text:
Talk:Emerging church/Introduction 2

HELL IS REAL!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.231.177.173 (talk) 12:31, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Introduction Worries
My apologies to everyone concerned for my part in the recent trend towards a revert war on this article. It stops here. However, there is an issue that needs to be resolved, and we need to work together to resolve it. It is time for actual discusson on this matter. So that we can begin following Wikipedia policy once again, instead of charging off and changing everything based on our own opinions, we need to come to a concensus on this information before it is changed again. My final edit here will be the addition of the disputed article tag, after which I propose we call a truce and halt editing of this section until a resolution can be achieved. --WestonWyse

 * My apologies likewise. I had started a discussion on the gross articulation of the emerging church here several weeks ago.  I allowed more than seven days to pass.  Had not heard anything from anyone and changed the needed information.  Since, I have been accused of making unnecessary changes and my changes have been reverted several times.  I prefer to site sources to prove our points instead of the you say, I say approach.  Likewise, I appreciate the dialogue, the attempts to provide an accurate description of this occurrence in the Church, and for the steps recently taken to resolve this matter. --Artisan949

 * Artisan949, I'm puzzled when you say you "had not heard anything from anyone" within seven days of your May 4th proposals. I responded the next day and WestonWyse within three days. Perhaps you are new to wikipedia and not familiar with the page history function.  In any case, it looks like we've got a multi-way discussion going on now, which I am mischievously going to describe as a conversation.  technopilgrim 22:22, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry for my delay here. I am busy with another project at the moment so please give me some time.  I have not forgotten what I have seemed to have started here.  Also, if you would like to read by academic work on the emerging church, please email me at aaron at thevoiz dot com.  I am more than happy to share and would actually be beneficial since I find myself repeating a lot of what I already present in my research and the 100 or so pages I've written on the EC.  Also, I would like to keep in mind that defining the EC is difficult, if not impossible at this point.  I am for describing it as accurrately as we can, but we must realize this may not be possible.  Our chances may be increased if we actually think of the EC occurrence occurring on several levels, degrees, etc.  Sure you have a aspect of the EC who believes it is all about candles and style.  I would like to suggest though that I do not believe that this was the original intent.  Thus we may want to approach the EC with a multi-layered description instead of a "we figured out what it is and its only this" approach.  --Artisan949

Now, I would like to officially re-open discussion on the following specific points:

The Emerging Church is an incipient movement

 * Movement is the appropriate categorizational term for the Emerging Church (see definition 2b). Conversation means an oral exchange of ideas, so EC leaders talking about EC things is a conversation, but the Emerging Church is a religious movement. The EC use of the term "conversation", therefore, is slang.  As Wikipedia is for an encyclopedic collection of information, the use of this term in this context is unjustified.  It could, however be noted at some point in the introduction or elsewhere in the article that "conversation" is the preferred term among EC leaders, along with an explanation of what it means in this context (elsewhere would seem more appropriate, in order to keep the introduction brief and to the point). --WestonWyse

 * The Emerging Church is considered a conversation, which some arguably also consider a burgeoning movement. It can be argued of the aforementioned definition of the term "movement," that the EC does not qualify under its meaning for the very reason that it lacks the "organization" relevent to movements. As the article appropriately mentions, the EC is decentralized.  I personally do not reject the notion that some assume the EC is a movement, however, as part of the EC I sense we are still in conversation mode.  Many would agree, including Brian McLaren, prominent emerging church thinker:

 * http://www.bpnews.net/bpnews.asp?ID=20420

 * Like this article indicated, the debate whether or not the EC is a movement or a conversation could continue indefinitely. Therefore, I propose we communicate at a minimum the EC is considered both and this should be done upfront, preferably in the Inroduction if there is to be any.  Additionally we could include the other "labels" of the EC outside movement and conversation, since possibly the EC is all of the above. --Artisan949

 * I am puzzled. Just because a movement lacks a central organization doesn't mean it isn't a movement. Consider the list of art movements -- which of these movements had a central organization, or any organization at all?  None probably. Which is why the Webster's definition of "social movement" makes no reference to organization, or lack thereof. Humpty Dumpty asserted that a word "means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less".  While comforting to Humpty, it is most puzzling to Alice. Let me also add that I certainly hope that the debate on the meaning of these words could not "go on indefinitely" as you suggest.  We could agree to use a dictionary, for instance, or failing that, an edit war.  But I really don't think the debate would be endless!

 * A proposal: Rather than use "conversation" in some non-standard sense in the beginning of the article, can we add a section later in the article to explain why it is that EC folks consider "movement" inappropriate and "conversation" appropriate (assuming that EC types generally believe this to be true)? There's probably something in there that would give us insight into EC thinking. If there is such a thing as EC thinking. (Meant not as an insult, but reflecting the concern that different EC thinkers may not agree on how such a section should be written).  technopilgrim 22:22, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Moreover, the EC does have organization, just not traditional orginization. It does have leaders, just not centralized leadership.  It does have aims and policy, just not standardized or enforced rules.  Even if a movement required these things -- which as technopilgrim points out, it does not -- the Emerging Church does have them. --WestonWyse 15:34, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

 * In addition, McLaren's definition -- "a group of people who are talking about the Gospel and church and mission" -- does describe a conversation, but applies only to meetings of emergent churches, groups, or leaders. Hundreds of churches worldwide altering their doctrine, theology, and worship around common goals and ideals is not "a group of people who are talking."  A discussion among the leaders of those churches regarding the changes being made would be a conversation.  Churches enacting those changes would be a movement. --WestonWyse 22:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree on this point that there is organization to the EC -self-organization. I understand your point, Weston.  It would serve us well to look into how sociologist describe movement and see if the EC meets what a social or religious movement is.  I just do not feel it's of intellectual integrity to define something clearly aa a movement based on a personal perception.  No one, critic or suppoter of the EC, has explained why they see this occurrence in contemporary Christianity as a movement, especially in light that many "EC'ers" have made the claim that the occurrence is still a conversation.  I think is important to not describe the EC as how any of us perceive it, but how it describes itself.  Also, I am considering your point on "churches enacting those changes would be a movement."  Again, I want to ask what source supports this?  Second, this is problematic as well since no one knows how many churches are indeed "emerging."  I suggest, in the US, that the conversation/movement is smaller than we think.  A lot smaller at this point in time based on my recent work.  --Artisan949

 * Well, being that it is a movement and that it deals with religious issues, Princeton says that it is a religious movement. Oddly enough, since the movement has no goals (which is arguable in itself and I'll discuss below), they say that it's not a social movement.  And this is an encyclopedia.  As such, this article is not about how the EC desribes itself, but what the EC is, as defined by the English language.  And the english language, as I've shown above, defines it as a movement: specifically as a religious movement.  Defining something as it describes itself is the epitome of Point Of View writing.  The article on the Nazi Party does not decribe the Nazis as they described themselves.  The article on George W. Bush does not describe the President as he describes himself.  The article on the Emerging Church should describe the movement factually and fully, not merely as its leaders describe it. --WestonWyse 23:14, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

>>For a person wanting to hold open dialog, you sure are wanting emerging to be called "a movement" - why? agenda on your end? just because a dictionary says "a movement is this" does not mean we "must" take it as solid - almost everyone in the conversation calls it a conversation, when those outside desire to call us what we do not call ourselves, that is considered "labeling" us, and that is so not cool - i care less what those "outside" have to say, they do not define what i see, express and relate to daily. ginkworld

 * Actually, just because a dictionary says "a movement is this" does mean that is the definition. Just because a certain group of people are using words in creative and new ways does not mean that encyclopedias should pick up the confusing and misleading verbiage.  And as I have pointed out before, this is an encyclopedia, not a forum for EC propaganda. So yes, I do have an agenda: to keep this article academic in nature, and not self-promoting.  Anything less is unacceptable in this medium. --WestonWyse 22:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Just want to add a couple of thoughts here...If the EC is a movement, it certainly is not one in the traditional sense. There are a number of very good reasons for this. Here are a few suggestions: 1) There is no clear driving mission, the civil rights movement had the goal of achieving racial equality, if the EC has such a goal it should be able to be articulated. 2) While there is some organization, there is not organizational focus, that is, I am going to join the Emerging Church movement. The dictionary definition most appropriate for the way movement is used in the definition is: a series of organized activities working toward an objective; also : an organized effort to promote or attain an end . EC is more like a recognition of a trend or a fad, than a "movement". It is an anti-institutional trend, but can one say it is an anti-institutional movement? I don't think so. Clearly something is happening, but if it is a movement it is in the very early stages, lacks a leader, and a driving mission. charleswear

 * Even though Emergent Village has preferred "conversation" instead of "movement", other networks around the world are seeing what we could define a movement and are more comfortable with the word. Def. "A rapid mulitplication of indigenous churches planting churches that sweeps through a people group or population segment" (David Garrison). --tallskinnykiwi

 * So the mission is: "the rapid multiplication of indigenous churches planting churches sweeping through people groups and population segments"? Is that what the mission is, or is that what is happening everywhere but in the US? charleswear

 * 1) There is no clear driving mission, the civil rights movement had the goal of achieving racial equality, if the EC has such a goal it should be able to be articulated. There are goals inherent in the EC.  People just tend to spend a lot of time arguing about what they are (hence this discussion).  Are you actually trying to say that the whole of the Emerging Church is just a bunch of people aimlessly doing things for no real reason?  What about "seeking to love our world in the Spirit of Jesus Christ"?  Or "to join in the activity of God in the world wherever we are able, so that God’s dreams for our world come true"?  "To help every believer answer the question, What does it mean for me to have a part in God's Kingdom"? To "shake off any residual 'leave it to beaver' orientation and begin swimming (even with a paddleboard) within the postmodern culture"? To "really trust the power of the gospel and learn to communicate it with authenticity, because for postmodern people, authenticity is primary"? "Letting the life of Christ in us become evident to all those around us," and to "demonstrate, live out, and practice our life in Jesus through all that we do and in the person we are choosing to become"?  Those are all goals fo the EC, at least according to Emergent Village, Emerging Church Network (which, incidentally, calls it a movement), EmergingChurch.org, and EmergingLife.org. --WestonWyse 13:18, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Okay, all of those missions sound like nice slogans, but how are they distinguishable in any way from the "institutional church" or from the evangelical movement, or the pentacostal movement, or the foursquare movement, etc. Am I making sense here? Because we throw in postmodern people does that make this a movement. I am not sure that the "emerging church" is really doing much to plant churches among postmodern people....yet. So, as a "movement" I am not sure it is doing very well....The focus used to be on generational focus, boomers, busters, gen-x, etc. then it shifted to cultural focus, modern, postmodern, etc. I think the reason that so many folks call it the emerging church (other than the relationship to emergent theories of organization, chaordicity, etc.) is that we have noticed that something is happening that is different. But most movements have begun with a "leader". This "movement" if it is one, is more spontaneous, viral, happening everywhere at the same time on a small and large scale and with nearly a complete lack of centralization. And by the way, why is the word incipient used, it appears that it is just another word for "emerging". So The Emerging Church is an emerging movement? I am not trying to pick a fight or prolong the discussion, but, geeze, let's not settle for language that doesn't truly describe the phenomenon that is "the emerging church." charleswear

 * 2) While there is some organization, there is not organizational focus, that is, I am going to join the Emerging Church movement. Joining has nothing to do with orginaztional focus; it has only to do with memberships.  I don't believe anyone ever "joined" the Civil Rights Movement, either.  They may have joined the NAACP, but I don't think there was ever a non-profit named "Civil Rights Movement".  It was a movement, not an organization. One could actually argue that if there was an organization, thet would exclude it from being a movement (although the dricing force behind the organization's goals could still be a movement). --WestonWyse 13:18, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Again, I want to call us back to the fact that we could discuss whether the EC is conversation or a movement indefinitely. Do we all agree that both should be discussed in this article?  Preferably, why it could be considered either/or/both.  I also want to reitterate that we shouldn't call it one or the other in the Introduction. --Artisan949

 * Except that there hasn't been one defendable reason why the definition of "conversation" fits the Emerging Church, other than "EC leaders prefer it." Nor has there been one defendable reason why "movement" shouldn't be used, other than "EC leaders don't like it."  Categorizationally (which is what encyclopedias do), and using definitions accepted within the English language (since this is the English language Wikipedia), the Emerging Church is a movement.  It's not really open to discussion or argument on this level, because those are the definitions of the words in question, as accepted by English scholars worldwide.

 * I agree that the EC use of "conversation" should be mentioned in the article, and other examples of EC slang should be included as well. But in the introduction, we should stick with English words being used as their academic definitions indicate.  And we should also provide actual information.  We can't just say "The Emerging Church is an incipient ecumenical thing (see below)".  There is no reason to neuter the effectiveness of the introduction to this article merely because the EC leaders are attempting to redefine words within the English language.  Let them push to change the accepted meanings of those words, and if in a decade or so they are successful and "conversation" has become synonymous with "movement", then change the article to use the new accepted definitons.  Not before.  --WestonWyse 22:32, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * The online dictionaries you've provided cannot be considered "academic." If we want to have an "academic" about this article, we should turn to the experts on social and religious movements.  This is what my point has been.  If we are going to call something a movement, provide the sources (not online dictionary sources - not academic enough or at all).  Many could argue Weston that you use modernistic slang by using the term movement.  Please site some experts for your argument.  There are no experts in "conversation," so best that I can do is argue that this is how the EC, in part, self-describes itself.  That is an important point and fact.  I will also reitterate that the INTRO should be a summary of what is provided, an abstract of sorts rather than trying to sum up an expression of the church in one sentence.  That WOULD BE an academic approach. (Sidenote:  Some think it a movement, others a conversation, others a fad... in all honesty who cares.  I just want to capture the Emerging Church in a fair and balanced light that is of intellectual integrity). --Artisan949

 * Princeton University "cannot be considered 'academic'"? I think scholars worldwide would disagree.  Nevertheless, from the second edition of the Oxford English Dictionary, v 10, p. 35: Movement, 6.a. "A course or series of actions on the part of a body of persons, moving or tending more or less continuously towards some special end.  Often with defining word prefixed, as in the Oxford movement."  I fail to see how using dictionary definitions of words could be considered jargon or non-academic. And capturing the EC by using its internal slang is neither a fair, balanced, nor with intergrity.  Such an article will eventually be deleted for NPOV content. --WestonWyse 22:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

 * From Wikipedia, "When reporting on objective facts, Wikipedia articles should cite primary and secondary sources whenever they exist." Reliable sources Your dictionaries, even reputable ones, are considered Tertiary sources by academic standards and by Wikipedia.  Previously, I meant to communicate that dictionaries are not as academic as primary and secondary sources.  Go to the experts.  I would imagine if we want to use the term "movement" (which we've already agreed needs to be utilized somewhere) then we must also provide the 1st/2nd sources which refer to the EC as a movement and better yet, should proabably rely on sociological experts in social/religious movements.  So clearly, for myself, this is NOT about EC "slang."  This about providing reliable information about the EC based on reliable sources.  Frankly, I do not care what you think the EC is or is not.  I do care what has been published on this subject and intend to provide that information and THAT INFORMATION ONLY.  I sense we are moving towards an impasse unless you (WestonWyse) can understand this academic/encyclopedic approach.  Show me the sources, please. --Artisan949 10:03, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I have a suggestion. Why not begin by saying something like "it is difficult to define EC because one of the things the EC tends to do is want to redefine the meaning of words to suit themselves. Thus, whilst according to normal use of the word, EC could be described as a movement because blah, blah, blah, those within the 'movement' tend to dislike this term, as, whilst accurate from the perspective of a dictionary definition, it does not reflect blah, blah, blah". This is a little more useful than the previous compromise suggested as it gives the reader, especially those outside the movement, more information upon which to reach their own conclusions. [Martin] 2nd June

>>I know, let's see it as a "conversation on the move" - one of the hardest things to do is define what we are and how we are getting to where we are getting to :) No one will ever be "happy" with what anyone calls anything.  Seeking to define simply causes others to defend what they are at, and not move to the point others desire them to be - if "movement" is wrong, cool - if "conversation" is wrong, cool - we then need to find a word that shares where we are and what we are striving to do - for me, at this time, "conversation" is the best - "movement" demands "leaders" and people who "speak for us all" and in this reality, that will not be found.  There is no one person we calim as "leader" so a "movement" is impossible. ginkworld

 * Nowhere has it been said that movements require leaders that speak for the entire group. If that was the case, then the Civil Rights Movement could not have been a movement, because not every soul involved listened to Dr. King, nor to Malcom X.  And although they do not speak for every person involved, the EC movement does have leaders, so that argument is invalid. --WestonWyse 22:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

--> {New post-er here, disclaimers: I finally broke down and created an account so I could jump in here, as suggested by Aaron. I'm a little new to Wiki participation, so if I breach etiquette, pls point it out to me.} I'm just going to jump in without being up to speed on /all/ the dicussion, but this question of whether or not EC is a movement is something in which I've been interested, and something I've written about elsewhere. I see that those inside EC don't want to be called a movement because it implies too much structrue and heirarchy, whereas those outside (obviously generalizing) see it as a movement regardless. I believe the fundamental issue is that EC is the first fundamentally /postmodern/ religious movement, whereas all that have gone before it are /modern/ movements. In the article at the external link, I provide a chart contrasting some /likely/ characteristic differences between a modern and a postmodern movement, and EC /does/ fit the notion of a movement, with the understanding that this /doesn't/ completely jive with movements of the past. I recommend that the definition call it a movement, with an added paragraph to say something to effect, "Internally, the emerging church prefers to call itself a 'conversation' rather than a 'movement', largely to differentiate that as a movement it is much more destructured and non-heirarchical as contrasted with other religious movements in history."

within the English-speaking Protestant church

 * This is untrue, as the EC does reach to other languages and to some Catholic circles. (Are other, non-Christian religions involved in the movement?) But judging from the list of resources and websites provided within the article, the EC is primarily, but not exclusively, within this group.  If this statement is inaccurate, please let us know. --WestonWyse

 * I do not understand the relevance of placing the EC in an "english-speaking, protestant" context. Of higher importance to me, "english-speaking" seems irrelevant.  What is our support for using such a term?  Where are our sources?  Who in the emerging church or those of scholarship on the emerging church utilize this term?  Should provide or delete it.  I think we will be unable to prove that it is primarily an "english-speaking" occurrence. --Artisan949

 * I originally added "English-speaking" based on the conclusions I formed in about an hour of websurfing, while trying to find an indication that the movement is found outside the English-speaking world. Just now in following the new inter-wiki link to the German wikipedia article on "Emerging Church", I see that that article describes the emerging church movement as having "started out in American, then spread quickly to England, Australia, and Holland, and now is represented by a small vanguard in Germany".  This is an excellent and useful description & I agree we should drop "English speaking" and instead insert this description.  It's helpful to know where the phenomenon originated, and where (and ideally when) it spread to other locations. technopilgrim 22:22, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

 * I'll second that. It sounds like a much better and more specific statement anyway. --WestonWyse 15:34, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Hi, I'm the guy who has written the German article. I came to the conclusion that the English Alternative Worship movement is more like a parallel developement. It's not so much influenced by the American forms of Emerging Church. So my description is not 100% accurate. Even though I would be very careful to label the EC an mainly english-speaking movement. I think it is mainly American because all the material and books are in English. In 2 or 3 years the situation will look differently!

 * With regards the "Protestant" adjective, again the appelation is empirical and I ask for a counter-example. WestonWyse, you mention a connection between the emerging church and Catholic circles.  Do you have some specific references? technopilgrim 22:22, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Artisan said so in the original call for discussion (at least, I assume Artisan and Aaron are the same, since he mentioned his call for discussion above). It's in the archived data at the top of the page.  I had heard such before, but I don't know any details.  If you have are specifics, Artisan, it would be nice to add them to the links section, or even to add a section to the article (as the article is becoming nearly all links...).  --WestonWyse 15:34, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, Artisan and Aaron are the same. As far as the whole "english-speaking" classification (which I know we've dropped - who is making the change?), I know the conversation is occurring in Asia and Africa as well. http://coryaldrich.blogs.com/baldman/2005/04/walp_emergent_g.html  It's really difficult to classify the emerging church as purely or primarily a protestant occurrence, since the EC is relying on Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, etc. heritage as well.  Some have thrown around the term, "post-protestant" and "post-evangelical" as an accurate description of the EC.  This is very different from a "protestant" affiliation.  Further, I'm not certain the EC started in the U.S.  Rather, it highly probable it occurred in the Europe, United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and probably other unmentioned locations at the same time for probably various and differing reasons.  No one started it.  The American Church cannot claim it. --Artisan949

 * I agree. Each country seems to have their own version of emerging church with native influences, and, very few would claim American heritage. The British in the eighties (NOS,Late Late Service) were far ahead of the Americans in the same decade. --tallskinnykiwi

 * Again, Anglican, etc. are Protestant (unless by "etc." you meant, for example, "Hindu") And so far, you have yet to actually provide any examples of these Catholic and Orthodox EC churches you keep mentioning, which doesn't lend a lot of weight to your argument.  The lack of Catholic or Orthodox churches does, however, lend weight to the "primarily Protestant" classification, and begins to shift it towards exclusivity as well.  As for "post-protestant" and "post-evangelical", I have a serious problem with creating words or new definitions of words when old words will work just fine (see the "conversation" discussion above).

 * And nowhere in the article was it said that the EC started in the USA. It merely said "English-speaking", which includes the United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and Great Britain. --WestonWyse 13:26, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Again, let's stay on track. We have already agreed to drop "English Speaking" (see conversation above).  There is no more need to hash that label out again.  In fact, I will make that change in the days to come.  Let our discussion focus on the "protestant" label.  Weston you said, "As for 'post-protestant' and 'post-evangelical', I have a serious problem with creating words or new definitions of words when old words will work just fine."  The problem is, "protestant" does not work.  Not all Christian traditions are considered protestant, my friend.  My point has been that it is not wise to pigeon hole the EC as primarily this or that, in this case, protestant because of post-protestant, post-evangelical, post-denominational, post-exclusivist terms.  Personally, identifying with the EC, I am a Catholic, Protestant.  How does classifying (oh we love to classfy) the EC as purely or primarily Protestant, capture those of us who come with a diverse, ecclectic heritage?  It doesn't.  Many people in the EC have moved passed these labels that seperate the Church, rather than bring us together.  We would do well to capture a description, a word, that communicates this.  "Primarily protestant" does not. --Artisan949

 * But it is primarily Protestant. Christian traditions are Catholic, Orthodox, and Protestant.  New "flavors" draw from one of those three.  And while the EC may have moved past labels, encyclopedias have not, and this is an encyclopedia.  The only way to argue that it is not primarily Protestant is to argue that it is primarily Catholic or Orthodox, or equal division of two or three of those.  And defining the bulk of this movement is not about addressing each and every individual adherent; it is about defining the bulk of the movement, which is primarily Protestant. As for the idea of being a Catholic-Protestant, I'll let your priest have that discussion with you.  --WestonWyse 22:41, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Weston, please!?!?! I refuse to go there with you my friend.  Rather, I appreciate your desire to keep this as encyclopedic as possible.  As you have asked us to prove that it is primarily something else, I ask you also to site your sources which suggest that it is "primarily protestant."  So far you have failed to equally do that.  We must seek out terms that communicate what the EC is and how it self-describes itself whether or not you like that approach or not.  Frankly, I do not care what WestonWyse thinks is the emerging church.  I want to know how the critics and the supporters (experts) are describing this occurrence.  Please provide sources, not just links.  Aditionally, let's find the common ground.  Why can't we communicate that it is protestant (though not primarily because we cannot prove that), but also moves away from protestantism or whatever else.  I'm comfortable with finding the common ground.  Are you? --Artisan949

 * I've looked through the list of links within the article, as well as the lists of links on many of those pages. I noticed none that were Catholic or Othodox.  Thus, my research indicates that the EC movement is primarily, if not exclusively, Protestant.  I will ask again, if there are counter-examples, please list them.  So far, the inability of anyone involved in this discussion to do so leads me to belive that I am correct in this conclusion.  That being the case, there seems to be no need for common ground, because the EC seems to be developing in purely protestant circles.  --WestonWyse 22:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

 * WestonWyse said, "Thus, my research indicates that the EC movement is primarily, if not exclusively, Protestant." Fortunately, Wikipedia says, "Wikipedia is not the place for original research.  Original research refers to original research by editors of Wikipedia."  No orignal research One word, "Sources?"  Let us move towards providing the facts instead of personal opinion.  If we can't do that, there will be an impasse which will not be beneficial.  --Artisan949 10:11, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

which focuses on reaching the "Postmodern Generation" (people born after 1980)

 * This is very poorly worded and desparately needs to be changed. The EC does not seem to have designs on any particular age group.  This should be changed to a simplified statement of the actual goals of the EC movement. --WestonWyse

 * I concur. Until an alternative is recommended, it should be deleted.  Agree? --Artisan949

 * I agree that a "generational" perspective is not universal among EC organizations, although many EC organizations appear to have exactly this perspective if their websites are any indication. technopilgrim 22:22, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Nonetheless, I doubt it is a primary goal -- the target of a specific demographic and the implied exclusion of others. I agree with deleting it, as I said above, but I would like someone more familiar with EC goals to propose an alternative.  It would be nice to list them simply (in a dozen or two words) within the introduction. --WestonWyse 15:34, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

 * This is the problem with the introduction. In its attempt to simplify the EC (which is complex) is reduces it to an over-simplified description of contemporary Christianity.  There is a section that address the values of the Emerging Church which I think were satisfactory.  Some changes have been made to them recently which are a bit problematic (mainly what we've discussed so far).  If there is to be an introduction, we should include several paragraphs perhaps and error on the side of being exhaustive rather than over-simplified.  Also, we should focus on the rest of the description of the emerging church, then write the introduction.  It should serve as a synopsis / abstract of what the page will contain, rather than a definition of the EC in "30 words of less." --Artisan949

 * Good call to delete it. In the Young Leaders (pre-Emergent) days in 1999, Doug Pagitt and I decided to drop the word "postmodern" since it created so much confusion among those who could only see the deconstructive side. Its only use now is a punching bag for fundamentalists. A better focus is a towards those in the emerging culture which is not defined by age or philosophy. tallskinnykiwi

 * Has this been deleted? If not, I will make that change in the days to come in addition to deleting "english speaking." --Artisan949

 * There was a truce called, remember? No deleting until a concensus has been reached.  The disputed article template is up there to point out that a discussion is underway and the factual accuracy is under debate. --WestonWyse 22:43, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Weston, weston, weston. No changes have been made yet.  And do you mean until you agree?  There is a concensus here to delete it.  Myself, Techno, Tallskinny, seem to concur.  What's the problem?  Is the problem that you don't agree because that's not enough reason to NOT change it.  If a concensus is what you want, we already have that. --Artisan949

reflecting the perceived needs and values of this generation, emerging churches emphasize authenticity, creative expression, and a non-judgmental perspective towards outsiders

 * I agree that the first phrase ("reflecting... generation") is overly-limiting and possibly POV against the EC. However, I fail to see the problem with the rest of this part.  Are any of those three points incorrect? --WestonWyse

 * They are not in so much, incorrect as they are limiting. The emerging church is concerned with more then authenticity and creative expression. Non-judgementalism does not seem to be a main value of the emerging church.  We should cite sources for the use of these three terms to summarize the EC.  I fail to understand why these three were chosen.  Why not community, mission, and theology or the arts, justice, and ecumenicism? --Artisan949

 * OK, I'm beginning to see your point; it's not that they're incorrect, but that they pigeon-hole emergent churches' philosophy and theology? How about deleting this section as well, and using the alternative explanation proposed for the section above to also cover this? --WestonWyse 15:34, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

 * The section on the values is OK (though it needs some correction). This should be the only place that we talk about the values of the EC.  I'm all for deleting this section.  Which alt explanation are you referring to? --Artisan949

 * The one someone needs to write to replace the 'Postmodern generation" section, above. --WestonWyse 13:27, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Can we post an alternative / replacement to that section here before we publsih it to the article? --Artisan949

 * I've rather been hoping someone would since I suggested it. --WestonWyse 22:44, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Doesn't it seem redundant since there is section devoted to these values more fully? --Artisan949

while retaining a Bible-based theology.

 * Retaining is not the same as enforcing. Unless the argument is that the EC discourages or disallows a Bible-based theology (which is ludicrous), this is an important statement, as it says that the EC is not a splinter cult with its own agenda, but a movement that can operate within traditional Christianity and its values. --WestonWyse

 * In our previous discussion, I did not mean to convey that the EC is a cult or does not adhere to a Christian orthodoxy or heritage. Rather, my concern is the use of the term "bible-based." What does that mean?  The term could have various meanings dependent on who is asked.  For a Catholic, a bible based theology may differ from a protestant, fundamentalist.  Furthermore, the EC strives not only to retain a theological orthodoxy, but a Christian faith, heritage, tradition, etc.  I've also argued that the EC has not defined its theology as of yet, so to say it is anything except a Christian theology would be problematic.  I appreciate the section on ecclesiology, but we encounter, head on, this problem there. --Artisan949

 * I agree that "Bible-based" is a bit of a codeword, and we can do better. As an outsider to the movement I can only ask how doctrinal disagreements are handled inside EC groups? Are they downplayed and left unresolved? Or do Bibles come out & Scripture verses start flying? Or does the group leader step up and say "this is what we tend to believe in our group"? Religious organizations have different answers to this problem, and it's useful to know how any particular organization resolves it.  BTW, I see the German wikipedia article talks about mysticism.   That's a very interesting answer, if indeed it applies to EC groups, as mysticism has been out of favor for a long time now & may be due for a resurgence.  technopilgrim 22:22, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

 * No, no; I didn't think you meant to imply that it is a cult. I'm just saying that it was a good way to note that the EC is compatible with traditional, even orthodox Christian teachings.  However, I do see your point.  Perhaps a better phrasing would be what I just said?  "while retaining compatability with the traditional teachings of the churches involved."  How does that sound? --WestonWyse 15:34, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Ah, mysticism would be something wonderful to address since critics have accused the EC of being new-age and mystical. Again, I want to emphasize the decentralization of the EC convo.  As such, the EC doesn't have a communal policy to handle doctrinal disagreements in the EC.  Rather, there is freedom for various theological positions within the emerging church convo, as long as these could be consider orthodox -and possibly a "generous orthodoxy" at that.  As such, each individual emerging church probably has its own way of dealing with theological dillemas -some conservative, some more liberal in approach.  I like your suggestion Weston.  One of the values use to be about deconstructing theology and freeing it for modernistic baggage.  I believe it also said something to about theological freedom granted as long as it fell somewhere in general Christian orthodoxy.  Too bad that was changed and deleted.  Perhaps, it should be simply "while seeking to retain  historical, traditional doctrines of the Church."  --Artisan949

 * You do realize there is a page history, where you can go see every change ever made to an article, right? Technopilgrim used it it point out your error in saying that no one had replied to your original post, above.  That said, does the EC actually seek to keep traditional doctrines?  It has seemed (and has been pointed out) to me that there was pretty much no organized or central doctrines of the EC. --WestonWyse 13:40, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, I know all about the History page. The changes were made long ago of which I mentioned previously.  Moving on.  At this time, there is no communal, or shared, or common theology though there is a non-commnal theology, a theological discussion happening with people coming from different perspectives.  I wondered if "seeking to retain" was the wrong phrase as well.  Perhaps, "while sharing a common value for the diverse historical, traditional doctrines of the Church."  I do not think collectively the EC is anti Christian heritage, history, tradition, doctrine.  There is in place a common value for these things within the EC, even if broad, eccletic, diverse. --Artisan949

 * The phrase "common value" is incredibly vague. It doesn't really convey any specific meaning.  How about "without excluding the historic, traditional doctrines of the Church"? --WestonWyse 22:48, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * That doesn't work because we cannot prove that. We can prove through EC literature what I suggested.  We have to be comfortable that aspects of this will be vague.  It will only become more clear as the EC progresses. --Artisan949

 * Encyclopedias are not for vagueness; they are for clarity. And EC literature I have seen contradicts your suggestion. --WestonWyse 22:28, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Great, let's talk about that then? Please provide a reference to the source that contradicts, ""while sharing a common value for the diverse historical, traditional doctrines of the Church."  Just off the top of my head, McLaren, Webber, Kimball, possibly Andrew Jones agree.  (You still lingering Andrew?).  Shall I provide citations? --Artisan949 10:20, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Emerging church/Introduction 2


text:
User talk:Chocolate999

Image:Spectacled2.gif listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Spectacled2.gif, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —MetsBot 19:20, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Chocolate999


text:
Joseph S. Cony

Joseph Saville Cony (1834 – February 10, 1867) was an officer in the United States Navy who served during the American Civil War. The Fletcher-class destroyer USS Cony (DD-508) was named in his honor.

Biography
Cony was born in 1834 in Eastport, Maine. He was appointed acting ensign November 3, 1862. First attached to USS Western World (1856), he commanded several successful small-boat expeditions along the Carolina coast.

On August 22, 1863, while executive officer of USS Shokokon (1862), he commanded a boat expedition of six men which surprised a much larger enemy encampment at New Topsail Inlet, near Wilmington, North Carolina. This small force captured ten men, one 12-pounder howitzer, eighteen horses, and destroyed the blockade running schooner Alexander Cooper and extensive salt works. For this accomplishment Joseph S. Cony was promoted to Acting Master on September 7, 1863.

In April 1864, while attached to USS Britannia (1862), he received the thanks of Major General Peck for his cooperation with the landing expedition at Bogue Inlet. During his cruise in this vessel he participated in the first attack on Fort Fisher. At the time of the second attack he was attached to USS Fort Jackson (1862) and was one of the volunteers in the Navy assault party which assisted in carrying the fort.

Cony was honorably discharged November 7, 1865. In 1866, Mr. Cony was appointed Lieutenant in the regular navy. By that time he was master of the merchant vessel, City of Bath, at sea. Before he could accept this appointment, he went down with his ship off Cape Hatteras on February 10, 1867.

title: Joseph S. Cony


text:
In forma pauperis

In forma pauperis (IFP or i.f.p.) is a Latin legal term meaning "in the character or manner of a pauper". It refers to the ability of an indigent person to proceed in court without payment of the usual fees associated with a lawsuit or appeal.

United Kingdom
The statute 11 Hen. 7. c. 12 allowed any poor person having cause of action to bring a writ without paying the usual fees, without paying the fees thereon.

Appeals to the House of Lords in formâ pauperis were regulated by the Appeal (Formâ Pauperis) Act 1893, which gave the House of Lords power to refuse a petition for leave to sue.

IFP was abolished in the United Kingdom in favor of a legal aid approach as part of the Legal Aid and Advice Act 1949.

United States
In the United States, the IFP designation is given by both state and federal courts to someone who is without the funds to pursue the normal costs of a lawsuit or a criminal defense. The status is usually granted by a judge without a hearing, and it entitles the person to a waiver of normal costs, and sometimes in criminal cases the appointment of counsel. While court-imposed costs such as filing fees are waived, the litigant is still responsible for other costs incurred in bringing the action such as deposition and witness fees. However, in federal court, a pauper can obtain free service of process through the United States Marshal's Service.

Approximately two-thirds of writ of certiorari petitions to the Supreme Court are filed in forma pauperis. Most of those petitioners are prisoners. Statistically, petitions that appear on the Supreme Court's in forma pauperis docket are substantially less likely to be granted review than others on the docket.

Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335 (1963), is a landmark case in United States Supreme Court history where in forma pauperis was invoked. In forma pauperis is usually granted in connection to pro se petitioners, but the two concepts are separate and distinct.

title: In forma pauperis


text: User talk:72.14.67.74

title: User talk:72.14.67.74


text:
Andrej Čuš and Greens of Slovenia

The Greens of Slovenia (Zeleni Slovenije, ZS) is a political party in Slovenia.

History
The Greens of Slovenia was formed on 11 June 1989 in the course of the Revolutions of 1989, when Slovenia was still part of Yugoslavia. At the first direct election in Slovenia, the Greens gained 8.8% of the votes cast and won 8 seats in the National Assembly legislature. At the 1992 parliamentary election the party gained 3.7% of the votes cast, losing 3 mandates in the assembly. Since 1996, it has fallen beneath the electoral threshold, and thus is no longer represented in parliament.

At the parliamentary election in September 2008, the party won no seats. At the early 2011 Slovenian parliamentary election on 4 December 2011, the party won 0.36% of the vote, thus not gaining any seat in the National Assembly. The party received 0.50% of the vote in the Slovenian parliamentary election on 13 July 2014, and again did not win any seats in parliament.

In March 2018 Andrej Čuš took over the leadership and renamed the party Andrej Čuš and Greens of Slovenia (Andrej Čuš in Zeleni Slovenije).

Europe Elects stated in April 2021 that the party displays the logo of the European Green Party (EGP) on their website; however, the EGP contacted Europe Elects and denied any affiliation.

title: Andrej Čuš and Greens of Slovenia


text: User talk:192.38.47.80

title: User talk:192.38.47.80


text:
Talk:Ordo Templi Orientis/oldarticle

Ordo Templi Orientis

''The factual accuracy of this article is disputed. Please see the article's talk page for more information.''

Ordo Templi Orientis (O.T.O., OTO), Order of Oriental Templars, Order of the Temple of the East

 * Peace, Tolerance, Truth:
 * Salutation on All Points of the Triangle;
 * Respect to the Order.
 * To all whom it may concern: Greeting and Health.

 * Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law.

The letters O.T.O. stand for Ordo Templi Orientis, 'Order of the Temple of the East', or less accurately, the 'Order of Oriental Templars', or. O.T.O. is a 'secret society' describing itself as an 'Outer Thelemic Order' which is dedicated to the high purpose of securing the Liberty of the Individual and his or her advancement in Light, Wisdom, Understanding, Knowledge, and Power through Beauty, Courage, and Wit, on the Foundation of Universal Brotherhood.

O.T.O. is the first of the great Old Æon orders to accept The Book of the Law, written or 'received' by Aleister Crowley in 1904. This book proclaims a New Æon in human thought, culture and religion. The Æon arises from a single supreme injunction: the Law of Thelema, which is Do what thou wilt.

This Law is not to be interpreted as a license to indulge every passing whim, but rather as the mandate to discover one's True Will and accomplish it; leaving others to do the same in their own unique ways. "Every man and every woman is a star." The Law of Thelema can ultimately be fulfilled only through the individual efforts of each person. Nevertheless, many worthy aspirants to the Great Work of Thelema have a genuine need for information, guidance, fellowship, or the opportunity to assist their fellow aspirants and serve humanity.

Founder Carl Kellner initially conceived of a "Academia Masonica" which rapidly evolved into the Ordo Templi Orientis.

Theodor Reuss soon succeeded the founder as head of the O.T.O.

O.T.O. and Aleister Crowley
In 1910 or 1911 Aleister Crowley entered the O.T.O. by admission of Theodor Reuss and in 1912 he was appointed head of the Order in the English speaking countries.

Although famous because of all-time notorious occultist Aleister Crowley, and although Crowley's contributions have been of enormous influence on the Order's development, the O.T.O. has had many other leaders that have contributed to the Order, both before Crowley and since his death.

Crowley wrote that Theodor Reuss suffered a stroke in the Spring of 1920. In correspondence with one of his officers, Crowley expressed doubts about Reuss's competence to remain in office. Relations between Reuss and Crowley began to deteriorate. In a letter to H. Spencer Lewis, Reuss claimed that Crowley had been expelled from the Order and forbidden to use its name in October 25 1921.

Crowley never acknowledged receiving an expulsion notice from Reuss, although the two exchanged angry letters in November of 1921. Crowley informed Reuss that he was availing himself of Reuss's abdication from office and proclaiming himself the Outer Head of the Order. Reuss died on October 28 1923. Crowley claimed in later correspondence that Reuss had designated him as his successor.

After Crowley's death he was succeeded as "Outer Head" of O.T.O. by Karl Germer,who died in 1962 without naming a successor. After Germer's death Grady McMurtry claimed the succession,which was disputed by other claimants and has given rise to a number of organizations claiming to be the legitimate O.T.O.,but the one he led appears to be the largest. Since McMurtry's death it has been run by its present Frater Superior,known in the Ordo as Hymenaeus Beta and identified by outside critics as William Breeze. It currently has approximately 3000 members around the world.

Criticism
A number of people regard the O.T.O. as evil, perhaps because of its link to sex magick. (According to non-hostile Crowley biographer Lawrence Sutin, the order's VIII degree related to solitary sex magick and the IX degree to sex between a man and a woman. Crowley, Sutin says, added a homosexual XI degree. This assertion is disproved by Crowley's own diaries, however, which record a number of XI degree workings with women.) Many OTO-hostile webpages contain false or dubious information, such as the claim that Aleister Crowley founded the Order and that he literally sacrificed children.

Some (Robert Anton Wilson, for example,) criticize the O.T.O. for its continued attempts at secrecy. (One Order-related website says that the secret is even easier to misinterpret than it is to profane.) Wilson says, in effect, that secrecy made sense when Western nations had laws against openness and clarity but that it now serves no useful purpose. One can find information about the sex-related O.T.O. degrees in books such as Sutin's and on sex-magick webpages.

Peter-R. Koenig, 'The Ordo Templis Orientis phenomenon,' a thorough piece of detailed field research, discusses the psycho-sociology of participants, i.e. their behavior, a critical assessment informed by a skeptical view, from an outsider, offering many links.

title: Talk:Ordo Templi Orientis/oldarticle


text:
Fabrice Santoro

Fabrice Vetea Santoro (born 9 December 1972) is a French former professional tennis player. Successful in both singles and doubles, he had an unusually long professional career, with many of his accomplishments coming towards the end of his career, and he is popular among spectators and other players alike for his winning demeanor and shot-making abilities; he is also one of a rare breed of player who plays two-handed on both the forehand and backhand sides.

Owing to his longevity on the tour and consistent ranking, Santoro holds several ATP records: the most career wins over top ten opponents for a player who never reached the top ten (40), and the most French Open appearances (20), tied with Feliciano López. He was the first player to appear in 70 Grand Slam men's singles events, and has the second-most losses in singles play behind López (444).

In singles, Santoro won six titles, but reached the quarterfinals at a Grand Slam only once. His career-high ranking of world No. 17 belied his impressive record against top ten opposition.

He had greater success in doubles competition, with two Grand Slam doubles titles, one mixed doubles title, and 25 doubles championships overall to his name.

Since March 2019, Santoro has been the coach of Canadian tennis player Milos Raonic.

Juniors
After having lost in the early rounds of the 1988 Jr French Open and 1988 Jr US Open, Santoro won the 1989 Jr French Open. He also had a semifinal appearance in the 1989 Jr US Open. He reached a career-high junior ranking of No. 3.

Junior Grand Slam results – Singles:

Australian Open: A (-)

French Open: W (1989)

Wimbledon: 3R (1989)

US Open: SF (1989)

Pro tour
When Santoro successfully defended his 2007 title by winning the 2008 Newport tournament at the age of 35, he became the oldest tennis player to win back-to-back championships at an ATP singles event.

In addition, Santoro won what was, at the time, the longest singles match in the open era: at the 2004 French Open, he beat fellow Frenchman Arnaud Clément in a 6-hour 33 minute first-round match (6–4, 6–3, 6–7(5), 3–6, 16–14). The record stood until John Isner defeated Nicolas Mahut at Wimbledon in 2010, but still remains the French Open record.

As a singles tennis player, the 2006 Australian Open was Santoro's only Grand Slam quarterfinal appearance.

In singles play, Santoro defeated 18 players who were ranked world no. 1 at some time during their careers: Novak Djokovic, Jimmy Connors, Mats Wilander, Boris Becker, Stefan Edberg, Jim Courier, Andre Agassi, Pete Sampras, Thomas Muster, Marcelo Ríos, Gustavo Kuerten, Carlos Moyá, Pat Rafter, Juan Carlos Ferrero, Marat Safin, Lleyton Hewitt, Andy Roddick, and Roger Federer (against whom he has a 2–9 record). Against other former world no. 1 players, Santoro is 0–6 against Yevgeny Kafelnikov, 0–1 against Ivan Lendl, 0–1 against Rafael Nadal, and 0–2 against Andy Murray. Santoro is famous for his winning record against Marat Safin (7–2); Safin himself has said, "Being told I would play Santoro was being told I was to die."

Santoro won the 2003 and 2004 Australian Opens doubles titles, partnering Michaël Llodra, a French compatriot, and was runner-up at the 2002 Australian Open, 2004 French Open and 2006 Wimbledon Championships. He also won the 2005 French Open mixed doubles title with Daniela Hantuchová. Santoro teamed with Michaël Llodra again to win the 2005 Tennis Masters Cup in Shanghai, a competition that included the top eight doubles teams in the world.

In addition to his doubles prowess, Fabrice is noted for his cheery attitude on court and his vast arsenal of trick shots, making him a crowd favorite and gaining him the admiration of his peers. In recognition of Santoro's varied and innovative style of play, Pete Sampras has nicknamed him The Magician.

Santoro plays with two hands on forehand and backhand, and though he is right-handed, often slices his forehand with his left hand. He attributes this to having used racquets of the same weight throughout his career, which were too heavy for a six-year-old starting off a career to hold with one hand. Santoro was fast around the court and was a skilled defensive player.

With his participation in the 2008 Australian Open, he broke Andre Agassi's record in Grand Slam appearances over his career with a total of 62. Santoro retired at the end of the 2009 season at his hometown tournament at the 2009 BNP Paribas Masters in Paris (Bercy), losing his final singles match against James Blake and final doubles match against Johan Brunström and Jean-Julien Rojer while partnering with compatriot Sébastien Grosjean.

Santoro came out of retirement for one tournament at the 2010 Australian Open in order to obtain the record for having played in Grand Slam tournaments in four different decades, logging a total of 70 appearances in Grand Slam tournaments. At 37, he was the oldest player in the ATP top 100, being ranked 68 when he entered this last tournament. He lost in the first round of the tournament – to Marin Čilić – ending his professional tennis career.

He was the first leader of the ATP Champions Race, winning the first tournament of the year in Doha in the year the race was introduced (2000).

According to the ATP website, as of the 2019 Davis Cup Finals, Feliciano López has lost more singles matches (475) than any other professional player (active or not), surpassing the record previously held by Santoro. Overall, however, Santoro has won more than half of his matches, with a career record of 470–444.

Personal life
Santoro was born in Tahiti and grew up in La Seyne-sur-Mer, in Southern France. His father worked at Toulon's military port, and is a former footballer who later became a tennis teacher. Santoro began playing tennis as a child at the club where his father taught.

As of 2022, Santoro divides his time between Paris and Corsica. He owns a home near Ajaccio. He is a big fan of the late French comedian Michel Colucci, better known as Coluche.

title: Fabrice Santoro


text:
Talk:North Devon (UK Parliament constituency)

Untitled
This should be moved to "North Devon (constituency)" unless there is more than one constituency with this name, to avoid over-disambiguation. Joe D (t) 17:23, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Personally, I agree (indeed that's where I started the article orginally) however I'd rather not have some articles with one type of disambiguation scheme and another set with a different type, therefore I suggest we restart the discussion on the wikiproject. (I still propose the comprimise of (westminster constituency) though) -- Joolz 23:12, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * It's a bit late for that, a lot of articles have already had their disambiguation corrected. Joe D (t) 23:37, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * The thing I don't want to happen is for many different disambiguation schemes to be used. The current one is ugly but the problem with just "(constituency)" is where more than one constituency (for example some scottish constituencies or apparently some Canadian constituencies too) share the same name. -- Joolz 16:16, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Turnout
Turnout number and % are I think wrong. BBC has 70.0% not 70.2%. All the party scores match the BBC's, it's the addition that's incorrect (should be 52,320). http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/politics/constituencies/E14000838 Neil W (talk) 18:24, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Shouldn't Auberon Waugh's party be the "Dog Lovers' Party", as he did secure more than one vote? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smlark (talk • contribs) 21:06, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Crowther first name
Why is Stephen Crowther shown as Steve Crowther is the result tables for the 2010 and 2015 election but not the 2017 election? — Preceding unsigned comment added by YttriumShrew (talk • contribs) 04:45, 15 June 2019 (UTC)


text:
Deane House

Deane House may refer to:

 * in Canada
 * Deane House (Fort Calgary), Fort Calgary, Alberta

(by state)
 * in the United States
 * Deane House (Little Rock, Arkansas), listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP)
 * Silas Deane House, Wethersfield, Connecticut, NRHP-listed
 * Francis Deane Cottage, Uxbridge, Massachusetts, NRHP-listed
 * Deane-Williams House, Cambridge, Massachusetts, NRHP-listed
 * Deane House (Cofield, North Carolina), NRHP-listed

title: Deane House


text: User talk:65.241.218.254

title: User talk:65.241.218.254


text:
D minor

D minor is a minor scale based on D, consisting of the pitches D, E, F, G, A, B, and C. Its key signature has one flat. Its relative major is F major and its parallel major is D major.

Scale
The D natural minor scale is:

Changes needed for the melodic and harmonic versions of the scale are written in with accidentals as necessary. The D harmonic minor and melodic minor scales are:

Scale-degree chords
The scale-degree chords of D minor are:
 * Tonic – D minor
 * Supertonic – E diminished
 * Mediant – F major
 * Subdominant – G minor
 * Dominant – A minor
 * Submediant – B-flat major
 * Subtonic – C major

Music in D minor
Of Domenico Scarlatti's 555 keyboard sonatas, 151 are in minor keys, and with 32 sonatas, D minor is the most often chosen minor key.

The Art of Fugue by Johann Sebastian Bach is in D minor.

Michael Haydn's only minor-key symphony, No. 29, is in D minor.

According to Alfred Einstein, the history of tuning has led D minor to be associated with counterpoint and chromaticism (for example, the chromatic fourth), and cites Bach's Chromatic Fantasia and Fugue, BWV 903, in D minor. Mozart's Requiem is written primarily in D minor, as are the famous Queen of the Night Aria, "Der Hölle Rache kocht in meinem Herzen", the ouverture and the final scene of Don Giovanni. Of the two piano concertos that Mozart wrote in a minor key, one of them is in D minor: Piano Concerto No. 20, K. 466. Furthermore, his String Quartet No. 13, K. 173, and String Quartet No. 15, K. 421, are also in D minor.

The only chamber music compositions in D minor by Ludwig van Beethoven are his stormy Piano Sonata No. 17 and the haunting Largo of the Ghost Trio Op. 70/1. Franz Schubert's String Quartet No. 14 (Death and the Maiden) is in D minor. A number of Gabriel Fauré's chamber music works are written in D minor, including the Piano Trio Op. 120, the First Piano Quintet Op. 89, and the First Cello Sonata Op. 109. Arnold Schoenberg's Verklärte Nacht is in D minor, as is his String Quartet No. 1.

Since D minor is the key of Beethoven's Symphony No. 9, Anton Bruckner felt apprehensive about writing his own Symphony No. 9 in the same key. As well as Bruckner's First Mass and Third Symphony, multiple other post-Beethoven symphonies are in D minor, including Robert Schumann's Symphony No. 4, the only Symphony written by César Franck, Dvořák's Seventh Symphony and Symphony No. 3 by Gustav Mahler.

Jean Sibelius often reserved the key of D minor for compositions he saw as being of a noble character; the Violin Concerto, the Sixth Symphony, and the string quartet Voces intimae are each in the key.

The tonality of D minor held special significance for Helene and Alban Berg.

D minor is particularly recurrent in the music of Sergei Rachmaninoff, with pieces written in the key occupying close to one eighth of his total compositional output, including the Third Piano Concerto; the Piano Sonata No. 1; the Symphony No. 1; the Trio élégiaque No. 2; the Études-Tableaux, Op. 33, No. 4; and Op. 39, No. 8; the Corelli Variations; and the symphonic poem Prince Rostislav.

Works in the classical music era and later beginning in minor typically end in major, or at least on a major chord (such as a picardy third), but there are a few notable examples of works in D minor ending in much sharper keys. Two symphonies that begin in D minor and end in E major are Havergal Brian's Gothic Symphony and Carl Nielsen's Symphony No. 4 (The Inextinguishable). Franz Liszt's Dante Symphony opens in D minor and ends in B major.

Similar to a D minor symphony ending in D major, as with Beethoven's Symphony No. 9, a D major symphony can have for its allegro first movement a slow introduction in D minor. Robbins Landon wrote that "Tonic minor Adagio introductions, especially in the key of D minor, were very popular with English composers of the year 1794", and Joseph Haydn copied this procedure for the D major symphonies he wrote in London.

Film composer Hans Zimmer is one of the most prominent users of the key of D minor in modern times. Many of his well-known scores were written in the key; notable examples are Gladiator, The Dark Knight, Pirates of the Caribbean and The Da Vinci Code. His frequent use of the key has been noticed by reviewers such as Christian Clemmensen of Filmtracks.com, who has called the trend "ridiculous stubbornness".

Other notable compositions

 * George Frideric Handel
 * Keyboard suite in D minor (HWV 437)
 * Johann Sebastian Bach
 * Toccata and Fugue in D minor, BWV 565
 * Harpsichord Concerto No. 1, BWV 1052
 * English Suite No. 6, BWV 811
 * Cello Suite No. 2, BWV 1008
 * Concerto for Two Violins, BWV 1043
 * The Art of Fugue, BWV 1080
 * Partita for solo violin No. 2 in D minor, BWV 1004
 * Georg Philipp Telemann
 * Fantasia for flute solo No. 6
 * Fantasia for viola da gamba solos No. 11
 * Joseph Haydn
 * Symphony No. 26 "Lamentatione"
 * String Quartet in D minor, Hob.III:76 "Fifths"
 * Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart
 * Kyrie in D minor, K. 341
 * Fantasia in D minor, K. 397
 * Felix Mendelssohn
 * Variations sérieuses, Op. 54
 * Piano Concerto No. 2, Op. 40
 * Piano Trio No. 1, Op. 49
 * Symphony No. 5 "Reformation"
 * Frédéric Chopin
 * Prelude Op. 28, No. 24 "Storm"
 * Polonaise, Op. 71 No. 1
 * Charles-Valentin Alkan
 * "Le chemin de fer", Op. 27
 * "En rythme molossique", No. 2 from 12 études in all the minor keys, Op. 39
 * Franz Liszt
 * Transcendental Étude No. 4 "Mazeppa", from S. 139, for piano
 * Hungarian Rhapsody No. 7, S. 244/7, for piano
 * Hungarian Rhapsody No. 17, S. 244/17, for piano
 * Hungarian Rhapsody No. 19, S. 244/19, for piano
 * Mazeppa, S. 100, symphonic poem
 * Robert Schumann
 * Violin Concerto, WoO 23
 * Piano Trio No. 1, Op. 63
 * Violin Sonata No. 2, Op. 121
 * Édouard Lalo
 * Cello Concerto
 * Anton Bruckner
 * Symphony in D minor
 * March in D minor
 * César Franck
 * Symphony D minor
 * Johannes Brahms
 * Piano Concerto No. 1 Op. 15
 * Tragic Overture
 * Violin Sonata No. 3 Op. 108
 * Modest Mussorgsky
 * Night on Bald Mountain
 * Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky
 * Orchestral Suite No. 1 Op. 43
 * Antonín Dvořák
 * Symphony No. 4 Op. 13, B. 41
 * String Quartet No. 9 Op. 34
 * Serenade for Wind Instruments Op. 44
 * Gabriel Fauré
 * Requiem Op. 44
 * Piano Quintet No. 1, Op. 89
 * Cello Sonata No. 1, Op. 109
 * Piano Trio, Op. 120
 * Ralph Vaughan Williams
 * Symphony No. 8
 * Eugène Ysaÿe
 * Violin Sonata No. 3 "Ballade"
 * Sergei Prokofiev
 * Toccata for piano Op. 11
 * Symphony No. 2 Op. 40
 * Piano Sonata No. 2 Op. 14
 * Aram Khachaturian
 * Violin Concerto
 * Dmitri Shostakovich
 * Cello Sonata Op. 40
 * Symphony No. 5 Op. 47
 * Symphony No. 12 Op.112

title: D minor


text:
Tamaricaceae

The Tamaricaceae, the tamarisk family, are a family of plants native to drier areas of Europe, Asia, and Africa. It contains four genera: Tamarix (with 73 species), Reaumuria (25 species), Myricaria (13 species), and Myrtama (a single species).

In the 1980s, the family was classified in the Violales under the Cronquist system; more modern classifications (Angiosperm Phylogeny Group) place them in the Caryophyllales.

Many of the plants in the family grow on saline soils, tolerating up to 15,000 ppm soluble salt and can also tolerate alkaline conditions. The leaves are generally scale-like, measure 1–5 mm long, overlap each other along the stem, and in some species are encrusted with salt secretions.

title: Tamaricaceae


text:
Talk:Arthur Weasley

Mr. Weasley's disbelife
Why does it say that he did not belive harry about his abuse? There is no evedence in the books. It should be removed.

possibly questionable edit
This edit was made by an anon who has been wandering around WP changing minor text, sometimes apparently at random. Since I know nothing about Harry Potter, I'm just leaving a notification here, hoping that someone with more knowledge will check it out... Cheers, Tom e rtalk 09:02, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

loyalty box
See this: A loyalty field discussion. ~ Emily (Funtrivia Freak) 21:48, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

See Talk:Weasley family for subsequent discussion.

title: Talk:Arthur Weasley


text:
William C. Sullivan

William Cornelius Sullivan (May 12, 1912 – November 9, 1977) was an assistant director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation who was in charge of the agency's domestic intelligence operations from 1961 to 1971. Sullivan was forced out of the FBI at the end of September 1971 due to disagreements with FBI director J. Edgar Hoover. The following year, Sullivan was appointed as the head of the Justice Department's new Office of National Narcotics Intelligence, which he led from June 1972 to July 1973. Sullivan died in a hunting accident in 1977. His memoir of his thirty-year career in the FBI, written with journalist Bill Brown, was published posthumously by commercial publisher W. W. Norton & Company in 1979.

Sullivan led the highly controversial COINTELPRO aimed at surveilling, infiltrating, discrediting, and disrupting domestic American political organizations which among other things, assassinated, imprisoned, publicly humiliated or falsely charged American political opposition and civil rights movements with crimes.

Background
William Cornelius Sullivan was born on May 12, 1912, in the small town of Bolton, Massachusetts. His parents were farmers in the area who worked a family farm there for fifty years. Sullivan later recounted that growing up in Bolton was a life without modern conveniences, including public transportation, school buses, telephone, mail service, or even electricity. Sullivan graduated from Hudson High School in neighboring Hudson and held advanced degrees from American University and George Washington University.

Career
Upon graduation, Sullivan worked for a time as an English teacher in Bolton before entering the civil service as an employee of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the agency's Boston office.

FBI
On July 3, 1941, Sullivan received a letter from Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) director J. Edgar Hoover offering him a position as special agent with the Bureau. Anticipating war in Europe, the young Sullivan had been working for the IRS prior to taking the FBI examination. He reported to the Department of Justice on August 4 of that year for training as an FBI agent.

There were two different sorts of agent trainees, Sullivan later recalled, those who had joined the FBI as clerks straight out of high school, when they were young, impressionable, and able to be trained to be fanatically loyal to the bureau and its leaders; and those like Sullivan who had graduated college and developed a professional skill-set before enlisting with the bureau. "The pressure on a trainee to conform was unremitting," Sullivan remembered, with those questioning FBI policies or violating agency rules quickly funneled out of the system. In addition, ideological homogeneity was reinforced by the universal recruitment of Anglo-Saxon candidates, with African-Americans, Jews, and Hispanics excluded from the training program as a matter of official policy.

Sullivan successfully completed his training and on September 26, 1941 was assigned to the FBI's field office in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. In accordance with the bureau's policy at that time, Sullivan was moved from field office to field office during his first year on the job, being transferred to El Paso, Texas in January 1942, where he was mentored by Charles B. Winstead, the FBI special agent who had killed bank robber John Dillinger.

Break with Hoover
Sullivan was depicted as a realist by journalist Bill Brown, who collaborated with Sullivan in writing his posthumously published memoir, declaring at the time of their first meeting in 1968 that "only a tiny handful" of anti–Vietnam War protesters had ever had contact with foreign communist parties and that the American Communist Party was "no longer important". Calling Sullivan "a short, neat man who spoke logically and clearly," Brown likened Sullivan's demeanor to that of tough guy actor James Cagney, "with a New England accent thrown in."

Sullivan claimed Hoover's concerns about the American Communist Party were overemphasized when compared to violations of federal civil rights laws in the segregated South. This friction worsened as Sullivan made his opinions public. Many FBI insiders considered Sullivan the logical successor to Hoover. However, on October 1, 1971, Hoover abruptly had the locks changed on Sullivan's door and removed his nameplate. Under the circumstances, Sullivan was forced to retire.

Sullivan then became even more vocal about Hoover's controversial domestic counterintelligence programs, collectively labeled COINTELPRO, including operations that he himself had conceived and administered. These were intended to spread confusion and dissension among political groups in the United States ranging from the Communist Party (CPUSA), Civil Rights Movement, and anti–Vietnam War movement on the left to the Ku Klux Klan on the far right.

Sullivan described the frameup of party leader William Albertson in a June 30, 1964, internal document filed by him and fellow FBI agent Fred J. Baumgardner: "My memorandum dated 6/12/64 was approved, authorizing a unique counterintelligence operation calculated to cast suspicion on Communist Party (CP) National Committee member and Executive Secretary of the New York District Organization, William Albertson . It was our intention to place Albertson in the unenviable position of being suspected as an FBI informant through the use of a planted bogus informant report prepared by the Laboratory in Albertson's handwriting on paper used by him with a ballpoint pen of the type he uses." In 1975, Sullivan testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee, "Never once did I hear anybody, including myself raise the question, is this course of action which we have agreed upon lawful, is it legal, is it ethical or moral?"

Civil rights feuding
Sullivan was instrumental in arranging for the mailing of a tape recording in 1964 to Coretta Scott King which contained secretly taped recordings of her husband Martin Luther King Jr. having relations with other women. In a memorandum, Sullivan called King "a fraud, demagogue and scoundrel". He also gave orders to track down fugitive members of the Weather Underground in the early 1970s.

Hoover had learned from the SOLO brothers, Morris and Jack Childs, who were members of the Communist Party of the United States (CPUSA), but in fact were double agents working against the Soviet Active Measures program of the KGB, that one of King's consultants, Stanley Levison, was involved with the CPUSA. Annually, the Solo brothers would travel to Moscow to pick up Soviet funding for CPUSA activities and distribute it on their return. Because such contacts suggested the civil rights movement was being co-opted by the CPUSA under the guidance of the KGB's Soviet Active Measures program, U.S. Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy ordered the tapping of King's telephone. The telephonic surveillance led to information concerning King's affairs, and the reason why Sullivan thought King unworthy of leading the movement and being "a fraud, demagogue and scoundrel." Realizing the danger to the movement, King's friend and mentor, Rev. Ralph Abernathy pleaded, on numerous occasions, that King cease and desist such behavior, as he was putting at risk the credibility of the movement.

A number of days later, Hoover called King "the most notorious liar in the country" at a press conference. It has been suggested by some that Sullivan wrote an anonymous letter to King calling him a "filthy, abnormal animal" and telling him that there "is only one thing left for you to do".

President Lyndon Johnson, not questioning the reason for Hoover's statement but realizing the political impact for the next election, forced Hoover to apologize. Hoover and King did meet at FBI Headquarters, but no one knows what happened. Some sources claim that Hoover had all of King's files and telephone transcripts on his desk. Ultimately, it was Sullivan who was responsible for gathering all the information on King.

After Hoover's death in May 1972, U.S. Attorney General Richard Kleindienst appointed Sullivan director of the newly created Office of National Narcotics Intelligence under the Department of Justice in June 1972. Sullivan had hoped to replace Hoover as the director of the FBI, but was passed over by President Richard Nixon in favor of loyalist L. Patrick Gray.

Personal life and death
Sullivan married Marion Hawkes.

William C. Sullivan died age 65 on November 9, 1977, from an accidental gunshot wound, as recounted by Robert D. Novak: "Sullivan came to our house in the Maryland suburbs in June 1972 for lunch and a long conversation about my plans for a biography of Hoover (a project I abandoned as just too ambitious an undertaking). Before he left, Bill told me someday I probably would read about his death in some kind of accident, but not to believe it. It would be murder. On November 9, 1977, days before he was to testify to the House Select Committee on Assassinations, twenty minutes before sunrise, sixty-five-year-old Sullivan was walking through the woods near his retirement home in Sugar Hill, New Hampshire, on the way to meet hunting companions. Another hunter, Robert Daniels, Jr., a twenty-two-year-old son of a state policeman, using a telescopic sight on a .30 caliber rifle, said he mistook Sullivan for a deer, shot him in the neck, and killed him instantly. The authorities called it an accident, fining Daniels five hundred dollars and taking away his hunting license for ten years. Sullivan's collaborator on his memoir, the television news writer Bill Brown, wrote that he and Sullivan's family were convinced that the death was accidental. Sullivan's death did not prevent publication of the memoir, telling all about the disgrace of J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI. After Watergate, with all the principals dead or out of office, it received little attention." Sullivan is buried in his family's plot at St. Michael Cemetery in Hudson, Massachusetts, with his wife, as well as his parents, sister and other relatives.

Works

 * "Freedom is the Exception": Three Lectures on the Values of the Open Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University, 1964.
 * The Bureau: My Thirty Years in Hoover's FBI. (with Bill Brown) New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 1979. ISBN 9780393012361
 * "The Need to Teach About Communism in Our Schools."
 * "World Communism: Strategy and Tactics."
 * "The University, Communism and the Community: An Address at Southern Methodist University, Dallas, Texas, October 18, 1961."

Additional sources

 * "William C. Sullivan, Ex-F.B.I. Aide, 65, Is Killed in a Hunting Accident". The New York Times, November 10, 1977. p. 94.
 * Athan G. Theoharis, Tony G. Poveda, Susan Rosenfeld, and Richard Gid Powers, The FBI: A Comprehensive Reference Guide. 1999. ISBN 9780897749916..

title: William C. Sullivan


text:
King Island (Alaska)

King Island (Ugiuvak; Остров Кинг) (King's Island in early US sources) is an island in the Bering Sea, west of Alaska. It is about 40 mi west of Cape Douglas and is south of Wales, Alaska.

Geography
King island is a small island located about 40 mi offshore, south of the village of Wales, Alaska and about 90 miles northwest of Nome. The island is about 1 mi wide with steep slopes on all sides. It was named by James Cook, first European to sight the island in 1778, for Lt. James King, a member of his party. It is part of the Bering Sea unit of the Alaska Maritime National Wildlife Refuge.

Population
The island was once the winter home of a group of about 413 Inupiat who called themselves Asiuluk, meaning "people of the sea," or Ugiuvaŋmiut, from Ugiuvak, the village of King Island and "miut," meaning "people of" or "group of people".

The Ugiuvaŋmiut spent their summers engaging in subsistence hunting and gathering on King Island and on the mainland near the location of present-day Nome, Alaska. Their winters were spent in other subsistence activities, particularly hunting and fishing on the ice. Subsistence activities on and around the island included hunting seals and walruses, crab fishing, and gathering bird eggs and other foods. The spring and summer was the important time of gathering to the Ukivokmiut, while the winters were the time of dance. Due to the limited daylight during the winter, the days were spent dancing in the "Qagri", or men's communal house. As an example, the month of December is known to the Uġiuvaŋmiut as Sauyatugvik or "the time of drumming".

After the establishment of Nome, the islanders began to sell intricate carvings to residents of Nome during the summer.

Population relocation
In the mid-1900s the Bureau of Indian Affairs closed the school on Ugiuvak, forcefully taking the children of Ukivok to go to school on mainland Alaska, leaving the elders and adults to gather the needed food for winter. Because the children were not on the island to help gather food, the adults and elders had no choice but to move to mainland Alaska to make their living. By 1970, all King Island people had moved to mainland Alaska year-round.

Although the King Islanders have moved off the island, they have kept a very distinct cultural identity, living a very similar life as they had on the island. Some King Islanders still return to the island to gather subsistence foods, such as walrus and seal.

In 2005 and 2006 the National Science Foundation (NSF) funded a research project which brought a few King Island natives back to the island. Some participants had not been back to the island in 50 years.

Demographics
King Island first appeared on the 1880 U.S. Census as the unincorporated native eskimo village of "Ookivagamute." In 1890, it returned as Ukivok. It next appeared in 1910 as King Island and would continue to report until 1960, with the exception of 1950 when no figure was reported. It next reported as Uġiuvak again, classified as a native village (ANVSA) in 1980 and 1990, but with no residents. It has not reported since.

title: King Island (Alaska)


text: Talk:Molly Weasley

title: Talk:Molly Weasley


text: User talk:70.17.116.160

title: User talk:70.17.116.160


text:
Talk:Percy Weasley

Trivia

 * This section was removed from the article and needs to be incorporated into the article. John Reaves 23:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Trivia

 * Percy is commonly believed to be short for Percival, an Arthurian character: there seems to be somewhat of a running theme of Arthurian legend in some Weasley family names. However, Percy is also an independent name, originally taken from the Percy family. In the trial from Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix, he is identified as "Percy Ignatius Weasley", indicating "Percy", not "Percival", as his full first name. Nonetheless, it is interesting to note that Percival is a middle name of Albus Dumbledore.
 * His middle name, Ignatius, probably comes from Ignatius Prewett (the husband of Lucretia Black), a member of the Prewett family who appears to be an uncle of Molly Weasley and her brothers Gideon and Fabian.
 * He passed 12 OWLs: given that Hermione required a time-turner to take twelve subjects in PoA, it is likely that Percy also required one (unless, somehow, he was able to timetable his lessons without needing to manipulate time).

No grief sentence
''The black sheep of the family, he is relatively humourless, and thus becomes the butt of many of Fred and George's jokes and pranks. However, Molly initially favours him, as he causes her no grief while he is in school''.

He causes her no grief at school? No, he only gets 12 OLW's, becomes a prefect, later a HeadBoy, gets top marks at his NEWT's, and once out of Hogwarts secures a job at the Ministry. Guess that's why she favours him (and not because he's her son) :) I don't think the last sentence is very good, I'm gonna remove it ok? Cheers! Raystorm 17:42, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Has Molly Weasley ever stopped loving her son? Isn't her fondist wish to be reunited with him... not a forced awkward one where Percy the the distraction but a real one?

It seems to me that Percy desperately wanted many of the same things his brothers (and sister) wanted... to escape a life of being poor. He saw his escape path via academic excellence and thus gaining an important job with the ministry at a young age. Though he expressed it poorly in his letter to Ron, he wants Ron to escape as well, and urged him to make the "right contacts" in Umbridge and shun Harry Potter (an anchor) to make good his escape from poverty. The diffrence is that Ron, while he hates being poor, isn't ashamed of his family and being poor, something Harry showed him. Harry is rich, but values the love of the Weasley family above all the money in his vault. Percy traded his family for a career. He never seemed to think it was possible to have both. 09:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

vandalism?
ok someone keeps changing the name to "Percivial" I just now reverted that to "Percy" if I am wrong please feel free to tell me.

Percy's Kids
Though Percy doesn't have any children or marriage listed in the epilogue, he is clearly seeing someone off from platform 9 3/4. Teachers don't meet the students on that end, so he's not a Hogwarts professor. In fact no one but children and their parents/guardians have ever been shown seeing children off, so he wouldn't be there just to enforce the rules as a ministry official. Therefore Percy must have at least one child.

title: Talk:Percy Weasley


text: User talk:198.237.138.17

title: User talk:198.237.138.17


text:
Barnegat Lighthouse

Barnegat Lighthouse, or Barnegat Light, is a historic lighthouse located in Barnegat Lighthouse State Park on the northern tip of Long Beach Island, in the borough of Barnegat Light, Ocean County, New Jersey, United States, on the south side of Barnegat Inlet.

19th century
The development of the original lighthouse began in June 1834 with the appropriation of $6,000 from Congress. The 40 ft lighthouse was commissioned the next year, though mariners at the time considered the building's non-flashing, fifth-class light to be inadequate. Because of the strong currents in the inlet, the lighthouse was built 900 ft away from the water; but within ten years only 450 ft separated the tower from the water.

In 1855, Lt. George G. Meade, an Army engineer and later Union general who defeated Robert E. Lee at the Battle of Gettysburg in the American Civil War, was assigned to design a new lighthouse. He was chosen largely because of his recent design of Absecon Light. Meade completed the construction plans in 1855 and work began in late 1856. Because of continuing erosion during its construction, the new lighthouse was located about 100 ft south of the original structure, the site of which is now submerged. During construction, in June 1857, the light in the original structure was relocated to a temporary wooden tower located nearby. This was prompted by the encroaching seas which threatened the original lighthouse and ultimately caused the tower to collapse into the water later that year. Because of the rough waters of the area, several jetties have been built throughout the history of both lighthouses.

Barnegat Light was commissioned on January 1, 1859. The tower light was 172 ft above sea level and the lighthouse itself was 163 ft tall, four times taller than the original. The new light was a first-order flashing Fresnel lens, which stood about 12 ft tall. The total cost of the project was about $40,000, with the lens alone costing $15,000. The current lighthouse is really two towers in one: the exterior conical tower covers a cylindrical tower on the inside.

20th–21st centuries
The lighthouse's beacon remained a first-class navigational light until August 1927 when the Barnegat Lightship was anchored 8 nmi off the coast. This prompted the automation and replacement of the first-order lens with a gas blinker. As a result, the tower's light was reduced by over 80 percent. The gas blinker was replaced several weeks later with a 250-watt electric bulb, though the gas apparatus can still be seen at the top of the tower.

The light was deactivated as a Coast Guard lookout tower in January 1944 and given to the State of New Jersey. Four years later, the local municipality, Barnegat City, renamed itself Barnegat Light. In 1954, the lens was returned to the borough of Barnegat Light and is now on exhibit in the Barnegat Light Museum. The area around the lighthouse was declared a state park and dedicated in 1957. The lightship was removed in 1969.

The structure was added to the National Register of Historic Places as "Barnegat Lighthouse" in 1971.

In 1988, the tower was closed for construction of the new south jetty, then reopened to visitors in 1991 with a new walkway on top of the jetty. The top of the lighthouse is accessible via its 217 steps and continues to attract in excess of half a million visitors year round.

In 2008, the Friends of Barnegat Lighthouse State Park, a local non-profit organization, raised funds to reactivate the lighthouse. A sum of $35,000 was raised, with $15,000 contributed by the Barnegat Light Borough Fraternal Order of Police Local Lodge No. 5. This supported the acquisition of a new $15,000 VRB-25 light system, as well as the replacement of ageing windows. Funding was raised entirely at the local level.

In October 2008, the VRB-25 system was installed. While physically smaller than the original light, the system has become a standard for US Lighthouses, with more than 100 installed.

On January 1, 2009, at 5:00 pm, the 150th anniversary of its opening, Barnegat Lighthouse activated its beacon for the first time since before World War II.

The lighthouse closed in March of 2022 for a seven-month renovation, though the museum and grounds remained open to the public.

The light now operates daily from dusk until dawn. There is a foghorn on Barnegat South Breakwater Light 7, at the ocean end of the south breakwater, which guards the inlet. The tower is flood-lit at night.

Museums
Adjacent to the lighthouse is the Barnegat Lighthouse Interpretive Center, run by the state of New Jersey and staffed by Members of the non-profit group that purchased the new light. The center shows the history of Barnegat Lighthouse from shipwreck to first-class seacoast light. Exhibits focus on the history of the lighthouse, lighthouse technology, the duties of Barnegat Lighthouse's keepers, and efforts to protect Barnegat Lighthouse.

Several blocks away is the Barnegat Light Museum, operated by the Barnegat Light Historical Society. It houses the light's original first-order Fresnel lens, as well as related exhibits including images of Sinbad, the WWII Coast Guard dog who was enlisted in the service, retired to Barnegat, and is buried at the base of the old Coast Guard station flagpole.

Popular culture
Barnegat Lighthouse is the subject of Keeper of the Tower, a suspense fiction novel by Barnegat resident Brett Scott Ermilio. The novel takes place circa 1919.

The lighthouse is depicted on New Jersey's "Shore Conservation" license plates and on the 1996–1997 Federal Duck Stamp.

title: Barnegat Lighthouse


text:
Jim Fuller (musician)

James Evans Fuller (27 June 1947 – 3 March 2017) was the lead guitarist and main songwriter for the 1960s rock band The Surfaris.

Fuller was known as the "Godfather" of surf music, a Californian instrumental music.

He was also a studio musician, and performed on many other artists' such as "The Seeds", rock, folk, and blues songs throughout his career, performing vocals, lead and bass guitar.

Fuller, with his Fender Stratocaster guitar in photographs and its sound on The Surfaris albums, contributed to the popularity of Leo Fender's instruments.

He is featured on "Hollywood's Rock Walk of Fame".

he continued to perform with The Surfaris and his other band, "Jim Fuller & The Beatnik" with a fan base in United States, Europe, and Japan.

He died on 3 March 2017, in Arcadia, California, at the age of 69.

Along with the rest of the Surfaris, Fuller was inducted into the Musicians Hall of Fame in 2019.

Best known hits

 * "Wipe Out"
 * "Point Panic"
 * "Surfer Joe"
 * "Waikiki Run...."

title: Jim Fuller (musician)


text:
User:Niel Orcutt

Niel Orcutt is a native of Alaska in the United States and has created several articles about Alaska for Wikipedia, as well as adding to many computer-generated articles about places in Alaska.

title: User:Niel Orcutt


text:
Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant

Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant (1746 – October 8, 1793) was an American politician who served as a member of the Provincial Congress of New Jersey from 1774 to 1776. He was a member of the committee that drafted the Constitution of New Jersey. He served as a delegate from the Province of New Jersey to the Second Continental Congress in 1776 and 1777, and as Pennsylvania Attorney General from 1777 to 1780.

Early life and education
Sergeant was born in 1746 in Newark, New Jersey, to Abigail (Dickinson) and Jonathan Sergeant. He moved with his parents to Princeton. He completed his initial studies, attended the College of New Jersey (now Princeton University), and received his degree in 1762. His maternal grandfather, Jonathan Dickinson, was the first president of the college at its founding in 1747. He graduated from the College of Philadelphia (now the University of Pennsylvania) in 1763 with an A.B. degree. He studied law in the Princeton office of Richard Stockton, was accepted into the New Jersey bar, and entered practice in Princeton in 1767.

Career
He was a member of the Sons of Liberty and served a major role in the Stamp Act controversy.

From 1774 to 1776 he was a member of the revolutionary New Jersey Provincial Congress. He served as clerk to the Provincial convention in New Brunswick on July 21, 1774, and as a delegate and secretary to the convention held in Trenton on May 23, 1775. He was a member and treasurer to the New Jersey Committee of Safety.

In early 1776, he was a delegate to the Continental Congress, but resigned in June to return home and serve on the committee that drafted the Constitution of New Jersey. On August 13, 1776, Sergeant wrote to John Adams of his plan to recruit a battalion of black slaves to help fight the British. Adams wrote back to Sergeant, "Your Negro battalion will never do. S. Carolina would run out of their wits at the least hint of such a measure."

In November 1776, he returned again to the national congress. In December 1776, Sergeant moved to Philadelphia after Hessian troops burned his house in Princeton. In September 1777 he resigned from Congress a second time, this time to accept office as the attorney general of Pennsylvania. He served as attorney general until his resignation on November 20, 1780. He moved to Philadelphia and opened a law practice there in 1780. He participated in the trial to settle the Pennamite–Yankee War land dispute between Pennsylvania and Connecticut.

In 1784, he was elected a member of the American Philosophical Society.

He served on the Committee of Health in Philadelphia during the yellow fever epidemic of 1792 and 1793. Sergeant died in Philadelphia in 1793 due to yellow fever. He was initially interred in the Old Pine Street Church cemetery, but was re-interred to Laurel Hill Cemetery in 1878.

Personal life
In 1775, he married Margaret Spencer and together they had eight children. Margaret died in 1787 and he re-married Elizabeth Rittenhouse, the daughter of David Rittenhouse, in 1778.

His son John Sergeant later represented Pennsylvania in the U.S. Congress. Another son, Thomas Sergeant, served as Pennsylvania secretary of state, attorney general and on the state Supreme Court.

title: Jonathan Dickinson Sergeant


text:
The Demons

The Demons may refer to:

 * Demons (Dostoevsky novel), an 1872 novel by Russian Fyodor Dostoevsky, also translated The Demons
 * The Demons (Doderer novel), a 1956 novel by Heimito von Doderer
 * The Demons (1973 film), a French-Portuguese horror film directed by Jesús Franco
 * The Demons (2015 film), a Canadian drama film directed by Philippe Lesage
 * The Demons (audio drama), based on the television series Doctor Who
 * The Dæmons, a Doctor Who serial first broadcast in 1971
 * Melbourne Football Club, nicknamed the Demons

title: The Demons