text:
Amnon Jackont

Amnon Jackont (אמנון ז'קונט; born 1948 in Ramat Gan) is an Israeli author of thrillers, a historian and a literary editor.

Jackont was allowed to postpone his military service for law studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. During the summer breaks he would serve in the military, but was injured and became disabled. He stopped his studies and became a successful businessman, active in real estate, investments and insurance. From 1980 he writes next to his business endeavours. Almost all his books became bestsellers. From 1988 he worked as a literary editor for the Keter Publishing House.

In 1997 Jackont ceased his business activities to concentrate on his own writing and editing and on his history studies at the Tel Aviv University. After completing his masters (2002), he has completed his PhD degree at the same university (2006).

Since 2002 he is also active in business and relationship counseling, in workshops and TV programs. Some of these are conducted with his wife, radio show hostess Varda Rasiel-Jackont. Amnon and Varda Jackont live in Tel Aviv.

Trojan horse exposure
In 2005, Jackont helped expose an industrial espionage ring involving executives at several major Israeli corporations. During the previous year, he had noticed excerpts from an unpublished manuscript appearing in internet forums, followed by a series of harsh reviews once the book was actually published. He also determined that his email was being read and manipulated by someone else.

When a computer technician found that the problem was a Trojan horse program on his computer, Jackont reported the matter to police. The person responsible was eventually identified as Michael Haephrati, the ex-husband of Varda's daughter from a previous marriage, who had apparently written the Trojan horse. The same program was identified as having been used by three private detective agencies to collect information from the espionage victims on behalf of their competitors.

Hebrew

 * Pesek-Zeman (Borrowed Time) (Israel: Am Oved, 1982) ISBN 965-13-0115-5.
 * Malkodet Devash (Honey Trap) (Israel: Keter Publishing, 1984) ISBN 965-07-0363-2.
 * Ish ha-sagrir: Sifre penai (The Rainy-Day Man) (Israel: Am Oved, 1987) ISBN 965-13-0475-8.
 * Aharon ha-meahavim ha-hakhamim (Last of the Wise Lovers) (Israel: Keter Publishing, 1991) ISBN 965-07-0165-6.
 * Mukhan le-hayim: Sipurim: Keter ketsarim (Ready for Life: Stories) (Israel: Keter Publishing, 2000) ISBN 965-07-0915-0.
 * Mavo Le-Ahava (Introduction to Love) (Israel: Keter Publishing, 2001)
 * With Varda Rasiel Jacont: Shin Kmo Sheker (L as in Lies) (Israel: Keter Publishing, 2004)
 * Hidath Moti (The Riddle of my Death) (Israel: Keter Publishing, 2009)
 * Over Va-Shav (Resurgence - A financial documentary story) (Israel: Yedioth Aharonoth Books, 2009)
 * Meir Amit – Ha-ish ve-ha-Mosad (Meir Amit - A Man and Mossad) (Israel: Yedioth Ahronoth Books, 2012)

English

 * Borrowed Time (UK: Hamish Hamilton, 1986, ISBN 0-241-11847-6) (USA: Trafalgar Square, 1988, ISBN 0-241-11875-1)

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

title: Amnon Jackont


text:
Condillac

Condillac may refer to:

 * Étienne Bonnot de Condillac (1715–1780), French philosopher
 * Condillac, Drôme, a commune of the Drôme département in France

title: Condillac


text:
Alfred Nutt

Alfred Trübner Nutt (22 November 1856 – 21 May 1910) was a prominent English publisher, folklorist, and Arthurian and Celtic scholar. Born in 1856 into a literary family in London, he took over his late father's publishing business in 1878 after studying in France and extensive European business apprenticeships.

Nutt made significant contributions to the field of folklore studies, founding The Folk-Lore Journal and presiding over The Folklore Society. His scholarly pursuits included significant research on the Celtic roots of the Grail legend, collaborative efforts with fellow scholars, and involvement in founding the Irish Texts Society. Nutt drowned while attempting to rescue his disabled son from the Seine in 1910.

Biography
Alfred Trübner Nutt was born in London on 22 November 1856, the eldest, and only surviving, son of bookseller and publisher David Nutt. His mother, Ellen, was the granddaughter of another well-known publisher, William Miller. His middle name was inspired by his father's publishing partnership with Nicholas Trübner. Nutt was educated at the University College School, London, and the College de Vitry-le-François, in Vitry-le-François, northeast France.

Nutt spent three years serving a business apprenticeship in Leipzig, Berlin, and Paris, before taking over his late father's business in 1878. In 1885, he married Marie Louise Gelly; they had two sons. Nutt was the founder of The Folk-Lore Journal (later Folk-Lore) and was elected president of The Folklore Society in 1897 and 1898.

Nutt was a friend and supporter of Jessie Weston, sharing her interest in Celtic origins of the Grail legend, and publishing some of her books. He was also associated with Whitley Stokes, Eleanor Hull and Kuno Meyer and his work had a substantial influence on the scholarship of Roger Sherman Loomis. Nutt was also instrumental to the establishment of the Irish Texts Society and his firm produced its early publications.

Nutt produced numerous works of scholarship, including Studies on the Legend of the Holy Grail: With Especial Reference to the Hypothesis of Its Celtic Origin, and his collaboration with Meyer on The Voyage of Bran, Son of Febal, to the Land of the Living; An Old Irish Saga. He authored analyses of the Mabinogion and was working on an annotated edition of Matthew Arnold's Study of Celtic Literature at the time of his death.

Nutt drowned in the Seine river, France, while on holiday at Melun, on 21 May 1910. He was attempting to rescue his disabled 17-year-old son, who had been dragged into the river when his horse bolted; his son survived. His wife succeeded him as head of the firm.

Selected publications

 * Studies on the Legend of the Holy Grail: With Especial Reference to the Hypothesis of Its Celtic Origin (London: David Nutt, 1888)
 * Beside the Fire: A Collection of Irish Gaelic Folk Stories (with Douglas Hyde; London: David Nutt, 1890)
 * Folk and Hero Tales (with Duncan MacInnes; London: David Nutt, 1890)
 * The Voyage of Bran, Son of Febal, to the Land of the Living; An Old Irish Saga (with Kuno Meyer; London: David Nutt, 1895)
 * Celtic and Mediæval Romance (London: David Nutt, 1899)

title: Alfred Nutt


text:
1992 French Open

The 1992 French Open was a tennis tournament that took place on the outdoor clay courts at the Stade Roland Garros in Paris, France. The tournament was held from 25 May until 7 June. It was the 96th staging of the French Open, and the second Grand Slam tennis event of 1992. This was the last time both the top seeds won the men's singles and women's singles until the 2018 French Open.

Men's singles
🇺🇸 Jim Courier defeated Petr Korda, 7–5, 6–2, 6–1
 * • It was Courier's 3rd career Grand Slam singles title and his 2nd and last title at the French Open. It was Courier's 5th title of the year, and his 9th overall.

Women's singles
Monica Seles defeated 🇩🇪 Steffi Graf, 6–2, 3–6, 10–8
 * • It was Seles' 6th career Grand Slam singles title and her 3rd and last title at the French Open. It was Monica's 6th title of the year, and her 26th overall.

Men's doubles
Jakob Hlasek / Marc Rosset defeated  David Adams /  Andrei Olhovskiy, 7–6, 6–7, 7–5
 * • It was Hlasek's 1st and only career Grand Slam doubles title.
 * • It was Rosset's 1st and only career Grand Slam doubles title.

Women's doubles
🇺🇸 Gigi Fernández / Natalia Zvereva defeated 🇪🇸 Conchita Martínez / 🇪🇸 Arantxa Sánchez Vicario, 6–3, 6–2

Mixed doubles
🇪🇸 Arantxa Sánchez Vicario / 🇦🇺 Todd Woodbridge defeated 🇺🇸 Lori McNeil / 🇺🇸 Bryan Shelton, 6–2, 6–3
 * • It was Sánchez Vicario's 2nd career Grand Slam mixed doubles title and her 2nd and last title at the French Open.
 * • It was Woodbridge's 2nd career Grand Slam mixed doubles title and his 1st title at the French Open.

Boys' singles
Andrei Pavel defeated 🇮🇹 Mosé Navarra, 6–1, 3–6, 6–3

Girls' singles
Rossana de los Ríos defeated 🇦🇷 Paola Suárez, 6–4, 6–0

Boys' doubles
🇲🇽 Enrique Abaroa / 🇦🇺 Grant Doyle

Girls' doubles
🇧🇪 Laurence Courtois / 🇧🇪 Nancy Feber

Prize money
Total prize money for the event was FF41,425,000.

title: 1992 French Open


text:
User:Richard L. Routh

Richard L. Routh is on the faculty of USC Upstate in the Department of Informatics. He can be reached via email at rrouth@uscupstate.edu. Ric Routh is also the President and Chairman of the Board of The GINESYS Corporation. He is also the Chairman of the Board of Informatics Professional Corporation. He is also the co-host of the Executive IT Forum--a monthly information and discussion forum for CIOs and IT DIrectors in the Upstate region of South Carolina.

Dr. Routh has a Ph.D. in Artificial Intelligence (from the Air Force Institute of Technology), an M.S. in Computer Systems (from A.F.I.T.), an M.A. in Business Management (from U. of P., AZ), and a B.S. in Applied Engineering (from U.S.M.A. at West Point, NY).

title: User:Richard L. Routh


text:
Talk:Gigantomachy

Some more details found here: Gigantes. Alexander 007 19:48, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * All the material here is now edited at Gigantes where the Wikipedia reader is most likely to look. The Gigantes can scarcely be separated from the Gigantomachia. Any objections to converting this article to a redirect? --Wetman 21:32, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

 * No objections. Alexander 007 21:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Expanded back, should work now. Brand[t] 22:32, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Yeah, it gives the Wikipedia reader some runaround exercise. The Gigantes can still scarcely be separated from the Gigantomachia.Plus mistaking Gigantes for Hecatonchires (Giants with their thousand hands), asserting that Ossa and Pelion were piled on Olympus (to reach what,  Heaven!) . Some reading in primary sources that could be cited would improve the reporting aspect. If encyclopedic thinking is out of reach, then Gigantomachia could be made into at least further two tiny articles, on lost poems. --Wetman (talk) 06:56, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hecatonchires were hundred-handed, while Ossa and Pelion were indeed Giants (Aloadae). Brand[t] 07:58, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Based on the above discussion, and the fact that all the content of this article (plus much more) is now contained in Giants (Greek mythology), I'm going make this article a redirect to there. Paul August ☎ 15:49, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gigantomachy


text:
Episcopal Diocese of Michigan

The Episcopal Diocese of Michigan is the Episcopal diocese comprising 70 congregations in the southeast part of Michigan.

The diocese traces its roots to the founding of St. Paul's, Detroit in 1824. It became a diocese of the Episcopal Church in 1836, one year before the State of Michigan entered the Union. Initially encompassing the entire Michigan Territory, it split several times to reflect a growing population, and now comprises only the densely populated southeastern portion of the state.

St. Paul's, Detroit was formally designated the cathedral of the diocese in 1912.

Location
At its foundation, one year before Michigan achieved statehood, the Diocese encompassed all of Michigan. As the church grew, the bishops found it difficult to administer such a large area, and the parishes farther from Detroit desired a bishop closer to their own areas and more attuned to their local needs.

To address these concerns, the diocese has divided three times. In 1875, the western half of the Lower Peninsula became the Diocese of Western Michigan. In 1895, the Upper Peninsula became the Diocese of Marquette (later renamed Diocese of Northern Michigan). Finally in 1995, the northeastern Lower Peninsula, Saginaw Valley, and Thumb areas (the northern two-thirds of its then remaining territory) became the Diocese of Eastern Michigan.

As a result of these divisions, the current Diocese of Michigan includes only the Detroit Metropolitan Area and adjacent regions as far west as Lansing, Jackson, and Hillsdale.

Officially, the diocesan boundaries are as follows:

The Counties of Hillsdale, Lenawee, Monroe, Jackson, Washtenaw, Wayne, Ingham, Livingston, Oakland (except for Holly Township), Macomb and that portion of Clinton County south of Price Road

History
The Episcopal Diocese of Michigan was organized In the fall of 1832 by parishes in Detroit, Ann Arbor, Troy, Monroe, Ypsilanti and Tecumseh. It became the 21st diocese of the Episcopal Church of the United States. From its beginning, St. Paul's Church in Detroit (the current Cathedral) served, initially informally until the formal designation in 1912, as the see of the diocese, and the early bishops served as rector of St. Paul's.

In the 1800s, the diocese focused on rapidly spreading the gospel to the region. As early as the 1840s, the church began to develop urban missions in Detroit to African Americans (St. Matthew's) and laborers (Mariners’ Church). The 1850s saw the development of missions in the Saginaw Valley and Upper Peninsula. Supporting churches in poor farming areas was a focus during this period.

The major emphasis of the diocese changed in the 1900s as the automobile industry began to prosper in Michigan. Throughout the century the financial stability of the diocese were closely tied to the development and decline of the industry in the Detroit area. The rapid rise in Detroit's wealth and power in the 1910s and 1920s were reflected in a diocese that became one of the largest and most influential in The Episcopal Church. The suburbanization of the 1940s and 1950s led to a focus on the physical expansion in the diocese with the addition of new church buildings. The decline of Detroit in the 1970s and 1980s saw the diocese cutting back and closing parishes.

Early in the 20th century, Bishop Charles D. Williams led the diocese to discuss the church's responsibility to the labor movement. Later Bishops Richard S. M. Emrich and Harry Coleman McGehee, Jr. began community activism around the issues of civil rights, peace, and justice. Beginning in the 1950s, the diocese debated the role of women, and later gays and lesbians, in the church.

Governance
Since 1920 the executive council (since 1995 called diocesan council) has met between conventions to continue its policy-making role. The standing committee provides advice and counsel for the bishop. Since 1875 the trustees of the diocese have managed the diocesan assets. The chancellor has since 1904 provided the bishop with legal counsel. The parishes in the diocese have been divided into regional groupings called at various times convocations, archdeaconries, area councils, and currently deaneries, that have varied over the years in number, names, and responsibilities.

Bishops
The immediate past bishop was Wendell Gibbs, one of only a few African-American bishops in the Episcopal Church. The current bishop is Bonnie Perry. Its first bishop was Samuel Allen McCoskry, who served 1836–1878.
 * 1) Samuel Allen McCoskry (1836 - 1878)
 * 2) Samuel Smith Harris (1879 - 1889)
 * 3) Thomas Frederick Davies, Sr. (1889 - 1905)
 * 4) Charles D. Williams (1906 - 1923)
 * 5) Herman Page (1924 - 1939)
 * 6) Frank W. Creighton (1940 - 1948)
 * 7) Richard S. M. Emrich (1948 - 1973)
 * 8) Harry Coleman McGehee, Jr. (1973 - 1990)
 * 9) R. Stewart Wood (1990 - 2000)
 * 10) Wendell Gibbs (2000 - 2020)
 * 11) Bonnie Perry (2020-)

title: Episcopal Diocese of Michigan


text:
Talk:Leaving Certificate (Ireland)

 * Discussion archive #1

Nightmare fuel
The article is excessively long and confusing, particularly because the exam system is described in various different sections of the article, then the prose performs sudden handbrake turns when it goes on to describe more recent changes to the way the exams operate. This produces an unfortunate whiplash effect in the mind of the disappointed reader who thought s/he was reading current information up to that point but finds that it is in fact outdated, with following paragraphs describing changes that have been introduced to the curriculum or how the exam is organised.

I have spent four hours cleaning up the article but further clean up is needed by someone patient enough to pick apart and excise many paragraphs of historical information so that only the current situation is described.

This will be tricky, unfortunately, because some of the information described here – before changes were introduced on different occasions by the Department of Education – remain current while some of the information is deadwood. It's a sad and chaotic mess.

In addition, the article ought to be reviewed critically to determine how much detail is needed, anyway. It contains far too much information. — O'Dea (talk) 15:02, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Looking over the article it appears fine. All of it's information is up to date and it does not conflate past and present information. The two are kept separate. As it currently stands there is no need to try and update the article because it already is updated. Dubarr18 (talk) 21:08, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The article really isn't "fine" because at various points it describes aspects of the leaving cert without warning the reader that the text being read at that point is historical, then the reader reaches a point where the article continues "then in year X, things changed." It is only at this point that the reader understands that the previous paragraphs are outdated, they are not descriptions of the current state of affairs, which follows the statement "then in year X." This confusion occurs a few times during the article, which is playing ping-pong against the reader's skull. — O'Dea  (talk) 06:27, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Again the article is fine in this regard. It doesn't switch between the past and present as you are saying here, all of it's information is up to date. Do you have anything you would consider an example of this? Dubarr18 (talk) 17:49, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 29 August 2023

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

The result of the move request was: not moved. Consensus that the existing DAB is necessary, as there are other countries that use the term "Leaving Certificate" to a meaningful extent. Additional rough consensus that the capitalized form "Leaving Certificate" is widely enough used to be preferable to sentence case. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 14:25, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Leaving Certificate (Ireland) → Leaving Certificate – The current target of Leaving Certificate is a redirect to List of secondary school leaving qualifications, but as posted in Talk: Leaving Certificate and discussed by myself in this AfD, the term "Leaving Certificate" is by far most commonly used to refer to the Irish qualification. I'm proposing this move and the deletion of the redirect to List of secondary school leaving qualifications, as List of secondary school leaving qualifications gets far fewer views than Leaving Certificate (Ireland), with Leaving Certificate getting barely 10 views a day. pinktoebeans (talk) 14:56, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Either way, move to WP:LOWERCASE (lowercase "certificate"). This is a common noun, not a proper noun. — BarrelProof (talk) 15:09, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The full name of the qualification is a proper noun so "Certificate" does need to be capitalised - see and   pinktoebeans  (talk) 15:44, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * It's an official certification, and the term is capitalized by some sources, but it is not a proper noun, since there is not just one single certificate – they hand out tens of thousands of these certificates. As far as I know, it is also not a trademark. — BarrelProof (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The name of this Irish secondary qualification is Leaving Certificate. Each word is always capitalised in every source that mentions it (I selected an official Irish government website and a major newspaper to show this convention), not just some. Please have a search of your own if you'd like to see this. Therefore, as Leaving Certificate is the official name of this specific qualification, it is thus a proper name and proper noun, and both words should be capitalised. pinktoebeans  (talk) 19:51, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * A discussion on the lowercase “certificate” is absurd to me. The Leaving Certificate is an official certification in Ireland and shouldn’t be lowercased proper noun or not. A simple Google search will see thousands of results showing Leaving Certificate or Leaving Cert. It has always been capitalised. As shown on the Irish government’s site and State Examinations Commission it’s never a lowercase ‘certificate’.  Same goes for the Leaving Certificate Applied and Leaving Certificate Vocational Programme. Edl-irishboy (talk) 19:52, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

 * Oppose - a search yields results which suggest the "leaving certificate" term is used in other countries such as India, so pointing at the list for disambiguation seems more appropriate in my opinion. - Indefensible (talk) 17:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose A high school graduation/leaving certificate/diploma is a general concept covered by List of secondary school leaving qualifications. As such, the various terms that might reasonably describe this general concept should reasonably direct to the general concept. Cinderella157 (talk) 10:20, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * oppose "Leaving Certificate" is not limited only to Ireland. The current redirect to "List of secondary school leaving qualifications" is the way to go. —usernamekiran (talk) 04:16, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Leaving Certificate (Ireland)


text:
User talk:FRANCINE

bABY GENDER SELECTION

cHOOSE THE GENDER OF YOUR BABY. bABY BOY OR bABY GIRL. cOUPLES WANT TO HAVE A SAY SO IN CHOOSING THE GENDER OF THEIR BABIES SO THAT THEY CAN COMPLETE THEIR FAMILIES gENDER SELECTION IS DONE WHEN YOU WALK INTO YOUR LAWYER'S OFFICE FOR ADOPTION AND HE ASKS YOU, " DO YOU WANT A BOY OR A GIRL?" mORE ON THIS TOPIC:

www.baby-gender-selection.com

title: User talk:FRANCINE


text:
Talk:The Man in the High Castle

Cleanup needed

 * Lead - really poorly done. It doesn't give the reader any real information about the story.
 * Plot summary - this covers only the alternative history and none of the plot. Not acceptable.
 * Characters - should be merged into the plot summary, for the most part
 * Storylines - that's the purpose of the plot summary
 * Story-within-the-story - completely unsourced
 * The I Ching as literary device - relevant, but completely unsourced
 * Themes - relevant, but unsourced
 * Inspirations - usually covered in a background and/or development section
 * Reception - sparse, requiring expansion
 * Sequel - unsourced quotes

This is a really sad state of affairs. How is it, that after 848 edits by 503 editors over 13 years, we are left with this article? I'm willing to help out, but there's got to be a way to improve the quality of our articles so that this doesn't happen again. Viriditas (talk) 03:29, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

 * The problem is that articles such as this attract well-meaning fans of the work that want to write about it to relive and analyse it, rather than write an encyclopedia article of use to someone who hasn't necessarily read the book. I've started going through and chopping the egrariously unsourced OR, remove unnecessary details and merge some of the smaller sections. Ashmoo (talk) 12:11, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Map
This map has been the source of much discussion, and is no longer in the article. I'm preserving it here for interest's sake ... it's actually useful to readers of the novel wanting to keep track of the world's geopolitical situation, though the Original Research angle makes it a problematic inclusion in a Wikipedia article.

70.54.140.52 (talk) 20:18, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

 * The map was again returned to here, for the reasons of WP:OR indicated by the other, separate editor in October 2014. Note, I am a regular scientific editor here, with login, and not the same IP editor above (but am on the road). Please, don't return this map without a verifiable citation as to its origin. Unlike Amazon and Netflix, Wikipedia has not yet begun to create original content!  Cheers, discuss here.  Le Prof.  71.239.87.100 (talk) 19:16, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Would it be sufficient to cite the pages from the book? Int 80h (talk) 03:20, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Quick question: why is the Mediterranean covered by country shading? Shouldn't the seas be visible, as it is everywhere else?-- Gen. Quon   (Talk)
 * IIRC, in the novel and the TV series the Atlantropa project has drained the Mediterranean. --Shimbo (talk) 11:27, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

Unsourced BLP-type statement moved here
The following fact-rich statement: is full of BLP references, and could be from a source that has first hand information (not allowed) or is taking it from a source without attribution, negating verifiability (also not allowed). Because it raises BLP concerns, as well as plagiarism or OR concerns, it is moved here. If verifiable, it should be easily sourced (preferably by its original contributing editor). Le Prof 71.239.87.100 (talk) 19:08, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * This has been adapted by Frank Spotnitz and is being produced for Amazon by Ridley Scott, David Zucker and Jordan Sheehan for Scott Free, Stewart Mackinnon and Christian Baute for Headline Pictures, and Isa Hackett and Kalen Egan for Electric Shepherd.

See ongoing map discussion above.
Map moved here again, for reasons stated by original editor. Two editors now concur on WP:OR violation (until a reference can be provided to indicate otherwise). I will elevate this as necessary, to prevent the reappearance of original research, on principle, and to avoid the policy-violating precedent that it engenders. See above regarding my status here. Le Prof. 71.239.87.100 (talk) 19:19, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
 * There's a "wrong" version in the Article again, where someone crudely painted a Mediterranean Sea into it. I don't see how this would benefit anyone. Since the map is explained in detail in the book, I don't quite see problems making a depiction here, as it is basically just a visualization of the data already available. In any event, the map currently (2016-01-05) on the article page is not only WP:OR but also incorrect. Int 80h (talk) 03:19, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Unsourced section removed
I've removed the section below from the article. It is completely without citation and appears to be an evaluation (read: Original Research) of the author's "errors" in the story. As we aren't citable, out it goes. It cannot return until we can cite someone speaking in terms of the story who points out these supposed "mistakes".

 * Goofs
 * The premise of the novel may contain several gaffes on Dick's part. First, the point of divergence is that Zangara assassinated Roosevelt. In our timeline, the attempt happened on February 15, 1933, before Roosevelt's term as President began. In the story, Roosevelt is said to have been President for a year. Either the divergining Zangara postponed his plans by a year, or the author simply made a mistake.
 * The idea that the Axis could subjugate a large part of North America is questionable too. Although US propaganda of the 1940s often portrayed the Axis' plan as literal world domination, there is no evidence that Japan ever sought to conquer and occupy California, in light of the resources necessary to govern an unwilling population. Japan's stated goal was to dominate the Pacific Ocean as its sphere of influence. The conquest notion famously got started from an out-of-context remark by Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto who was attempting to persuade his handlers to leave the USA alone. Likewise, it is now known that the Third Reich's goal was to dominate Europe and avoid entanglements with the United States, a much larger, stronger nation. The level of technology that the story's Axis develop in such a short time is far beyond the capacity of anything in the mid 20th century, suggesting that Dick got his idea of Axis capabilities purely from the "bogeymen" portrayals within US propaganda.

- Jack Sebastian (talk) 05:00, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

 * I've also removed virtually all of the See Also and Further Reading sections, for the same reasons listed above. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 18:42, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

 * Re the Further Reading list: I can see that a number of entries can be safely omitted but the ones with a direct reference to the book in the title (such as Campbell, Laura E. 1992. "Dickian Time in The Man in the High Castle", Extrapolation, 33: 3, pp. 190–201), even though the article isn't cited in the main article, would warrant an entry in any Further Reading list. I've always taken the "Further Reading" concept as allowing the wiki reader to explore further afield if they so wish. Just a thought, and I'm happy to drop the point if this has been discussed and decided upon elsewhere. Perry Middlemiss (talk) 22:26, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree, and have restored Further Reading, but not See Also, nor the rightly-removed WP:OR goofs section mentioned above. We no more need a separate source to tell us that a work with "The Man in the High Castle" in its title is about "The Man in the High Castle" than we would need a source to tell us that the sources cited in the article are about what they are being used for.  That way lies an endless abyss of meta, and several of these are ipso facto archetypal WP:SCHOLARSHIP and serve as reliable sources in their own right.  That said, the encyclopedic references in there could do with more explicit mentions of the relevant sections, such as an entry for Philip K. Dick or "The Man in the High Castle" in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, which is currently ambiguous as to its relationship to the article.  —Geoff Capp (talk) 21:00, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Upon reflection with the comments here, I would not oppose those further reading bits that were removed earlier, so long as the material is directly (and I wish to stress that) related to the material. It would be even better if the material were used as reference for the article, so it could be directly incorporated into the article. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 19:28, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
 * If I had direct access to those sources (and in some cases comprehension of Italian beyond that provided by translation engines), I'm sure a way could be found to fold most of them in as references. I think it would be a good idea to have that as an article goal over time: as people track them down, additional material and corroboration can be incorporated, and the relevant sources can be moved from Further Reading into References as appropriate. As an interim measure, so that potential sources not entirely lost, I will put the section back (standardizing the formats a little more, though citation templates would be preferable IMHO), and move the questionable entries to this subsection of the talk page—that will leave the information available to editors who want to see if there's useful material there without cluttering the article itself, providing better conformance to the expected editorial standards and policies.  —Geoff Capp (talk) 04:17, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * And here's a diff of the article showing the changes from the last version of Further Reading. —Geoff Capp (talk) 04:19, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Moved from Further Reading pending verification of relevance
—Geoff Capp (talk) 04:17, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

'Longer'?
In the intro it states that the version of World War II in this story is 'longer', and then gives its start and end as 1939 to 1945...which is the exact same length as the real War. The word 'longer' here should either be clarified or removed.Trilobright (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2015 (UTC)

Hitler's speech in episode 6 of season 1 mentions 1947 as the ending year.Tarrasq (talk) 20:05, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Edit
Removed comment claiming that GB dropped nuclear bombs on US army bases in The Grasshopper Lies Heavy. No character in TMITHC states this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.92.67.130 (talk) 14:05, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on The Man in the High Castle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20100115010708/http://blackstoneaudio.com/audiobook.cfm?id=4699 to http://www.blackstoneaudio.com/audiobook.cfm?id=4699

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

Wegener
The article states that "and oddly there are no German military or naval - as opposed to SS - personnel depicted anywhere in the first season"; though I seem to remember that Wegener was addressed with a military rank (, not with the SS rank. If I remember correctly, both Oberst and Colonel were used, I would need to verify. His uniform in the last two episodes would also point that he is in the military.

 * The reason there are no SS ranks in the novel is because, in this version of history, the SA got the upper hand of the SS, there was no Night of the Long Knives; as a result, the German High Command was mostly staffed by professional soldiers, as opposed to ideologues, and so would not have made basic tactical errors like invading Russia during the winter.
 * Nuttyskin (talk) 22:50, 29 August 2021 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 18 May 2019
Remove page protection please 69.65.90.61 (talk) 16:05, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. – Þjarkur (talk) 16:10, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 26 May 2019
Baynes and Tagomi finally meet their Japanese contact as the Nazi secret police, the Sicherheitsdienst (SD), close in to arrest Baynes, who is revealed to be a Nazi defector named Rudolf Wegener. Wegener warns his contact, a famed Japanese general, of Operation Dandelion, an upcoming Goebbels-approved plan for the Nazis to launch a surprise attack on the Japanese Home Islands, in order to obliterate them in one swift stroke and rule the rest of the former United States. As Frink is elsewhere exposed as a Jew and arrested, Wegener and Tagomi are confronted by two SD agents, both of whom Tagomi shoots dead with an antique American pistol. Back in Colorado, Joe abruptly changes his appearance and mannerisms before the trip to the High Castle, leading Juliana to deduce that he intends to murder Abendsen. Joe confirms this, revealing himself to be an undercover Swiss Nazi assassin. Juliana mortally wounds Joe and drives off to warn Abendsen of the threat to his life. 69.65.90.61 (talk) 11:45, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. NiciVampireHeart 15:40, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Removed map as exremely speculative & OR
I raised this on the talk page of the file itself, where it got no response, so I have removed the map and moved the discussion here.

In particular, I don't accept the very large Rock Mountain States shown here. It isn't logical and doesn't seem consistent with PKD's vision.

The map creator's explanation at www.high-castle-world-map.com doesn't really help much either: "The role of the Rocky Mountain States is that of a buffer state between territories which are controlled by Nazi Germany and Japan. It could not fulfil this role if Germany would be able to send troops through the territory of the allied CSA all the way west to the PSA border. Therefore Texas and the more western states must belong to the RMS to keep both sides apart from each other." On the contrary: as a buffer, the RMS is clearly a minimal concession by the nuclear-armed Nazis to the Japanese, using only mountain/desert areas less viable for crop-growing etc. Real world Nazi practice in Europe also suggests that they would impose a RMS without great regard for the traditional national or state borders. Hence it might even be restricted to Arizona, Utah, Idaho, Western Montana and the Canadian Rockies (Eastern BC). Even if the Nazis gave the quasi-puppet CSA by giving it Texas, the CSA still doesn't border the PSA or "threaten" the Japanese.

Grant |  Talk  14:21, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

The author of the map has taken the reason for the most eastern extent of the RMS directly from the novel and provided the quote. On page 145 of the Google Books version Freiherr Hugo Reiss reads in ″The Grasshopper Lies Heavy″. And then it says: ″Where was this published? Herr Reiss inspected the cover of the book. Omaha, Nebraska. Last outpost of the former plutocratic U. S. publishing industry, once located in downtown New York and supported by Jewish and communist gold... Maybe this Abendsen is a Jew. (...) Actual name probably Abendstein. (...) Beyond doubt, we ought to send somebody across into the R.M.S. to pay Herr Abendstein a visit.″ From this section, we can see, that in PKD's vision Nebraska belongs to the RMS.

A few lines later on, Reiss is reconsiders the possibility of a raid against the publisher of ″The Grasshopper Lies Heavy″. He thinks: ″Maybe it's foolish. The book after all is in print. Too late now. And that's Japanese-dominated territory. ...the little yellow men would rise a terrific fuss.″ This tells us that Japan has a stronger influence in the RMS. It "dominates" the territory. The extent of it may be due rather to Japanese than to German decisions.

Your quote from "High-Castle-World-Map.com" is dealing with the borders of the "South", the re-established CSA, not the RMS. When the novel tells us, that the RMS do contain the still existent Nebraska, how far should the outline of the CSA go beyond that maximum eastern outreach into the west? If the Japanese are "dominating" the RMS, why should they accept that a German puppet state will diminish the distance to German controlled territory?

Granted that the novel itself is the best possible source and does contain an explanation for the borders of the RMS, do you agree to the map being inserted into the article again? Gernsback67 (talk) 18:05, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

There has been no response. I don't see how the notion that "the RMS is clearly a minimal concession by the nuclear-armed Nazis to the Japanese" can be proven by any quote from the novel. That "real world Nazi practice in Europe also suggests that they would impose a RMS without great regard for the traditional national or state borders" is something, an editor knows who is mainly interested in military history rather than literature. PKD however was no military historian. He has mentioned many states in his novel which are part of PSA or RMS as a whole. The quotes above are clearly showing that Nebraska is a part of the RMS. There is no reason why they should not be extended as much as this in the north and south of Nebraska. To remove the map on these grounds was not justified. Consequently I have put it back again. Gernsback67 (talk) 17:39, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2019
the map shown is a fan map and is not canon to the book. it shows inconsistencies with the book such as the Confederates States of America which is never mentioned in the book and most likely does not exist in that universe. 173.64.119.242 (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

 * ❌. No request made. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 02:37, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Although to follow up, I looked at the map in question, and it was really inappropriate, so I've simply removed it. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 02:51, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

 * The world map has been removed under the assumption that a CSA-style Nazi controlled puppet regime in the South of the former USA has not been mentioned in the novel and the map therefore would be "non-canon". This however does not correspond to the facts. The existence of such a fourth state next to the PSA, RMS and remaining USA has been mentioned in the novel very early, on page 18 of the Google books edition. There Frank Frink is thinking about where he should move to in order to find a new work. And he thinks:
 * "What about the South? Ugh Not that. As a white man he would have plenty of space, in fact more that he had here in the PSA. But... he did not want that kind of place.
 * And worse, the South had a cat's cradle of ties, economic, ideological, and God knew what, with the Reich. And Frank Frink was a jew."
 * From this passage, we can see, that "The South" does exist and is under strong German influence. It cannot mistaken for the remaining USA, which have New York as its capital or for the RMS, which are under Japanese oversigt (see section 12 for this). "The South" of course is only a colloquial name. In his novel "Flow My Tears, the Policeman Said" Philipp K. Dick dipicted a scenario which was beginning after a "Second Civil War": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_My_Tears,_the_Policeman_Said. From this you can see that the question how the civil war history might affect the U.S. society of his time was not alien to him. When you know that "The South" is a racist, anti-semitic regime which collaborates with the Nazis and must be placed to the East of the RMS buffer state, what official name would you give to this entity and what former U.S. states would you include on a map of it? Would you include Illinois? Would you leave out Virginia? It is obvious what PKD wanted to imply. The Nazis were able to wield control over a vast area without establishing an own occupation system by relying on the racist tradition of the Confederacy. The CSA were re-established as a collaborative puppet regime. This is why the name Confederate States of America is included into the legend of the map. The colloquial name from the novel "The South" was added for those who have not only dealt superficially with the novel and might recognize it. The passage in the novel is short and was overlooked by almost everybody. Wikipedia has overlooked it until only recently. Nevertheless the existence of "The South" in the novel is a fact. The notion, that there is only a trinity of a Japanese, a German and a neutal territory, was always wrong. It became much more popular due to the tv show. It is however nothing else but a common belief. To counter a false common belief with provable facts in my view is what Wikipedia is about. A graphical dipiction would help much to show directly and obviously that the world of the novel is not the world of the tv show.
 * Naming the map a "fan map" is a misunderstanding, I think. Thousands of Wikipedia contributors are creating maps every day based on information they have collected from reliable sources. This map is no exception. It has been designed especially for Wikipedia. The reliable source with regard to the question discussed here of course is the novel. To publish the map on an own website parallel to the upload on Wikipedia simply was a method of the author to offer additional information about the creation of the map, so any editor and any reader of Wikipedia could clarify open questions. On the website this could be done in a wider extent than possible on this talk page. The author of the map has explained this on the website meanwhile: http://www.high-castle-world-map.com/Site/purpose.htm. If user 173.64.119.242 had informed himself about the new CSA there, he would have found the citation quoted above and the request for deletion of the map would never have come about. Now that the map has been included on Wikipedia pages in 17 other languages, the author is hoping that editors of this pages might inform themselves on the website if necessary. This would be helpful because he himself is unable to communicate with them on their talk pages in their respective languages or alphabets.
 * Given that "The South" is absolutely "canon" and the map was made for Wikipedia and no "fan map" what other aspects do you regard as "inappropriate"? Ore else, do you agree to include the map again? Gernsback67 (talk) 18:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * (Please indent your replies. See WP:THREAD for more info.  You can also WP:PING registered users when you want to get their attention in a discussion, rather than using talk page messages, as I'm doing here.)  Please see WP:TLDR also; this is way longer than I really care to read through.  What I'll say in response to what appears to be your main point is that creation of maps to give a visualization of statistics is fine (provided those statistics are well-sourced, of course).  But in my opinion, creating a map of the fictional world of a novel which requires careful analysis of the work falls squarely within WP:OR, and so is not kosher.  An argument can also be made that a map like this is excessive detail that's not needed for this article.  For these reasons, I think the article should remain without the map. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with Gernsback67. The map is fine. It's not OR, it's a copyright-free version of maps in sources which are themselves based on information in the novel. Lots of articles have similar maps Fatherland (novel) for example. I find it very hard to accept that it's "too much detail" for what is an important, and indeed genre-defining, novel. --Shimbo (talk) 00:44, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the input. I am positive that, within a few days, I can offer a map which only shows the situation in the former contigous USA. This map will be concentrated on the main setting of the novel and thus more suitable. The political geography of the territory will be the same like in the world map. I am confident that issues like the size of the Rocky Mountain States and the existence of the "South" have been discussed on this talk page sufficiently and that this new map will not be deleted with regard to any of these issues. Gernsback67 (talk) 18:34, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Given that "The South" is absolutely "canon" and the map was made for Wikipedia and no "fan map" what other aspects do you regard as "inappropriate"? Ore else, do you agree to include the map again? Gernsback67 (talk) 18:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * (Please indent your replies. See WP:THREAD for more info.  You can also WP:PING registered users when you want to get their attention in a discussion, rather than using talk page messages, as I'm doing here.)  Please see WP:TLDR also; this is way longer than I really care to read through.  What I'll say in response to what appears to be your main point is that creation of maps to give a visualization of statistics is fine (provided those statistics are well-sourced, of course).  But in my opinion, creating a map of the fictional world of a novel which requires careful analysis of the work falls squarely within WP:OR, and so is not kosher.  An argument can also be made that a map like this is excessive detail that's not needed for this article.  For these reasons, I think the article should remain without the map. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I agree with Gernsback67. The map is fine. It's not OR, it's a copyright-free version of maps in sources which are themselves based on information in the novel. Lots of articles have similar maps Fatherland (novel) for example. I find it very hard to accept that it's "too much detail" for what is an important, and indeed genre-defining, novel. --Shimbo (talk) 00:44, 3 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the input. I am positive that, within a few days, I can offer a map which only shows the situation in the former contigous USA. This map will be concentrated on the main setting of the novel and thus more suitable. The political geography of the territory will be the same like in the world map. I am confident that issues like the size of the Rocky Mountain States and the existence of the "South" have been discussed on this talk page sufficiently and that this new map will not be deleted with regard to any of these issues. Gernsback67 (talk) 18:34, 3 December 2019 (UTC)

Addition of a map of the former USA
I have added a map which is focused on the setting of the novel, the former USA territory. Please check the novel in case of any questions about the accuracy. In the Google Books edition you can find the respective passages about the PSA and "the South" on page 18, the RMS on pages 42 and 145 and the USA on page 82.Gernsback67 (talk) 17:06, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Bring the Jubilee
Bring the Jubilee is set in the 19th century only in the sense that much of it takes place when the narrator is able to visit it via time travel, where his interference with the actual course of events actually was the cause of the divergence of the world of the novel and our own real one. It is actually set in its universe's version of then-contemporary early 1950s. This should probably somehow be addressed – as the implication that the novel which Dick said inspired this one was set in the 19th century is not completely correct and involves a convention not employed in The Man in the High Castle, where no one is presented as having traveled through time nor are its alternative facts brought about as a result of time travel. 72.105.79.12 (talk) 02:26, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

 * I have made the smallest possible edit, which will not expand the passage too much. It is now stating that the novel is set "mainly" in the 20th century. Details can be looked in the article about Bring the Jubilee. Gernsback67 (talk) 19:05, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

OCLC
OCLC given is of a "book club" edition which is almost definitely not the first edition. I am not sure about identification number policy in English Wikipedia, or even if there is one. But if you are supposed to provide ISBN, OCLC, etc., for the first edition, 12870577 is wrong and probably should be removed. --Nomad (talk) 17:35, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 28 February 2020
Background In the novel's alternate history, US President Franklin D. Roosevelt was assassinated by Giuseppe Zangara in 1934 leading to the continuation of the Great Depression and US isolationism during the opening of World War II. Adolf Hitler led Nazi Germany to conquer Eastern Europe and parts of the Soviet Union, but the allies were able to push back Nazi Germany. Meanwhile, Imperial Japan successfully occupied Eastern Asia and parts of Oceania. Imperial Italy conquered northern parts of Africa. As Japan invaded the US West Coast, Germany invaded the American South on the U.S East Coast with the exception of the border states from the American Civil War. By 1947, the US and the remaining Allies surrendered to the Axis, ending the war.

By the 1960s, Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany are the world's competing superpowers, with Japan establishing the "Pacific States of America" (P.S.A.) from the former Western United States and the remaining Rocky Mountain States being a neutral buffer zone between the P.S.A. and the Nazi-occupied American South, and the remaining United States in the North and Mid-Western States. The buffer zone is also part of the remaining United States. In the East, there is a country in the American South below the Civil War Border States. "Nazi America" is a puppet regime in the American South, which respects all races equally, including Jews and African-Americans, but collaborates with the Nazi Government and has Richmond, Virginia as it's capital. In the North, Mid-Western, and the Rocky Mountain States, the United States of America still exists and has Washington D.C as their capitol. The official flag of the United States is the Stars and Stripes.

Hitler, though still alive, is incapacitated from advanced syphilis, and Martin Bormann has become Chancellor of Germany, with Goebbels, Heydrich, Göring, Seyss-Inquar, and other Nazi leaders soon vying to take his place. The Nazis have drained parts of the Mediterranean to make room for farmland, developed and used the hydrogen bomb, and designed rockets for extremely fast travel across the world as well as space, having colonized the Moon, Venus, and Mars. The novel is set mostly in San Francisco. Here, Chinese residents first appear in the novel as second-class citizens. The secondary setting of the novel is the Rocky Mountains States, namely the cities of Cañon City, Denver and Cheyenne. TheNewYorker1776 (talk) 16:05, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

 * ❌. You just seem to have copied an pasted a section of the article here; it's not clear what changes you want to make. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 03:58, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Using of Word Order in writing
Not being a native english speaker and having read the book, it occurred to me that the used Word_order changes in the P.S.A-Sections. Thus leading to Japanese speaking and thinking subject–object–verb instead of subject–verb–object. This has a general influence on the described P.S.A. culture as even the American inhabitants of the P.S.A. speak subject–object–verb with the Japanese. Is this observation correct and worth a mentioning in the article? Sofafernsehfan (talk) 09:26, 15 August 2020 (UTC) (For Details: User https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benutzer:Sofafernsehfan of wikipedia in german language.)

Wrong discriptions in Background-section
I have reverted a series of edits which were inserting discriptions into the Background-section that were not in line with the content of the novel. By searching with the appropriate words in the e-book version of the novel I have found out that the following places, regions and countries are not mentioned only once: Hong Kong, Israel (or Palestine), Alaska, British Honduras, Jamaica, the Caribbean as a whole, Ghana, Nigeria, Pakistan, Ireland. The novel describes the Nazi conquest of the European part of the Soviet Union. The outreach of Nazi Germany to the east thus is not limited to Austria, Poland and Czechia. The novel does not clarify whether Mussolini’s New Roman Empire is a „republic“ or whether the head of state is still a king from the House of Savoy. The novel does not mention the status of the U.K., France or India and thus is not describing them as fully or partially „independent“. The novel describes that most of Africa is under German control – no African country has gained independence. The idea that „for unexplained reasons“ „most countries in the world are independent“ is completely opposed to the discription in one dialogue of the novel in which it is told that after the war Nazi Germany, Italy and Japan have devided the world among them. In such a world hardly any country could regard itself as „independent“.

When explaining the territory of the Pacific States of America, the text of the novel does not include Alaska or Hawaii in it, not as states, not as territories, not in any other way. It does not mention any resistance movement within the Rocky Mountain States. In the novel the discription of the German-controlled puppet state in the American south is very brief. The only passage, which is dealing with it, can be found on this page in the section „Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2019“. It does not specify how many former U.S. states are included in the territory of „the South“ and does not name Tampa as its capital. In the novel Washington D. C. is not mentioned only once, not as capital of the remaining USA, not in any other way. While the word „capital“ is not used in this context, it is very clear from many descriptions that New York is the centre of Nazi activities in the remaining USA. To ignore D.C. completely in fact is a literary device, Philipp K. Dick is using effectively to create in eerie atmosphere. The reader is left alone with his/her speculations about the fate of the city in a world where it does not seem to play any role any longer and in which Nazi Germany possesses nuclear weapons.

I have also deleted a link to a world map, mainly because the map does not show the Rocky Mountain States. The map of the former contiguous USA is restored. It is focused on the setting of the novel. Gernsback67 (talk) 15:58, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I've noticed a string of edits that appear to be unsupported by the text. The latest being that Israel exists in the world of TMITHC, which seems highly unlikely, though I've not specifically checked the text. As these edits are all coming from the same IP, and the user's comments don't seem constructive, I think concerns about the user's behaviour need escalating. --Shimbo (talk) 12:03, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

 * I guess it is okay to have a look at this. However in this case finally it was possible to convince the user of the facts. Gernsback67 (talk) 17:15, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Incorrect information in the Plot Summary section
Plot summary says that Tagomi flies to Germany to rescue Fink. This is incorrect. Hunted down the edit; 22:24, 4 February 2021. Would change it myself, but I have at least two messages saying my IP has been vandalizing, no idea why. If someone would fix it I would appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.35.116.104 (talk)

Just finished reading the book and I concur with the comment above. Frink is arrested but never leaves San Francisco. Tagomi frees Frink by refusing to sign extradition paperwork presented to him by the German Consul in SF. Tagomi and Frink never travel to Germany. 162.72.4.203 (talk) 20:10, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

One more map removed
I have removed one more map, as reproduced here, supposed to describe the geopolitical world of the book. It is even much more precise than a former one already removed (see discussion above). Needless to say, the book doesn’t contain one tenth of what this minutely precise map shows. And the legend provided, « a plausible world map of the novel », doesn’t change the fact that it is almost entirely speculative. --Sapphorain (talk) 20:46, 12 February 2022 (UTC)

RfC result
(In relation to the last section of the talk page, and to the RfC mentioned below, I move here this discussion seemingly leading nowhere. --Sapphorain (talk) 22:05, 9 May 2022 (UTC))

So the RfC was recently closed, and it was decided that there was a consensus against including the map in the article, I don't agree with this result, but there isn't really anything I can do about it:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hypothetical_Axis_victory_in_World_War_II#RfC_on_map_in_lead

I was thinking though, if it was possible to at least include the map in the article of the novel itself, because it is better than the current one there, what do you think about it? -- 2804:248:f6f7:5f00:1cac:cc04:f5df:4191 (talk) 07:49, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The world map is on the contrary much worse than the current one, and can certainly not be included in the article of the novel itself (nor anywhere else). It is one the worst examples of original research one can think of, as it is including parts of the world the novel doesn’t even mention. I am so far OK to tolerate the current map, which of course is also original research, because it includes only a region described in the novel. But I am very well aware other contributors will not be as accomodating, and will not object if this map is removed also. No map at all would be fine with me.--Sapphorain (talk) 21:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I disagree, it does have its flaws, but it is likely a good representation of the world of the novel, I do think it should be included there. -- 2804:248:f69d:6700:1043:ddcf:d650:df0f (talk) 22:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Your assertion « It is likely a good representation » is the whole point: who says so? You? The lambda Commons contributor who drew the map? This is of no value according to wikipedia standards. Can you provide a reliable and admissible source confirming your point of view?  --Sapphorain (talk) 07:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The map contains things that are mentioned in the novel and also fills in blanks, both with historical events and plans. -- 2804:248:f69d:6700:1043:ddcf:d650:df0f (talk) 08:26, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It's the "fills in blanks" that is not acceptable. Once again: under what authority? No matter how you phrase it, what you wish to allow is original research, which Wikipedia explicitly excludes.--Sapphorain (talk) 09:10, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * It is also based on historical events and plans though, you should at least check the archived site, yet for some reason though you claimed the explanations didn't appear. -- 2804:248:f69d:6700:d0c9:5e74:b53d:1fb (talk) 21:36, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I think I am getting tired of this. This is leading nowhere. If you are able to cite a reliable, published source that directly support this file, as is required by WP:OR, then please do so. Otherwise please stop arguing. --Sapphorain (talk) 07:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Frankly I'm tired of this too, the sources are on the map site, both for the novel as well as historical events and plans, you should at least check it out. There is no reason why the map shouldn't be on the article of the novel. -- 2804:248:f69d:6700:b8b8:cb5:d047:8a63 (talk) 21:36, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * If the sources you mention exist, you should be able to provide them, right here. After all, in a wikipedia article you cannot replace a source by the bare assertion that it exists on the archived version of a blog. This is leading nowhere, I am moving this discussion to the appropriate talk page --Sapphorain (talk) 22:05, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Ok, well first the map's depiction of the Pacific States of America as well as an independent Southern state and Japanese-occupied Hawaii is based on page 18 of the novel:

 *

 * The depiction of a Japanese-controlled Brazil is based on page 20, which describes the Japanese burning forests in Brazil:

 *

 * Sweden being neutral is based on page 27:

 *

 * The division of Africa is based on some German real life plans:

 * That is also true for the territories Turkey has in the map and for the division of Switzerland:

 * Finland's territory was based on some plans for a Greater Finland, which did have support during the War:

 *

 * Those are some of the sources, there are more, the map site links to other Wikipedia articles, so I had to post some of the sources used for the information on these article, I couldn't do it with all of them of course and there were also pages of the book which I couldn't access. If this doesn't make the map admissible though, then OK, I'm not really interested in continuing this any further. -- 2804:248:f69d:6700:b8b8:cb5:d047:8a63 (talk) 23:58, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This is exactly what is called original research and is not allowed by wikipedia standards: combining material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source, and also « filling blanks » as you mentioned it yourself. Please do read WP:OR and WP:SYN before uselessly going on arguing.--Sapphorain (talk) 08:45, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * This is alternate history though, and well I'm not sure how WP:SYN applies to this particular case, but anyway I'm not going to waste my time with you. -- 2804:248:f657:a900:901a:40cd:8acc:9345 (talk) 20:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

 * I have not read the book; if I understand the discussions on this page, there is no map in the book itself, correct? If that's the case, then let the words of the book do the speaking. A self-made map is not helpful. Without a map extant within the pages of the book, nor one created by a reliable source (i.e. from a newspaper, journal, reliable-source website, or other supported source - definitely not individual wikipedia editor interpretations) then no imagined map belongs in the article. This is simply the overriding policy of Wikipedia, and we have to stick to it. Anastrophe (talk) 21:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

 * 2023-3-19: 1206 hrs EDT: The Truth link in the article has been edited to reference a flat earth propaganda blub which reads "The truth is, the earth is flat and stationary/non-moving. Why are the world's oceans perfectly horizontal and FLAT? ..."  This obviously needs to be reverted to whatever the actual link is supposed to be for Man in the High Castle/Truth.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:14D:4501:920:E1E0:7DD3:DAFF:BF6A (talk) 16:07, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

The map of former contiguous USA is speculative
It is not quite appropriate to just say that the borders drawn in this map are "approximate". They are in fact very speculative. In particular those of "the South" are backed by nothing in the book

I gathered below the significant information the book provides regarding the borders of the four states drawn in this map.

PSA: This is the most correct part of the map, consisting of « California, Oregon, Washington and part of Nevada » (Chapter 1). The « part of Nevada » is however not further described in the book.

RMS: One can infer from comments in Chapters 3, 6 and 9 that Colorado, Wyoming, Utah and the Eastern part of Nevada (still without more precision) are parts of RMS. Nebraska is probably also part of RMS, Omaha being mentioned as « the last outpost of the former plutocratic U.S. publishing industry » (Chapter 8). But this map also includes a number of other states (Idaho, Montana, the Dakotas, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas) which are never even mentioned in the book.

U.S.: The book only mentions that Philadelphia, Boston (Chapter 3), New York and Baltimore (Chapter 6) are within its borders.

The South: The state is mentioned (Chapters 1 and 2), but the book doesn’t mention specifically any part of it. Its borders on the map are pure speculation. Sapphorain (talk) 07:00, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

 * "The South" is implied to be the Confederacy, so I don't see the issue with the borders. 2804:248:FB0D:F300:897A:936E:2EC4:20F2 (talk) 21:35, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It is your personal interpretation. The Confederacy is not mentioned in the book. --Sapphorain (talk) 23:18, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * ... And besides, that is a very strange and absurd argument, as in the map "The South" doesn't include Texas, which was in the Confederacy, and on the other hand includes Missouri, Kentucky and West Virginia, which were not. --Sapphorain (talk) 23:35, 28 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It's obvious "the South" is the Confederacy, what other state could it be? The CSA claimed Missouri and Kentucky as their territory, and West Virginia was, well, a former part of Virginia.
 * As for Texas, the Germans and the Japanese presumably would want an equal distance between their territories, so I don't think it is absurd or strange. 2804:248:FB7D:D900:107C:798E:C709:7652 (talk) 02:08, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Your argument here is exactly what is called original research and is not allowed by wikipedia standards: combining material from multiple sources to reach or imply a conclusion not explicitly stated by the source. --Sapphorain (talk) 08:12, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * It would make zero sense in this context for a state to be called "the South" if it wasn't the Confederacy.
 * I'm starting to think you're just using "original research" as an excuse to remove and disrupt content. 2804:248:FB7D:D900:FC41:EFC8:48D:6C81 (talk) 09:27, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * This statement is very peremptory, and again is your own personal opinion. Which I very much doubt is universally shared. But this is not the issue. The fact is that the Confederacy is never mentioned in the book. The fact is that reaching a personal and unpublished conclusion from several sources is called original research and is not allowed by wikipedia. To point out such an illegitimate conclusion can hardly be qualified as « disrupting content ».--Sapphorain (talk) 11:43, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * "The South" is obviously the Confederacy, and I'm not the only one who shares this opinion. Sometimes things are quite obvious even if not explicitly stated.
 * If you don't want to disrupt content you shouldn't add unnecessary warnings. 2804:248:FB7D:D900:B402:DB9C:F967:BC66 (talk) 06:14, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Not being the only one to share an opinion is hardly an encyclopedic argument. Wikipedia is not a discussion forum. This is leading nowhere and I am stopping right here this sterile discussion. --Sapphorain (talk) 08:15, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I finally removed the map altogether, as it goes against the No original research policy in several ways. It is much more precise than what the book describes, it « fills the blanks » by a combination of other sources and personal opinion, it is not enclosed in any edition of the novel, and it was never published in any other reliable source. --Sapphorain (talk) 07:22, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree that the recently deleted map is original research. @Sapphorain is correct, and the IP user should WP:DROPTHESTICK.
 * However, I would be in favour of including this map: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_in_the_High_Castle_(TV_series)#/media/File:Man_High_Castle_(TV_Series)_map.svg as that is not original research, being based on the opening credits of the TV series.
 * I know the map is from the TV series, not the novel, but it's representative enough to be useful, IMO. Including it might also bring the (decade long!) campaign to introduce a map to a close. Shimbo (talk) 13:56, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I don’t know the TV series, but this map shows to me it is only extremely loosely inspired by Dick’s novel. The PSA is called « Japanese Pacific States », and includes parts of Idaho, Utah, Arizona and New Mexico, which it doesn’t in the novel, the whole state of Nevada and not only part of it as in the novel, and only parts of Oregon and Washington, which are clearly described in the novel as being entirely in the PSA (chapter 1).
 * The RSA is called « Neutral zone » and has apparently not the status of a state. It doesn’t contain the eastern part of Nevada, nor the whole states of Utah and Wyoming, as it does in the novel (chapter 3).
 * In this map there is only one big region eastwards, labelled « Greater Nazi Reich », again a denomination that never appears in the book. Much worse, it contains the whole state of Nebraska, despite the fact that « The grasshopper lies heavy » was published in Omaha, within the Rocky Mountain States of the novel (chapter 8).  In the novel however, the U.S. and « The South », although puppet states of the Reich, are mentioned as two distinct states with distinct policies (chapter 1). There is slavery in The South, but not in the U.S.
 * So I am strongly opposed to the inclusion of this map as an illustration for the novel. As the map I suppressed, it doesn’t even deserve to be called an approximation of the situation described in the novel (and is even worse in this respect).
 * ... Besides, this map is (of course) already included in the page on the TV series, whose world it faithfully describes. So what would be the point of including it also here, despite the fact that it doesn't describe the world of the novel correctly ? --Sapphorain (talk) 16:12, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Your points about the accuracy of the map compared to the (scant) evidence in the novel are not wrong. I don't think it matters though. Captioning it as being from the TV series, not the novel, and so only broadly indicative would solve that problem.
 * The point of including the map from the TV series would be to bring this ridiculous decade-long saga to an end. But apparently feelings are running too high, and opinions have become too deeply entrenched, for that.
 * I'm not getting drawn in to any kind of pettifogging dispute, so I'll just check in in another decade and see how you're getting on, I guess. Shimbo (talk) 19:54, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I think approximation is a good way to describe it, many of its contents are in the novel, so I don't think it is original research, despite possible inaccuracies.
 * With that being said, I don't think the show map is appropriate for the article either, there are many differences between the novel and the show. 2804:248:FBD7:2E00:4428:3A7F:DCBB:AA5 (talk) 02:05, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Background
Left « Greater Germanic Reich », never mentioned in the book, as a piped link for « the Reich », as used in the book. Similarly left « Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere », not mentioned in the book, as a piped link for «  Co-Prosperity Pacific Alliance », as in the book. Added « and still compete for the control of South America  in 1962 », which corresponds to what is mentioned in the book (but maybe needs rephrasing). Suppressed « expanded its colonial empire with occupations of eastern Asia and Oceania », those events not being mentioned anywhere in the book. Suppressed the mention that the U.S. « is ruled by a Nazi military governor « : no such governor is ever mentioned in the book. Replaced « Canada » by « part of Canada », as at least Nova Scotia is part of the Reich. Sapphorain (talk) 15:56, 13 May 2023 (UTC)

A simple observation
While I was rewatching the TV series yesterday I thought to myself that "Hawthorne Abendsen" is a peculiar name and wondered why the author might have chosen it. Then it hit me. Hawthorne Abendsen has the reverse initials of Adolph Hitler. Does anyone know if this is this a coincidence? Does it have any deeper meaning? Has anyone else noticed similar stuff? Neilrieck (talk) 13:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I am rather skeptical, to say the least. If this is not a coincidence it has certainly nothing to do with the peculiarity of the name « Hawthorne Abendsen ». « Henry Adams »  would have done the job quite as well. With this type of speculations Hugo Reiss, the good nazi, becomes the reverse of Reinhard Heydrich, the bad one… And, but of course: the first name of Reiss is a clear hint that Dick was expecting a Hugo award for this book. --Sapphorain (talk) 21:49, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Man in the High Castle


text:
Delta Phi Epsilon

Delta Phi Epsilon (ΔΦΕ) may refer to:

 * Delta Phi Epsilon (professional), the professional foreign service fraternity and sorority
 * Delta Phi Epsilon (social), a National Panhellenic Conference affiliated social sorority

title: Delta Phi Epsilon


text:
KCMO (disambiguation)

KCMO is the abbreviation for Kansas City, Missouri, informally.

KCMO may refer to:

 * KCMO (AM), a radio station (710 AM) licensed to Kansas City, Missouri, United States
 * KCMO-FM, a radio station (94.9 FM) licensed to Kansas City, Missouri, United States
 * KCTV (TV), a television station (channel 5) licensed to Kansas City, Missouri, United States, which used the call signs KCMO and KCMO-TV until March 1983

title: KCMO (disambiguation)


text:
User:Chain~enwiki

Cory Hain's Wiki Home

This is the link to the theory of Functional Typology

Here are the continua that describe the cognitive types:

Here is my "genetic spread" theory on the evolution of ADHD (and Asperger's)

ADHD Genetic Carrier Theory (This theory also explains Asperger's)

As groups formed tight knit bonds through culture in order to provide "safety in numbers", there was no incentive for an individual to leave the birth group. This meant that groups would have a limited genetic pool. Highly structured groups/culture tend to be xenophobic. This creates an environment in which genetic material is not fresh. In a highly complex animal this creates genetic diseases that eventually wipe out the group. (see Muller's ratchet)

Groups needed both fresh genetic material and xenophobia.

Cultural structure needs to be tight in small groups. A strict hierarchy must be maintained in order to provide the best protection. Foreigners bring new ideas and instability. This creates a conundrum.

Groups that let in foreigners in would have fresh genetic material to keep the group healthy.

Groups would die off after several generations. The groups that died did not have an adaption that is known as AD/HD.

In order to create such an individual, a simple removal of the connection between the cultural processing memory and awareness needs to happen. This is probably done through altering serotonin and dopamine. It leads to a strong connection between the contextual/experiential memory and awareness.

Interesting...........very interesting.I'm afraid I don't understand it fully.But it sounds like something that deserves attention...It's better than that "hunter in a farmers world" crap anyway.

title: User:Chain~enwiki


text:
Talk:Camarilla

Yet to be filled?
This article was started and apparently abandoned. It seems to be a topic worthy of an article, but it needs to be completed. --Metropolitan90 04:56, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Proposed merger of Power behind the throne with Camarilla
As the "See also" sections show there are a great many terms with more or less the same meaning which have evolved in history and literature.

Not all of them would probably need an article of their own. I should suffice to deal with each in a separate section under a shared lemma.

Maybe we could begin by merging power behind the throne and camarilla since these two seem to be just too similar.

thanks,

KaiKemmann (talk) 10:41, 12 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oppose. While nuanced, there seems to be enough distinction that they are truly distinct concepts and not merely synonymous terms. "Power behind the thrown" implies actual power to get things done, but "camarilla" seems to involve a close circle of softer influence that may or may without any actual power as such (in the later case, it is a model merely with explanatory power but not the predictive power one would expect in the former). Morgan Riley (talk) 02:26, 30 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Closing, given the uncontested objection and no support. Klbrain (talk) 22:41, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Terminology
In the first para, is "traditional governance practices" quite the right phrase? I see what's being attempted here, but few things are more traditional than a camarilla.

There's form for this kind of complaint going back to the middle ages and beyond- the attacks on royal favourites giving behind the throne advice and having more influence than the senior court office holders, let alone the nobles who "should be the king's chief counsellors"- as well as modern examples from constitutional polities, to be sure. On the other hand, modern constitutional monarchs are bound to act on the advice of ministers because it's the only way to secure democratic backing, but like monarchs once were, office holders who have the legitimacy of constitutional appointment can't help but be advised from all over. What office holder has not been? And if the monarch's favourite has been given a court office, or the president's favourite been named a special advisor, suddenly they become officials.

To get people's backs up enough to be called a camarilla, or warrant the name by real influence, the group has to have something more special in terms of cohesion, distance from official public status, secrecy, and influence. And even then, it's very traditional. Arguably the restriction against camarillas is the non traditional, relatively modern innovation.

Even "conventional", while much closer to the intent, suffers from some similar conceptual weaknesses. "Formal", "official", "legal", "public", "constitutional", or "structured" might be better adjectives. Public is the weakest- even normal government isn't always public. Random noter (talk) 21:18, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Camarilla


text:
Talk:Small for gestational age

Why the name change
Why was the name of this article changed from low birth weight to "small for gestational age"? And, if you know enough about it to change that name, and to made that graph, why is it still a stub?

However, the most important factor can be seen by inspecting that usage a little more closely, or even by just looking at the definition of "low birth weight" retained from before the move, and comparing that with the information presented in the new graph by User:Violetriga: these are two different concepts. Somewhat related, but distinct.

The definition of "low birth weight," both here and in many of the articles found in a search of the Web, is a flat, across-the-board less than 2.500 kg. It does not depend on "gestational age."

In other words, "low birth weight" is more easily determined, and based on what is often the only accurate information available: weight at birth. It certainly looks as though baby might be "low birth weight" without necessarily being "small for gestational age". Isn't that true? Or have I misread the little I have looked into about this? Gene Nygaard 19:51, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The article wasn't further expanded simply because I didn't have the time - I was about to do it after the move but then had to rush off. My plan is to have articles on SGA (this one), AGA (a new article) and LGA (currently at alternative name macrosomia).  These will then also be linked to birth weight (basically a parent article) and gestational age.  Low birth weight means less than 2500g at term (ie 40 weeks) and is the same as SGA.  SGA is a more official name than "low birth weight" and, while the common use argument may have some truth to it here, for sake of consistency I think the three articles should follow the same naming scheme.  So, hopefully it'll all come together in the next few days. violet/riga (t) 23:30, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Actually, AGA may well redirect to birth weight, but we'll see how it develops. violet/riga (t) 23:36, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Thinking about it further what you're saying is correct - Low birth weight is the wider category. violet/riga (t) 23:26, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * But thinking again I have a lot more to say about SGA at that's what this article will be mainly about. I'm looking at moving it back after I've finished working on it.  Gah.  violet/riga (t) 09:44, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Birth weight/merge
Birth weight/merge has been created which merges the following articles:
 * Birth weight
 * Small for gestational age
 * Large for gestational age

Comments would be appreciated on this possible way forward. violet/riga (t) 14:12, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

SGA and IUGR/FGR
I'm concerned about the potential for confusion with this article in its current form. SGA as an outcome is defined simply on the basis of birthweight and gestational age of newborns i.e. the child has to be born in order to be classified. Measures of growth retardation may assign a fetus (or a newborn) to outcomes such as IUGR and FGR. It is entirely possible that the growth of a child born SGA has been restricted (and the fetus was therefore IUGR/FGR), but the terms are differently defined and therefore not wholly interchangeable. From the point of a view of an epidemiologist working with these outcomes, it is of great importance that their definitions are understood and correctly used. I will attempt to make the article reflect these definitional differences myself over the coming days.Jimjamjak (talk) 09:50, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Epidemiology
It would be great to have something in this article about where in the world this phenomenon is most common. Credulity (talk) 19:18, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Small for gestational age. 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/20120402214755/http://oasis.state.ga.us/oasis/help/mch.html to http://oasis.state.ga.us/oasis/help/mch.html

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) 05:36, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Small for gestational age


text:
14th Dáil

The 14th Dáil was elected at the 1951 general election on 30 May 1951 and met on 13 June 1951. The members of Dáil Éireann, the house of representatives of the Oireachtas (legislature), of Ireland are known as TDs. It sat with the 7th Seanad as the two Houses of the Oireachtas.

On 24 April 1954, President Seán T. O'Kelly dissolved the Dáil at the request of the Taoiseach Éamon de Valera. The 14th Dáil lasted days.

Composition of the 14th Dáil
Fianna Fáil, denoted with a bullet, formed the 6th government of Ireland.

Graphical representation
This is a graphical comparison of party strengths in the 14th Dáil from June 1951. This was not the official seating plan.

Ceann Comhairle
On the meeting of the Dáil, Patrick Hogan (Lab) was proposed as Ceann Comhairle by John A. Costello (FG) and seconded by Joseph Blowick (CnaT). His election was approved without a vote. Hogan had served as Leas-Cheann Comhairle from 1927 to 1928, from 1932 to 1938 and from 1948 to 1951.

TDs by constituency
The list of the 147 TDs elected is given in alphabetical order by Dáil constituency.

title: 14th Dáil


text:
User talk:Doshea3

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Djegan 19:53, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:Papal Cross.JPG
Thanks for uploading Image:Papal Cross.JPG. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Longhair 09:49, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Re: Italian Concerto
I'm glad you enjoyed the recording. It's been spliced up a bit (because it's my college audition tape) but it's still the culmination of many hours of hard work. I'd love to hear any recordings you've contributed to this (or any) site.

-Austen Green (the Bach player)

--X3d hydra 03:42, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks a lot, Austen. I'll get back to you on those recordings—I intend to make a few once my piano is repaired. :)

 * Doshea3 18:23, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Doshea3


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nobody

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was - deleted - SimonP 15:31, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Nobody
A one-line dict def, about what would appear to be a prediction about a forthcoming unnotable game character. Not encyclopedic, Wikipedia is not the place for this. UkPaolo 19:54, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete speculation. JamesBurns 11:29, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete NeoJustin 02:55 June 3, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Nobody is not notable. No Account

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

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nobody


text:
The Dead Dog Café Comedy Hour

The Dead Dog Café Comedy Hour was a radio comedy show on CBC Radio One for four seasons, running from 1997 to 2000.

The show was set in a fictional café of the same name, in the equally fictional town of Blossom, Alberta. Both Blossom and the café were originally described in Thomas King's award-winning novel Green Grass, Running Water, though it was run by different characters. The show borrowed numerous elements from King's novel.

The show featured King (playing himself), Floyd Favel Starr playing Jasper Friendly Bear and Edna Rain playing Gracie Heavy Hand. All the main characters were Indigenous Canadians, although in the show they call themselves and other First Nations peoples 'Indians'. The humor is wry and sarcastic, often dark and subtle, "Good morning Gracie". The show was a mix of scathing political critique, social commentary, mock cultural stereotyping—mostly white, or white perceptions of native peoples, and irreverent comedy.

Despite the name, the show was 15 minutes long. It typically ran as a segment on CBC Radio One's This Morning. The show had a number of regular segments, including:

 * Gracie's Authentic Traditional Aboriginal Recipes, including puppy stew, fried bologna, and Kraft Dinners
 * The Authentic Indian Name generator, featuring three wheels that could automatically create names like "Stewart Coffee Armadillo" or "Rosemarie Clever Tuna"
 * Friendly Bear's Blackout Bingo, where listeners were asked to play bingo at home using a card they made up
 * Gracie's Conversational Cree, which taught simple but useful phrases, such as, "Please ask the chauffeur to bring the car around" and "How long will we be in port?"
 * Recommendations from the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples were ironically highlighted.
 * A recurring sign-off at the conclusion of each episode, "Stay calm! Be brave! Wait for the signs!".

It also regularly featured short guest spots in the "What Else Do You Do (When You're Not Being Famous)?" segment, which featured interviews with famous Indigenous people such as Tomson Highway, Laura Vinson, Graham Greene and an actor playing Louis Riel.

The Dead Dog Café Comedy Hour returned for a one-off hour-long show in 2002, recorded live at Regina's Globe Theatre, Regina,

2006 revival
The original Dead Dog cast briefly returned on Dead Dog in the City which aired weekly on Sounds Like Canada with repeats on Nighttime Review from April 6, 2006 to December 20 that year. Twenty-six new episodes were planned and aired again over the summer of 2006. This new iteration also starred Tara Beagan as Portia Jumpingbull.

Discography

 * Dead Dog Café Comedy Hour, Vol. 1 (1998)
 * Dead Dog Café Comedy Hour, Vol. 2 (1999)
 * Dead Dog Café Comedy Hour, Vol. 3 (2000)
 * Dead Dog Café Comedy Hour, Vol. 4 (2001)

title: The Dead Dog Café Comedy Hour


text: Category:North Aegean

title: Category:North Aegean