text:
Talk:Catholic Church in Poland

Untitled
Something is wrong with the map: 15 is Torun, and 13 is Bydgoszcz bishoprick; and 15 should be colored in green, and 13 in violet.
 * Thanks for noticing the error. I've corrected it. – Kpalion (talk) 6 July 2005 22:26 (UTC)

Someone is wanting the article to refer to "the times of foreign oppression". I changed this to "the socialist period" to be more NPOV, but the user says the former phrase is necessary to encompass previous periods in Polish history. Well, I don't know what formula is best to use, but I do know that classifying the socialist period as a "time of foreign oppression" violates NPOV. If anyone can come up with a better way to characterize things, feel free. Everyking 19:45, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Latin
The Latin words are adjective forms, and not really direct translations of the names of the cities... AnonMoos (talk) 13:06, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Religion in Poland
CIA Fact book shows:

Roman Catholic 89.8% (about 75% practicing)

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/pl.html

--Krzyzowiec (talk) 01:35, 21 October 2008 (UTC)

Fee for marriage?
Should we then add "in violation of canon law 848 which states that "The minister is to seek nothing for the administration of the sacraments beyond the offerings defined by competent authority, always taking care that the needy are not deprived of the assistance of the sacraments because of poverty." from http://www.vatican.va/archive/ENG1104/__P2T.HTM. Student7 (talk) 20:16, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 2 October 2016

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

The result of the move request was: Procedural close per WP:MULTI. Follow-up instead at Talk:Roman Catholicism in Armenia. (non-admin closure) — Andy W.  ( talk  · ctb) 00:37, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Roman Catholicism in Poland → Catholic Church in Poland – In consistancy with other equivalent articles, including Catholic Church, Catholic Church in England and Wales, Catholic Church in the United States, etc. Chicbyaccident (talk) 14:11, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep Why should this be different from the 163 other articles in the Category:Roman Catholic Church by country? Laurel Lodged (talk) 17:08, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Roman Catholicism in Armenia which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 00:46, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Catholic Church naming conventions RfC
There is currently an RfC at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (Catholic Church) that may be of interest. Chicbyaccident (talk) 10:00, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Apostasy? Fake news.
I disbelieve the veracity of reports of an "apostasy procedure" being approved by the Polish Church, for two main reasons: So I question the reliability of these sources that have been presented for this procedure. Elizium23 (talk) 22:20, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Per Omnium in mentem, canon law no longer recognizes "acts of formal defection" which is what this is by another name.
 * 2) It would be a huge violation of canon law and the baptized person's rights to remove them or strike them from the baptismal register. Other bishops have been asked for this and rightly refused, because this is a legal record of a past event that happened, and cannot be stricken under any circumstance.

 * Not being being able to remove oneself from baptismal register is against the baptized person’s rights. Unfortunately it’s still the case in Poland, and many other countries.  Calling the register a “legal record” is blatantly false; it’s similar to company’s databases, as opposed to legal records, which are, well, legal.

 * Still, that’s the official procedure for apostasy provided by the polish church. It does not result in removing oneself from church registers, though. Trasz (talk) 23:58, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually sacramental records are very truly legal records in every sense of the phrase. Can. 535 §1 In each parish there are to be parochial registers, that is, of baptisms, of marriages and of deaths, and any other registers prescribed by the Episcopal Conference or by the diocesan Bishop. The parish priest is to ensure that entries are accurately made and that the registers are carefully preserved. they are prescribed by law and kept according to law and it would be illegal to strike one's name from a baptismal register and I have never seen a civil law against this, but it would be safely ignored. It would be a violation of the baptized person's rights to be stricken from a register, and the Church (as of 2009) no longer recognizes any method for "formal defection" in her laws. Elizium23 (talk) 00:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * You have not proved this is a procedure provided "by the Polish Church" only by a (fake) news site and a highly motivated anti-Church "how-to" apostasy site. Elizium23 (talk) 00:16, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Legal records are things that are mandated by law, not by canon law. Your idea that somehow granting someone their rights would be a violation of their rights is obviously absurd, although I suspect I don't want to further discuss your rationale there.
 * The main problem here, though, is that you're somehow mistaking apostasy for striking someone from the register. Catholic Church does have the official procedure for apostasy, which is described in the article; it does not, however, result in removing anyone from the register, or even no longer counting them as Church's members.  It's purely symbolic.  Sources - including official Church publications - are easy to find, although I agree it would be useful to link them here. Trasz (talk) 00:39, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * According to what is written there now, it does involve that! Are you saying that you do not stand by what is written at this point in the article and it does not conform to what the Polish-language sources say? Elizium23 (talk) 01:21, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Elizium23 wrote: . Please check out the original uchwała nr 20/370/2015 of 7 October 2015 by the Episcopal Conference of Poland. Unfortunately, the pdf file is a scan - you will not be able to easily convert it to text and pass it through an automatic translator. Boud (talk) 02:44, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Elizium23 - the fact that the current Polish apostasy rules of the Catholic Church refuse to fully remove a former member's private data (such as a baptism record) from its database(s) is a violation of European privacy law - the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). A possible result of the current revolutionary atmosphere could be that the Church loses political power and is forced to satisfy European privacy law, and to pay huge fines (up to 5% of its revenue) for violations of the GDPR. In any case, please read the uchwała (formal decision of an organised body) or find someone Polish-speaking who can translate it for you. Boud (talk) 03:02, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , as the sources have been translated for me, this is an "act of formal defection" which the Episcopal Conference has made a concession for in their law. "Apostasy" is the name of a particular sin and crime that is excommunicable, but the act in question is not an act of apostasy, according to the reliable sources, it is an act of formal defection from the Church, which has precedent. Elizium23 (talk) 01:30, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * "Apostasy" and "formal defection" in this context are two words for the exact same thing.Trasz (talk) 01:37, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's see:
 * Apostasy:
 * wikt:apostasy:
 * pl:Apostazja (Polish context): rejecting religious faith or religion ...  Currently apostasy is understood as the conscious, freely chosen, publicly cutting off contact with the Church.
 * None of these mention the internal concepts of sin within a religion; nothing about a crime in the ordinary sense of state systems of justice with laws, judicial institutions, police and prisons. The internal definitions within a particular religion do not override the widely accepted definitions. So I wouldn't say that apostasy and formal defection are exactly the same, but they're close enough. The term apostasy procedure seems enough for disambiguation - it's a formalisation of apostasy, which is the closest thing in Poland to forcing the Catholic Church to obey European privacy law and freedom-of-religion law. Boud (talk) 01:53, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , "apostasy" to the Catholic Church is a sin, and a crime punishable by excommunication. "Formal defection" is a procedure as described in the Episcopal Conference source here. Elizium23 (talk) 20:12, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I would be surprised if either the Catholic Church or Islamic imams or Jewish rabbis or Hindu priests got to override the generally accepted meanings of the word apostasy in the English language in en.Wikipedia. If you have a precise reference, it would seem justified to me to add a comment that the Catholic Church disagrees with the widespread usage of the word apostasy to refer to the apostasy procedure. In Poland apostazja is currently being very widely used - private info includes reports of whole families starting the procedure now and calling it ,,apostazja", so the usage in Polish appears to be similar to English. Boud (talk) 20:25, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , it is not that the Catholic Church disagrees, it is just that the Catholic Church has precise terminology about these things and simply chooses to use her precise terminology while Europeans choose to colloquially use a term that has other connotations. It is largely about being sensationalistic that the media has taken the term "apostasy" and run with it. Nobody cares about being precise. Elizium23 (talk) 20:38, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * There's nothing imprecise in the term "apostasy"; the "formal defection" is just newspeak, and has no place outside of Church documents. Also, please note that your idea of "apostasy being a sin and a crime" is obviously false: after apostasy you're no longer a member of Catholic Church, thus no "sins" nor "excommunication" apply to you. Trasz (talk) 20:55, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , that shows how poorly you understand the process, because the person remains a member with a baptismal record; nobody can ever 'cease to be a member' of the Catholic Church, and sins apply to everyone, regardless of membership. A formally defected person could still be excommunicated. Elizium23 (talk) 21:08, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * This is obviously false - after apostasy you are no longer a member of the Church; it's what's guaranteed by law in every civilised country. The church obviously claims otherwise, but it's just a lie and really doesn't matter.  You can get "excommunicated" afterwards, but you can equally be excommunicated by literally every single other Church you're not a member of, and it carries the same meaning: none. Trasz (talk) 21:18, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * @Trasz - if you remove this dispute tag again falsely claiming "issue resolved" while the matter has clearly not been resolved, or you call another editor's entry "vandalism," as you did here, I’ll report you myself. Just to give you a heads up. - GizzyCatBella  🍁  21:50, 1 November 2020 (UTC) ( Additional Note - Sorry, I have no opinion on the matter itself, just notice inappropriate behaviour of one of the involved here) -  GizzyCatBella  🍁  22:03, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Can you cite the Wikipedia rule that says one shouldn't call destructive actions a vandalism? Trasz (talk) 13:16, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

RFC
Should the procedure for notating the baptismal register be known here on Wikipedia as "apostasy" or "formal defection" according to reliable secondary sources? Elizium23 (talk) 03:07, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
 * apostasy should be the default word. The sources in Poland overwhelmingly use the term apostazja (apostasy). There should not be a ban against using the term "formal defection", but in most contexts, such as the October 2020 Polish protests, "formal defection" from the Catholic Church would be less understandable to most readers than the much more widely used term "apostasy", that follows normal English usage.
 * Bezprawnik "Procedura apostazji – jak wystąpić z Kościoła?" -
 * Polsat "Apostazja - czym jest i jak wiele osób dokonuje jej w Polsce?" -
 * National Geographic "Coraz więcej Polaków chce dokonać apostazji. Czym jest i jakie niesie ze sobą skutki?"
 * Dziennik Łódzki "Jak przeprowadzić apostazję? Apostazja: co to jest? Procedura została uproszczona. Teraz jeszcze łatwiej dokonać apostazji 1.11.2020" - In this case, the priest Paweł Rytel-Andrianik, spokesperson for the Episcopal Conference of Poland, described the Episcopate's 2016 decree as a.
 * Boud (talk) 03:29, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

 * The Church regulations are in no way more reliable than a dictionary. Apostasy is the right word here. Trasz (talk) 13:17, 2 November 2020 (UTC)

 * Folks, let's be careful here. There are three sins against the unity of the church. - Apostasy is radical abandonment of Christian faith. - Heresy is serious error in doctrine, short of apostasy. - Schism is severing communion with the church, and need not entail either heresy or schism. So a person who leaves the full communion of the Catholic Church to join, for example, a church of the Orthodox Communion or to join the Polish National Catholic Church (PNCC) falls into schism, but probably not heresy and most assuredly not apostasy.  OTOH, a baptized person who practices Wicca or Buddhism has fallen into apostasy.  The Society of St. Pius X (SSPX) is currently in a state of both schism (severed ecclesial communion) and heresy (rejection of doctrine articulated infallibly in the apostolic constitution Lumen gentium), while the PNCC is only in a state of schism -- the magisterium of the Catholic Church has determined that there is no doctrinal obstacle to reconciliation of the PNCC.  We should use the term that fits the situation, with respect to situations both in Poland and elsewhere.  I'm not familiar with the situation in Poland that triggered this discussion, so I'll leave it to those who are familiar with the details to ascertain the correct English term.
 * We also need to be aware that, in translation from one language to another, words that seem similar or that constitute literal translation in another context may have very different meaning. The classical illustration of this is the sentence "I'm full." -- by which we Americans mean that we have eaten enough to be satisfied, and don't wish more food at that particular moment.  But translate that sentence literally into French, and it takes on a completely different meaning.  If said by a man, it means that he is drunk.  And if said by a woman, it means that she is pregnant.  And, to use another example, "science" is a transliteration of the Latin scientia meaning "knowledge" and philosophy is a transliteration of the Greek philosophia also meaning "knowledge" -- but somehow the English words "science" and "philosophy" are not exactly synonyms.  The fact that "apostasy" seems to be a transliteration of the Polish word apostazja does not necessarily mean that it is the right word.  Norm1979 (talk) 03:21, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * You're right, in principle, about linguistic false friends - common roots do not guarantee common meanings.
 * However, the context here is en.Wikipedia writing knowledge about human rights in the English language, not presenting an internal point of view of one particular religious organisation. There are no sins involved from the encyclopedic point of view. Poland is part of the EU with strong human rights legislation. When English commonly describes the formal quitting from a religious organisation as apostasy, then that is what counts - an internal church definition doesn't override that. "Apostasy" is not a word like "parthenogenesis" (virgin birth), which has a well-defined scientific meaning.
 * Merriam-Webster: apostasy: an act of refusing to continue to follow, obey, or recognize a religious faith
 * Oxford: Apostasy: Renunciation of one's religion.
 * Cambridge: apostasy: the act of giving up your religious or political beliefs and leaving a religion or a political party
 * The word schism is about two groups separating, not about one person quitting a religious group. I fail to see how schism could replace the role of apostasy or how schismatize (?) could replace apostasize. I don't see how the expression fall into schism could be acceptable, because it would risk giving a pejorative connotation to the act. There is no negative connotation to apostasizing, except from the internal point of view of the Catholic Church (or any other religion or cult from which one apostasizes).
 * Boud (talk) 20:14, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , (the negative connotation is built right into the Greek root a-)
 * The whole point here is to describe an internal process of the Catholic Church. It seems prudent to use the correct legal term to do it.
 * If we said that a criminal committed "murder" and was arrested for "murder" and was convicted of "murder", what does that say about a legal system where he was arrested for "homicide" and convicted of "manslaughter"? Do we not use precise terms for the internal POV of the courts and justice system? How is this any different? Elizium23 (talk) 21:21, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The negative connotation is not built into the Greek root a-. It's a logical negation. Asynchronous communication for online education has no negative connotation. It happens to be not synchronous. Wikipedia editing is generally asynchronous, and there's nothing bad about that.
 * This is not a purely internal process of the Catholic Church: it is a process of the Catholic Church that the Church is forced to provide by European law in order to satisfy its human rights obligations. Internal Catholic Church rules do not generally count as "law" in the usual sense of the word - laws of the State - in EU member states. Internal Catholic Church terminology does not overrule widely accepted English-language dictionaries either. Being forced to say "formal defection" instead of "apostasy" would sound like a euphemism. See WP:WEASEL. Boud (talk) 22:51, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , don't be ridiculous. The Church is sovereign and can't be forced into any process she doesn't want to do. Elizium23 (talk) 22:52, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Welcome to the XXIst century. That sort of attitude illustrates very much why some religious institutions are being forced to obey the law and why the taboo that protected the Catholic Church in Poland from criticism has been broken. Boud (talk) 08:11, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , you seem to be missing the detail that a "religion" is a complete and self-consistent set of beliefs about deities, often associated with or other practices that are consistent with those beliefs. A religion is NOT an organization that adheres to those beliefs.  Doctrinally, the simplest religion is Atheism -- the sole tenet that there is no deity.  Dissociation from a religious organization that adheres to a particular set of beliefs does not necessarily imply abandonment of those beliefs.  The Catholic Church is an organization that teaches Christianity, but it is NOT a religion.  A person who leaves the Catholic Church to join another Christian denomination is NOT apostate.
 * As to your point that a schism is a separation of two groups, a "group" can be just one person. I'll also note that heresy often plays a role in a schism, as in the so-called "Protestant Reformation" of the 16th century -- Martin Luther and John Calvin were heretics as well as schismatics, but they were NOT apostate.  Norm1979 (talk) 02:45, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I would edit complete and self-consistent in the above, since it distracts from the issue - inconsistency within the belief system, and between the belief system and practices, is highly common in religions/religious organisations. Boud (talk) 08:11, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , I suspect that what's closer to the truth is that many people who self-identify as adherents to a given religion never learn the whole body of doctrine of that religion and thus engage in practices that don't conform to its doctrine. But, in any case, this is diverging from the original question and thus getting off topic.  Norm1979 (talk) 18:28, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * I would edit complete and self-consistent in the above, since it distracts from the issue - inconsistency within the belief system, and between the belief system and practices, is highly common in religions/religious organisations. Boud (talk) 08:11, 6 November 2020 (UTC)
 * , I suspect that what's closer to the truth is that many people who self-identify as adherents to a given religion never learn the whole body of doctrine of that religion and thus engage in practices that don't conform to its doctrine. But, in any case, this is diverging from the original question and thus getting off topic.  Norm1979 (talk) 18:28, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

 * Apostasy is what reliable sources are using. This is a touchy subject inside the church as apostasy, de jure, could imply burning at the stake or whatever else is proscribed to apostates these days, so they try to avoid this term inside the church, but it is still what sources use.--Astral Leap (talk) 10:36, 16 November 2020 (UTC) strike sock
 * Apostasy should be the default word. It is what is used by sources and is the nearest thing to an understandable term for secular-ish countries. The first use can always be clarified, (formally quitting the Catholic Church?). 'Defection' has too many cold-war associations and the objection to 'apostasy' seems based on an WP:OR theological argument.Pincrete (talk) 09:19, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

Why is there a step-by-step explanation of how to leave the Catholic Church in Poland?
This page is intended for people interested in information about the Catholic Church in Poland. That's why it's weird that this section should be on this page. I understand that there is a lot of controversy around this topic. But that shouldn't have a major effect on the page. Besides, it also comes across as biased. On no other page about a religious or political organization on Wikipedia is there an explanation of how to cancel your membership. This while controversial events are also taking place at other organizations. Dariokp (talk) 11:25, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

 * No religious order or political organization makes it that hard to leave it. Also, the context: at this point, in Poland, people are leaving the church faster than ever before. Trasz (talk) 14:37, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Thank you for the quick answer. I understand that people are now leaving the church faster than ever before in Poland. Only I do not understand why an explanation of how to do that is required. Moreover, some organizations are more difficult to leave than the Catholic Church. There are 21 countries in the world where apostasy is illegal, including the death penalty in some countries. According to this logic, we should also explain how to leave the major religions in those countries.Dariokp (talk) 21:16, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Exactly, the article should focus only in the growing apostasy trend in Poland, not about how to apostatize. This last theme belongs more to the article on Apostasy in Christianity, here it is off topic.--Potatín5 (talk) 13:48, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

To my edits
All Polish bishops in active ministry are members of KEP (see art. 3 of its statut). And the Eastern Ordinariate de jure oversees all Eastern Catholics that aren't members of UGCC or the one parish in Kostomłoty. However, I doubt that it actually serves anyone besides Armenians because other Greek Catholics (Slovaks or Ruthenians) would be served by UGCC hierarchy and other Eastern Catholics would be extremely rare in Poland and not native to Poland (unlike Armenians). It's a bit simplification but I think it's justified. (And the current version isn't correct, too, because of the neo-uniate parish in Kostomloty.) --Pan Někdo (talk) 14:35, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * You are engaging in original research that misrepresents the current situation. Unless you have evidence that says that no other Eastern Catholics are served by the ordinariate, you should not suggest that it is exclusively an Armenian body. You need to source why you think the current version is incorrect, too. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:19, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
 * From the page of Armenian Catholics in Poland: "W praktyce, oznacza to opiekę wyłącznie nad wiernymi obrządku ormiańskiego..." (EN: In practise, it means only care for the faithful of Armenian rite...) and follows by mentioning the Kostomloty neouniate parish that has been transfered to the diocese of Siedlce (which used to be in this ordinariate). And lastly: the current version doesn't explicitely mention that the ordinariate doesn't serve anyone else, it only says that Armenians are served by it. (And the version I've just reverted is wrong in multiple ways: KEP compromises of all bishops, see link above and not all other Eastern Catholics are served by the Ordinariate, the Kostomloty parish is in a Latin diocese.) --Pan Někdo (talk) 08:21, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for providing a reference. I have corrected your additions for grammar and links. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:20, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Catholic Church in Poland


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chauncey Peppertooth

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was Delete Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:28, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Chauncey Peppertooth
One of a few Case Western Reserve University band whose umbrella article, Case Western Reserve music scene, was recently deleted after this VfD. See also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music/Notability_and_Music_Guidelines. This is not a vote, just a listing so they don't fall through the cracks after the music scene VfD. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 23:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, you might also wish to look at . It's a direct copy of that page - possible copyvio. Megan1967 10:22, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Spamguy 05:28, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable. JamesBurns 09:29, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

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


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zugzwang (band)

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was Delete Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:30, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Zugzwang (band)
One of a few Case Western Reserve University band whose umbrella article, Case Western Reserve music scene, was recently deleted after this VfD. See also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music/Notability_and_Music_Guidelines. This is not a vote, just a listing so they don't fall through the cracks after the music scene VfD. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 23:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete does not meet wikipedia guidelines. No allmusic.com or albums. Megan1967 10:24, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable. JamesBurns 09:30, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. -- BD2412 talk 03:41, 2005 Jun 4 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Speakeasy (a capella group)

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was Delete Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:32, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Speakeasy (a capella group)
One of a few Case Western Reserve University band whose umbrella article, Case Western Reserve music scene, was recently deleted after this VfD. See also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music/Notability_and_Music_Guidelines. This is not a vote, just a listing so they don't fall through the cracks after the music scene VfD. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 23:06, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete does not meet wikipedia guidelines. No allmusic.com entry. Megan1967 10:26, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable. JamesBurns 09:30, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Minimum Requirements

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was Delete Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:35, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The Minimum Requirements
One of a few Case Western Reserve University band whose umbrella article, Case Western Reserve music scene, was recently deleted after this VfD. See also Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Music/Notability_and_Music_Guidelines. This is not a vote, just a listing so they don't fall through the cracks after the music scene VfD. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 23:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, you might want to look at this website . The article copies the first paragraph - possible copyvio. No allmusic.com. Fails to establish notability. Megan1967 10:29, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable. JamesBurns 09:31, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. -- BD2412 talk 03:41, 2005 Jun 4 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oceaneering

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was article was deleted at 05:21, 12 Jun 2005 by Duk ({{copyvio}}). Zzyzx11 (Talk) 03:26, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Oceaneering
First-person advertising. RickK 23:07, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * deleted after listing on WP:CP--Duk 05:21, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * speedy --Xcali 23:28, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's not even advertising (no link, no hint of where they're located) it's just lame. I agree it deserves to go away quickly, but we do have rules. Isaac R 00:02, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete bad attempt at vanity/advertising. - Etacar11 00:52, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Talk:Culture of Birmingham

This article is an unweildy mess
We need to disaggregate the historical elements from a contemporary profile of the arts in the city. I suggest three pages: "History of the fine arts in Birmingham" / "History of Music in Birmingham" / and "Arts in Birmingham" (strictly for a profile of the city now). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.155.182.168 (talk) 11:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Hendrix
Of Steve Winwood and Dave Mason, the article said "the last two being close friends of Jimi Hendrix. Winwood played on 5 Hendrix LP's and Hendrix first heard "All Along The Watchtower" by Bob Dylan at a party he was invited to by Mason, he decided to record his own version the same night with Mason playing acoustic guitar." I can find no evidence that Hendrix ever came to Birmingham so I have deleted this passage. The information about Hendrix is not relevant here. --Theo (Talk) 23:07, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

 * Theo, this took place in London not Birmingham, why did you assume that it took place in Brum? 195.92.67.69 22:10, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I did not assume that it took place in Birmingham. Indeed, I imagined that it did not take place there.  Since the event did not take place in Birmingham, it seemed irrelevant to the article. So I deleted it.  I recognised, however, that I might be mistaken even though I did check that no event of this nature had occurred in Birmingham—because such an occurrence would merit inclusion here. --Theo  (Talk) 22:25, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Parkes
Parkes reference deleted. It's reasonable to restrict arts topics to the institutions and the artists themselves rather than the peripheral technological roots. You won't see a description of the elephant or ivory on the Glenn Gould page just because of their historical contribution to piano keys! Parkes is well covered anyway under Science and invention in Birmingham. RayGirvan 20:35, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Celluloid was invented by Brummie, Alexander Parkes (1813-90) in Birmingham, from this Photographic film evolved.
 * Way to go! Let's have brickworks, without which all those cinemas and theatres couldn't have existed! The brass industry responsible for all the musical instruments! Paper mills for all the books! Birmingham waterworks, without which all those artists would be dead of thirst! There comes a point where relationships are too peripheral to be worth mentioning... RayGirvan 13:02, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Nonsense, celluloid was the very beginning of photographic film and as such it should stay on the film section as a Brum first as well as invention, it is like mentioning the Steam engine without mentioning James Watt. The whole idea of wikipedia is to create a cross reference of articles that all relate to oneanother, Parkes - Brummie - invented Celluloid - Celluloid gave way to film - warrants mention on Brum arts. 195.92.67.69 22:08, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The line of descent isn't so straightforward. Parkes and his successor Spill saw no further than tacky trinkets, and went bankrupt. If anything they foresaw modern uses of plastic for utility and decorative objects. The lineage of celluloid film more probably goes back to the collodion process, c. 1850, which was the first use of a nitrocellulose based photographic emulsion. RayGirvan 22:44, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Jools Holland and Jam House
Let's go to source. Go to the site of Luminar plc, and search for "Jools". A quick skim finds that "in April 2000 we acquired the Jam House, a branded going concern concept, in conjunction with Jools Holland based in Birmingham", and that he's "on board as the venue’s musical and creative advisor" (which isn't a managerial post - the guy has a career). So he's probably a co-owner, but certainly doesn't "run" it in the general admin sense. RayGirvan 21:47, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Luminar's annual reports for the past few years have stated that Jools Holland was granted an option on 50,000 shares at £8.77 "to strengthen the company's relationship with [him]". The option is contingent upon him remaining involved with the Jam House until 2006. He may be a co-owner but we cannot conclude that from this. I think it most likely that he is being offered contingent remuneration for consultancy.  I would guess that he was an owner of the Jam House before its acquisition by Luminar. I cannot confirm this without recourse to Companies House records. Perhaps someone with a subscription could check. --Theo  (Talk) 22:52, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Reasonable conclusion. The FT November 2, 2000 describes the acquisition (no earlier details) saying the Jam House "is fronted" by Jools Holland. Birmingham Post, October 11, 2000: "Jam House, which has the considerable cachet of Jools Holland as one of its backing names". Basically we're talking a token role for them to have a prestigious name to wave. RayGirvan 23:42, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I saw Jools recently live, quite superb, I have also visited the Jam House Nick Boulevard 23:26, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Biographies
See Literary connections with Birmingham for many more examples of Birmingham and related authors. RayGirvan 22:56, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * This is why I find wikipedia interesting. Nick Boulevard 23:30, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Birdland
Birdland were actually from Kingsbury, south of Tamworth. Their record label was in Coventry. Still not Brummies, either way. --Brumburger 21:23, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Musical comparisons
Before we get into an argument over the inclusion of comparisons to other cities, can we please discuss the phrasing here? The fundamental question seems to be: is it necessary to compare the musical contribution of Birmingham to that of other cities?

In my opinion, the comparison is not essential but it does enhance the reader's understanding of the city's place in England's musical landscape. I propose: '':Birmingham has had a vibrant and varied musical history over the last half-century. There has never been a "Birmingham sound" comparable to Merseybeat or Madchester but the city is described as the birthplace of Heavy Metal .'' —Theo (Talk) 08:29, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * My intention in including the references to Liverpool and Manchester was to show that despite the fact that Birmingham's music scene isn't celebrated, it in fact matches up to (even surpasses) either of those cities. It's not the first place that would spring to mind if you were asked about a provincial city with a music scene, and that's partly because a lot of the music is (or was) not trendy - it doesn't get the critical kudos.  Heavy Metal is hugely popular, friends who work in music retail tell me it's the only genre where sales are consistently increasing, but it's generally seen as a bit naff, music for spotty teenagers.  ELO were one of the biggest bands of the seventies, but completely out of favour these days.  The same could be said for Duran Duran in the eighties - huge success then, and still a lot of fans now, but you won't find many modern bands claiming them as an influence, they are seen as a slightly embarrassing relic.  But when you look at Liverpool and Manchester closely, they don't have anything like the long-term success of Birmingham.  I'd be happy with Theo's rewording.  --Brumburger 09:04, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * "My intention in including the references to Liverpool and Manchester was to show that despite the fact that Birmingham's music scene isn't celebrated" ~ who doesn't celebrate it?, the people of the city have supported local bands fervently and the Brum Beat scene although not as obvious to the media as other cities was quite extensive and some great musicians hailed from there, this is why I tried to include such trivia as Jimmy Hendrix recording All along the watchtower because of (and with a) Birmingham musician, one of the most influential rock recordings ever?
 * Birmingham bands have been very "trendy" whatever that means, Durran Durran whether you like it or not have been a big influence in recent club culture from the chronic hairstyles to the extravagant clothes style, I have heard many new bands such as the editors (another Brum band in current favour with radio 6) who play a similar style recently, to suggest that Duran Duran are a "slightly embarrassing relic" is a bit unfair and your opinion not mine, I think that seeing as you were happy to point out that you are a professional journo Ray It is fair now that I should point out that I am a professional musician. Dexys, The Beat, Traffic even early UB40 were all underground (better than trendy) individual acts and are still played on "trendy" stations today such as Radio 6. Manchester had a brilliant spell in the late eighties mainly down to the success of the Hacienda and its wide music policy, similar to the Rum Runner but on a much bigger but less stuck up scale.
 * Liverpool and Manchester are definately bigger in the medias eyes especially papers such as the New Musical Express who have had a dislike of anything Birmingham for some time, why should we pander to their misconceptions, Wikipedia is honest and as I keep getting told... unbiased, so we need to know the facts and not someone elses view which is always going to be challenged. Nick Boulevard 18:37, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I meant "celebrated" exactly in the sense of what you're saying in that last paragraph - being "bigger in the media", having a reputation. It's nothing to do with particular bands, it's to do with the city as a whole having a reputation as a centre for music.  All the Liverpool post-punk groups of the early eighties traded on that city's reputation, as did Frankie Goes to Hollywood, and the Zutons do today.  A lot of those groups were mediocre, but they got a bit of a boost from the association with the Beatles.  Birmingham (as the article makes clear) has a great musical history but it doesn't have the same cachet.  --Brumburger 19:08, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia is not the media is it? Wikipedia is based on fact, when I initially wrote that article and researched all the brum bands I included a statement at the beginning which read something like.. "Birmingham has contributed massively to the British music scene for over half a century" but someone on this page deleted it, later someone else re-worded it to this (which I prefered and is not too OTT), http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Birmingham&oldid=11558397#Popular_music. Nick Boulevard 17:51, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Agreed. "Iconic" is another word that sprang to mind. Merseyside is, primarily through originating the Beatles: Birmingham isn't, despite its solid track record. RayGirvan 10:04, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * How can you suggest that Black Sabbath are not iconic? Nick Boulevard 18:37, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * We were talking about the musical reputation of regions as a whole. RayGirvan 19:55, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Ray, according to Google hits (Andy Mabbetts prefered method of establishing how important something is) Black Sabbath figure quite highly in musical reputation and seem to be quite iconic, so do Duran Duran etc. If we are talking about musical reputation of a region as a whole then we could add Nick Drake to brum (west mids) list who grew up a few miles south of Brum or the Specials from Coventry, we do not need to mention the word iconic or Liverpool or Manchester or any other missleading comment other than Brum has produced some really talented musicians, their scene is an ongoing one that relies on a proud heritage, the view that Manchester or Liverpool's music scene is more famous than that of Brum is a contentious issue and one that could be argued till the cows don't pup on the fields. Lets drop this and concentrate on the article... Popular music in Birmingham. Nick Boulevard 22:57, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Revised version adopting Ray's lovely word:
 * Birmingham has had a vibrant and varied musical history over the last half-century. There has never been an iconic "Birmingham sound" comparable to Merseybeat or Madchester but the city is described as the birthplace of Heavy Metal .

—Theo (Talk) 13:29, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Theo, the Brum Beat in the 60's was brums own sound mate, look here please. http://www.brumbeat.net/ thanks. Nick Boulevard 18:37, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * It's worth mentioning but - see this NME reprint - it does appear to have been a branding construct rather than a unified style like, say, Merseybeat. RayGirvan 18:57, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * And who do you propose branded the merseybeat, could it have been press releases from a record label, can you verify this please. Nick Boulevard 22:51, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Google finds "about 995" for 'Brumbeat', "about 247,000" for 'Merseybeat'. Andy Mabbett 19:06, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Are we now to base wikipedia inclusion on google hits, thats a bit naive isn't it? Nick Boulevard 22:57, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[resetting indents] The site that Nick cites says Norrie Paramore apparently came up with "Brum Beat" as part of an advertising campaign to promote national interest in the bands he had signed up from Birmingham, but the term Brum Beat would later become known more for the geographical location that certain groups and performers came from, rather than for a single unifying "sound". As Ray says, it is worth mentioning but I do not see how to do so without diminishing the "birthplace of heavy metal". How about:
 * Birmingham has had a vibrant and varied musical history over the last half-century. There has never been an iconic "Birmingham sound" comparable to Merseybeat or Madchester but the city is described as the birthplace of Heavy Metal . Norrie Paramore of EMI promoted his West Midlands bands under a "Brum Beat" slogan in the 1960s but this did not represent a single sound  and was one of many attempts to exploit the Merseybeat phenomenon.

The associated reference is: Woodhouse, John R. 'Welcome to Brum Beat', Brum Beat (2005). Retrieved June 20 2005. —Theo (Talk) 20:16, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry to be pedantic here but what about the amount of Reggae artists and bands that have evolved out of a Brum reggae scene, amount to more than Manchester and Liverpool combined but have arguably been overlooked by the press because Birmingham isn't "trendy", shall we mention this also ie: Birmingham has a great history of reggae musicians, more so than Liverpool and Manchester combined do you get my point? Why use a comparison when it is not needed, I would argue that Brum has contributed to the Madchester scene with the Charlatans who are always refered to as a Manchester band, I think that if we were to keep the reference to Liverpool and Manchester it needs to be explained further Nick Boulevard 22:51, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * That is also interesting. Can we say that more reggae artists come from Brum than any other English city except London?  I would need a source but I think that this would be sufficiently significant to merit a mention.  The origin of the Charlatans is something for the body of the section.  The thrust of this opening paragraph is to communicate the things for which Brum is famous. Overlooked or neglected achievements could form a second paragraph—perhaps that is where we should mention reggae and the Charlatans. If we all accept the form of paragraph one, we can put that in the article and move on to paragraph two.—Theo  (Talk) 07:32, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Theo, the thing is that this initial title has been changed about so much since I first bulked up the popular music section some months ago, please read my last response to Brum Burger above, this intro stayed for ages and it doesn't suggest anything other than the absolute truth, it is neither OTT Brum biased nor is it highlighting any "poor old overlooked brum" type of wording, the initial sentence to the article IMO should be short and to the point, we can asume that the reader may have never thought of comparing Birminghams music to that of Liverpool, London or Manchester, this is an encyclopedia and bare facts should remain otherwise I would like the Jimmy Hendrix stuff back again, this is why I added them in the first place so as to try and shout about the music scene and it's influence, you rightly pointed this out to be trivia and irelivant to the article, I now agree but I disagree that we should have reference to other cities on the page, the reader can see for themselves just how much or little the city has contributed to Brit music from the bands and musicians, they only need to click to Manchester or Liverpool to see what those cities offer, am I to go to Liverpool and Manchester and add a comment at the start of their music section... "Although the Afro-Caribbean music scene is not as diverse or successful as Birmingham... etc.." how long do you reckon it would remain and believe me there are plenty of examples of bias on those pages. I suggest not comparing to anywhere, just something like what was there before, "Over the years Birmingham has been a centre of inovation for many different types of music." Black Sabbath are more successful/famous heavy metal band than anything in Liverpool or Manchester, UB40 are a more successful/famous reggae band than anything in Liverpool or Manchester, The beat are a more successful/famous ska/2-tone band than anything in Liverpool and Manchester, Traffic were a more successful/famous psychadelic band than anything in Manchester, Duran Duran are a more successful/famous new romantic band than anything in Liverpool or Manchester, I realise that this is what the sentence was trying to suggest, IMO it reads as though it is trying to cement the media misconception that Brum music has not been as famous as the cities mentioned when in fact it has, I really think this should be dropped, If I object you can guarantee others will and personally I would like there to be some kind of sustenance to what we decide here. Thanks Nick Boulevard 17:51, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * In which case, how about:
 * Birmingham has had a vibrant and varied musical history over the last half-century. There has never been an iconic "Birmingham sound" but the city is described as the birthplace of Heavy Metal, and was home to bands of international reknown. Norrie Paramore of EMI promoted his West Midlands bands under a "Brum Beat" slogan in the 1960s but this did not represent a single sound  and was one of many attempts to exploit the Merseybeat phenomenon. —Theo  (Talk) 23:00, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Further proposal: treat this as another example of Nick's distorted agenda and obstruction of rational edits about Birmingham. I'm adding it to the RfC as an example of how he hasn't changed.RayGirvan 23:21, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Ray, what on earth are you talking about? This is getting a bit pathetic, it really is I was about to post a reply to Theo as we are trying to reach a compromise about this page that could be welcomed by all and the contribution you offer is to stirr up trouble, Ray... you really do not like poeple argueing against you I have not touched the page and I won't until the discussion is finished, I have just as much a right to what "intro" sits on this page as you or anyone else here, that is exactly what we were discussing untill you... grrrr Nick Boulevard 23:34, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Whats even more annoying is that I have now lost my last reply to Theo which gave an alternative option part wording his last version.... I just can't be bothered now, do what you want. Nick Boulevard 23:38, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't care if it incites your gormless rage. This discussion is entirely about long-standing issues. It riles you that Birmingham isn't as iconic as somewhere else, so we get the usual w*nk along the lines of Birmingham music being iconic because your sister's aunt knew someone whose cat was vaccinated by a vet who liked Slade. RayGirvan 00:00, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * gormless rage... usual w*nk... ~ slowly, slowly... ;) Nick Boulevard 00:55, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[Resetting indents]Ray: Your proposal is not helpful. Nick: I would still like to see your proposed rewrite.—Theo (Talk) 08:18, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Hi Theo, don't worry I won't take Rays comment personally, It actually takes quite a lot to get me into a "gormless rage" :) infact just for the record I was chilling out with a Beer whilst listening to The Doors last night, lovely eveing as well.
 * Ok I have just come in from work and I will try and remember what was lost in the cross edit, I will post later. Thanks. Nick Boulevard 17:05, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Musical Comparisons (part II)
Ok, I have taken into account the fact that Brum has never had a particular music scene as famous as the Merseysound or Madchester scene although the city has contributed to both scenes (charlatans - Manc & Fortunes - Mersey), I am in the process of elaborating on the music article so as to highlight the intro, to reach a compromise I will be addressing the facts that Birmingham has appreciated many "supergroups" who have received much acclaim and notoriety and whilst the city has experienced micro music scenes there has never been a city-wide scene that could be labeled as such, I have come up with this as the initial intro:

"Whilst cities such as Liverpool and Manchester have enjoyed famous music scenes that have been easily labeled by the British media Birmingham's music styles have often proved difficult to "box" with many smaller scenes evolving (possibly due to its sprawling size) or individual supergroups taking the limelight rather than the city itself. Birmingham has had a vibrant and varied musical history over the last half-century with many famous Birmingham musicians contributing to a wider British music scene in general."

I was going to mention heavy metal in there but it is not 100% a Birmingham sound, like most scenes the city has contributed rather than created the sound although heavy metal obviously has more longevity than either the merseybeat or madchester scene, which incidentally incorporated the indie and baggy scene as well with bands from all over the country, anyway... is this a fair compromise? Thanks Nick Boulevard 1 July 2005 18:02 (UTC)

 * Ok, if no one objects then I shall use the above wording in the article. Thanks all. Nick Boulevard 4 July 2005 18:04 (UTC)

 * I object. Three "scenes" in one para; size doesn't "sprawl"; Birmingham doesn't have "music styles"; species evolve, not "scenes"; there haven't been many "supergroups". Andy Mabbett 5 July 2005 23:09 (UTC)

 * According to Hamlyns "The Illustrated History of Rock Music" by Jeremy Pascall (ISBN 0 600 37605 2) and Wikipedia.

 * 1. The Moody Blues are classed as a superband/group with an album featured, they started out as a "good pop band with a great image in 1965" and after band member changes they became "one of the most successful bands of the time" reaching "superstardom".

 * 2. Robert Plant "Leader of the Midland Flower People" in 1967 and John Bonham learned their music skills in Birmingham bands and were born and raised within a few kilometres of the city itself hence their involvement with the Brum Beat, Jimmy page played for a Birmingham band not long before starting Led Zeppelin and later incorporated Robert and John, the three members becoming Led Zeppelin - "The biggest group of the early to mid-decade (1970's) was, without the slightest doubt, Led Zeppelin. Between them Robert Plant, Jimmy Page, John Paul Jones and John Bonham released something that might be described as Rock Of Attrition- the loudest, heaviest ever heard. Led Zeppelin was a musical juggernaught, an armageddon machine powered by the crashingest rythm drive ever unleashed on an innocent public. Seeing Led Zeppelin for the first time may be compared to going into battle against Hannibal and coming face-to-face with armoured elephants- you don't know whether to flee for your life or stand and watch this incredible sight and thus risk being ground under foot. Led Zeppelin was the only truly succesful supergroup." One of the most famous Rock bands in the world with Plant still releasing music.

 * 3. Traffic are described as an "early supergroup" the main musician being Brummie Steve Winwood. "In September '67 Melody Maker - then Britain's most aware thoughtful and serious music weekly - featured a Magnificent Seven of the best guitarists in the world. Six were British and one an American who had to come to Britain to find acceptance. They were Eric Clapton, Pete Townshend, Jeff Beck, Jimmy Page, Stevie Winwood, Peter Green and Jimi Hendrix... Winwood had been in the Spencer Davis Group and had recently founded Traffic." Blind Faith - "Joining our two superheroes in 1969 were the young prodigy of the early sixties, Stevie Winwood, by now a veteran of cult worship after his highly successful stint with Traffic..."

 * 4. UB40 are without contest the most famous UK Reggae band ever, they were the only uk mixed race band of any substantial fame to be used in the recent Live 8 concert in London and are famous world wide.

 * 5. As taken from Wikipedia itself. "Judas Priest are a heavy metal band formed in 1969 in Birmingham, England by Ken Downing and Ian Hill. The band's classic line-up consists of vocalist Rob Halford, guitarists K.K. Downing and Glenn Tipton, and Ian Hill on bass guitar. They epitomize the classic heavy metal genre, particularly the NWOBHM ("New Wave of British Heavy Metal") movement, and have influenced hundreds of musicians and bands. Their popularity and influence earned them the nickname "The Metal Gods".

 * 6. Wizzard - The most famous UK Christmas release band EVER! :)

 * 7. As taken from Wikipedia itself. "Black Sabbath are a British progressive heavy metal band, originally comprised of John "Ozzy" Osbourne (vocals), Tony Iommi (guitar), Terence "Geezer" Butler (bass), and Bill Ward (drums). They are without question the most influential heavy metal band in history. They are also cited by many as the very first heavy metal band."

 * 8. Duran Duran are still the most successful and world famous UK New Romantic group, "The band has sold over 70 million records, and has had eighteen singles in the Billboard Hot 100 chart, and thirty in the Top 40 of the UK Singles Chart". The band have an immense cult following, even now they fill huge venues like for instance the NEC, they took part in the originall Band Aid and the more recent Live 8.

 * 9. Dexys Midnight Runners have to receive some credit also purely for their long standing popularity and individual style which is described as New Wave and Northern Soul.

 * 10. The Streets, "Has It Come To This" proved to be a breakthrough hit for The Streets, going top-twenty in 2001. His debut album, Original Pirate Material, Skinner wanted to take garage in a new direction with material reflecting the lifestyle of British youth. The album was released in 2002 and proved to be successful both with critics and the general public. In the UK, the album was nominated for the prestigious Mercury Music Prize. The Streets was nominated for best album, best urban act, best breakthrough artist and best British male artist in the 2002 Brit awards. The NME named it as one of their top five albums of 2002.

 * Original Pirate Material had debuted and peaked at number 12 in the UK album charts, and wouldn't reach any higher until his next album was released.

 * The success of Original Pirate Material in the UK led to a US release of the album through Vice/Atlantic in late 2002. It quickly became a critical favourite with Rolling Stone, Spin Magazine, The New York Times Blender, USA Today and the LA Times all nominating it as one of the albums of the year. The album reached number 2 on the Billboard electronic charts and the top 20 on the independent and Heatseeker charts in the US in 2003.

 * 11. Birmingham formed The Charlatans are the most sucessful and famous UK indie band still writing music with most of the musicians coming from the West Midlands.

 * My inclusion of the words supergroup and famous are not just my own words Andy and when you take into account the musicians as well the city is actually extremely famous. Nick Boulevard 8 July 2005 18:33 (UTC)

 * These references look like terribly hyped descriptions. Is this supposed to be an objective assessment? -
 * Led Zeppelin was a musical juggernaught, an armageddon machine powered by the crashingest rhythm drive ever unleashed on an innocent public. Seeing Led Zeppelin for the first time may be compared to going into battle against Hannibal and coming face-to-face with armoured elephants

 * To be fair, did you ever watch Led Zeppelin perform live in the late 60's early 70's? as the book tells us... Jeremy Pascall, journalist, editor, author and broadcaster has specialized in chronicling the popular arts. He started his career as a reporter on New Musical Express before moving to a pop magazine Rave magazine, as a feature writer in the late 60's. He was, for several years, the rock reviewer of 19 magazine. He has written books on Paul McCartney and Wings and the Rolling Stones. He edited a four volume history of rock entitled The Story of Pop and many books on rock subjects including Elvis Presley, punk rock, black music, Elton John, the Beach Boys, the Beatles and country music. In addition he contributes to magazines around the world and is (was) co-author of Hamlyn's A Pictoral History of Sex in the Movies - I have been trying to get hold of a copy of "Hamlyn's A Pictoral History of Sex in the Movies" but I can't find it anywhere?

 * The rock book is excellent, really extensive and informative with some brilliant photographs, well recommended with bands such as The Who, Stones and Pink Floyd covered extensively, by the way here are a few links to pascal articles:

 * reviewer
 * sad loss to broadcasting
 * an interesting move interview for NME
 * NME

 * did you ever watch Led Zeppelin perform live in the late 60's early 70's?. No. Did you ever come face-to-face with armoured elephants? I don't doubt Pascall's credentials. It's just that he writes in rock journalism style: it's difficult to assess who's genuinely important, because it cranks up the importance of everyone.

 * Erm... how wrong can you be.. Mr Invisible???, the point is that we have an opinion of a writer who, during the 60's and 70's, wrote prolificaly for the major music publications of the UK, the term "supergroup" has to come from someone/somewhere... Birmingham has provided the UK with many supergroups... Nick Boulevard 00:25, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Did I mention the word "supergroup"? I'm just questioning the general objectivity of assessments from coffee-table books written in ludicrously hyped language. Must stop now: it's late, and the feeling in my eyelids can be compared to their having been trampled by a herd of armoured elephants. [Unsigned by User:195.92.67.78 03:17, 10 July 2005]

 * I am with User:195.92.67.78 on this one. Oh, and I am now going to reset the indent! —Theo (Talk) 10:55, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Is the following an acceptable form?
 * While cities such as Liverpool and Manchester have enjoyed famous music scenes that have been easily labeled by the British media, Birmingham's music styles have proved difficult to package because of their diversity and the tendency for high profile individual groups to emphasise their own brand rather than that of the city. Birmingham has had a vibrant and varied musical history over the last half-century with many famous Birmingham musicians contributing to British music in general. —Theo (Talk) 10:55, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I must admit that the book is a little hyped but then isn't that journalsim? Anyway, I think that looks good Theo. UB40 and Duran Duran have always championed Birmingham, both bands often being interviewed about their roots, Duran Duran recently played the NEC where they were hyping the audience and saying how proud they were to be back infront of their Birmingham home crowd, UB40 fronted the live capital of culture bid for Brum. Ocean Colour scene named their most successful album after a suburb of Birmingham, the Streets sang about the Bulring in Brum and Matt Skinner is not shy in stating where he grew up, West Heath. I think that the emphasis could be put on the idea that the media choose not to associate certain bands with the city because often the bands are individual in their style and do not pertain to a particular scene in the city, whereas Manchester scene consisted of many bands all sounding similar and Bristol trip hop scene the same. I concede to your removal of "supergroup", I guess it's a bit dated anyway, what about:

 * While cities such as Liverpool and Manchester have enjoyed famous music scenes that have been easily labeled by the British media, Birmingham's music styles have proved difficult to package because of their diversity. The tendency for the media is to often concentrate on high profile individual groups rather than the city itself. Birmingham has had a vibrant and varied musical history over the last half-century with many famous Birmingham musicians contributing to British music in general. Nick Boulevard 12:14, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Actually we could merge Theo's edit with what is already there, after a second look it fits ok? Nick Boulevard 12:20, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Led Zeppelin precursors and graffiti
Andy: Please explain why the two pieces of information and the two typos that you reintroduced to the aricle are enhancements. Your assertion that "their music bore no resemblance to Led Zepeplin" is not even supported by the written and musical sources. Members of Band Of Joy have commented that Plant used some of the band's pieces for early Zeppelin numbers; have you ever heard anything by Band Of Joy or do you have a source stating the dissimilarity? And why is the legality of graffiti pertinent to this article? In my opinion the place for comments on the legality of graffiti is in the Graffiti article. —Theo (Talk) 11:57, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

1) Of course typos are no t enhancements, Please feel free to correct any you find. 2) It's ages since I heard any Band of Joy, but since Wikipedia is not for "original research", I don't see how that is pertinent, anyway 3) "using the pieces" (which could simply mean lyrics, or songs whcih were "covered" by Led Zep) does not sit with the Led Zep articles' claims as to their originality. Please cite your claim. 4) The legality of graffiti is of relevance, because of the context. Andy Mabbett 13:02, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

1) I apologise for the typos gibe. It was a snide response to your having reverted corrected typos back into the article. 2) I think you may be misunderstanding No Original Research. It is about not introducing new ideas. It is not about not checking assertions. The reason I wondered whether you had heard any Band of Joy is that you may have recognised some of the songs that they covered as the bases for some Zeppelin songs. You might then have read the Led Zep material here on Wikipedia with a different eye and noticed the references to plagiarism and rearrangement. 3) [Led Zeppelin]], Led Zepellin (album), and Led Zeppelin II all mention areas in which the band were not original. This is not to detract from Led Zep.  As far as I can tell (and I know from experience that using such a modifier opens the way for you to say that I must therefore be wrong; please resist that) Led Zep played covers and rearrangements of the blues numbers (that they had covered as Band of Joy and in other bands) in a heavy metal style.  Using the technique that you have demonstrated earlier: please do not make assertions that you cannot support with explicit references.  I have been unable to find a reference that states that Led Zeppelin's "music bore no resemblance" to that of the bands in which its members previously played. Band of Joy played the numbers from which Led Zepelin numbers were derived. Led Zep covered songs that were covered by Band of Joy.  I agree that Heavy Metal is a very different sound to the Blues, but it is not entirely without resemblance to the blues and to maintain that two covers of the same song bear no resemblance is inappropriate exaggeration in an encyclopedia article. 4) Please explain why it is necessary in this context to explain that graffiti "is illegal, and regarded by some as vandalism", particularly when graffiti is only illegal when applied without consent (is all Birmingham graffiti illegal?). —Theo (Talk) 15:00, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Hi Theo and all, graffiti art is carried out illegally in Brum but many legal pieces are still carried out like for example in Selly Oak ball park, the Custard Factory and in Selfridges, thanks for picking up on Andy's adjustments, I look forward to his clarification on his Led Zep edits. Nick Boulevard 00:09, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Media
Sources: http://www.skillset.org/uk/westmids/article_1831_1.asp

http://www.publications.bham.ac.uk/annual-review-03/june.htm

http://www.transdiffusion.org/pmc/studio1/circles.htm

Nick Boulevard 16:23, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Merging
Personally, I think everything from Music of Birmingham which isn't already here (if there is anything, which I doubt) should be put in this article and MoB turned into a redirect. But I'm not that bothered which way it goes, as long as we end up with one article containing all the information. --Brumburger 09:14, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Fine (so long as the page length remians sensible). Andy Mabbett 09:28, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Having done a side-by-side comparison, most of MoB is a subset of AiB (probably just an earlier version of this article), the exception being the section on dance music which doesn't appear here at all. So maybe the answer is to move all the musical stuff from here to there.  --Brumburger 12:06, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd rather see the music stuff on a separate page, although looking at the pattern which the Music of Birmingham page was formed on (as per comments on its talk page) - i.e. Music of Manchester (and Music of the United Kingdom from which that page effectively devolves) - it might be appropriate to put only popular music onto that page and keep the classical music here. Arts in Birmingham could then have a "see Music of Birmingham" line under the sub-heading Popular music. Also, if the Music of Birmingham page is kept then it should probably add the tag as per the aforementioned pages. (N.B. Classical music is not covered in any of these pages - presumably as it is seen as non-indigenous...).

 * Moving popular music to a separate page gives more room to develop the other arts on this page. It will also mean I will spend less time as a spectator of the numerous edit wars that popular music seems to attract :) Valiantis 13:21, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Sounds good to me - I can see the point about classical music not belonging with other forms. Looking at the other "Music from X" articles, they either seem to be about regional styles (i.e. folk, mainly), or an area's popular music scene.  --Brumburger 15:03, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I disagree with the merge. A separate "music of" seems reasonable, even if the two articles aren't very well differentiated at this point.  I note that music of Birmingham is listed as an encyclopedia topic at Music encyclopedia topics.  The fact that there's no classical info just means the article's incomplete. Tuf-Kat 16:26, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I would suggest classical music might not be covered in Music of the United Kingdom because it is by definition (see European classical music) not possible to break such music down along national boundaries. I appreciate this is an opinion, not a fact. Also, the category is called music of Birmingham, not music in Birmingham. I think this distinction is significant. Valiantis 12:08, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

While I opposed this merge to begin with, it was not really done very well. Even if you wanted to make classical and popular music separate, why put the music festivals and venues in between? And its not really neutral to put obscure, underground house and hip hop music under "popular" since many would dispute that classification. And why are some festivals covered under "classical music" and some under a separate heading? This article now looks very unbalanced. Tuf-Kat 04:43, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I apologise for making the merge without reading this talk page first. I know better now guys.ant_ie 18:30, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Culture of Birmingham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080506154335/http://www.transdiffusion.org:80/emc/studioone/circles.php to http://www.transdiffusion.org/emc/studioone/circles.php

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:57, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Culture of Birmingham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070923014637/http://www.birmingham-alive.com/ to http://www.birmingham-alive.com/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:41, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Culture of Birmingham


text:
User talk:Bballboy6dr

The coolest person alive and my screenname

title: User talk:Bballboy6dr


text: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2005 May 31


text:
Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 May 31

Category:Engineering Societies

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete --Kbdank71 18:54, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

1) misspelt (should be societies), and 2) what exactly is meant by "engineering societies"? Other than those two songs, what would go in this category? — Timwi 19:09, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

 * What's your point?. There is a Category:Engineering societies, well populated, not this redlinked capitalized version which you claim had two songs.  Gene Nygaard 21:14, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually, there are two articles there (see ). This doesn't really need a deletion discussion, though, as there's no description page to delete.  Just recat those articles as something else.  --Azkar 21:29, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I've just removed the tags from those pages. These pages would not fit in at Category:Engineering societies.  Sadly, the two articles are about the same song, but listing different sets of lyrics (my understanding, after looking at the articles, is each school has a local set).  I don't know which is the preferred title, so I've left messages on the talk pages asking the editors of those pages if they could merge to the title of their choice.  --Azkar 05:24, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

Category:Baldwin brothers

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus (keep) --Kbdank71 18:55, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

created by User:Ssd in July 2004. I came across this category when looking at Alec Baldwin's page. Its a pretty useless category. It small (4 articles) with little room to expand (ie - There are only 4 Baldwin Brothers). Furthermore, the information contained in the category is already contained in the article Baldwin brothers. This makes it a little redundant Dowew 02:59, 31 May 2005 (UTC) User:Dowew
 * Actually, I think I'd rather see the stubbish information on Baldwin brothers merged into this category description and deleted. The category's fairly harmless.  --Azkar 03:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I'd say merge the information into Baldwin brothers and/or Alec Baldwin, and get rid of the cat. I do agree the category is mostly harmless, but I'm afraid it's also mostly pointless. Radiant_* 12:12, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep Logical grouping. SchmuckyTheCat 14:42, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Zikim

Zikim (זִיקִים) is a kibbutz in southern Israel. Located in the northern Negev desert, it falls under the jurisdiction of Hof Ashkelon Regional Council. In, it had a population of.

History
For settlement history preceding the kibbutz, see Hiribya: History. Ancient discoveries in Zikim comprise a Greek graffito on the base of a high-quality plate dating from 144-160 BCE, and Greek inscriptions on Gazan jars from the 6th to early 7th century CE.

The kibbutz was established in 1949 on land that had belonged to the depopulated Palestinian village of Hiribya, by a group of young Romanian Jews who belonged to Hashomer Hatzair before their arrival in Mandatory Palestine in 1947.

At that time, Jewish settlement in the Negev was very sparse, and each new location was considered to be a "point of light" (zik) in the wilderness. Michael Har-Segor, later an Israeli historian, came up with the name while imprisoned in Romania for his activity in Hashomer Hatzair. He says he translated a quote from Pushkin into Hebrew: "From sparks shall come a flame."

Zikim attracted members of Hashomer Hatzair from around the world, most recently from South America. British actor Bob Hoskins, although not Jewish, worked as a volunteer in Zikim in 1967.

In 2006, a Qassam rocket fired from northern Gaza hit a mattress factory in Zikim. Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for the rocket attack. In July 2014, five armed Palestinians attempted to cross into Israel via the beach at Kibbutz Zikim. They were killed by IDF gunfire.

On 7 October 2023, as part of an attack on Israel, Hamas amphibiously assaulted the Zikim training base and Zikim kibbutz. Hamas killed 19 civilians, 8 soldiers and left dozens wounded in the Zikim Beach massacre.

Economy
The main crops are mango and avocado. Zikim also operates one of Israel's largest dairy farms. The main industrial product is polyurethane, produced by the kibbutz factory, Polyrit.

Notable people

 * Bob Hoskins
 * Peretz Kidron
 * Hagai Zamir

title: Zikim


text:
User:Behagelig

I am a hypochondriac that likes Earth food.

title: User:Behagelig