed that his "pure breed" race is "the best natured of all peoples", it would surely not deserve a whole section here. Steinitz was not Goebbels, he was never seen as an expert in the "racial theory" and never had a notable political influence. (WP:UNDUE: Just as giving undue weight to a viewpoint is not neutral, so is giving undue weight to other verifiable and sourced statements. An article should not give undue weight to any aspects of the subject, but should strive to treat each aspect with a weight appropriate to its significance to the subject. Note that undue weight can be given in several ways, including, but not limited to, depth of detail, quantity of text, prominence of placement, and juxtaposition of statements.) Moreover if mentioned here, it should be well referenced from Steinitz' own writings, as this is a relatively heavy accusation from today's point of view.--Ioannes Pragensis 14:20, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I believe this is not notable and should be removed. It is an indirect quote from a 1911 source. While Edward Winter is a thorough researcher who unearths all sorts of interesting facts, mainstream chess historians (e.g. Israel Horowitz and Reuben Fine, both Jewish incidentally) ignore it. I suggest you create an article with a name like "Jews in Chess" and put all that stuff there. Rocksong 00:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I encourage creation of a separate page devoted to consideration of Jews in Chess. There should be enough material for it, and it would be more useful to have the discussion unified in a single place rather than scattered through dozens of pages. Quale 17:28, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
 * On the other side, do we have articles like Americans in football or Indians in cricket? I doubt that such articles were more than just playgrounds for original research and nationalistic/racistic superstitions.--Ioannes Pragensis 18:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I have a different view. Notability on Wiki is determined (as I have discussed with some of you, with citations) by whether the material appears in multiple, unrelated, etc., sources.  Not by the subjective POV of any of us.  That is rather clear in Wiki policy.  So if there are such references on the web to Indians in cricket, it is notable.  Also, Wiki makes it very clear that it is appropriate for ethnicity and religion to be related within an article.  So the above reference, for example, to "nationalistic/racistic superstitions" is not one that, to the extent that I understand it, is compelling. Whether there might as well be sufficient material for another article on the subject is a separate issue -- I would have no problem with one being created, but it does not determine the instant issue. --Epeefleche 23:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I've said it before and I'll say it again: So create an article called "Jews in Chess". Rocksong 23:55, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I said it above and I'll say it again. That is secondary to this issue.  One could create an article on Blacks in baseball.  But that does not mean that one should delete references in the Jackie Robinson article to the fact that he is black.  Separate issues.--Epeefleche 00:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I never said delete references to Steinitz being Jewish. I said delete his opinions on Jews and chess, because I believe they are unimportant to this article. In a very long article we might perhaps include it, but it looks out of all proportion to me. Perhaps best of all is to put the quote in "Jews in Chess", and refer the reader there. Rocksong 01:04, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Ioannes and Rocksong. Steinitz was a great chessplayer and had great ideas about chess. On other subjects, including this one, he was no expert, and even something of a crackpot. While the fact that so many chessplayers are Jewish is an interesting one, and might well be the subject of an article, Steinitz's take on it is not particularly interesting or insightful. So I don't see any reason to include this material in the Steinitz article.Eldred 04:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I've sought to reduce the size and prominence of the quote, as one way of working towards the greater balance suggested above.

Whether we work towards a page on Chess and the Jews, something I gather editors such as IP may well object to, I think that this is sufficently notable here given Winter's reference to it for mention to be made here, even if in a less prominent fashion than it appeared previously.

--Epeefleche 00:20, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be fair and factual to note (without any theorizing) how many Champions were Jews - Steinitz, Lasker, Botvinnik, Smyslov, Tal, Spassky, Fischer (half-Jewish, paternity debated) and Kasparov (half-Jewish, his father's name was Weinstein). Then you could add those who were in the top 5 of their times - Zukertort (his father was a Christian Protestant missionary of Jewish origin), Tarrasch, Rubinstein, Nimzowitsch, Flohr, Kashdan, Reshevsky, Fine, Boleslavsky, Bronstein, Geller, Korchnoi (50%), etc. I haven't even got near the last 20 years, and have probably missed out several oldies. For refs, you could start with GREATEST JEWISH CHESS PLAYERS ("Of the fifty-one highest ranked players, approximately one-half were Jewish, or of Jewish descent" - Elo's historical ratings) Philcha (talk) 04:42, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

 * Agreed (except for Spassky - it appears to be a myth that he is Jewish). The issue I (previously known as Rocksong) have is that it belongs at a "Chess and the Jews" article, not the Wilhelm Steinitz article. Peter Ballard (talk) 05:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I meant to say, "in Chess" - even if it becomes a separate article, it's of little use if Chess doesn't link to it. You might want to look at Talk:Chess, where I seem to have started a bit of a debate about how much of what should be in Chess. Philcha (talk) 00:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

On a lighter note
Does anybody have a good source for the incident where Steinitz was playing a game by telegraph with somebody -- Lasker, maybe, or Chigorin -- and got arrested by the police for espionage because they thought he was transmitting information in a secret code? I think it would be an interesting and funny addition to the article. (Hopefully Winter hasn't proved this story was aprocryphal!)Eldred 04:43, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

1894 match
NY Times Mar 11 1894 should be used - if I don't get around to it, someone else should. Philcha (talk) 22:51, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Good find! I've added it to World Chess Championship 1894. Peter Ballard (talk) 04:34, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

 * And I've patched it (very briefly) into Wilhelm Steinitz. So who's going to incorporate it into Emanuel Lasker - the NYT article makes it plain that even people who respected Steinitz regarded Lasker as the favourite. I didn't mention this in Wilhelm Steinitz because that would have entailed explaining why the heavily-hyped Zukertort stood little chance in 1872 and less in 1886, which even I would regard as OR. Philcha (talk) 14:21, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

What drove Steinitz?
The pattern I see emerging from Steinitz' record is that he was more concerned with developing his theories and demonstrating their superiority than with winning contests or making money:
 * Long lay-off from competition 1873-1882, but active as a commentator - except for whitewashing Blackburne.
 * He entered the Vienna 1882 super-tournament. While he was away The Field replaced him with other chess correspondents.
 * He entered the London 1883 super-tournament.
 * Moved to USA and set up own journal.
 * He inisted the contract for the 1886 Zukertort match should say, "for the Championship of the World".
 * He offered to play the 1886 match for free.
 * Championship matches every 2-3 years after that. He played a behind-the-scenes role in organising his 1889 match with Chigorin (Steinitz—Chigorin, Havana 1899 - A World Championship Match or Not?).
 * He help organise the NY 1889 "candidates" tournament.
 * Before the 1894 Lasker match he said "... if I do lose he will have to beat me with my own weapons" (NY Times March 1894). According to the NY Times Steinitz dropped plans for retirement in order to play Lasker - despite that fact that several commentators who understood and respected Steinitz' theories regarded Lasker as the favourite.

In other words he used journalism to promote his theories, returned to competition when office politics made journalism unavailable as a pulpit, set up his own journal, found that beating Zukertort in 1886 was the best possible advertising, and actively sought championship matches after that - even against Lasker.

Does anyone know of any good historical sources that would cast light on Steinitz' motivations? (Not Fine-style retrofitted psychoanalyses). If we could add well-supported material on Steinitz' motivations it would add human interest, which most chess articles tend to lack (not just in Wikipedia).

It would also be very useful to have information about the state of Steinitz' finances throughout his career. For example cash shortage may have forced him to play Lasker in 1894. And in 1888-89 he had a sponsor lined up (Havana Chess Club) then went looking for an opponent (Chigorin).

But I still suspect that money was more of a hygiene factor than a motivating factor for Steinitz - contrast Joseph Henry Blackburne, who made a very nice income out of his frequent exhibitions. Philcha (talk) 13:16, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Backup copies
The following are backup copies of material for which new places need to be found:

 * Barely five feet in height, and handicapped by lameness and later by arthritis, Steinitz had a sharp tongue and violent temper. As a result of this, his relations with the London chess community became difficult, so in 1883 he decided to leave England and moved to New York, where he lived for the rest of his life, although he made enemies there too. Despite his combative nature Steinitz could praise in glowing terms great play by his competitors; for example he described Zukertort's win over Blackburne in the London 1883 tournament (where Steinitz finished second behind Zukertort) as "one of the most brilliant games on record", and Blackburne's win over Schwarz in Berlin, 1881, with the words "White's design, especially from the 21st move in combination with the brilliant finish, belongs to the finest efforts of chess genius in modern match play."

Philcha (talk) 19:31, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

Chess politics in 1870s
Fine (The World's Great Chess Games) says "By 1871 Steinitz' enemies in London ... imported at foreign player, Zukertort, to dethrone him." All the material I've found recently about the politics of chess during Steinitz' reign is about the 1880s. Does anyone know of any material that would support or refute Fine's statement? Philcha (talk) 00:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Apostrophes
Which is correct as a possessive: Steinitz' or Steinitz's ? This article has it both ways. Daniel Freeman (talk) 02:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * I would think Steinitz'. Thanks, I'll check the article. Philcha (talk) 04:55, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * I think it would be "Steinitz's". Bubba73 (talk), 05:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Do we have a dialect issue? I was educated in Scotland. Philcha (talk) 07:10, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Perhaps. I asked a language expert, and he said "'s", but he supposes that some people would write it without the "s".  Bubba73 (talk), 14:07, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

 * As with Hispanic names, I'd have thought the ending without the 's' would have been correct. In either case, consistency of orthography counts for something too. Hushpuckena (talk) 23:21, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Petrosian on Steinitz - sources?
I commented out as unsourced an alleged quote from Petrosian: "The significance of Steinitz's teaching is that he showed that in principle chess has a strictly defined, logical nature." Can we find a good ref for this? 3 of the 4 that Google returns are Wikipedia clones. Philcha (talk) 10:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Mistake in match results
The text currently says this: Lasker won convincingly (5 wins, 10 losses, 4 draws). I'm trying to figure out whether the results in parenthesis are from Steinitz' viewpoint, or if it's just a mistake or something... maybe it should be clarified if anybody knows.

Seigneur101 (talk) 02:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes, that is from Steinitz' viewpoint. Bubba73 (talk), 04:22, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Re-phrased - hope it's an improvement. -- Philcha (talk) 08:17, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with File:AdolphAnderssen.jpg
The image File:AdolphAnderssen.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
 * That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --07:30, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

 * Done - stupid dog FURbot! --Philcha (talk) 08:29, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Quote
"Chess is a scientific game and its literature ought to be placed on the basis of the strictest truthfulness, which is the foundation of all scientific research." — W. Steinitz. SunCreator (talk) 23:48, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Nice! Can you provide a ref? --Philcha (talk) 01:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The International Chess Magazine by William Steinitz - 1891. Page 117 SunCreator (talk) 03:18, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Was there only 1 issue for the whole of 1891? Or was this an end-of-year compendium edition? --Philcha (talk) 07:43, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

Unsourced statement "It's common knowledge ... three Hurras"
This edit added "It's common knowledge that immediately after the last game, Steinitz shook Lasker's hand, then invited the spectators to salute the new World Champion with three Hurras" (after 1894 match), but without a citation. I'm about to remove it. I'll reinstate it if anyone can provide a good source. --Philcha (talk) 04:15, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

World champ before 1886
The article says "Some contemporaries and later writers described him as world champion since 1866, when he won a match against Adolf Anderssen, while other contemporaries considered him champion when he beat Zukertort in 1871." It needs to name some of those people and give a reference. Bubba73 (Who's attacking me now?), 04:20, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Rather a long list on both sides, IMO too long for the main text - see ref 37, beginning "Dating the start of Steinitz' reign to 1886" --Philcha (talk) 04:34, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

 * But Golombek's encyclopedia, for instance, list him as W.C. starting in 1866, but it also states that 1886 was the first match designated as a world championship and it doesn't say anything about his contemporaries considering him to be the W.C. as early as 1866. I think it needs one specific source that says that.  Bubba73 (Who's attacking me now?), 05:09, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

 * There's not neat and tidy definition, and any attempt to make it neat would distort the evidence - the murky beginnings appeared in the early 1840s. --Philcha (talk)

 * I know that, but "some contemporaries" is still weasel wording. Bubba73 (Who's attacking me now?), 05:58, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Not weasel wording, as the reference gives all the details - but it's better not burden the main text with all this detail. --Philcha (talk) 09:26, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Traite des amateurs
Hi everybody,

I noticed SyG deleted my addition concerning the fact that some of the ideas of Steinitz, in embryonic form, were formulated in the Traité des Amateurs by some contemporaries of Philidor in 1775. I am referring to the concept that at the beginning of the game the forces stand in equilibrium; correct play on both sides maintains this equilibrium and leads to a drawn game, therefore a player can win only as a consequence of an error made by the opponent. From this prospective, there is no such a thing as a winning move and even the most skilled master can do nothing against these natural laws of the game. You can find this in different points of the "Traite des amateurs". I added this because it is not known and quite surprising. Philidor, for instance, had a different opinion since he tought that with correct play white should win.

My addition was deleted on the basis that it was not referenced. That is perferctly fine, of course, I am not here to criticize SyG's opinion. I just want to understand how to make a better contribution. Thus, just for my understanding, I tought my contribution was referenced enough since I quoted the reference to the Traite des amateurs with the link to google books where you can go and read what I was talking about. Did somebody read it? Is that not enough as a reference? What do you think should be a better way to referenciate it? I thought that to add in the references exactly the book where this was formulated was the best reference you can have. Initially I wanted to quote directly the introductive section of Chapter IV, which is one point of the Traite where this is explained "The combinations being endless, it is clear that the winning or losing of the game, between players equal in point of skill, must depend on the first bad, or what amounts to the same thing, the first lost move on either side; we cannot, therefore, avoid protesting against the erroneous doctrine laid down by Philidor and others, that he who has the first move, ought to win the game in consequence of that advantage. We proceed to prove, from the very games adduced by Phihdor in support of his position, these three important points. Firstly, that the move alone can never be considered a sufficient advantage to insure success : Secondly, that he who has not the move, will very soon acquire it, or neutralize its effects; and, Lastly, that supposing each move to be the best that could possibly be played, the game ought to be drawn." which is interesting considering that it was written one century before Steinitz. But then I tought it was too much since this is the article about Steinitz not about the Traite. Moreover, there was the link to the Traite page where everything is explained. What do you think?

Sersunzo (talk) 04:20, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Hi, the quote is interesting, but seems to be about First-move advantage in chess rather than than Steinitz's view (Steinitz on Paulsen; Lasker's "In the beginning of the game ...") that attacks are futile unless one has gained a positional advantage first. The first part from the Traite, "The combinations being endless, it is clear that the winning or losing of the game, between players equal in point  of skill, must depend on the first bad, or what amounts to the same  thing, the first lost move on either side", appears to assume what it tries to prove, that Black can draw - Black's first bad might be getting the Black pieces. --Philcha (talk) 06:47, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I see your point and indeed you are right; this particular quote was mainly focused on replying to Philidor. I see some connections, tough, because it implies the concet of natural equilibrium of forces. The equilibrium can only be altered by bad moves they say. They of course focus on the first bad move, because they have in mind the starting position, but Steinitz law would be a natural extention of their reasoning. If you think at the romantic era, where the focus was on good moves that a genius could create out of noting, the amateurs are anticipating Steinitz. Of course, this is not automatic or completely clear in the Traite (otherwise we would say today amateurs' laws instead of Stainit's laws). This is why I added "in embryonic form". I don not want to add anything to the article if is not shared, but to me simple sentence like: "Some ideas of Steinitz, altough in embryonic form, can be found in the Traite des amateurs" would be not out of place.

Thanks for your attention Sersunzo (talk) 13:24, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Unfortunately there's not evidence for "Some ideas of Steinitz, altough in embryonic form, can be found in the Traite des amateurs". OTOH Steinitz (cited) explicitly said Paulsen's ideas got S thinking. --Philcha (talk) 14:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Ok, never mind. I do not want to insist. Just for sake of clarity, however. I was not saying that the Traite des amateurs influenced Steinitz. He quoted Paulsen and for what we know Steinitz maybe did not even read the Traite. I was just saying that in the Traite you can find some ideas that remind what Steinitz said one century later, which is not obvious and, in fact, the romantic school had a different view. Although I can see how this alone could be not enough for including it in this page of wikipedia. Thanks for the discussion anyway.

Sersunzo (talk) 15:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

"Czech-American"?
I'm not sure what the wikipedia standard is for "Czech" versus "Austrian" or "Bohemian" in this situation, but I don't think any serious source would include the "American", even though he did live there for quite some time at the end of his life. Also, the phrasing was "an Czech-American chess player" which suggests whoever changed it is less than meticulous. So I changed it. 83.70.226.235 (talk) 12:24, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

 * It's mess, as one would expect with a multi-national empire.
 * The best compromise I see now is:
 * Although S grew up in Prague (then "capital" of Bohemia, now capital of Czech Republic), his chess achievements started in Vienna and almost of S's chess career was as an Austrian, so "Austrian" is the most accurate short description for most of S' career and "Bohemia" and/or "Czech" is unimportant.
 * S spent his last 12 years as a US citizen, which is a significant time and includes: the 2nd half of the project to drawing up regulations for the future conduct of world championship contests; how the new generation of masters accepted S's approach to play. So I've added this period to the lead and infobox.
 * What do you think? --Philcha (talk) 14:41, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

His birthplace and jewish childhood in the Czech city of Prague is by no means unimportant. That his chess achievements started in Vienna is unimportant. His chess career was as a Czech player representing Austria/Hungary. Austria is not always the most accurate description for a person coming from a multi-national empire. --Posp68 (talk) 14:07, 24 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Before your contribution, the last contribution to this discussion was in 2010, so it may well be that the article treats Steinitz's nationality differently now from the way it did then.

 * There is some discussion of this in MOS:BIO, but it can indeed be tricky to determine the right way to describe a person's nationality in the face of shifting national boundaries and the subject's own migration. Wikipedia is more or less tied to its "reliable sources"; that is, we editors are supposed to avoid as much as possible making our own judgments about nationality, but to rely as much as possible on the judgments made in the sources we cite, such as, for example, the Landsberger biography of Steinitz.  Bruce leverett (talk) 04:17, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

???
Does anyone know what this means. 'From the 1870s onwards, commentators have debated whether Steinitz was effectively the champion earlier'The Gaon (talk) 08:26, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

 * That's in the lead, which is a summary. The details are at Wilhelm_Steinitz and the linked "main article". --Philcha (talk) 11:29, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

main photo
How about replacing the main image with this one? It appears that the one that is used is a drawing based on this photo. Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 15:56, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Will Hartson
I've never heard of this guy. Is Bill Hartston (The well known English chess author) intended? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.254.58.72 (talk) 18:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

 * It might be William Hartston, but I don't know. Notice the different spelling of the last name.  Bubba73 You talkin' to me? 19:24, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Wilhelm Steinitz. 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/20081026085730/http://www.endgame.nl/bad1870.htm to http://www.endgame.nl/bad1870.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081216145316/http://www.endgame.nl/wien.htm to http://www.endgame.nl/wien.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080619023938/http://www.endgame.nl/newyork.htm to http://www.endgame.nl/newyork.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080619170844/http://www.endgame.nl/wfairs.htm to http://www.endgame.nl/wfairs.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070926221345/http://www3.sympatico.ca/g.giffen/19thcent.htm to http://www3.sympatico.ca/g.giffen/19thcent.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060527101733/http://www.souvenirworldja.com/chessworld/playbetter/Technical_Articles/worldchamps/steinitz/william_steinitz_1836.htm to http://www.souvenirworldja.com/chessworld/playbetter/Technical_Articles/worldchamps/steinitz/william_steinitz_1836.htm

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) 14:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

What is a serious match?
Steinitz won every serious match he played from 1862 until 1892, sometimes by wide margins. What does serious match means??? This needs further elaboration in the article. I known some matches that he lost in that period. Was he playing drunk, on drugs, was he losing on purpose...? 213.149.62.70 (talk) 01:03, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * There is a table of his match results in the article. It shows that during that period, he lost an informal series of games with Anderssen in 1862, and tied a playoff match with Winawer in 1882.  So your objection is well taken.  That sentence doesn't add much, and is not well sourced; if you want to just delete it, I wouldn't object.  Bruce leverett (talk) 03:28, 2 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Good catch 213.149.62.70, and thanks for the last sentence—it made me laugh. Quale (talk) 21:28, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

Birth name
Per Edward Winter, C.N. 9200 (reporting a communication by Thomas Niessen), it appears that Steinitz' birth name was actually Wolf Steinitz. This is in the Russian Wikipedia version of this article, but not in ours. Double sharp (talk) 05:11, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Wilhelm Steinitz


text:
Interleukin 4

The interleukin 4 (IL4, IL-4) is a cytokine that induces differentiation of naive helper T cells (Th0 cells) to Th2 cells. Upon activation by IL-4, Th2 cells subsequently produce additional IL-4 in a positive feedback loop. IL-4 is produced primarily by mast cells, Th2 cells, eosinophils and basophils. It is closely related and has functions similar to IL-13.

Function
Interleukin 4 has many biological roles, including the stimulation of activated B cell and T cell proliferation, and the differentiation of B cells into plasma cells. It is a key regulator in humoral and adaptive immunity. IL-4 induces B cell class switching to IgE, and up-regulates MHC class II production. IL-4 decreases the production of Th1 cells, macrophages, IFNγ, and dendritic cells IL-12.

Overproduction of IL-4 is associated with allergies.

Inflammation and wound repair
Tissue macrophages play an important role in chronic inflammation and wound repair. The presence of IL-4 in extravascular tissues promotes alternative activation of macrophages into M2 cells and inhibits classical activation of macrophages into M1 cells. An increase in repair macrophages (M2) is coupled with secretion of IL-10 and TGF-β that result in a diminution of pathological inflammation. Release of arginase, proline, polyaminases and TGF-β by the activated M2 cell is tied with wound repair and fibrosis.

Receptor
The receptor for interleukin-4 is known as the IL-4Rα. This receptor exists in 3 different complexes throughout the body. Type 1 receptors are composed of the IL-4Rα subunit with a common γ chain and specifically bind IL-4. Type 2 receptors consist of an IL-4Rα subunit bound to a different subunit known as IL-13Rα1. These type 2 receptors have the ability to bind both IL-4 and IL-13, two cytokines with closely related biological functions.

Structure
IL-4 has a compact, globular fold (similar to other cytokines), stabilised by 3 disulphide bonds. One half of the structure is dominated by a 4 alpha-helix bundle with a left-handed twist. The helices are anti-parallel, with 2 overhand connections, which fall into a 2-stranded anti-parallel beta-sheet.

Evolution
IL-4 is closely related to IL-13, and both stimulate type 2 immunity. Genes of this family have also been found in fish, both in bony fish and cartilaginous fish; because at that evolutionary level they can't be distinguished as IL-4 or IL-13, they have been named IL-4/13.

Discovery
This cytokine was co-discovered by Maureen Howard and William E. Paul as well as by Ellen Vitetta and her research group in 1982.

The nucleotide sequence for human IL-4 was isolated four years later confirming its similarity to a mouse protein called B cell stimulatory factor-1 (BCSF-1).

Animal studies
IL-4 has been found to mediate a crosstalk between the neural stem cells and neurons that undergo neurodegeneration, and initiate a regeneration cascade through phosphorylation of its intracellular effector STAT6 in an experimental Alzheimer's disease model in adult zebrafish brain.

Clinical significance
IL-4 has also been shown to drive mitogenesis, dedifferentiation, and metastasis in rhabdomyosarcoma. IL-4, along with other Th2 cytokines, is involved in the airway inflammation observed in the lungs of patients with allergic asthma.

Illnesses associated with IL-4
IL-4 plays an important role in the development of certain immune disorders, particularly allergies and some autoimmune diseases.

Allergic diseases
Allergic diseases are sets of disorders that are manifested by a disproportionate response of the immune system to the allergen and Th2 responses. These pathologies include, for example, atopic dermatitis, asthma, or systemic anaphylaxis. Interleukin 4 mediates important pro-inflammatory functions in asthma, including induction of isotype rearrangement of IgE, expression of vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (VCAM-1), promoting eosinophilic transmigration through endothelium, mucus secretion and T helper type 2 (Th2) leading to cytokine release. Asthma is a complex genetic disorder that has been associated with IL-4 gene promoter polymorphism and proteins involved in IL-4 signaling.

Tumors
IL-4 has a significant effect on tumor progression. Increased IL-4 production was found in breast, prostate, lung, renal cells and other types of cancer. Overexpression of IL-4R has been found in many types of cancer. Renal cells and glioblastoma modify $10,000$–$13,000$ receptors per cell depending on tumor type.

IL-4 can primitively motivate tumor cells and increase their apoptosis resistance by increasing tumor growth.

Nervous system
Brain tissue tumors such as astrocytoma, glioblastoma, meningioma, and medulloblastoma overexpress receptors for various growth factors including epidermal growth factor receptor, FGFR-1 (fibroblast growth factor receptor 1), TfR (transferrin receptor), IL-13R. Most human meningiomas massively expresses IL-4 receptors, indicating its role in cancer progression. They express IL-4Rα and IL13Rα-1-1, but not the surface γc chain, suggesting that most human meningiomas express IL-4 type II.

HIV
IL-4 may also play a role in the infection and development of HIV disease. Auxiliary T cells are a key element of HIV-1 infection. Several signs of immune dysregulation such as polyclonal B cell initialization, previous cell-mediated antigen-induced response and hypergammaglobulinaemia occur in most HIV-1 infected patients and are associated with cytokines synthesized by Th2 cells. Increased IL-4 production by Th2 cells has been demonstrated in people infected with HIV.

title: Interleukin 4


text:
Nanman

The Man, commonly known as the Nanman or Southern Man (, lit. Southern Barbarians), were ancient indigenous peoples who lived in inland South and Southwest China, mainly around the Yangtze River valley. In ancient Chinese sources, the term Nanman was used to collectively describe multiple ethnic groups, probably the predecessors of the modern Miao, Zhuang, and Dai peoples, and non-Chinese Sino-Tibetan groups such as the Jingpo and Yi peoples. It was an umbrella term that included any groups south of the expanding Huaxia civilization, and there was never a single polity that united these people, although the state of Chu ruled over much of the Yangtze region during the Zhou dynasty and was partly influenced by the Man culture.

Etymology
The early Chinese exonym Man (蠻) was a graphic pejorative written with Radical 142 虫, which means "worm", "insect" or "vermin". Xu Shen's (c. 121 CE) Shuowen Jiezi dictionary defines Man as "Southern Man are a snake race. [The character is formed] from [the] insect / serpent [radical and takes its pronunciation from] luàn 南蠻蛇種从虫䜌聲."

William H. Baxter and Laurent Sagart (2014) reconstruct the Old Chinese name of Mán as *mˤro[n]. Baxter & Sagart (2014) provide a similar Old Chinese reconstruction for Min *mrə[n] 'southern tribes', which is also a name for Fujian province. Today, similar-sounding self-designated ethnonyms among modern-day peoples include Mraṅmā, Hmong, Mien, Bru, Mro, Mru, and Maang. The ethnonym Hmong is reconstructed as *hmʉŋA in Proto-Hmongic by Ratliff (2010), while Mien is reconstructed as *mjænA in Proto-Mienic (see Proto-Hmong–Mien language).

History
The Man were described in the Book of Rites as one of the Four Barbarians associated with the south. They tattooed their foreheads, had inwards pointing feet, and ate raw food. Although various stereotypes and accounts are recorded in the Book of Rites, little detail is actually known about their inner social hierarchies, their social customs, and the social interdependence among the tribes at that time.

During the Spring and Autumn period, King Wu of Chu (r. 741-690 BC) undertook many campaigns against the Man, who rebelled during the reign of King Zhuang of Chu (r. 613–591 BC). During the reign of King Dao of Chu, the general Wu Qi also conducted campaigns against the Man. When the state of Qin conquered Chu, they found that the commandery of Qianzhong, corresponding to modern Hubei, Hunan and Guizhou, was still inhabited by Man people.

Under the Han dynasty, the Man were recognized as three distinct groups: the Pangu, Linjun, and Bandun. The Pangu worshiped dog totems and lived in the commanderies of Wuling and Changsha. They were also known as the Man of the Five Creeks. The Pangu had no unified leader but individual chiefs were acknowledged as local administrators by the Han. They wore clothes weaved from tree bark, used dotted patterns for their robes, wore short skirts, and painted their legs red. The Linjun lived further west in the commanderies of Ba and Nan, around modern Chongqing. Linjun was actually the name of a chief, who according to Linjun mythology, turned into a white tiger upon his death. Thus the Linjun worshiped the tiger. The Bandun Man (literally "board shield" barbarians) lived further west of the Linjun and were known for their music and heroic conduct in war. They supported Liu Bang after the fall of the Qin dynasty and contributed troops to Han campaigns against the Qiang people. According to legend, they killed a white tiger during the reign of King Zhaoxiang of Qin (r. 306–251 BC) and were therefore spared from taxes.

The Bandun Man rebelled in 179 due to unrest caused by the Yellow Turban Rebellion, but when amnesty was issued by Cao Qian in 182, the rebellion was ended. There was another brief uprising in 188 which amounted to nothing. Related to the Bandun were the neighboring Cong (賨) people, who became interested in the mysticism of the Celestial Master Zhang Lu and moved north to the border of his territory. When Cao Cao attacked Zhang Lu in the summer of 215, he fled to Duhu of the Cong and Fuhu of the Bandun for refuge. However Duhu and Fuhu surrendered to Cao Cao in the autumn and received appointment, with Zhang Lu following in the winter. The Bandun and Cong were settled in what is now modern Gansu province. In 219 Liu Bei's officer Huang Quan attacked them and drove several non-Chinese peoples north into Cao Cao's territory. The Cong from the Ba region in particular mingled with the tribal Di people in Guanzhong. These people became known as the Ba-Di, and they later founded one of the Sixteen Kingdoms, the Cheng-Han (304—347).

In southwest China, the Nanman tribes rebelled after the death of Shu Han's founder, Liu Bei, in 223.The Shu Han chancellor, Zhuge Liang, led a successful expedition to quell the rebellion in 225. One of the leaders of the Nanman, Meng Huo, was captured seven times before he surrendered. The campaign was retold in the famous 14th-century historical novel, Romance of the Three Kingdoms, which provides a heavily romanticised narrative of the events that happened.

After the fall of the Han dynasty, the Man became more integrated into Han Chinese society. A notable example was Zhang Chang, a Jin dynasty (266–420) rebel from one of the Man tribes in Hubei who was allowed to serve as a county official prior to his rebellion. During the period of Northern and Southern dynasties, the Man were able to remain independent by switching sides out of political expedience. The southern courts appointed Man chiefs as tax collectors for their regions. Many Man chiefs taxed their subjects lightly which resulted in some Han Chinese pretending to be Man people. On one occasion, a Han Chinese called Huan Dan (桓誕) even became a Man chieftain. The Man also rebelled at times. Defeated tribes were resettled at border garrisons or became slaves in the metropolitan area. Generally speaking, the trend was for the Nanman to migrate ever northward. By the 7th century the ethnic character of Man society was decidedly mixed.

Culture
The Nanman "Southern Man" tattooed their foreheads and were a totem worshiping people. Among their totems were those dedicated to tiger, snake, and dog deities.

Modern China
The She people and Yao people are said to be descended from the Man. The "Nan Man Zi" (, lit. Southern Barbarian) is now still a term to call the people from southern China used by northern Chinese.

title: Nanman


text:
Grimjack

Grimjack is the main character of a comic book originally published by the American company First Comics, and later by IDW Publishing. John Ostrander and Timothy Truman are credited as co-creators of the character, although Ostrander had been developing Grimjack with artist Lenin Delsol before Truman's arrival on the project according to Ostrander's own text piece in Grimjack #75. In that same essay, the writer also revealed having initially conceived the character to be the star of a series of prose stories, set in a post-apocalyptic Chicago.

Grimjack is the street name of John Gaunt, a sword-for-hire, ex-paramilitary, war veteran and former child gladiator. He operates from Munden's Bar in the Pit, a slum area of Cynosure, a pan-dimensional city to which all dimensions connect.

Publication history
Grimjack began as a backup feature in issue #10 of the comic book Starslayer. The character of Grimjack was created by John Ostrander and Timothy Truman, but the setting, the pan-dimensional city of Cynosure, predates the character. The Grimjack backup story was very popular with the readers of Starslayer, and First Comics decided to give the character his own title. The Grimjack backup story ran from issue #10 to 17. Grimjack guest-starred in the main Starslayer story in issue #18, in July 1984.

Issue #1 of Grimjack was published by First Comics in August 1984, and ran until issue #81, in April 1991, with all stories written by Ostrander. Artists who worked on the series included Timothy Truman, Sam Grainger, Tom Mandrake, Jim McDermott, Steve Pugh, Tom Sutton, Paul Guinan, Martin Thomas, and Flint Henry. With issue #55, the character of James Twilley, a future incarnation of Gaunt, was introduced as the timeline jumped forward 200 years. Throughout its run, with the exception of a few full-length issues (as well as #60 with its expanded letter column), Grimjack featured a backup story in the manner of other First Comics series. From issue #2 to 69, the backstory was titled Munden's Bar, a telling of events at the eponymous bar. The story brought a small amount of fame to the series for its occasional guest stars, such as the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Starting with issue #70 a new backup feature began, as John Ostrander felt that Munden's Bar was getting too far away from his original intent and he suspended it for reworking. In its place was his own serial entitled Youngblood, drawn by Steve Pugh. Youngblood told the story of John Gaunt's troubled childhood, via flashbacks from a point in Gaunt's life prior to his first published appearance in Starslayer, but after the "Demon Wars". It concluded in issue #81. Although one of First Comics' most popular titles, after the company declared bankruptcy, it did not make it into print again until 2005.

In 1990, First published Demon Knight, a stand-alone graphic novel featuring the James Twilley incarnation of Grimjack going back in time to the Demon Wars to try to change his fate. Although a stand-alone, the story ties in thematically with the "Demon Wars" flashback storyline taking place in issues #66–69 and Twilley appears in a panel of issue #69.

First's Grimjack Casefiles, a reprint series covering the Starslayer backup stories and the first issues of the Grimjack series, ran a total of 5 issues from November 1990 to March 1991.

Following their recovering the rights to Grimjack, John Ostrander and Timothy Truman teamed up again to publish Grimjack: Killer Instinct, a 6-issue miniseries published by IDW Publishing. The miniseries, since reprinted in graphic novel form, serves as a prequel to the First Comics Grimjack series and shows John Gaunt's life leading up to his first appearance in Starslayer #10. The series met with critical acclaim for its art, storyline and original setting. With a script by John Ostrander and art by Timothy Truman, the series was lettered by John Workman and edited by Mike Gold. All of them had worked on the original Grimjack comic. IDW Publishing also re-issued the First Comics Grimjack run in a series of trade paperbacks under the title The Legend of Grimjack. As of October 2007, 8 collections have been released.

The character was serialized in a new storyline, The Manx Cat, as a Comicmix.com webcomic in January 2011. It has since seen print as a six-issue miniseries through Comicmix's arrangement with IDW Comics. The story involves "The Manx Cat", a statuette of such a cat that at first seems to be a simple MacGuffin like the classic Maltese Falcon of the novel and films by that name, but which begins showing malevolent powers. The plot thickens with time travel, reincarnation, and Elder Gods. Like most modern comics, it features digitally-created art.

John Gaunt
John Gaunt, alias Grimjack, was born in The Pit, a slum area of the pan-dimensional city of Cynosure, where both magic and technology, humans and aliens intermingle. His mother Anya (née Laughton) died in childbirth. John had two older brothers, Nick (nicknamed "Young Nick" and named after their father, "Old Nick") and Jake. His father married Anya's sister, Maite (nicknamed "Mouse") and they had one child together, Joe. Joe was the only of his brothers for whom John cared, and he vowed to Mouse that he would watch out for him. Old Nick had one brother, Jack. Young Nick hated and resented John, blaming him for the death of their mother, the only person who loved him. Throughout John's life, Young Nick manipulated their father into hating John in hopes that he would kill John.

When John was about five years old, Old Nick attacked and killed Jack in a drunken rage. He was sentenced to prison but later escaped. The day he returned home Mouse vanished. It is unknown whether Old Nick killed her. On John's eighth birthday, Old Nick, having decided that Gaunt was actually Jack's son, attacked John with a broken bottle. This caused the distinctive vertical scar that Gaunt carried through his life. Old Nick fell in the fireplace and burned to death.

Following their father's death, the four brothers survived on the streets by stealing. One night they broke into the house of a merchant to rob him. Jake killed the merchant when he discovered them in the house. Nick, Jake and Joe escaped but Nick knocked John unconscious and abandoned him to take the rap for the murder. John was found guilty and sentenced to fight in the Arena of Cynosure. The day he arrived in the Arena he vowed to kill Nick.

Gaunt joined one of the gangs of child warriors called "Wolfpacs". During that time, Gaunt went by the name of "Grinner" and was known as the second-best fighter in the Arena, second only to The Dancer. Gaunt was released from the Arena at age 22 because, while he fought and killed, he refused to make his kills entertaining to the crowd.

Following his release, Gaunt began a search for his brothers. Attacked and badly wounded in a street fight, Gaunt stumbled upon the entrance to the dimension of Pdwyr. There he was nursed back to health and met the love of his life, a woman named Rhian. He studied magic with Rhian's father, Maethe Mathonwy, but while Gaunt could summon power he did not have the inner peace needed to properly control it. Another Cynosure resident, Major Lash, found his way to Pdwyr and informed Gaunt that the city had been invaded by Hell itself. Lash convinced Gaunt to return to Cynosure and fight in the Demon Wars by persuading him that if the city fell the demons would find and destroy Pdwyr. The city's forces were able to repel Hell but demons invaded Pdwyr, causing the destruction of the land and the death of all those Gaunt loved, including Rhian. After burying his dead, Gaunt joined the Major's group of temporal bounty hunters, the Lawkillers, not knowing that it was Major Lash who had betrayed Pdwyr to the demons. Gaunt would not learn the truth for some 25 years.

At age 30, John Gaunt had a final fateful confrontation with his brothers. Nick shot John, leading Joe to draw his gun and shoot Nick. Jake then shot Joe and Joe shot Jake. John shot Nick. Jake shot Joe again, killing him. John then finished Jake. Nick shot John again and John killed Nick.

After leaving the Lawkillers, Gaunt joined the Trans-Dimensional Police, Cynosure's police department. Upon quitting the TDP, he was enlisted as the first member of Cadre, a spy agency of the Cynosure government. After the events detailed in the Grimjack: Killer Instinct storyline, he abandoned Cadre and set himself up as a mercenary and private investigator in Cynosure. At some point he purchased the bar known as Munden's, apparently named after bartender Gordon Munden, from Munden's ex-wife.

Grimjack clone
During a bloody conflict with the Lawkillers, Gaunt managed to kill two of Major Lash's men, Preacher and Grunt, but turned his back on Lash, disgusted with the senseless bloodshed and murder, including the revelation that the enemy he had killed months ago was his biological son. Lash seized this opportunity and killed Grimjack. Gaunt was shocked to find himself in Heaven, where he was reunited with his former love, Rhian. He was informed that for all his faults, he always stood by his friends, and for that he was judged worthy. But he soon discovers that The Dancer has reanimated Gaunt's corpse in order to murder his friend Blackjacmac. Gaunt was horrified at this, as Blackjacmac would likely go to Hell if he were to die at this point in his life. Forfeiting a peaceful Afterlife, but continuing to act for the benefit of his friends, Gaunt returned to Cynosure by animating a clone body of himself at an age several decades younger than his original body. In this body, Gaunt operated under the alias "Chaney" and had increased psychic sensitivity. Gaunt operated under this identity for several months, gradually re-establishing relationships with his friends, until he met a man claiming to be an incarnation of himself from 3,000 years in the future. This "FutureJack" tells Gaunt that when he left Heaven, he was barred from returning to either Heaven or Hell. Gaunt is condemned to be reborn eternally. "FutureJack" convinces Gaunt that his doom is tied to the fate of Cynosure and to accompany him on a mission to hasten the destruction of the city. During the mission Gaunt realizes that "FutureJack" is lying to him and shoots him. "FutureJack" is apparently destroyed.

James Twilley
Grimjack was reborn as James Edgar Twilley, the son of a rich Cynosure family. Initially unaware of his past life, Twilley began remembering at around age 14 when he witnessed a thug murdering a jock who bullied him in high school. Twilley murdered the thug and marked himself with the trademark Grimjack scar of his previous life. Twilley went underground, disappearing from his family and friends as he set about re-learning his past skills. When he was ready, Twilley showed up at Munden's and, using a clause written into the ownership contract of the bar, claimed his identity as well as the bar. Sometime later, his family, distraught over the changes that their son had undergone, kidnapped him and forced him into a personality restructuring therapy to erase the troubling memories, but when presented with a copy of John Gaunt as supposed proof that Twilley's memories were false, he flew in a frenzy and ripped out the Gaunt copy's throat with his teeth. Discovering his family's manipulations, James Twilley left his family and assumed once again the street name of Grimjack with Munden's Bar as his base of operations. James Twilley died in issue #81 of Grimjack, concluding First Comics' run.

Other appearances
Grimjack's first published appearance was in a backup story in First's Warp, "The Dogs of War", featuring the character Sargon, Mistress of War. The story opens in Munden's Bar and Gaunt appears in shadow in one panel, although this was not known at the time. Ostrander identified this figure as Gaunt years later. In addition to his own series, Grimjack made appearances in two Munden's Bar specials and a few First Comics crossover specials including The Gift and Crossroads. Away from First, Gaunt's corpse made a one-panel appearance as a sight gag in issue #5 of the DC Comics horror anthology title Wasteland.

In the fourth chapter of his 1986 Amber novel Blood of Amber, Roger Zelazny introduced a character named "Old John", who works as an emissary for the King of Amber. Old John is described as having a "nasty-looking scar running both above and below his left eye" and a "nasty grin", wearing a dark feathered hat. Zelazny, a fan of the Grimjack series since its premiere issue, later contributed the introduction to the Grimjack graphic novel Demon Knight. In the short story "The Shroudling and the Guisel", published posthumously in Amberzine #8, Zelazny refers to Grimjack by name: "I stood among the grave markers of unknown mortals—Dennis Colt, Remo Williams, John Gaunt—and swore to be her champion if ever she needed one". This story was later reprinted in the Zelazny collection Manna from Heaven.

Legal history
Following the bankruptcy of First Comics in 1991, the legal rights to Grimjack became tied up with First Comics' other assets. Ken F. Levin, co-founder of First Comics, and Mike Gold, Grimjack's original editor, set out to free the rights to the character from legal limbo. There were several reports over the years that the problem was not the rights to Grimjack, invariably stated in these accounts to be owned outright by Ostrander, but those to its setting, the pan-dimensional city of Cynosure, which was the property of First Comics. The unique nature of the place was crucial to many of Ostrander's storylines, and some observers even considered it to be a "character" in its own right.

After 12 years of efforts, all rights to Grimjack were released and a new company was founded, NightSky GrimJack Rights and Production Vehicle (Four Wheel Drive Model), LLC, with legal ownership to the character. John Ostrander and Timothy Truman are said to have "substantial equity positions" in the venture.

In other media
J. Michael Straczynski had reportedly planned to write a film adaptation of Grimjack during his time on Babylon 5. He initially planned to produce the script during the summer of 1996, but timing conflicts prevented him from doing it. As a result, the project was put on hold, and has not been resurrected since. According to Straczynski, the film was budgeted for $30 million, and as scriptwriter, Straczynski intended to remain as faithful as possible to the source material.

At San Diego Comic-Con 2019, the Russo brothers announced their production company AGBO were developing an animated television series adaptation for Amazon. It's being written by Kevin Murphy and the Russo brothers will produce the show.

title: Grimjack


text:
Hanover Street (film)

Hanover Street is a 1979 American-British war and romantic film, written and directed by Peter Hyams, and starring Harrison Ford, Lesley-Anne Down and Christopher Plummer.

Plot
In London during the Second World War, Lieutenant David Halloran, an American B-25 bomber pilot with the Eighth Air Force based in England, and Margaret Sellinger, an English nurse, meet on Hanover Street in a chance encounter.

The following day, Halloran's squadron is sent to bomb Rouen. The plane's starboard engine is hit, but the fire is put out. Cimino, the bombardier, begs Halloran to let him drop the bombs early and turn back, but Halloran does not care about the danger and orders him to wait until they are over the target, prompting him to angrily exclaim that he hates Halloran.

Halloran and Sellinger meet again two weeks later in a secret assignation on Hanover Street. Although she is married, they rapidly fall in love. She tries to resist, but is drawn to the charismatic American and they begin an affair. By contrast her husband Paul Sellinger is, by his own description, suave, pleasant, but fairly dull. A former teacher, he is now a trusted member of British intelligence.

During the next few missions, Halloran orders Cimino to drop the bombs early, as he is scared of death because he now has "a reason to live", much to the anger and disappointment of Hyer, the co-pilot. Weeks later, before take-off, Halloran hears something odd in the engine and turns back, forcing another pilot, Patman, to go in his place. That night, it is revealed that Patman's plane was hit in the bomb bay with the bombs still on the plane, killing all on board, and that had it not been for that engine, it would have been Halloran.

Ashamed of his actions, Halloran volunteers for an undercover mission in Nazi-occupied France to deliver a British agent. At the last moment, Paul Sellinger takes the place of the agent, and himself joins the mission. His reasons are initially unclear, but he slowly reveals that he wants to prove himself in the field.

Flying over France, the aircraft is hit and the crew is killed except for Halloran and Sellinger. In occupied France, the two have to work together after Sellinger injures his ankle. Sellinger's mission is to proceed to the German headquarters in Lyon and, posing as an SS officer, photograph an important document that lists the German double-agents in British intelligence. Halloran agrees to help Sellinger. Making contact with a local farmer's daughter in the French Resistance, they disguise themselves as German SS officers and photograph the documents using Sellinger's fluency in German (though, despite speaking convincing subtitled German, Plummer's Sellinger consistently states his own rank using Wehrmacht, not SS, terminology) to fool the SS. SS troops raise the alarm when Halloran makes the incorrect response to a question in German, but the pair manage to escape after a lengthy motorcycle chase, and make it back to the farm where they had received assistance earlier. However, the farm owner, the father of the collaborating woman, betrays them and they are forced to flee again; though pursued by hundreds of Nazi troops, they successfully escape when they are assisted by the French Resistance. Sellinger, however, is badly injured.

In London, Sellinger's wife finds out that Halloran and Sellinger are together and have come back home, with her husband wounded but alive. Going to visit him in the hospital on Hanover Street, she meets Lieutenant Halloran for the last time. They embrace and kiss, and he tells her that he loves her "enough to let her go", she goes in to see her husband as he goes back out into Hanover Street, where the love story had begun.

Cast

 * Harrison Ford as Lt. David Halloran
 * Lesley-Anne Down as Margaret Sellinger
 * Christopher Plummer as Paul Sellinger
 * Alec McCowen as Maj. Trumbo Marty Lynch
 * Michael Sacks as 2nd Lt. Martin Hyer (Halloran's co-pilot)
 * Richard Masur as 2nd Lt. Jerry Cimino (Halloran's bombardier/navigator)
 * John Ratzenberger as Sgt. John Lucas (Halloran's engineer/turret gunner)
 * Jay Benedict as Cpl. Daniel Giler (Halloran's radio operator/waist gunner)
 * Eric Stine as Farrell (Halloran's tail gunner)
 * Patsy Kensit as Sarah Sellinger
 * Max Wall as Harry Pike
 * Shane Rimmer as Col. Ronald Bart
 * Sherrie Hewson as Phyllis
 * Jeff Hawke as Patman (cameo)

Development
Peter Hyams' career was in a slump after the failure of Peeper (1975). He wrote the script for Telefon but was not able to direct it. He then wrote Hanover Street and said "that was a script that got a lot of attention and people wanted. I was offered an absolute fortune to sell the script but not direct it. I was running out of money and I had a wife and two babies." Hyams said his wife told him "if you sell that script I'm going to leave you," so he decided not to sell the script. The success of Capricorn One enabled Hyams to direct Hanover Street. Finance was provided by General Cinema.

The film was said to have been inspired by the 1940 film Waterloo Bridge and "other pix of that ilk."

Casting
Kris Kristofferson was cast as the male lead in the film and Genevieve Bujold as the female lead. Kristofferson was intrigued by the aerial sequences he had read in the script, as he had served as a helicopter pilot with the 82nd Airborne Division of the U.S. Army for five years. Bujold wanted to make the film because it was a love story; she also related to the subject matter of a married woman falling in love while married, because that had happened to her in real life. Christopher Plummer signed to play the third lead.

However, Kristofferson dropped out of the film. Harrison Ford, in Europe working on Force 10 from Navarone with Robert Shaw, was persuaded to take the lead role.

When Kristofferson dropped out, Bujold decided to leave the film as well. She was replaced by Lesley Anne Down. Down said she read the script quickly and only her part. "I expected it to be sweet, sickly and over the top and it was," she later said of the film.

Historical accuracy
Although United States Army Air Forces North American B-25 Mitchell bombers were featured prominently in Hanover Street, the aircraft was a rare sight in England during World War II, except in squadrons allocated to the RAF's 2nd Tactical Air Force on strikes into Occupied France in company with the de Havilland Mosquito prior to, and after, D-Day. The typical light bomber in use by the 9th US Air Force based in England was the Martin B-26 Marauder, but the film-makers were forced to use the B-25 due to the few B-26 Marauders in existence.

In the film, Margaret Sellinger emerges from a Piccadilly line tube station called "Hanover Street". In reality there was no such station and, since Hanover Street links upper Regent Street and Brook Street; this would not, in any case, match the alignment of the Piccadilly line, unless there were a fictitious spur similar to that which ran from Holborn to Aldwych from 1907 to 1994.

Aircraft

The aerial sequences were mostly filmed at the by then-disused Bovingdon airfield using five North American B-25 Mitchell bombers flown over to England from USA specially for the filming. Scenes showing the B25s flying through flak on the bombing run were filmed at Little Rissington, the simulated flak bursts being provided by current British AA gunners.

Filming
Ford said he accepted the role "because I had never played a love scene in all my years in the movies. I thought that the part would help me grow, but I hated making that film from start to finish." He said he "never saw" the film. "They wanted me to promote it but they wouldn't show it to me and I'd never pay to see it. It was a terrible experience."

Box office
The film earned $1.5 million in the U.S. in 1979 and was considered a box-office failure.

Critical reception
Hanover Street received decidedly mixed reviews from critics. Vincent Canby referred to that fame in his review:

"Every now and then a film comes along of such painstaking, overripe foolishness that it breaks through the garbage barrier to become one of those rare movies you rush to see for laughs. What Peter Hyams has achieved with Hanover Street, his new film about a wartime romance set in the London of 1943, is a movie that is almost as funny as Woody Allen's What's Up, Tiger Lily? which, if you remember, was a straight-faced Japanese spy picture that Woody took over and dubbed with a hilariously knuckle-brained English language soundtrack. The clichés were everywhere, but always just slightly out of place and inappropriate. This pretty much describes the unfortunate method of Hanover Street, which looks as if Mr. Hyams had studied every popular romantic drama, from A Farewell to Arms to Love Affair and Love Story, and then, when he left the screening room, had been hit on the head with a brick. ... [Ford's] more of a comic-strip character here than he was in Star Wars, which was a live-action cartoon."

Variety wrote that the film is "reasonably effective as a war film with a love story background. Unfortunately it's meant to be a love story set against a war background." It also notes: "Down again distinguishes herself in a role that doesn't seem up to her standards, while Ford back in the pilot's seat again projects an earnest, if dull, presence. Rest of the cast is under-utilized. John Barry has contributed a score that evokes Douglas Sirk's glossy tearjerkers of the 1950s." Film reviewer Leonard Maltin had a similar critique, calling Hanover Street, "slick, but contrived and unconvincing."

Awards
Patsy Kensit was nominated for, but did not win, the Best Juvenile Actress in a Motion Picture award for 1980 from Young Artists Awards.

Other
The film has developed a following among film fans and aviation enthusiasts due to the flying sequences.

title: Hanover Street (film)