text:
Talk:Fundamental theorems of welfare economics

Introduction summary
Can we not have something short and to the point in the opening paragraph introducing these? I was thinking of something along the lines of:
 * The Two Fundamental Theorems of Welfare Economics are two well-known axiomatic propositions in welfare economics. The first proves the efficiency of free markets and the second that in a free market it is possible to redistribute wealth.

I don't really understand the technical bits well enough to precis them (the above are mostly guesses), but I'm sure that somebody else does. — KayEss | talk 16:37, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

WTF??? Local Nonsatiation is a weak requirement???
Reminds me of that old physics joke. Q: How does an elephant go down a ramp? A: Well, first assume the elephant is round... Except in economics there seems to be no compulsion to go back and adjust for missed assumptions. Let's look at a few examples. a) toll road. Is there a better alternative within epsilon?  b) internet cable monopoly offering. Is there a better alternative within epsilon? c) Cheetos. Is there a better offering within epsilon?  For that matter, what is the distance metric used?  Is the consumption set even a metric space at all? 70.113.72.73 (talk) 04:08, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

The above are examples of violations of local non-satiation for individual goods; however, the assumption in question is local non-satiation for the choice set as a whole. This is indeed an extremely weak assumption. All it implies is that there exists at least *one* good that the consumer could get slightly more of and would prefer slightly more of. Ossanha (talk) 04:37, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

 * As a matter of fact, local non-satiation is even weaker than that. Local non-satiation states that for every bundle, there exists another bundle that is preferred to that bundle, in epsilon-distance to the original bundle. That means if one "good" is a "bad" in some area, the existence of a close bundle with less of the "bad" still satisfies local non-satiation. The two most prominent failures of local non-satiation (to illustrate), is when goods are only available in discrete chunks, or if there exists a global satiation point (think of CB preferences).
 * As a side-point, the IP user fails to explain his examples a bit more. Both toll road & internet cable monopoly offerings don't satisfy some of the assumptions of the 1st FTWE (no externality, no price-taking). Don't know why they think they can contribute if they haven't read even the first chapter in a microeconomics textbook... Oragonof (talk) 08:55, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Hoppe of the Austrian school has proven the second theorem incorrect.
"Hoppe's argument dispatches entirely the notion of Pareto optimality as a social-welfare-maximizing end state. Welfare economics starts with the objective fact of self-ownership and then demonstrates that each step of voluntary acquisition and use of property satisfies the Pareto rule and thereby, improves social welfare. Moreover, each instance of state intervention into the voluntary acquisition or use of property benefits some and harms others and, thereby, fails to improve social welfare."

http://mises.org/article.aspx?Id=4014 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.178.234.45 (talk) 12:15, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

 * The theorem is mathematically correct given the assumptions. Go ahead and prove that the argument is invalid given the assumptions and you'll be in line for the Nobel Prize. Whether the assumptions are realistic is another question. I don't think any modern academic economist thinks they always hold. Whether they are a good approximation depends on the case in question... Oragonof (talk) 09:01, 23 June 2023 (UTC)

Re: Hoppe ... So you are saying that everything that benefits one person and harms another reduces total utility, proof by assertion?70.113.72.73 (talk) 04:08, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Deleted spurious conjecture in introduction
The claim was made that people need to understand the economy and how to make use of the lump-sum transfers for the transfers to be effective. This is false. Neither welfare theorem will hold in a hypothetical world where people don't understand how to interact in the market and buy and sell goods. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.42.67.48 (talk) 06:18, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Really Bad
The theorems were really hopelessly mangled. I just fixed the first theorem, though I don't have time right now to do the second (the proof is quite long). Regarding the comments below about monotonicity of preferences, that isn't actually necessary for the FFT. The weaker assumption of local nonsatiation is sufficient.

Also, why are the two theorems together in one article? I recommend splitting them into two and then just cross-referencing. Also, there seem to be a few other articles mascarading as treatments of the FFT. These should probably be deleted.

--Ossanha

Major Problems with assumptions!
Firstly, I disagree with the use of the term "axiomatic", these propositions are based on a number of lower-level assumptions (e.g. the rationality/selfishness of all players, assuming that all traders have monotonic utility functions, and so on). The fact that this statement is proven given other assumptions shows, in my opinion, that it is not axiomatic but built on more basic axioms.

More importantly, I believe that the statement of the theorem (or perhaps of Walrasian equilibrium) is incorrect. Unless I am misinterpreting the definition, there is no assumption here that utility functions are monotonic. This assumption is necessary for a proof of the theorem.

The proof sketch shown is also flawed, due to this missing assumption. Consider the case where we have two traders. Player 1's utility functions is a constant (i.e. he/she couldn't care less about the allocation he/she receives) and Player 2's utility function is monotonic. A Walrasian Equilibrium will lie at some point on player 2's budget constraint curve. This point will not be Pareto efficient, because if Player 1 gives their goods to Player 2, Player 1 will be no worse off (their utility remains constant) and Player 2 will be better off (due to their monotonic utility function).

To summarize, this statement of the theorem is lacking the monotonic assumption, without it the theorem is false. (With it, it is provable, though with all respect I still do not like the proof sketch provided, I would like something more mathematical - personal preference)

See Feldman, "Welfare Economics and Social Choice Theory", Chapter 3 for further discussion.

 * You don't need monotonicity for the first theorem. All you need is local non-satiation. See Mas-Colell, Whinston and Green chapter 16. radek 19:02, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

cleanup
I may have messed up some mathematical notation in my recent edits. The page was such a mess that whoever created it should check that. Next I'm going to change the title of the article to conform to the style manual. Michael Hardy 23:05, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

of, not, in
It should be Fundemental Theorems OF Welfare economics, not IN Welfare Economics. Just like Fundemental Theorem of Algebra or Calculus or whatever. Please don't change it to IN.radek 03:11, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Agreed, I tried moving too "of", but I got an error message, hopefully someone can help fix this.--Bkwillwm 19:37, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Requested move
Support It's 'of' not 'in'. Also per comment above, good idea would be to have two seperate pages for the theorems and then this page just a short statement and redirect.radek 22:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. — Nightst a  llion  (?) Seen this already? 09:03, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Change the preference relations to "succ"
I would go through and change these myself, but I don't have the time at the moment. Every time two bundles are compared, the preference relation should be expressed $$x_i \succ y_i$$ rather than $$x_i > y_i$$, and $$x_i \succeq y_i$$ rather than $$x_i \geq y_i$$. This is important because without the distinction it is hard to tell in the proofs when "greater than" is meant and when "preferred to" is meant. This makes the proofs hard to read. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.118.239.104 (talk) 22:57, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Not the most general or concise formulation
The presentation of the two theorems is not very precise mathematically, as couple comments pointed out already above. A la Debreu, the consumption sets should lie in a normed topological vector space X and price is given by an element of the dual of X. In this setting, FFT is proved in about two lines and the SFT not too much more than that. If no one objects, I might make some modifications along these lines. The short section on FFT can certainly be expanded.

Only in the general infinite-dimensional setting is the full-strength of the hyperplane-separation theorem used (although texts like Mas-Colell do freely quote it in finite-dimensional situations). The Hahn-Banach theorem, of which hyperplane separation is a corollary, holds trivially for finite dimensional topological vector spaces. Mct mht (talk) 06:27, 27 October 2012 (UTC)

No precise statement of the model
This article should at least be understandable to someone with the necessary mathematical background, not just people with knowledge of economics as well. The "formal statement" is not formal at all unless you know what "preferences", "non-satiated", "price equilibrium", "transfers", "allocation" and "Pareto optimal" mean. If it's not possible to briefly recap the mathematical model so as to make it understandable to someone with a background in pure math, then there should at least be links to articles that do contain that information. Gaiacarra (talk) 08:48, 21 November 2017 (UTC)
 * These sound like excellent suggestions. I will take a look when I get a moment. Jonpatterns (talk) 14:49, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Arrow's Theorem
Arrow's Theorem is not traditionally referred to as the "third welfare theorem," even though it is often discussed in contrast to the first welfare theorem. I can't find a single source that calls it "the third welfare theorem," and the current citation is a dead link.

The short description of Arrow's Theorem currently in the article is also problematic, it uses the unorthodox term "arrow social welfare equilibrium" without defining it, and completely misstates the independence of irrelevant alternatives assumption. (The assumption is about independence across alternatives, not independence across individuals.)

I'm going to remove the description of the "third welfare theorem," but Arrow's Theorem will still be mentioned under "related theorems." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manybytes (talk • contribs) 07:56, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

History?
It's sort of strange. I've read a 700 page popular micro economics text covering this in detail, and a few other bits and pieces and it's still not clear to me who came up with these so called theorems. It's either Walras, or Arrow, or Debreu or all of them, and maybe some others too. But it is clear as mud to me exactly who contributed what when. A "History" / "Origins" section would be greatly appreciated.

History
I’ve added a history of the theorems, addressing the suggestion of the previous (unsigned) comment. It turned out to be longer than I expected – I always imagined that one more author would sew the topic up, but it took a long time for the ideas to evolve to their current state.

I would like to make a few changes to the wording elsewhere (though not to the maths), but I’ll wait to see if I get my head bitten off first. Colin.champion (talk) 12:16, 26 August 2020 (UTC)

 * My head still being in place, I rewrote the final section (‘Related theorems’). I removed the claim that Arrow’s ‘Impossibility theorem’ is a third fundamental theorem on the grounds that no one had spoken up for it in the course of a year, and provided a slightly longer summary of the Greenwald-Stiglitz theorem in compensation. Whether the G-S theorem merits its place other people can decide. Colin.champion (talk) 13:47, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

 * I reworded the lead para and the section on ‘interpretations’, merging the latter into the former and generally being more guarded in tone. I think the article was originally written in the belief that ‘lump sum payment’ meant ‘one-off payment’, but while Mas-Colell et al. do not say what it means, it is clear that the ‘lump-sum transfers’ on p331 of their book must be recurring per capita payments. Colin.champion (talk) 14:36, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Volunteer Marek’s edits (Nov 2020)
Volunteer Marek has made a number of changes, chiefly deleting what he or she regards as original research on my part. It may be that some of these changes are improvements, and it may be that I’m not the best person to say that some of them introduce faults. However none of them are supported by any reasoning, and many of them seem to me to introduce significant errors. I don’t want to simply revert them, so I’ll give a couple of examples of what I consider to be errors.

 * I wrote that ‘There are no externalities [footnote: ie. firms can’t pass their costs onto other people without their consent] and no transaction costs’. This has been reduced to ‘There are no externalities’. This modification is justified in the edit summary by the words ‘incorrect OR’. The new wording is incorrect on two counts. Firstly, the absence of transaction costs is indeed a requirement for the FFT. Secondly the absence of externalities is not, without qualification, a requirement at all. The reason is that the term ‘externality’ does not have a perfectly clear meaning, but is often understood as including ‘pecuniary externalities’ (see Mas-Colell et al p352: they explicitly point out that an externality of this sort ‘creates no inefficiency’). It is only the non-pecuniary externalities which interfere with the optimality of markets. Rather than get bogged down in a discussion of the terminolgy of externalities I simply explained the meaning of the term in a footnote in a way which corresponds to the assumption needed by the FFT. Without this qualification the statement of the FFT is incorrect.

 * I wrote that ‘competitive markets ensure an efficient allocation of resources in the short run’, citing an observation of Hotelling’s which shows that they need not be efficient in the long run. Volunteer Marek deleted the words ‘in the short run’ (‘more OR’). I have read scores of things about the FFT none of which looks beyond short-run effects: the FFT refers to exchange and (to some extent) production, but not to the life history of the firm. I am not aware of any serious argument that competition is necessarily optimal in the long run. I cited Hotelling in support of my wording. How is that OR?

I think Volunteer Marek is a little quick to dismiss as OR statements which are based on a close and careful reading of numerous authoritative sources. Colin.champion (talk) 11:00, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

 * Pretty much everything I removed was either original research, editorializing or simply wrong.
 * 1) With regards to externalities - I removed it because there are both negative and POSITIVE externalities and both violate the assumption of the theorem. To equate "externalities" with "firms can't pass their costs onto other people" is to (very clumsily) characterize all externalities as negative externalities. Furthermore, what does the sentence "firms can't pass their costs onto other people without their consent" even mean? What is "consent" here?
 * 2) Absence of transaction costs is a requirement for the FFT? Maybe in some specific way but if so then that way is usually covered by the "no externalities" assumption. Anyway. Show me a source.
 * 3) "Pecuniary externalities" aren't really externalities, that's all there is to it (though indeed, the wording "pecuniary externalities" is confusing which is why it's mostly avoided by economists)
 * 4) Your comment on Hotelling is clearly WP:OR and WP:SYNTHESIS. First, Hotelling here would be a primary source (he's not the last word on this). Second, I'm not sure you're even understanding Hotelling correctly. Third, what does "short run" even mean here? The distinction between short run vs. long run has several definitions (whether prices are flexible, whether capital can be accumulated, whether entry into markets is allowed), so as is this statement makes no sense. Anyway, given its assumptions, FFT apply to any economy with finite number of trading periods, or to an economy with infinite number of trading periods but with complete markets.
 *  Volunteer Marek  16:55, 10 November 2020 (UTC)

 * 1) You’re splitting hairs. Costs can be negative if you need to be finickety. ‘Passing on costs without people’s consent’ is distinguished from ‘passing on costs as part of a transaction accepted voluntarily by both parties’. I think any reader will undrestand this.
 * 2) Ref [1] in the article (p7).
 * 3) Pecuniary externalities are externalities according to Mas-Colell et al, whose book the article is based on. Also according to the wikipedia definition. I don’t see how a meaning of externality which excludes them can be taken for granted.
 * 4) Can you show me a proof (or serious argument) that the FFT as normally understood covers the process by which firms and industries come into being and close down? If not, a statement of the FFT which does not caveat itself accordingly goes beyond anything the proofs establish. I have read Arrow, Debreu, Mas Colell etc. and all I see is exchange and (to some extent) production. Colin.champion (talk) 17:31, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm not. Anyway. Show me a source to support that text.
 * 2) That does not support the text you're trying to add to the article (the issue is about constrained Pareto efficiency)
 * 3) Show me where this is related to the FFT.
 * 4) I'm not going to engage in original research here and neither should you.  Volunteer Marek   02:44, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

I was hoping someone else would come into the discussion. Consensus isn’t reached by two people slugging it out indefinitely. Colin.champion (talk) 07:40, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Notation in the proofs.
Maybe this notation is standard in economics (I'm sure it's standard in some field), but can we please have at least some indication for non-experts of what the mathematical notation being used means? Looking up mathematical notation conventions without knowing the names for the concepts they describe is very difficult, so could someone who knows please add at least an explanatory link for anything you wouldn't get in grade school (i.e., anything most English-speakers can't be expected to already know)? DubleH (talk) 06:54, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

If you want to know, what I didn't understand was the meaning of the "(X*, Y*, p)" and "(X*, Y*)" tuples in the first paragraph of the first proof. I understood most of the set theory and vector stuff that followed. I havn't really looked at what's past that closely enough to know if I understand it.DubleH (talk) 06:59, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Microeconomics 2
Fundamental theorem of welfare economics 2405:205:B086:ABD9:0:0:1967:8AC (talk) 12:35, 6 June 2023 (UTC)

First Fundamental Theorem, 5th bullet ("Preferences are selfish.")
What is a selfish preference and why was it included as a hypothesis? There is no mention of this in the literature. See page 549 of the following book:

Mas-Colell, Andreu, Whinston, Michael D., and Green, Jerry R. (1995). "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680. Daniellesteffen (talk) 21:35, 21 May 2024 (UTC)

 * Correct. No such mention in the literature. Must be removed. Limit-theorem (talk) 11:20, 24 May 2024 (UTC)


text:
Leon Langakis

Leon Langakis (Λέων Λαγγάκης) was a Greek shooter. Langakis participated in the 1896 Summer Olympics in Athens, competing in the free rifle event. He did not finish the competition.

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

title: Leon Langakis


text:
Ioannis Vourakis

Ioannis Vourakis (Ιωάννης Βουράκης) was a Greek shooter. He competed at the 1896 Summer Olympics in Athens. Vourakis competed in the free rifle event. However, he did not finish the competition.

title: Ioannis Vourakis


text:
Talk:1877 in music

Untitled
What is Lesson Éolides? The symphonic poem Les Eolides was written in 1875–6 (I think it was premiered in 1877 and that is worth a note yes!) and I do see a few 'google-references' to Lesson-Eolides but don't know what it is. This is a serious question. Schissel : bowl listen 16:38, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:1877 in music


text:
Cherry Grove, Minnesota

Cherry Grove is an unincorporated community in Fillmore County, Minnesota, United States.

The community is located 9 miles south of Wykoff, at the junction of Fillmore County 5 and 160th Street, near Forestville Mystery Cave State Park. U.S. Highway 63 and Fillmore County 14 are both in the vicinity.

Cherry Grove is located along the boundary line between York Township and Forestville Township.

Nearby places include Spring Valley, Ostrander, Etna, Wykoff, Greenleafton, Preston, and Harmony.

Cherry Grove is located 12 miles southeast of Spring Valley; and 15 miles southwest of Preston. Cherry Grove is 17 miles west-northwest of Harmony.

ZIP codes 55975 (Spring Valley) and 55965 (Preston) meet at Cherry Grove. A post office previously operated in the community of Cherry Grove from 1857 to 1893, and again from 1894 to 1903.

The South Branch Root River is nearby.

title: Cherry Grove, Minnesota


text:
Talk:Beulah Annan

Incorrect Dates?
Found and photographed her tombstone yesterday. It reads

Top panel: BEULAH M.

Front: DAU. OF J.R. & M. SHERIFF NOV. 18 1898 MAR. 10, 1927

Epitaph: Gone but not forgotten.

--Sporkofscience 22:09, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Murder Controversy
why call her a murderess? I think she was finally acquitted.

I agree with the above statement - While it is evident that it was she who killed the man, it never came clear if it was an actual murder, or a self-defence kill. I say, change "murderess" into "killer". --Akuen 18:02, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Why not adopt the treatment given to Belva Gaertner, whose situation is comparable? The article on her calls her "Suspected American murderess". It is a fact that many suspect she committed the murder, despite her lack of conviction. --Rnickel 18:12, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
 * She changed her story multiple times. That makes her a serial liar. We will never know for sure, but she's probably guilty of manslaughter or murder. 70.161.8.90 (talk) 00:05, 3 July 2024 (UTC)

Needs sources
No sources, add unref tag. POV, calls her a murderer though she was not convicted.--FloNight 23:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I say she is a scumbag killer who instead of having a musical about the sham acquittal she should have gotten the electric chair. Poor dumb Al Annan.

 * Don't take it out on Kander and Ebb; they wrote the musical long after she was acquitted (and had died). And as it turned out, even the musical was ahead of its time; it wasn't till after O.J. Simpson's trial in the 1990's that it took off as the long-running revival (and later Oscar-winning film).  --RBBrittain 03:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Conflict between paragraphs
The first and second paragraphs under "Early life" are conflicting. The first says she moved to Chicago right after divorcing Perry Stephens; the second says she didn't move there till after she married Al Annan in Kentucky. Since there aren't any web links to the Chicago Tribune articles cited, I can't for myself which is correct. Which one is it? Or are both correct (i.e., she married Annan immediately after divorcing Stephens--which suggests Annan wasn't her first cuckold)? --RBBrittain 03:51, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Beulah Annan


text:
User talk:David Koller

"Every Breath You Take"
Just dropping you a quite note saying thank you for adding a citation to the "Every Breath You Take" article! I am hoping to improve it to GA quality someday, and that citation certainly helps me out! Feel free to add any other citable info you can find! Have a nice day! CarpetCrawler (talk) 03:31, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Netsys Technologies

The article Netsys Technologies has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "No evidence this passes GNG/NCOMPANY. Suggest SOFTDELETE by redirecting to parent company (Cisco Systems)."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 15:48, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

title: User talk:David Koller


text:
User talk:Jliller

Welcome!
Hi Jliller, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

""

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

""

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 16:40, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of TNM (video game)
I have nominated TNM (video game), an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/TNM (video game). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Afro Talkie Talk - Afkatk 09:05, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jliller


text:
User talk:Ignis33

Welcome!
Hi Ignis33, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

""

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

""

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 16:40, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ignis33


text:
New Haven–style pizza

New Haven-style pizza is a style of thin-crust, coal-fired Neapolitan pizza common in and around New Haven, Connecticut. Locally known as apizza ( from Neapolitan  'na pizza, ; lit. 'a pizza'), it originated in 1925 at the Frank Pepe Pizzeria Napoletana and is now served in many other pizza restaurants in the area, most notably Sally's Apizza and Modern Apizza. This geographically limited pizza style has been favorably regarded by national critics.

Characteristics
In a New Haven-style pizzeria, a "plain" pizza is a crust, oregano, tomato sauce, and a little bit of grated pecorino romano cheese. A "plain" New Haven–style pizza may also be called a "tomato pie". Mozzarella is considered a topping.

Pepe's restaurant is credited with inventing the "white clam pie," a pizza of crust, olive oil, oregano, grated cheese, chopped garlic, and fresh littleneck clams. It served littleneck clams on the half shell at the bar, which Pepe later added to the pizza.

What makes New Haven-style pizza distinct is its thin, often oblong crust, characteristic charring, chewy texture, and limited use of melting cheeses. It tends to be drier and thinner than, but closely related to, traditional New York–style pizza. Both styles in turn are close descendants of the original Neapolitan pizza.

Baking and serving methods
New Haven-style pizza is traditionally baked in a coal-fired oven at extremely hot temperatures above 650 F. It is sold whole rather than by the slice.

Availability
, New Haven-style pizza is widely available in New Haven and the surrounding area, especially Bridgeport and other nearby coastal cities and towns. New Haven-style restaurants have opened across the United States, though there are some states and many large cities which still have none.

In media
Henry Winkler, Lyle Lovett, Chris Murphy and Michael Bolton discuss the history of New Haven Pizza in Gorman Bechard's documentary Pizza: A Love Story. In the film the black char imparted from the ovens is described as adding a smoky barbeque flavor not found elsewhere. A recurring phrase spoken by several in the movie is, "It's not burnt, it's charred."

title: New Haven–style pizza


text: User talk:204.225.63.10

title: User talk:204.225.63.10


text:
Gyeongju National Museum

The Gyeongju National Museum is a museum in Gyeongju, North Gyeongsang Province, South Korea. Its holdings are largely devoted to relics of the Silla kingdom, of which Gyeongju was the capital.

The museum is located immediately adjacent to the royal tomb complex, in an area which also includes the Gyerim forest, Cheomseongdae observatory, Banwolseong palace, and Anapji Pond.

History
The museum was first founded in 1945 as the Gyeongju Branch of National Museum of Korea. The main building of the museum was built in 1968. The museum was upgraded as "Gyeongju National Museum" in 1975 and has been under expansion since then.

Collections
There are a number of national museums in key locations across Korea, but the collection of this museum is especially important because it allows the general public, archaeologists, and historians to understand the rise of civilization in southeast Korea. The museum contains important items of national cultural heritage. They include the Emille Bell, which is said to ring with the sound of a child who was sacrificed for its casting. There are several Silla crowns in the museum's collection. The museum also holds many artifacts excavated from Anapji Pond and artifacts excavated from the Hwangnyongsa Temple site. Many holdings are displayed outdoors, a common practice in Korean museums.

The volume of archaeological and historical artifacts in the collection of the Gyeongju National Museum is so large that most of the objects cannot be displayed and are thus stored out of the view of the general public. The Gyeongju National Museum has maintained an archaeological research department for decades, and staff there have conducted numerous field surveys and excavations in North Gyeongsang Province. This role has lessened with the onset of government-funded 'buried cultural heritage research centres' (ko:매장문화재조사연구소) across Korea since the mid-1990s. However, the role of the museum as a centre of cultural heritage conservation was enhanced when the Korean government built a large warehouse on the museum site in the early 2000s to house the mountains of archaeological material unearthed continuously from Gyeongju and across North Gyeongsang Province.

title: Gyeongju National Museum


text:
User talk:Turidoth

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia!
Hope you like it here, and stick around! Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) we use the '~' symbol. To insert your name, use ~~~; to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Follow the Simplified ruleset. Eventually, you might want to read the Style manual and Policies and guidelines. Remember Neutral Point of View
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and most importantly, have fun!

Good luck! – Meelar 16:41, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

HKWNB, HKCOTW, Current events
Hi! Thanks for your contributions to Hong Kong-related articles. You might also be interested in the HK wikipedians' notice board, HK Collaboration of the Week and Current events in Hong Kong. Happy editing! – Instantnood 23:19, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

File:Cello bridge.jpg and File:Mute on cello.jpg
Hi Turidoth. Are you the author of those two images? Could you add the information template to the images? thanks. Amada44  talk to me 07:49, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Amanda, you left a message on my wikipedia page ask me to add more info to my two photos. What sort of info were you looking for? ~ Turidoth
 * Sure. I did this one as an example: File:Cello bridge.jpg. It is still missing the source. Could you add own to that image? Please log in when you do so! cheers, Amada44   talk to me 10:49, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:03, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Turidoth


text: Template:Kaluzhsko-Rizhskaya line RDT

title: Template:Kaluzhsko-Rizhskaya line RDT


text:
Talk:Gyeongju National Museum

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gyeongju National Museum. 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/20100207134614/http://gyeongju.museum.go.kr/ to http://gyeongju.museum.go.kr/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100207134614/http://gyeongju.museum.go.kr/ to http://gyeongju.museum.go.kr/

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) 09:47, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gyeongju National Museum


text: User talk:62.255.240.194

title: User talk:62.255.240.194


text:
Middle Welsh

Middle Welsh (Cymraeg Canol, Kymraec) is the label attached to the Welsh language of the 12th to 15th centuries, of which much more remains than for any earlier period. This form of Welsh developed directly from Old Welsh (Hen Gymraeg).

Literature and history
Middle Welsh is the language of nearly all surviving early manuscripts of the Mabinogion, although the tales themselves are certainly much older. It is also the language of most of the manuscripts of mediaeval Welsh law. Middle Welsh is reasonably intelligible, albeit with some work, to a modern-day Welsh speaker.

Phonology
The phonology of Middle Welsh is quite similar to that of modern Welsh, with only a few differences. The letter u, which today represents in North Western Welsh dialects and  in South Welsh and North East Welsh dialects, represented the close central rounded vowel  in Middle Welsh. The diphthong aw is found in unstressed final syllables in Middle Welsh, while in Modern Welsh it has become o (e.g. Middle Welsh marchawc = Modern Welsh marchog "horseman"). Similarly, the Middle Welsh diphthongs ei and eu have become ai and au in final syllables, e. g. Middle Welsh seith = modern saith "seven", Middle Welsh heul = modern haul "sun".

The vowels are as follows: Vowel length is predictable: vowels are long in monosyllables unless followed by a geminate or one of the consonants, , , , or a geminate. The vowels could combine into the following falling diphthongs:

1. ending in :, , , ~

2. ending in :, ,

3. others:, (and possibly , )

The diphthongs and, whose first component gradually changed into , were originally allophones of  and , respectively, and no distinction between the two was expressed in Middle Welsh spelling, so their presence during most of Middle Welsh is not immediately observable. However, the fact that the modern pronunciations beginning with an occur in all word-final syllables, regardless of stress, makes it plausible that their distinctness from  and  was a legacy from the time before the stress shifted from final to penultimate syllables in Old Welsh. The full opening to and  may have been completed at some point in later Middle Welsh, possibly the thirteenth to fourteenth centuries.

The consonants are as follows: Consonants may be geminate. is mostly found in loanwords such as siacet 'jacket'.

Stress was placed on the penultimate syllable with some exceptions such as the causative verbs in -háu, e.g. sicrháu ('to make things secure' from sicr 'secure'). In terms of intonation, the tonal peak must have been aligned with the post-stress syllable, reflecting the earlier final stress of the late Brythonic period, since this persists even in Modern Welsh.

Differences from modern Welsh
The orthography of Middle Welsh was not standardised, and there is great variation between manuscripts in how certain sounds are spelled. Some generalisations of differences between Middle Welsh spelling and Modern Welsh spelling can be made. For example, the possessive adjectives ei "his, her", eu "their" and the preposition i "to" are very commonly spelled y in Middle Welsh, and are thus spelled the same as the definite article y and the indirect relative particle y. A phrase such as y gath is therefore ambiguous in Middle Welsh between the meaning "the cat" (spelled the same in Modern Welsh), the meaning "his cat" (modern ei gath), and the meaning "to a cat" (modern i gath). The voiced stop consonants are represented by the letters t c at the end of a word, e.g. diffryt "protection" (modern diffryd), redec "running" (modern rhedeg). The sound is very often spelled k before the vowels e i y (in Modern Welsh, it is always spelled with a c, e.g. Middle Welsh keivyn = modern ceifn "third cousin"). The sound is usually spelled with a u or v (these are interchangeable as in Latin MSS), except at the end of a word, where it is spelled with an f (in Modern Welsh, it is always spelled with a f, e.g. Middle Welsh auall = modern afall "apple tree"). The sound is usually spelled with a d (in Modern Welsh, it is spelled with a dd, e.g. Middle Welsh dyd = modern dydd "day"). The sound is spelled r and is thus not distinguished from  (in Modern Welsh, they are distinguished as rh and r respectively, e.g. Middle Welsh redec "running" vs. modern rhedeg). The epenthetic vowel is usually written, in contrast to Modern Welsh: e.g. mwnwgyl rather than mwnwgl "neck".

Letter-sound correspondences
In general, the spelling is both variable and historical and does not reflect some sound changes that had taken place by the Middle Welsh period, most notably the lenition. Some of the less predictable letter-sound correspondences are the following:

Notable differences from modern Welsh
Middle Welsh is closer to the other medieval Celtic languages, e.g. Old Irish, in its morphology. For example, the endings -wŷs, -ws, -es and -as are used for 3rd person singular of the preterite in Middle Welsh as well as the form -odd. In the same person and tense exists the old reduplicated preterite kigleu 'he heard' of the verb klywet 'to hear', which corresponds to the Old Irish ·cúalae '(s)he heard' from the verb ro·cluinethar '(s)he hears'.

Middle Welsh also retains more plural forms of adjectives that do not appear in modern Welsh, e.g. cochion, plural of coch 'red'.

The nominal plural ending -awr is very common in Middle Welsh, but has been replaced in modern Welsh by -au.

Morphonology
Like modern Welsh, Middle Welsh exhibits in its morphology numerous vowel alternations as well as the typical Insular Celtic initial consonant mutations.

Vowels
There is a productive alternation between final syllables and non-final syllables known as mutation or centring, which is by necessity triggered by the addition of any suffix and operates as follows:

The centring mutation is due to a process of vowel reduction that operated earlier, in late Brythonic, when the stress was placed on the last syllable.

Further, there are two types of alternations that are caused by following vowels (extant or lost) and are no longer entirely productive, but nonetheless very frequent in the morphology. The first type is ultimate affection, which occurs in the last syllable of a word and is caused by a vowel that used to be located in the next syllable. The originally triggering vowel is either i or a, hence the alternations are referred to as i-affection and a-affection. The more common type is i-affection, which occurs in plurals with a zero ending and in the present singular of many verbs. In addition, in some cases, the singular has an affected vowel, but the plural does not (this has been termed 'reversion'). The alternation operates as follows:

Ultimate a-affection is found, most notably, in the feminine forms of adjectives that do have gender declension, and it changes the stem vowels as follows: The second type of affection is triggered by (typically) extant close vowels or semivowels in the following syllables, and is hence known as penultimate affection (in fact, it also reaches the antepenult in Middle Welsh). The effect varies somewhat depending on the triggering vowel, hence one may speak more specifically, for instance, of y-affection. Penultimate y-affection is a regular feature of verb forms with an ending containing y (e.g. the second person singular and plural in the present indicative). Both it and other types of penultimate affection may also occur due to the addition of suffixes containing the respective vowels, e.g. in the plural of nouns. Penultimate and ultimate affection may occur in one and the same form, e.g. castell 'castle' – pl. kestyll, manach 'monk' – meneich 'monks', or, with reversion, elein 'fawn' – pl. alaned (the latter two may then be termed cases of 'ei-affection' ).

Consonants
In contrast to modern Welsh, the consonant mutations are not always reflected in Middle Welsh orthography; this is especially true of the nasal mutation.

1. Lenition / soft mutation

Lenition turns voiceless stop consonants into voiced ones and voiced stops into fricatives (further turning into zero in the case of ). It occurs most notably:

a. in the second members of compounds: march 'horse' > moruarch 'sea-horse, whale';

b. in a noun preceded by the possessive pronouns for 3rd singular masculine and 2nd singular possessors (y 'his' and dy/th 'thy'): kyuoeth 'wealth, realm' > y gyuoeth 'his wealth, realm';

c. in a noun preceded by the numerals 1, 2 and 7: march 'horse' > deu uarch 'two horses';

d. in a noun or adjective preceded by a name that it describes: brenhin 'king' > Keredic Vrenhin 'Ceredig the king'; bendigeit 'blessed' > Catwaladyr Uendigeit 'Cadwaladr the blessed';

e. in a possessor noun or an adjective preceded by a feminine singular noun or a semantically dual noun: Morgant > gulat Uorgant 'the land of Morgan', tec 'fair' > y wreic deccaf 'the fairest lady', mawr 'big' > deu uarch uawr 'two big horses';

f. in a feminine singular noun preceded by the definite article: gwreig > y wreig 'the woman';

g. in a noun following the prepositions a, am, ar, at, dan, gan, heb, hyt, y, is, o, tros, trwy, uch, wrth, the conjunction neu or the vocative particle a;

h. in a noun functioning as the subject after some verbal forms (in contrast to modern Welsh). It is common after many 3rd person forms of the verb 'to be', and after the 3rd person singular imperfect and pluperfect (sometimes also preterite) of other verbs. It also occurs in subjects separated from their verbs;

i. in a noun functioning as the object after most verbal forms, but sometimes not after the 3rd singular present and preterite;

j. in a noun or adjective functioning as a nominal predicate after the verb 'to be' or the predicative particles yn and y: mawr 'big' > ot oed uawr ef 'if he was big';

k. in a noun or adjective used adverbially (including after the adverbial particle yn);

l. in a verb after the relative pronoun a, the interrogative pronouns pa, py and cwt, the interrogative particle a, the negative particles ny and na, the affirmative particles neu, ry and a, the particle yt, many prefixes such as go- and di-, the conjunctions pan, tra and yny;

m. in the verb 'to be' after a nominal predicate.

2. Nasal mutation

The nasal mutation replaces stops with corresponding nasals (while keeping them voiceless if the original stops were voiceless): It occurs:

a. after the preposition yn 'in' (and sometimes also the predicative and adverbial particle yn): pob 'every' > ymhob 'in every'. This does not occur with verbal nouns.

b. the possessive pronoun vy 'my': brawt 'brother' > vy mrawt 'my brother'

c. the numerals 7, 9, 19, 12, 15, 100, and by extension some others.

3. Spirant mutation

The spirant mutation replaced voiceless stops with fricatives: It occurs after:

a. the possessive pronoun for 3rd singular feminine possessors y 'her': penn 'head' > y phenn 'her head'

b. the conjunction/preposition a 'and, with', the conjunctions no 'than', na 'neither, nor' and o 'if', the preposition and adverb tra 'over, very'.

c. the negative particles ny, na (note that these also cause the spirant mutation), the affirmative particles neu and ry, many prefixes such as go- and di- (note that these also cause lenition of the other mutable consonants)

d. the numerals 3 and 6.

e. the interrogative cw 'where?'

4. Aspiration (sandhi h)

The consonant h appears initially before vowels after certain pronouns, namely the possessive pronouns y 'her', yn/an 'our', eu/y(w) 'their' and the 1st singular 'infixed' pronoun -m as well as the 'infixed' pronoun -e/y when it expresses a 3rd person object (be it singular masculine, singular feminine, or plural); e.g. wynneb 'face' > y hwynneb 'her face'.

5. Provection

Provection is a phenomenon that causes devoicing of consonants within certain medial consonant clusters that may arise via morphological processes. Two identical voiced stops yield a voiceless geminate stop (e.g. d + d > tt), a voiced stop is devoiced before another voiced stop or voiceless consonant (d + b > tb or tp), a voiced consonant may be devoiced before a sonorant (d + r > tr) and is always devoiced before a voiceless consonant (d + s > ts) and merges with a following /h/ into a voiceless geminate (e.g. d + h > tt).

Nouns
There are two genders, masculine and feminine.

There is a definite article which precedes the noun phrase and has the form y- before a consonant and yr- before a vowel or.

Noun plurals may end in a variety of unpredictable endings such as -eu, -(i)on, -oed, -ed, -yd, -et, -ot, -(i)eit, -awt, -awr, -ant, -er, -yr, -i or zero suffix with ultimate i affection in the root ). A vowel change may also accompany the addition of an ending; apart from the predictable option of centering, that vowel change may also be a penultimate i, y or j affection (before -ion, -ieit, -i, -yd or rarely -ieu) or, conversely, a reversion of ultimate i affection before endings such as -eu, -on, -ed and -ot. The special plural suffix -os has diminutive meaning. There are also singulative endings -yn (masculine) and -en (feminine), which produce singulars not only from collectives, but also from plurals: blew 'hair' > blewyn 'a hair'; llyc 'mouse' > llygot 'mice' > llygoden 'mouse'.

There is no grammatical case. Nouns may be placed after another nouns to express a possessor, sometimes triggering a mutation, for which see above.

Adjectives
Some, but not all adjectives may have special plural and feminine forms, and concord is not always observed. The plurals may be formed with a zero ending and ultimate i-affection or with the ending -(y)on, which may also cause mutation or penultimate j-affection. The adjective-forming suffixes -adwy, -eit, -in, -lyt never allow plural formation. Feminine forms of adjectives are derived from masculine ones via ultimate a-affection.

The equative degree is formed by the suffix -(h)et, the preposed particle mor or the prefix ky(f)-. The forms in -(h)et are preceded by ky(n). E.g. ky uelynet oed a'r eur 'it was as yellow as gold'. The comparative is formed with the suffix -ach (the comparandum is introduced by the aspirating conjunction no(c) 'than') and the superlative uses the suffix -(h)af (the comparandum is introduced with the preposition o 'of').

Adjectives could be used adverbially when preceded by the particle y(n) (kilyaw y gyflym 'withdrew hurriedly'); when they were placed first in the sentence or were in the comparative, they did not require the particle either.

Pronouns
The personal pronouns have many forms with different functions. The independent forms are commonly used as objects, syntactically isolated or as fronted subjects. The reduplicated forms express emphasis, the  'conjunctive'  ones express contrast, and the  'infixed'  ones usually express objects or possessors, while being added to various particles and function words. The prepositional forms are added to prepositions ('conjugating' them). The forms as follows: The variants i and di of the 1st and 2nd singular simple pronouns and inneu and ditheu of the corresponding conjunctive pronouns are used when these follow a conjugated verb, preposition or possessed noun; Evans (1970) terms them 'affixed' pronouns.

In the 3rd singular infixed pronoun, the allomorph -i/e is used after the words a, y, pan, tra and yny, while -s is used after ny, na, ry, neu, can, gwedy, kyt, o and pei.

The reflexive pronoun consists of the word hun (pl. hunein), preceded by a possessive pronoun (as in myself, yourself etc.).

The most common relative pronoun is a.

The demonstrative pronouns may be proximal or distal and distinguish, besides the masculine and the feminine form, a neuter one, which, however, corresponds with the plural. They are as follows:

Some demonstrative adverbs are ynaeth 'then', yno 'there' (yna can mean both), ynoeth 'thither', yma(n) 'here', (y)velly 'so, thus'. Now was nw in early texts, but later weithon, i.e. y weith hon (lit. 'this time') or yn awr (lit. 'in/the hour').

Sawl is 'so many'. Meint 'number, size', ryw 'kind' and peth 'thing' can be used in various complex constructions with pronominal elements.

The main interrogative pronouns are pwy 'who' and pa/py 'which'. 'What' can be expressed as pa beth 'which thing?'. Others are pet 'how many', cwt 'where', pan 'whence', pi 'whose' (always merged with a copula – pieu = pi+yw, pioed = pi+oed etc.).

Universal pronouns are pawp, oll 'all' (with adjectival variants pop and holl) and cwbyl 'the whole'.

Indefinite pronouns are nep 'any(one)' and dim 'any(thing)'.

Finite forms
There are four tenses – present(-future), preterite, imperfect and pluperfect – and two moods (indicative and subjunctive). A subjunctive is distinguished from the indicative only in the present and the imperfect. The verb agrees with the subject (but it agrees in number only if the subject is placed before the verb, not after it). The inflection of the verb distinguishes two numbers and three persons, as well as a special 'impersonal' form, which is used in a way similar to a passive. Contrary to the example of caru, the 3rd singular present of many or most verbs has i-affection, e.g. arch-af 'I ask', but eirch 'he asks'. Furthermore, some verbs, especially denominatives, have a 3rd singular ending -(h)a (originally part of a suffix). Some other, rare and archaic 3rd singular endings still occurring in Middle Welsh are -(h)it, -(h)awt, -yt, -yd. Of the different forms of the 3rd person of bot, yw, ynt follow the predicate, whereas (y) mae, (y) maent are placed in the beginning of the clause (and can alone mean 'where?' in questions); oes is used in negations, questions and conditions, mostly in the sense 'there is' ('there is' is also the meaning of the impersonal yssit; ys is used mostly with verbal nouns and in the mixed order, for which see the section Syntax). The 3rd singular ending may also be -i with penultimate i-affection. Contrary to the example of caru, and unlike modern Welsh, the 3rd person singular preterite form most frequently ends in -wys or -ws, or in -s preceded by some other vowel as in -as, -es or -is, e.g. gallws 'was able'. The second person singular exhibits y-affection. The of the subjunctives is in the process of disappearing after vowels and sonorants, but causes provection (devoicing and gemination) after voiced consonants: e.g. dycko corresponding to 1st person singular indicative dygaf 'bring'. The subjunctive is used to express wishes, indefiniteness, purpose or a concession. The 3rd singular may also end in -(h)it.

Note: Bot also has special 'consuetudinal' (habitual) forms for the present and past mostly formed from the stem byd-.

Non-finite forms
Both of the verbal adjectives have passive meaning: the one in -edic is a past participle passive (car-edic 'loved') and the one in -adwy is a future participle passive or gerundive (cred-adwy 'credible'). Less common suffixes with a past passive meaning are -at, -(h)awt and -eit.

The verbal noun is formed in a great variety of ways, the most common ones being:

1. just the verb stem with a zero suffix: adaw 'leave'

2. with the suffix -u, which is typical of stems containing -a, -ae, -e- and -y-: caru 'love', credu 'believe', kyrchy 'approach', including denominative stems in -ych-: bredychu 'betray'

3. with the suffix -aw, which is typical of stems ending in -i or containing -i-, -u-, -wy- or -eu- (keissyaw 'seek', gwisgaw 'dress', urdaw 'ordain', kwynaw 'complain', blodeuaw 'blossom')

4. with the suffix -i, which is typical of stems containing -o-/-oe- or ending in -w (adoli 'worship', merwi 'die'); there are also some stems containing -a-, which then undergo penultimate i-affection: erchi 'request'.

There are also some less common suffixes such as -ach, -aeth, -(a)el, -ec, -(e/y/u/i/ei)t, -n, wyn, -(ou)ein, -fa(n) and -s.

Verbal nouns are used very frequently in many periphrastic constructions, including prepositional phrases (with the preposition y – lit. 'towards V-ing', i.e. 'in order to V', with the preposition yn – lit. 'in (the process of) V-ing'), as an object of the verb gwneithur 'do' (lit. 'to do a V-ing'). They may even occur alone without a finite verb within a narrative (lit. 'And (there was) a V-ing'). The subject could be introduced by o 'from'.

Prepositions
Prepositions are 'conjugated', i.e. pronominal morphemes are added to the prepositions. The preposition may also undergo other changes, e.g.: A vowel appears before the preposition; it may be -a-, -o- or -y-, depending on the specific preposition, e.g. ar 'on' – arn-a-f 'on me', rac 'before' – rag-of 'before me', gan 'from' – genhyf 'from me'. Most prepositions cause lenition (am, ar, gan etc.), but yn 'in' causes nasal mutation and a(c) 'with' causes spirant mutation. The prepositions themselves often occur with a lenited or non-lenited first consonant. Some notable prepositions are a(c) 'with', am 'around', amcan y 'about', ar 'on', at 'to', can(t) 'with, by', ker 'near, by', ech 'out of', eithyr 'outside', erbyn 'by, for, against', gwedy 'after', heb 'without', herwyd 'according to', gerfyd 'by', hyt 'until', is 'below', mal 'like', o(c) 'from', parth 'towards', rac 'for', (y) rwng  'between', tan 'under' y 'to, for', tra(c) 'over, beyond', tros 'for, instead of', trwy 'through', y ('to', 'for', 'belonging to'), (y) tu (a(c)) 'towards', uch 'above', wrth 'at, by, for', y(n) 'in' (y before infixed pronouns), yr 'during, for'. Prepositional phrases often function as complex prepositions: ym penn 'at the end of' (from penn 'head, end'). As indicated elsewhere, y(n) may also introduce nominal predicates and words used adverbially.

Syntax
As in modern written Welsh, the VSO word order (Gwelod y brenin gastell: "Saw the king a castle") is not used exclusively in Middle Welsh, but irregular and mixed orders are also used: Y brenin a uelod gastell: ("[It was] the king that saw a castle"). The suggestion is that the mixed order places emphasis on the subject, and is often used in Welsh today to emphasise something. The formal difference between the two is that a negative particle (ny/na) precedes the subject in the mixed order (thus Ny brenin a uelod gastell would mean "It was not the king that saw the castle", but precedes the verb in the irregular order (thus Brenin ny uelod gastell = "The king did not see a castle"). Furthermore, the mixed order could preserve the copula that originally participated in this cleft construction (Ys y brenin a uelod gastell).

Unlike modern Welsh, however, the irregular or 'abnormal' orders are much more common than the 'normal' one, even though they require an additional particle to be grammatical. There are two main variations:

1. with a subject or object 'fronted' before the verb (SVO or OVS) and followed by the particle a (causing lenition) – e.g. Arawn a eirch y wrogaeth instead of Eirch Arawn y wrogaeth 'Arawn asks for his homage';

2. with an adverbial expression 'fronted' before the verb (AdvV) and followed by the particle y(d) (yd before a vowel; causing lenition) – e.g. Y Lynn Cuch y uynn hela instead of mynn ef hela y Lynn Cuch 'he wanted to hunt in Glynn Cuch'.

Both particles may also be replaced by ry or yr.

When the verb of a sentence is a copula governing a nominal predicate (P), early texts preferred the order VPS, but PVS becomes more common in the bulk of Middle Welsh prose. If the nominal predicate is not fronted, it may be introduced by the particle y(n): y bu (yn) barawt ('it's ready').

A direct question is introduced by a: A dywedy di ynni? 'Will you tell us?'

Modifiers, both adjectives and 'genitives', normally follow their nouns, e.g. gwreic dec 'a fair woman', pendeuic Dyuet 'the prince of Dyfed' (with lenition if the nouns are feminine). The nouns indicating a possessor (the 'genitive nouns') are, morphologically, just unmarked nouns juxtaposed with another noun (apart from the lenition after a feminine noun). Independent pronouns can be appended in the same way, redundantly, after a noun already modified by a possessive pronoun (y erchwys ef, lit. 'his dogs (of) him') and likewise after a 'conjugated preposition' (arnaf i, lit. 'on-me me'). An adjective may precede a noun if connected with it by the particle a 'which' (maur a teith 'a long journey') and a few adjectives such as hen 'old' and prif 'chief' are also normally placed in front of the noun.

Possession is expressed literally as '(possessed) is with (possessor)', rather than with a verb 'to have'.

Numerals
Only the cardinal numerals for 2 to 4 and the ordinal numerals for 3 to 4 have a gender distinction. The ordinal numerals are mostly formed with the suffix -uet, less commonly -et or -yd (masculine) / -ed (feminine), while '1st' and '2nd' are suppletively formed. The morphologically simple cardinal numerals and their corresponding ordinal numerals are as follows: The numerals from 11 to 19 are formed in a variety of ways. 12 and 15 simply conjoin a simple numeral with the word 'ten' ; 11, 13, 14 are literally 'N on ten'; 16, 17, 18, 19 are 'N on fifteen', and 18 is 'two nines'. The original pattern was that of 12 and 15, and some early texts contain words for 11, 14 and 19 that follow the same pattern. The ordinals apply the ordinal form sometimes of the unit and sometimes with the word ten. Between 20 and 40, numbers are expressed as 'N on twenty'. The numbers from 40 to 180 are expressed using a vigesimal system, with multiples of 20 ('N twenties'), and, if necessary, units exceeding the nearest multiple designated as 'N and N twenties' (or, sometimes, as 'N twenties and N'). Hundreds and thousands are denoted by conjoining the unit they are multiples of with the words for 'hundred' and thousand. Exceeding units are indicated added to the hundred or the thousand using the word 'a(c)' 'and': 'N and N hundred' (or 'N hundred and N'). In accordance with this, the number 6,666 is expressed as chue guyr a thri ugeint a chuechant a chue mil, i.e. 'six men and three twenties and six hundred and six thousand'. Both cardinal and ordinal numerals generally precede the nouns that they modify (except for kyntaf 'first'); the noun after a cardinal may be in the singular, as in deu wr 'two men', or in the plural. If the numeral is composite, the noun comes after the first element: teir llong ar dec 'three ships on ten', i.e. '13 ships'. The phrases with a cardinal can also be constructed as 'N of Xs', e.g. tri o wyr 'three men', and this is the normal pattern with thousands (pym mil o wyr '5000 men'). Sometimes, compounds are formed: cannwr 'a hundred men'.

title: Middle Welsh


text: User talk:193.218.90.23

title: User talk:193.218.90.23


text:
User talk:Judge Magney

Hey, welcome again to Wikipedia. Here's the standard welcome greeting; it has some useful links you might be interested in:

Welcome!

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

PS I'll look over your arguments about Pelosi in a minute and tell you what I think. Dave (talk) 16:42, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Category:American lawyers
Hi, you seem to know law quite a bit better than I do. Another user and I have been trying to figure out exactly who should be in Category:American lawyers. I welcome your input at Category talk:American lawyers. --Idont Havaname 20:57, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Lost Liberty Hotel
I just spent about 15 minutes going through the article and trying to come up with a version where both sides agreed on everything except for the parts that were being discussed. Here are the differences from your last version, which you may want to review. Much of the red text in the commentary section is a result of things changing order, so things look much different than they really are. Hopefully, this version will allow us to have less dramatic edit wars, because we'll only be reverting the parts we care about directly. Dave (talk) 02:02, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

judicial activism
I understand the distinction you're making, though I don't know if the two terms qualify as "fundamentally" different. If the judicial tyranny page is only one or two lines I don't see why it cannot be incorporated under activism. Either fill out the tyranny page to make the distinction more robust or take the paragraph you've added to activism and make it a full section so that people re-directed will notice. I don't mind changing my vote if you can make Judicial tyranny more than a stub. Marskell 10:10, 22 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I changed my vote. We shall see. Marskell 09:30, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Judicial tyranny
I'm happy with the way Judicial tyranny stands now, and noted this change of opinion on the AFD page. Edgar181 17:18, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I (the original deletion proposer) too am happy with the new version of this article. It is a neologism but I am inclined to see it as a notable one (172,000 Google hits for the phrase put it into a different class than most WP:NEO cases seen on AfD). I've added a legal stub category to the article to make it more likely that other knowledgable people come across it and expand it. Hynca-Hooley 00:49, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Hugo Black
This is a bit tardy on my part, but I thought you might be interested in this. I quoted, and responded to, your criticisms of the Hugo Black article here. Would love to hear what you think of my responses to your objections—I think it would help in improving the article's quality. Best wishes, Hydriotaphia 02:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Judge Magney


text:
Talk:Upper Mesopotamia

Geographic scope
Wouldn't this area also include areas that are in present-day southeastern Turkey? Sanli Urfa, for instance? john k 16:44, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Technically, al-Jazira only includes a few places very close to the border, like Nisibis. Al-Jazira is mostly aluvial plain geographically and ancient Persian territory historically. This puts Sanliurfa too far north. --Gareth Hughes 21:41, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

However, Urfa (ar-Ruha, Edessa) was traditionally part of the Mesopotamia province of the Byzantines which was lumped together under al-Jazira by the Umayyads. So, there might be some merits to this.--Khodadad 08:59, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Title
Would this not be better entitled al-Jazira,_Mesopotamia? It's quite unusual to see the Arabic definite article given as a separate word, IMO.Palmiro 18:36, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I think you're right: al-Jazira is a better way of writing الجزيرة, but there will be a good few redirects to fix. --Gareth Hughes 19:31, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

"Riparian" plain

 * Al-Jazira is characterised as a riparian plain,...

I have a sneaking suspicion that "riparian plain" is not the right description here. The riparian zone is the band of land immediately adjactent to a channel (and some of the channel) — it's on the order of metres to 10s of metres (perhaps more for the Amazon). A riparian plain is better known as a floodplain. However, I think this plain is much much bigger. An alluvial plain, perhaps, if not simply a plain? Cheers, Daniel Collins 22:54, 7 April 2006 (UTC).
 * You are probably right - the Jazira is a very large area. Palmiro | Talk 13:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I couldn't find a reference to definitively describe the physiography of the area, but it is no riparian plain. Daniel Collins 15:03, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Map?
This article could use a map to make it really helpful. Stephen C. Carlson 01:31, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Proposed Move to Upper Mesopotamia
Geographically in English this area is called Upper Mesopotamia. Moving the article there would get rid of any confusion with former provinces called al-Jazira, and clarify that this is a geographical area and not a political one. The redirect would take care of links from Al-Jazira, Mesopotamia. --Bejnar (talk) 01:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

 * Also, "Jazeerah"/"Jazira" etc. most literally means "island" in Arabic, so it would be nice to have some explanation as to how the word came to be applied to an inland region... AnonMoos (talk) 21:44, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Syriac name
The Syriac name is only relevant at the point it was inserted if it relates to the Arabic name, for which I could not find a source. Does anyone have a source for that? The Arabic name means island in Arabic, which some have claimed is because it is the island between the Tigris and the Euphrates; however in actual usage the territory so named does not correspond to that island, (1) because it doesn't go downstream far enough, and (2) because it includes highlands to the east and west of the two rivers. The Syriac name might be interesting, hence I placed it in a note. It would be also be interesting to know what the Roman and Parthian names were for the area. Then a whole section could be devoted to the naming discussion. Now as Syriac and Arabic are both Central Semitic languages and Syriac was spoken in Upper Mesopotamia prior to the Arab invasion, it is reasonable to conjecture that the island name in Arabic was taken from a similar sounding island name in Syriac. However, without a citation, it remains original research. --Bejnar (talk) 21:59, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Well I didn't try to put it as an etymological evidence to the Arabic name, what I had in mind when I included Syriac in the first time was to show that the region is called that in Arabic and this in Syriac, I couldn't find anything links Syriac to the possible use of the arabic term for island, however I know that the Syriac "gazertho" means isolated/cut-off so that's very plausible reason for tha imho, however it's still all my own original research unfortunately.--  R a f y  talk 01:26, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The article Al-Hasakah Governorate mentions its Classical Syriac name ܓܙܪܬܐ Gozarto apparently without citation. Whoever wrote that part probably knows something about the etymology. I think in Modern Syriac it is called something like ܓܙܪܬܐ ܕܒܝܬ ܢܗܪ̈ܝܢ Gozarto d'Bethnahrin which means Island of Mesopotamia. Saintali (talk) 05:46, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Upper Mesopotamia


text:
Curtain Call: The Hits

Curtain Call: The Hits is the first greatest hits album by American rapper Eminem. It was released on December 6, 2005, under Shady Records, Aftermath Entertainment, and Interscope Records. The album collects Eminem's most popular singles, as well as three new songs, including a live version of "Stan", featuring English singer-songwriter Elton John performed at the 43rd Grammy Awards, plus the songs "Fack", "When I'm Gone" and "Shake That" featuring Nate Dogg.

The album was certified Diamond in the United States on March 8, 2022, and quintuple platinum in New Zealand. It reached number one on several charts, including the US Billboard 200 and UK Albums Chart.

On July 11, 2022, Eminem announced a sequel to the album titled Curtain Call 2, which would contain material from his later work. It was released on August 5, 2022.

Chart performance
Curtain Call: The Hits debuted at number one on the UK Albums Chart and Billboard 200, after two sales days, in a similar fashion to Eminem's previous album Encore. The album racked up first-week sales of nearly 441,000 and with close to 324,000 scans the second week for a two-week stay at number one. It slipped from number one to number four in its third week but surged 33 percent to finish with sales close to 430,000. The disc scored nearly 1.2 million scans in its first three weeks of release. It also gave Eminem his fifth straight number 1 album in the US and UK including the 8 Mile soundtrack. , the record had sold 3,782,000 copies in the United States. Curtain Call was later certified Diamond by the RIAA in the United States.

The album's two singles, "When I'm Gone" and "Shake That", peaked at numbers 8 and 6 respectively in the US Billboard Hot 100. Only "When I'm Gone" qualified for the charts in the UK, where it peaked at number 4.

In August 2017, the album was declared the longest-charting rap LP in the history of the Billboard 200.

Clean version
A clean version of the album is also available. It has 15 tracks with both "Intro" and "Fack" removed (due to the extreme sexual nature of the latter, and the former's connection to the song) and "My Name Is" put to track one. The tracks appear exactly how they appeared on the clean versions of their respective albums except for the song "Guilty Conscience", which uses the radio edit. Certain profanities remain on several tracks, as words including "shit", "bitch", and "ass" were not censored on The Slim Shady LP or The Marshall Mathers LP. However, on "Just Lose It", the clean version leaves "ass" uncensored, unlike on Encore, the word "ass" was replaced with "thing".

Track listing
Notes
 * $undefined$ signifies an additional producer.
 * $undefined$ signifies a co-producer.

Personnel

 * Jeff Bass – bass, guitar, keyboard
 * Karin Catt – photography
 * Larry Chatman – project coordinator
 * Lindsay Collins – studio coordinator
 * Tommy Coster – keyboard
 * DJ Head – drum programming
 * Dr. Dre – producer, mixing
 * Eminem – producer, executive producer, drum programming, mixing
 * The 45 King & Louie – producer
 * Marti Frederiksen – engineer
 * Brian "Big Bass" Gardener – mastering
 * Scott Hays – assistant engineer
 * Richard "Segal" Herredia – engineer
 * Mauricio Iragorri – engineer
 * Ben Jost – assistant engineer
 * Rouble Kapoor – assistant engineer
 * Steven King – bass, guitar, engineer, mixing
 * Anthony Mandler – photography
 * Jonathan Mannion – photography
 * Joe Perry – guitar solo on "Sing for the Moment"
 * Kirdis Postelle – project coordinator
 * Luis Resto – keyboard, programming, producer
 * Tom Rounds – assistant engineer
 * Les Scurry – production coordination
 * Mike Sroka – assistant engineer
 * Urban Kris – assistant engineer
 * Nitin Vadukul – photography

title: Curtain Call: The Hits


text:
Talk:Dog poop girl

Dog poop girl
This story is a case study in the power of the Internet to expose someone publicly as punishment for a perceived social affront. This is similar to the Star Wars Kid incident, except that the goal in that case was ridicule and amusement, not punishment.

 * The issue of punishment fitting the crime / mob justice is raised.

 * The issue of the right to privacy in a global community is raised.

I would like the chance to expand on what has been started here to discuss commentary on these issues and how this incident fits into a larger social context. The story's profile has already been raised by the article in the Washington Post and in other print journalism sources (to be added as references later).

The photo is also an Internet phenomenon, having been widely disseminated and remixed. Breakall 17:36, 2005 July 12 (UTC)

Poop and shit
Is "poop" somehow less literal than "shit" as a translation of 똥? Seems to me, since euphemisms for 똥 are much less idiomatic in Korean than euphemisms for shit in English, "poop" is at least as literal as "shit" -- if not more so. -- Visviva 03:39, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I will readily admit that I am not a Korean speaker -- so I could not tell you on my own.
 * "Dog poop girl" was used in the Washington Post story, so I felt comfortable using it. I know there are more than one translations of the derogatory name given to the woman, and so I have redirected "Dog shit girl" and "gae-ttong-nyeo" to this page. Please let me know if you think this arrangement does not suffice. Breakall 12:12, 2005 July 13 (UTC)
 * That seems fine. I was actually referring to the parenthetical note that gae-ttong-nyeo is "literally" dog-shit-girl.  -- Visviva 12:17, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks -- I eliminated the superfluous translation.
 * Also, I have redirected "Gae-ttong-nyue" to this article -- should it be "Gae-ttong-nyeo"? Breakall 13:18, 2005 July 13 (UTC)
 * The more redirects the merrier, but nyeo is the correct romanization, per the Revised Romanization of Korean. Cheers for your hard work!  -- Visviva 14:55, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
 * OK, the other romanization now redirects as well. Breakall 15:29, 2005 July 13 (UTC)

VfD
This article was unsuccessfully nominated for deletion. See Votes for deletion/Dog poop girl for a record. Postdlf 07:10, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks to all who voted to keep! Breakall 14:02, 2005 July 20 (UTC)

I don't understand this edit notation: (deprod, survived AfD around this time last year, should be discussed again.) How do I go about starting this type of discussion? Vagabond997 12:22, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Edited Picture
Should we really be using the picture with the girl's face blurred out? Her face has already been shown around the Internet, I doubt that being on Wikipedia unedited will save the girl any grief. If we're to blur this picture, are we to blur pictures of other people that have famous via embarassing means (e.g. The Star Wars Kid)? I feel that an unedited picture adds authenticity to this article and more encyclopedic. It may be "nice" to edit it, but unprofessional. She got infamous due to the picture, and as such it should be the original. --SeizureDog 12:46, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree with SeizureDog. I have replaced the blurred image with the original image. Breakall 04:23, 2005 July 24 (UTC)
 * Was this image removed? I do not see it in the article any longer.  Hall Monitor 20:19, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I believe it was deleted as a copyright violation. Check the logs at WP:COPYVIO and WP:IfD.  -- Visviva 01:47, 20 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I have reuploaded the image. How can you have an article about a picture without the picture itself? It is fair use in its true form. --SeizureDog 01:29, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Merging without discusion?
Being bold is great, but merging an article into oblivion without any discussion seems to cross a line. — Gaff ταλκ 20:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Especially given that this merge has been reverted several times by different users (including myself), and is therefore clearly contested. PC78 22:44, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Repetition?
I quote from the article: "In early June 2005, the woman, who appears to be in her 20's took her lap dog on a subway in Korea. Her dog defecated on the floor of the subway car and, when asked by other elderly riders, she rudely declined to clean up after it. Another subway rider offered the woman a tissue, which she used to clean the dog but not its waste. When other passengers suggested she clean up the mess, she ignored the requests and departed the subway at the next stop."

So were there two rounds of requesting? Or is it just that the article's poorly written? Unidentified Flying Bunny in the Sky TalkContribs 01:27, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Focusing the article
I propose that the lead read something like this to focus the article on the incident not the person : -

 * "Dog poop girl" was an incident on a South Korean subway that was recorded and published, resulting in a backlash by Internet vigilantes.

-- neon white user page talk 16:25, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

"Popular Poop Website"
Really? Popular? Sez who? In comparison to other "poop websites", or overall? Cause I'm not buying it. 22:51, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

What was it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.9.23.42 (talk) 02:21, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dog poop girl