text:
Shadia Drury

Shadia B. Drury (born 1950) is a Canadian academic and political commentator. She is a professor emerita at the University of Regina. In 2005, she was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada.

Early life and education
Drury was born in Egypt but earned a Bachelor of Arts at Queen's University and a PhD from York University.

Career
Drury has taught Political Science and Philosophy at the University of Calgary and at the University of Regina, where she holds the Canada Research Chair in Social Justice.

In 2005, she was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada. Two years later, she published "Aquinas and Modernity: The Lost Promise of Natural Law" through the Cambridge University Press. She is also a columnist for Free Inquiry magazine.

Criticism
Several political philosophers consider Drury's attacks on Leo Strauss and his followers to be unfounded. In his 2009 book, Straussophobia: Defending Leo Strauss and Straussians against Shadia Drury and Other Accusers, Peter Minowitz argues that Drury’s work is “plagued by exaggerations, misquotations, contradictions, factual errors, and defective documentation.”

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

title: Shadia Drury


text:
User talk:KeithTyler/DDT

Dragostea Din Tei
I'd like to ask why you copyedited Dragostea Din Tei. It wasn't a copyedit but something I wrote on Wikipedia from my own knowledge, and although you have added some information, some formatting and factual basis of the article has been sacrificed. I don't want to revert without asking here first, but i'm in believing that the article now seems to make less sense than previously. Hedley 19:39, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dragostea Din Tei (Again)
Hey again,

After consulting some people in the chat room i've been recommended to revert Dragostea Din Tei to the last version by Mackeriv. General consensus was that that version was more factually correct and better written. I wouldn't of reverted just on my own opinion.

I noted that you did add some more info though, obviously i'm not going to just revert anything thats changed, but inparticular adding more on memes isn't recommended as a consensus agreed to make the article about the song almost completely. The notable memes are listed, and any foreign mock-ups/videos don't need including - Indeed, the latter is showcased a lot in Numa numa. Hedley 00:04, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I've replied to your latest message on my talk page. Hedley 00:21, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dragostea Din Tei Dispute
As we won't get anywhere just debating over why we feel our versions are better than each others, i've asked User:Mikkalai to sort the situation out. He has shown interest in the Numa numa and Dragostea Din Tei articles for some time, and isn't biased, so hopefully he can resolve the dispute. Hedley 11:46, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:KeithTyler/DDT


text: Category:Necrophagist albums

title: Category:Necrophagist albums


text:
User talk:Warrior of Jesus

Please stop adding vandalism to articles on Wikipedia (such as you did on Harry Potter). This will be considered vandalism if it continues. Please use the sandbox for any further testing. — Ilγαηερ   (Tαlκ) '' 18:10, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Please don't add point-of-view text to articles as you just did to George Bush. Wikipedia has a policy of neutrality.  To read more, see WP:NPOV.  Cheers, smoddy 18:21, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Warrior of Jesus


text:
Talk:Rywin affair

POV edits by Molobo and anonymous IP (possibly Molobo)
Michnik did admit to private friendship and meetings with Urban and Kwasniewski.PiS doesn't want to "purge" left or liberals since, only corrupted officials and infromal cliques, since its future coalition partner PO, includes liberal minded politicians anyway. Molobo

 * Sorry Molobo, but the bulk of your changes are either POV, off-topic, or both. If at all, then this should be discussed in Adam Michnik and Law and Justice, respectively, as it has little or nothing to do with the affair this article is about. Urban is indeed a special case, but he is completetly irrelevant to the article because of his marginal, pariah-like role in the Polish public. There is nothing sensational or even "scandalous" about Michnik's "friendship" with Kwasniewski, either - given that he even made his peace with General Kiszczak. Apart from that, we should not take PO's slogans and wordings at their face value. When speaking of "liberals" I was obviously not referring to the PO's ilk of market-liberals with a conservative outlook on society, but to the "left" half of the cardinal liberal-conservative cleavage in Polish politics, with whom the PO is calling for a showdown. They do not intend to get rid of a few "corrupt officials and cliques", but to restage the wojna na górze. Otherwise they would hardly be pushing the idea of a "Fourth Republic", would they? That is the message they are trying to get across, occasional understatements notwithstanding, and that is why their potential electorate supports them. You are welcome to address the issue in a NPOV manner on Law and Justice, but it is simply out of place here, POV or no POV. --Thorsten1 18:44, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * PS: As always, please do remember to sign and timestamp your edits properly.

Oh dear Thorsten-what you are doing is just showing your own personal point of view.Urban isn't a pariah as he controls one of influential newspapers NIE, and the point was not that of if he is in politics(which he is anyway) but whetever Michnik was involved with former communists who are involved in one way or another in the affair. Secondly-it is more accurate to describe Michnik as leftis dissident, neither is he legendary(besides his symphatisers) nor is his stance anti-communistic totally as he supported many communist ideas in his life as ideologists. Third-the writing "the most radical" report is a POV, since one could state that the most radical report was the one that didn't found any group involved.Thus minority report is more neutral, objective statement. Fourth-what you think of PO or PiS is your own private matter.The fact remains that nobody is calling for complete purge of "left" or "liberals" but of corrupt cliques and informal relationship associated with this groups. Besides you are rather misinformed as they are people with liberal outlook on society in PO, and it has distanced itself from many of PiS actions.Thus your statement about the the supposed desire to purge Poland of left parties is only your personal view. Molobo
 * If you consider NIE "influential" I suppose you live in a different country than the Poland I know. Quite irrespective of Urban's role in Polish society, his role in the affair was marginal, too. If you think otherwise, please feel free to provide details on his involvement in the affair - because that is what the article is about, and not about any "friendship" between Urban and Michnik, which may or may not have been accidentally discovered during the investigations. "it is more accurate to describe Michnik as leftis dissident," What is the best way to describe Michnik's political position as a dissident prior to 1989 is simply not an issue in an affair in the 2000's. Please take this to Adam Michnik, if you see it fit. "neither is he legendary(besides his symphatisers)". I will certainly not fight over the attribute "legendary" - feel free to replace it with "well-known", "prominent" or some such - but regardless of that, if Michnik is not a "legendary" dissident I daresay there aren't any legendary dissidents. Although I take it that you would consider Maciej Giertych more legendary... ;-) "nor is his stance anti-communistic totally as he supported many communist ideas in his life as ideologists." I think there is no denying that Michnik played a prominent role in the anti-communist opposition for most of his adult life up to 1989. As for whether or not he "supported many communist ideas in his life" - why don't you discuss this where it belongs, i.e. in Adam Michnik? As long as you keep it NPOV, I am sure such information would be a good addition. I for one would be curious. "writing "the most radical" report is a POV, since one could state that the most radical report was the one that didn't found any group involved." I did not write "the most radical report", but "the most radical minority report", i.e. the minority report that departs most radically from the majority report. That is a difference. "Fourth-what you think of PO or PiS is your own private matter." I see, and what you think is the objective truth, right? "The fact remains that nobody is calling for complete purge of "left" or "liberals" but of corrupt cliques and informal relationship associated with this groups." So that is what constitutes a "Fourth Republic" then? "Besides you are rather misinformed as they are people with liberal outlook on society in PO, and it has distanced itself from many of PiS actions." Maybe there are, and I guess it depends on what you define as a "liberal outlook on society". The fact remains that PO is generally seen as an heir to the conservative AWS, and not to the liberal UW and if any single attribute describes them, it not liberal but conservative. "Thus your statement about the the supposed desire to purge Poland of left parties is only your personal view." If you consider the PO a "left party", then this speaks volumes on your own political position. Maybe that is what they teach you at Rydzyk University, but not many political scientists elsewhere will support that description. Anyway, I am digressing myself. Why don't we continue the discussion on Talk:Law and Justice? --Thorsten1 20:21, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

1.NIE is one of the leading newspapers, and has contributed to discovering affairs in landscape of politics in Poland. 2.Urban was involved in the affair, so the point stays. 3.It seems you are conviced I am somebody you knew before since the allegations about my support for Giertych, studying in Rydzyk university.You are confusing me with somebody else, whom I don't know. 4."the most radical minority report", i.e. the minority report that departs most radically from the majority report." Good then I shall use the phrase you use.The term "radical" is rather negative in the context. 5.Wikipedia's entry on Law and Justice describes it as centre right. 6.Again proove that somebody calls for purge of liberals and left parties rather then corrupt officials, groups and informal corrupt relationships and cliques.Your claims about the "purge" are simply POV. 7.Nobody of course called PO a left party, which you falsly accuse me of, but the fact that it includes people with liberal outlook on some social issues.Which doesn't mean that the person must belong to leftist party I am glad to inform you. 8. "I see, and what you think is the objective truth, right?" So far no purge of liberal and left has happened, and no such demands have been issued, thus it is your POV, and rather radical one. Molobo

 * Molobo, I am glad to see that your recent edit was somewhat more acceptable than the previous ones. Still, a number of problems remain.
 * "1.NIE is one of the leading newspapers, and has contributed to discovering affairs in landscape of politics in Poland." Urban's NIE is certainly not a "leading newspaper", but a nihilistic, vulgar special interest publication; its editor is a professional provocateur who relishes causing a stir. People who read it do so for the thrill, not because they consider it a serious source of information.
 * "2.Urban was involved in the affair, so the point stays." Fine, but how was he involved? You seem to make much of his dining with Michnik, but fail to explain his supposed role in the affair. There is plenty of documents to mine - the minutes of the Rywingate hearings are available at http://isip.sejm.gov.pl/KomSled.nsf/; the names Michnik and Urban occur in the same document four times . The Michnik-Urban connection might be of interest to the article Adam Michnik, but vague allusions that appear to have nothing to do with the actual bribery scandal will have to be removed.
 * "3.It seems you are conviced I am somebody you knew before since the allegations about my support for Giertych, studying in Rydzyk university.You are confusing me with somebody else, whom I don't know." No, I am not mistaking you with anyone particular. I just can't help noticing that your arguing is very generic of a particular political POV associated with the Radio Maryja/Leage of Polish Families milieu. Your sympathetic edit of League of Polish Families last night tells me I am on the right scent.
 * 4."the most radical minority report", i.e. the minority report that departs most radically from the majority report." Good then I shall use the phrase you use. Be my guest. "the minority report that was the most departed from the majority report" sounds awkward. "The term "radical" is rather negative in the context." No, it is absolutely neutral.
 * "5.Wikipedia's entry on Law and Justice describes it as centre right." These terms are, of course, highly relative. From the LPR's angle, even Law and Justice is left-wing. Law and Justice is clearly right of PO (as you yourself acknowledged), which can be described as centrist at best - many would rather consider them somewhat right-of-centre. Anyway, thanks for pointing me to the inaccuracy on Law and Justice - I shall see to that some time.
 * "6.Again proove that somebody calls for purge of liberals and left parties rather then corrupt officials, groups and informal corrupt relationships and cliques.Your claims about the "purge" are simply POV." Just peruse the public statements of Law and Justice's representatives; you will find much evidence of a simple, populist reduction of Polish society in terms of "us and them" (my i oni), where "they" are the enemy that needs to be purged in order to establish a Fourth Republic. Take this randomly selected statement in an interview with Law and Justice vice chairman Kazimierz Ujazdowski on the 1989 Round Table talks: "As it turned out, its purpose was to introduce a whole range of pathologies of communist origin; that is why the Round Table's anniversary may rightfully be of interest to Aleksander Kwaśniewski's camp" . There you have it in a nutshell - the portrayal of the Third Republic as an inherently "pathological" political freak, the martial thinking in terms of "camps", according to which "Kwaśniewski's camp", including everyone from the post-communists to the liberal UW/PD stock (who you deny has an anti-communist background) is a morally corrupt clique. So Law and Justice's project is not simply about removing a few "corrupt officials", but about redefining Poland as a whole.
 * "7.Nobody of course called PO a left party, which you falsly accuse me of," I am not accusing you of anything. I simply intepreted this somewhat muddled statement of yours: "they are people with liberal outlook on society in PO [i.e., Law and Justice's prospective coalition partner, Citizens' Platform] [...]. Thus your statement about the the supposed desire to purge Poland of left parties is only your personal view." If these two sentences are not meant to characterise PO as a "left party", what are they supposed to mean?
 * 8. "So far no purge of liberal and left has happened." Obviously not, but then Law and Justice is not in power yet, so they have not yet been obliged to live up to their populist slogans. And, of course, I wouldn't call Lech Kaczyński's banning the Warsaw equivalent of the Christopher Street Day, while at the same time approving a counter-demonstration by the right-wing hate-group Młodzież Wszechpolska, a "purge". But it is a clear indication of things to come should Law and Justice emerge as the strongest political force from the 2005 Sejm election. If you can come up with a word that describes Law and Justice's proposals for Poland more neutrally and equally concise as "purge", I will certainly not object. "and no such demands have been issued" - see above. Anyway, these are interesting topics to discuss in Law and Justice - not here, where Law and Justice only gets a passing reference. --Thorsten1 10:43, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Thorsten wiki is for presenting facts.Your personal views about Law and Justice or Mlodziez Wszechpolska are of no importance here.--Molobo 01:54, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV
I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:
 * This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
 * There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
 * It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
 * In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:36, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Shuttup you smarmy little turd — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.231.115.40 (talk) 09:39, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rywin affair


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antonia Pugliese

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Speedy delete. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 19:16, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Antonia Pugliese
vanity/attack/whatever by habitual vandal IP Ben-w 18:11, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete — nn — RJH 18:27, 19 July 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 appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
User talk:KeithTyler/Micronations

Deletionist campaign
Hi there. I noticed your rational and considered response to the general deletionist hysteria concerning the New Utopia VfD. In case you weren't aware that particular VfD is simply the latest in a poisonous ongoing campaign being waged against all micronation articles on Wiki (of which there are currently about 20), irrespective of notability, by a small committed group of rabid deletionists.

If the subject interests you, you might also want to note the articles in the Micronations Category, in order to keep an eye on its contents; I’ve been adding a number of well-researched, illustrated, fully referenced articles to this category, and revising existing ones extensively in recent months, but there are moves afoot thanks to a highly suspect ongoing arbitration of process to have me banned completely from writing anything at all about micronations on the basis that as the founder of one, anything I write is somehow self-promotional and/or controversial. --Gene_poole 22:43, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

External link policy
I appreciate your interest and comments concerning the arbitration process involving myself and Samboy. Your comments concerning my deletion of inappropriate external links from the micronation article are however misplaced. The only external links that belong in any article are those that illustrate valid aspects of the article content. In the case of the micronation article I have only removed links to micronations that are (a) not referenced by that article, and the inclusion of which is redundant and does not add anything useful to the article, and (b) for which no third party source of verification exists. If something cannot be independently verified it is obviously not encyclopaedic. In almost all cases you can see that those links were placed there by editors who have made no other edits at all - in other words they are not only unverifiable, they are self-promotional insertions. There are literally tens of thousands of these types of micronations in existence and Wiki cannot and should not be a link repository for them. My removal of those links is nothing more than basic housekeeping. As I have already stated elsewhere at length, Samboy's claims that this represents self-promotion by me is belied by the fact that almost all of the links in the current article where actually researched and inserted by me - the important difference being that they are all links to micronations that can be verified by many external documentary sources. Gene_poole 03:07, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Copyright
Concerning your comments about copyright on samboy's page, I will only say that what you call my "minimalist" interpretation seems to have been applied by the other contributor to the german silver article as well, because if you read his contribution you will see that he has done exactly the same thing as me, ie take a number of sources and reconfigure & conflate the sentences in question to form new sentences. The sentence concerning "technical uses" in particular uses almost the exact same words I did, rearranged. --Centauri 00:37, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)

The Micronation article
Since you defended George Cruickshank during my arbitration against him last year, I would like to bring to your attention his recent alledged actions. There is strong evidence that the account User:Centauri is a sockpuppet of his. See this page for more evidence.

Recently, User:Centauri has been rather vigilant about linking to Empire of Atlantium from the micronation article:

This, despite the fact that he is the only user who wants this particular content in the Micronation article:

I am requesting that you look at this article and make up your own mind how to handle this content dispute (the fact that Wik may be back just fuels flames to the fire). Samboy 04:05, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your input. Samboy 19:31, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, I would appreciate it if you looked at the matter too.

 * This is text that I am trying to include:

 * A "summit of micronations" hosted as part of the exhibition was attended by representatives of Sealand, Elgaland-Vargaland, New Utopia, Atlantium, Frestonia and Fusa, and will feature in a 5-part BBC television documentary about micronations produced by Danny Wallace and scheduled to screen in the United Kingdom commencing in July 2005. The exhibition is also being reprised at the Andrew Kreps Gallery in New York City from 24 June - 29 July 2005.

 * The section in bold (which has this reference to suppoort it, is what Samboy is creating a song-and-dance about, going so far as provoke an edit war on the subject with an editor who I and many others are reasonably certain is a sockpuppet of Gzornenplatz, who has of course been forbidden to edit anything, by Jimbo.

 * It should be pointed out that the paragraph directly above, causes Samboy no issues at all:

 * In August 2003 a summit of micronations took place in Helsinki at Finlandia Hall, the site of the Conference for Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE). The summit was attended by delegations of the Principality of Sealand, the Kingdoms of Elgaland & Vargaland, NSK-State in Time, Ladonia, Transnational Republic, the State of Sabotage and by scholars from various academic institutions.

 * Both paragraphs describe events that are of international significance as far as micronations go, and I think it's important to list the participants. The fact that Samboy is so cut up over one of them, while completely ignoring the other one, shows that his judgement on the issue is severely impaired, being affected by personal disagreements he has had with other editors in the past.

 * I'd also ask you to compare the edit history of myself and Samboy on this article. It shows that Samboy has not added a single word to the article, while I have contributed a significant amount of work to improving both the article's written content and formatting. This shows that Samboy's claims about "advertising" by me are rubbish. --Centauri 04:55, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks for injecting some sound reasoning into this discussion. --Centauri 06:34, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

I know you don't like dealing with this article, but I have just put up a poll on Talk:Micronation to try and come up with a reasonable consensus. Samboy 07:58, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

Micronations
Thanks for the heads-up on micronations. My contribution was just a drive-by. I'll be OK. --SV Resolution(Talk) 00:12, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Assistance with banned troll
If you could take a look at Sealand and Empire of Atlantium and assist dealing with Wik's continued trolling there it would be appreciated. I count a total of 49 reverts on both articles by him - and that's just today. He is now simply creating new sockpuppets to continue edit warring as fast as admins are banning them. The latest sockpuppet to be created is Perhaps protection and an IP ban are called for. --Gene_poole 03:43, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Poll: Micronation Infobox
An info box template has recently been created by myself and O^O for use in Wikipedia articles about micronations and other unrecognised entities, to address longstanding concerns and edit wars that have resulted from the inappropriate use of the standard country infobox in these types of articles.

This new info box has so far been successfully incorporated into the following articles: Sealand, Republic of Rose Island, Independent State of Aramoana, Empire of Atlantium, Avram and Province of Bumbunga, and it is intended to incorporate it into most of the other articles in the [|micronation category] in due course.

However, one editor, Samboy has suggested that the micronation infobox should be excluded from Empire of Atlantium on the grounds that the article is "not notable" and because only 22% of micronation articles in Wikipedia currently have the info box (ie because the info box project is not yet complete).

As someone who has contributed to similar discussions in the past, I thought this might interest you. I have instituted a poll on this subject here, and invite you to review it if you are so inclined.

Thanks. --Gene_poole 06:13, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Thank you for your insightful comment concerning Samboy's shennanigans. Hopefully knowing that everyone can see right through him will have a positive impact on his disruptive behaviour. --Gene_poole 04:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Infobox discussion
Hi. Further to your comments recently about the Atlantium infobox I thought you'd be interested to know about these AFDs. Seems there's a push on to delete/degrade Wiki's micronation articles at the moment:

 ,, and  --Centauri 02:52, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Help with micronation article vandalism
Hi there. Long time no speak. Would you mind seeing if you can fix the recent vandalism of Empire of Atlantium. Some nutter (probably yet another Wik sock, by the look of the edit history) has set up a couple of double redirects to BJAON and Atlantis which I don't really know how to fix. --Gene_poole 05:20, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Deletion discussion
Hi. As someone who's contributed to discussions concerning micronation articles before, I wonder if you wouldn't mind taking a look at this deletion discussion. --Gene_poole 00:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:KeithTyler/Micronations


text: User talk:80.43.32.226

title: User talk:80.43.32.226


text:
Talk:Dodge Spirit

Archives of old discussions
Archive 1

R/T image caption
71.121.133.179, I have again reverted your incorrect change to the Spirit R/T image caption, just as I did when you made the same incorrect change last July. It is not a 1992 model with 1991 wheels, it is a 1991 model with 1991 wheels and 1991 grille and 1991 SBEC and 1991 (120 mph) speedometer and 1991 (plain plastic) dash trim and 1991 everything else. I know because it was mine at the time the photo was taken, and I not only held the title and registration, but also the factory build sheet and window sticker. I'm not sure why you keep making this change but please stop doing it now. Perhaps your guess is based on the colourless rather than amber front turn signal and sidemarker lenses; keep in mind that application of these was not entirely consistent. If you look closer, you may also discern other factory equipment on this car that wasn't on most other Spirit R/Ts. But even so, it is a 1991, and that's what the caption will need to carry on saying. —Scheinwerfermann T·C 23:13, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Too much R/T
This article focuses way too much on the Spirit R/T and not enough on the regular versions of the car. There are 8 photos of the R/T, and only 1 photo of the Base/LE/ES Spirit. Also, do we really need all that information about the Mexican and South American market Dodge Spirit? --Reelcheeper (talk) 17:51, 8 October 2010 (UTC-5)

 * In the first place, new topics on discussion pages always go below old topics, not above. I've moved your new topic down here to the bottom where it belongs. Secondly, by what standard do you declare there is "way too much" coverage of the Spirit R/T? What do you propose, arbitrarily deleting some of it to satisfy your notion of what constitutes just enough coverage of the R/T? If you feel there are aspects of the ordinary Spirit that aren't adequately covered, y'don't go chopping out existing coverage, you go ahead and make your contributions. Do it in accord with Wikipedia protocol and it'll stay put. And yes, we really do "need" all that information about the Mexican and South American market Spirit…I'm not sure what you think you meant by that question. It's topical, relevant, and properly written, so what exactly is your beef with it? —Scheinwerfermann T·C 04:37, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, sorry about posting at the top of the page (I'm not a very experienced user). Also, it wasn't very smart of me to think that relevant information should be deleted from any article; I see your point. No need to get mad at me, I realize my mistake (and I was being serious when I posted this comment). —Reelcheeper (talk) 00:06, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

This article lacks a very important reference: The website "Allpar.com, which has relevant information on the R/T's and less developed standard models of the Spirit, Acclaim (very similar) and other Dosge and Chrysler products, and is NOT an official page, but one made by Dodge and Chrysler enthusiasts and is extremely helful souce. amclaussen, Mexico City.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.141.216.31 (talk) 18:42, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Merger proposal with Plymouth Acclaim
The Plymouth Acclaim is nothing more than a badge-engineered Dodge Spirit. Based on the precedent of merging other Plymouth vehicles into Dodge articles and Dodge Aries being merged into Plymouth Reliant, I think that Plymouth Acclaim should be merged into Dodge Spirit. Who supports and who opposes the merge? Explain.--Kevjgav (talk) 08:34, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

I changed my mind about the merge. I realize that there's no need to merge Plymouth Acclaim into the Dodge Spirit article and there's also no need to merge Chrysler E-Class and Plymouth Caravelle into the Dodge 600 article because they've been fine on their own without any problems. Not to mention that starting with the Dodge Aspen/Plymouth Volare, Chrysler did nothing but badge engineering. So if we're going to merge these articles, we might as well just merge every Chrysler product since 1976. I think we should retain the split.--Kevjgav (talk) 11:37, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dodge Spirit. 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/20121203113329/http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/1990-to-1995-dodge-spirit-6.htm to http://consumerguideauto.howstuffworks.com/1990-to-1995-dodge-spirit-6.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:17, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Merge Plymouth Acclaim into this article
As I covered on the Acclaim talk page, the only difference between the Acclaim and Spirit are the grille, taillights and trim, not notable enough for the Acclaim to warrant it's own article. A lot of the information in it's article is not specific to the Acclaim itself, but an overview of the three cars in general and how the Acclaim differs from the Spirit, a number of itscontent even seems to be forked from the Spirit article. There also appears to be an emerging consensus that the non-notable Plymouth clones are having their articles Merged with the Dodges: Plymouth Sundance redirects to Dodge Shadow, Plymouth Horizon redirects to Dodge Omni, Plymouth Trailduster redirects to Dodge Ramcharger, etc. In the case of the Acclaim specifically, it and the Spirit were so interchangeable that Chrysler even marketed it together with the Spirit in the same commercials. If they're interchangeable enough to share a commercial, they're interchangeable enough to share a Wikipedia article. Reattacollector (talk) (via public computer). 64.85.150.114 (talk) 16:49, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Oppose Going through both articles, I'm more of an opinion that both articles are in need of updating (in terms of bringing them in line with better-written auto articles). While I'm not going try and disagree on these models being interchangeable, two separate articles is better than one poorly-done article. I also agree with the answer presented for a similar merger proposal on this talk page. Using this logic, do we merge every article about Chrysler product lines over the past 40 years? every Ford article since 1941? every GM auto article since 1936? --SteveCof00 (talk) 09:40, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:Dodge Spirit


text:
Talk:Health of Charles Darwin

28.205.191.56
If anyone wishes to do further research I suggest this would be one of the most current sources of information and from a knowledgeable source:

[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=11620304&dopt=Abstract Colp R., To be an invalid, redux. J Hist Biol. 1998 Summer;31(2):211-40 ].

An anonymous user is consistently defacing Charles Darwin's illness article with lots of irrelevant material copied directly from creationism sites. I have put a NPOV warning on the article because of this and wil submit it to a vote in the community if he insists. He is turning a previously well-balanced and medical view into a rambling of religion and science which I find that cannot fit well in the article. --R.Sabbatini 20:19, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

re: the above complaint regarding my research and contribution to this article

I believe I have submitted a substantial amount of peer reviewed material at this board (JAMA, The American Journal of Medicine, Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London,  etc. ) and offered material/studies which I believe offered insight in regards to the etiology of panic disorder. I also submitted historical research from sources like http://www.aboutdarwin.com in order to clear up some historical inaccuracies (For example, Darwin was never a member of the clergy). Lastly, I have no wish to get into a lengthy argument with the above person and barring any new revelations from the above Colp article I cited above and a Lancet article which may offer further illumination,  I likely am done with my research at this point. I hope Wikipedia members find my material informative and helpful in gaining understanding in regards to Darwin's illness. 7/21/2005

Important Addendum

I wish to clarify my position vis a vis some medical/science journals. It will help the above reader understand why it is important to know the personal case history of Darwin in regards to the period where he states he has emotional doubt regarding the validity of his evolutionary position and also give some background information in regards to Darwin.

Darwin's sickness as reported in The American Journal of Medicine

According to the article "The Illness of Charles Darwin" by William B. Bean in the September 1978 publication of the American Journal of Medicine rarely did a day go by where Darwin did not have in "many degrees of severity and many combinations" the following medical symptoms:  nausea, severe vomiting, flatulence, alimentary canal pain, various forms of eruption of the skin, and nervous exhaustion.

Dr. Bean also noted the following symptoms obtained from a Darwin letter:

"My nervous system began to be so affected so that my hands trembled and my head was often swimming".

Dr. Bean quotes from another Darwin letter the following symptoms:

"involuntary twitching of the muscle...fainting feeling - black spots before the eyes."

'''Dr. Bean wrote in his article that Darwin suffered from "psychoneurosis provoked and exaggerated by his evolutionary ideas". Dr. Bean also wrote that his Darwin's wife, Emma, greatly disapproved of his evolutionist ideas and "This, facismile of public reaction, must have kept lively his anxiety and torment."'''

Lastly, some have claimed that Darwin got Chagas disease in South America. Dr. Bean dismisses the diagnosis of Chagras disease for Darwin's illness which has been attributed for Darwin's illness and due to the following reasons: no other member of the Beagle crew had symptoms of Chagras disease,  "infection with T cruzi occurs not from a bite but contamination of a bite with excreta" and Darwin had "numerous partial exacerbations and remissions that would be unusual in the case of Chagras disease".

Darwin's illness and a Royal Society Article

'''The Royal Society is the independent scientific academy of the UK. It should be noted that in the abstract for the January 1997 article, Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London, D. A. B. Young, "Darwin's illness and systemic lupus erythematosus" (for the full article see: Notes Rec R Soc Lond. 1997 Jan;51(1):77-86) it states that today the psychogenic view of Darwin's sickness "holds the field"'''. Also, the abstract stated that D. A. B. Young noted subsequent to AW Woodruff's work showing that Darwin did not likely have chagas disease, the chagas view finds little support. Even the leading proponent of Chagas disease, Dr. Saul Adler, stated that Darwin may have suffered both from chagas diseas and from "an innate or acquired neurosis" (see subsequent discussion of Chagas disease).

As can be seen in the above medical literature citations the psychogenic aspect of Darwin's illness is considered to be a extremely prominent factor. As can be seen in Dr. Bean's diagnosis some in the medical community believe Darwin's illness may be purely psychogenic in nature. I documented via Darwin's words that he had emotional doubts. Clearly emotional doubts are relevant to psychosomatic, psychogenenic, and psychobiological illness. To sweep Darwin's emotional doubts under the rug is not following good medical practice in regards to forensic diagnosis. A good diagnostic approach is to look at the total evidence including emotional doubt. Darwin's illness as demonstrated by my JAMA, and American Medical Journal, and other citations clearly shows there is a heavy psychological component of Darwin's illness and the causes of this should not be minimized or obscured. Lastly, I believe Darwin's illness is some aspect is extremely likely to be purely psychogenically caused. The eruptions of facial eczema that Dr. Colp refers to are not related to panic disorder. '''Dr. Colp noted that Darwin had facial eczema that often was caused by controversies over his evolutionist ideas. Also, Dr. Colp stated from what he understands, facial eczema is not one of the complaints that are among the many somatic complaints of panic disorder.'''

I realize that some people are ardent admirers of Mr. Darwin. I do believe, however, that it is not a valid approach to obscure relevant personal history if valid commentary is to be given in regards to a diagnosis. In short, the principle of total evidence is a sound principle when one is engaged in problem solving in relation to complex issues which Darwin's illness certainly is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.205.191.56 (talk • contribs) 16:26, 22 July 2005

Revamp
The conciseness and clarity of this article was suffering from repeated and surplus text, and excessive POV. I've revamped it and will recommend removal of the VfD notice...dave souza 18:03, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Vote for Deletion
This article survived a Vote for Deletion. The discussion can be found here. -Splash 04:20, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Remove NPOV template
I've edited the article to remove or balance POV statements, and now propose to remove the NPOV dispute template...dave souza 13:10, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

Prestigious New England Journal of Medicine weighs in
Article Title: Darwin: The Life of a Tormented Evolutionist, By Adrian Desmond and James Moore

Purpose: To review the book

Author: Ernst Mayr, Ph.D., Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138

Citation info: New England Journal of Medicine, Volume 328:816 March 18, 1993  Number 11

Quote: "The authors deserve special praise for abstaining from rehashing long-refuted speculations, such as the theory that Darwin had Chagas' disease (although he was indeed bitten by the triatoma bugs in Argentina) or the psychoanalysts' claim that his symptoms were due to a conflict with his father."

taken from: http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/full/328/11/816

ken 15:56, 2 August 2005 (UTC)kdbuffalo

Are References to Creationists POV?
As someone whose work has been - for some unknown reason - labeled "creationism" (it isn't), I would like to ask the question: Why are only ALLEGEDLY creationist comments and views identified as coming from a particular ideology?

In my personal view the idea that Darwin suffered remorse for his sinfulness is indeed a "non-starter". But why do I need to be told that this is a supposedly "creationist" claim (as if it didn't speak for itself)?

Are other comments and claims labeled according to whether they come from agnostics, atheists, humanists, Latter Day Leninist Trotskyites, etc?

My own observations on Darwin, and the primary filter through which I have tended to assess the potential usefulness of evidence is that of someone trained first as a social psychologist and later as a hypnotherapist. Since these areas of study have undoubtedly had a significant influence on my views, if comments by creationists are to be labeled as such, shouldn't my contributions be marked "shrink", or some similarly deprecating label?

And are we to suppose that people who find their way to this article are so ignorant and/or stupid that they need to have it pointed out to them when anything POSSIBLY from a creationist source appears on the page?

I submit that this highly discriminatory practice is neither NPOV, nor even useful, no matter how irritating some people may find views which do not coincide with their own. On the contrary, I suggest that it is fairly patronising, not to say arrogant, to suppose that readers aren't capable of figuring this out for themselves, and that people cannot think clearly on some subject just because they adhere to some branch of organised religion.

In a truly rational discussion one deals with the IDEAS presented, and evaluates them on their own merits rather than trying to influence the outcome by sticking labels on the source of the idea.

BTW, since completing my website I have received a number of e-mails from academics who wouldn't touch creationism with a barge pole, yet who feel that they are being seriously discriminated against just because they refuse to agree that Darwin's ideas are absolutely the last word on all things evolutionary. One very good reason NOT to assume that someone is coming from a "creationist" background unless there is solid, independent evidence to support that hypothesis.

For a genuinely NPOV article I suggest that ALL references to writers' idealogical/religious preferences, real or imagined, should be removed except where a quote or comment is referenced as coming from a specific source which can be unambiguously identified as having such a POV (e.g. a recognized creationist organization or publication).

For this reason, whilst leaving all of the external links intact, I have removed the division between "external links" and "creationist links". I honestly think readers, if they check the links at all, and if they give a hoot, will be able to figure out for themselves which ones are the creationists.

Andy Bradbury 18:56, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Your articles re-spout arguments about Darwin's priority issues which are usually seen in creationist screeds; it is not hard to see why someone might have considered it to be in the same category. In any case I've restored the subhead though moved your article out of it. (In the end, I should note, I don't think that historical questions about Darwin have anything much to do with whether or not Darwinism as a whole is or is not correct.)
 * As for the bigger question, identifying potential biases in sources in articles of a controversial nature is very much in line with our NPOV policy. It is not POV to point out that a source is coming from a fringe and ideological point of view. Neutrality requires attribution of views, and there are some instances where lump attribution makes sense when categorizing sources. People can draw their own conclusions just the same; knowing that the author is a creationist, though, can give important clues about whether or not they are reliable, whether they use sources well, and whether or not they should accept their argument as intellectually honest. All of the other links in that category are clearly self-identified as creationist; I don't think our adding that label as a form of categorization changes much. --Fastfission 18:52, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
 * As someone who apparently wrote the article referred to, Andy, you seem a bit careless about the question mark emphasised in the website. Reliable sources as policy requires great care in using such websites, though there is an argument for using them to illustrate a particular viewpoint. Your use of language such as "evolutionists already know that simple "natural selection", no matter whose idea it was, does not explain how full-blown macro-evolution can occur." is very much aligned with Creationist usage: accepting that you may be taking some other position, I've modified the subhead. ...dave souza, talk 19:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

To Fastfission:

Wow!

You write: "I don't think our adding that label as a form of categorization changes much."

In which case, why are you arguing that it should be left in?

Actually the lack of clear thinking in these comments is evident right from the opening words, specifically in regard to the phrase "your articles re-spout". If one wished to be objective and rational, as opposed to emotional, insulting and steeped in your own personal biases, why would one use a perjorative term like "spout"? And what's the point of "usually seen"? Are such ideas ONLY seen on creationist sites? Of course not. It is purely personal bias which leads one to make the assumption that if a comment resembles something on a creationist website then this author, too, must be a creationist. What kind of sloppy thinking is THAT?

Or again, what is meant by "a fringe and ideological point of view"? From one POV or another, EVERY viewpoint is questionable.

Are we to take this to mean that argument depends on the argument that the majority are always right (a well-known logical fallacy)? Is this a serious suggestion that some people have NO ideological/religious views as far as this subject area is concerned? Surely it is clear that being opposed to either creationism or evolutionism is just as much a religious/ideological standpoint as being in agreement with creationism or evolutionism?

(BTW, in the UK English dictionary "evolutionism" means nothing more than believing that the theory of evolution is correct.) I would also point out that if anyone who has indeed read my site will be aware that it is HEAVILY referenced, and that the starting point for my investigation was a book by a thoroughly reputable scientist - Professor Loren Eiseley. (Whether anyone else chooses to agree with the conclusions drawn by Prof. Eiseley and/or myself regarding Darwin is something else again.) Professor Eiseley was most certainly NOT a creationist, nor even a doubter of evolution.

As top what someone might or might not have "considered", that would depend on whether they evaluate ideas on their own merits, or simply think in headlines and slogans. An unfortunate symptom of falling educational standards in both the US and the UK. (My website on the Scopes Trial of 1925 details a growing list of examples of flawed research/deliberate misrepresentation of the facts of that event by a string of US academics, the Encyclopaedia Britannica, and even a publication of the American Congress.)

As to whether Darwinism as a whole is or is not correct, are we to suppose that our understanding of evolution has not advanced one whit since 1859? Surely not.

My article is about whether it still makes sense to refer to Darwin as though he were the font of all wisdom on the subject of evolution - or whether he has been used by certain people as an excuse to prevent genuine advances in that field of investigation.

That, too, is made quite plain in m article. Though I agree one would have had to read it all the way through to know that.

Finally, we find the claim: "I don't think that historical questions about Darwin have anything much to do with whether or not Darwinism as a whole is or is not correct."

And the point is?

The Wiki page we are discussing has to do with Darwin's health/ill-health - NOT with Darwinism.

Again, there appears to be a tendency in these comments to lump things together and oversimplify everything, instead of identifying individual ideas and evaluate each in its own right.

This looks, to me, like a clear case of "dumbing down"?

Dave: Careless about the question mark?

Considering that it was me who added the question mark into the reference on this page I find the meaning of this comment utterly obscure. My site presents evidence and draws a conclusion BUT I make it clear that this is my PERSONAL interpretation of the evidence and that readers should draw their own conclusions.

As to the quote: "evolutionists already know that simple "natural selection", no matter whose idea it was, does not explain how full-blown macro-evolution can occur." - I should point out that this was based, at least in part, on the work of Professor Brian Goodwin, a convinced evolutionist and one of the earliest proponents of the now widely used organizing system known as cladistics. Professor Goodwin's book "How the Leopard Changed His Spots" (now published by Princeton Science Library, BTW) is devoted to this subject.

Again, whether anyone chooses to agree with Professor Goodwin's views, or not, the point is that they have NOTHING to do with supporting creationism.

Like Fastfission's comments, this appears to be an example of bias which seeks to pigeon-hole everything that isn't ideologically acceptable, instead of evaluating ideas in their own right.

My question still stands - why is it NPOV to label creationist comments as being from that source (even if the link is purely the fruit of sloppy thinking) - yet no one else's comments/claims/statements are labeled according to relevant influence(s)?

Andy Bradbury 08:19, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Presumably you'd then be content if the other sources are labelled "Mainstream science". I'd have no objection to that. Your website has an analysis or synthesis of published arguments, concepts, data, ideas, or statements that serves to advance a position (see WP:NOR) which you object to being described as creationist, but just happens to match a common creationist position and is clearly not mainstream science. .. dave souza, talk 08:54, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Coeliac?
I'm no expert. But the vagueness and multiplicity of the symptoms - malaise, vertigo, dizziness, muscle spasms and tremors, vomiting, cramps and colics, bloating depression etc.- is similar to that described by celiac disease sufferers. With celiac it is usually difficult for sufferers to establish a causal relationship because of the ubiquity of the offending grains in the diet (I imagine this could also be the case in Darwin's time) and it may take several years of misdiagnosis -hypochondria, depression, lyme etc to arrive at the correct one. Gomez3000adams 05:30, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks, it's an interesting speculation but of course we can't add original research to the article, and would need a verifiable source directly relating the diagnosis to Darwin. Ta again, .. dave souza, talk 09:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC) correction09:13, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes of course, this probably isn't the correct forum to post such speculation. I'm merely shooting in the wind hoping some more astute researcher might explore the angle Gomez3000adams 17:57, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Religion is relevant?
The section on Darwin's religious views makes no mention of how religion might have caused his disease, so I don't see why it should be in this article. While interesting, there is already an article on Darwin's religious views. Unless serious objections are voiced, I'm inclined to remove that section. OcciMoron 15:08, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I second that Gomez3000adams (talk) 17:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Darwin's experiences with Dr. James Manby Gully
Friends, the information in this article at present on Darwin's experiences with Dr. Gully deserve more detail. As you will see, I have gathered [WP:RS]] and [[WP:V] information. I hope that others will work with me to integrate this information within the article.

Although Charles Darwin was only 39 years old in November, 1848, he was so ill that he couldn't attend his own father's funeral. In March, 1849, Darwin himself acknowledged that he was unable to work one day in every three, and further, he felt that he was dying. He said this specifically, "I was not able to do anything one day out of three, & was altogether too dispirited to write to you or to do anything but what I was compelled. I thought I was rapidly going the way of all flesh."

Darwin’s cousin, [William Fox], recommended that Darwin seek out the care of Dr. [James Manby Gully], an author of a popular book on water-cure. Although Darwin knew that Dr. Gully also prescribed homeopathic medicines, he was skeptical of homeopathy. On March 19, 1849, Darwin wrote, “I grieve to say that Dr Gully gives me homeopathic medicines three times a day, which I take obediently without an atom of faith.” It is uncertain if water-cure and/or homeopathic medicines had a powerful effect, but something did. On March 28, 1849, he had not have any vomiting for 10 days (a rare experience for him). By April 19, 1849, Darwin wrote, “I now increase in weight, have escaped sickness for 30 days, which is thrice as long an interval, as I have had for last year; & yesterday in 4 walks I managed seven miles! I am turning into a mere walking and eating machine.”

Darwin's symptoms of nausea and vomiting returned, and he suffered with varying degrees of intensity from this indigestion throughout his life, though after leaving Gully's clinic, he no longer complained about fainting spells, spots before his eyes, or the degree of fatigue that he had previously experienced. DanaUllmanTalk 06:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks for coming back on this, the section could do with considerable filling out. However, as we've discussed elsewhere, your presentation is based on primary sources and breaches WP:NOR in synthesising the argument that homeopathy was particularly significant. This seems unsupported in the light of the similar success of treatment at Dr. Lane's hydrotherapy, and the failure of Dr. Gully's treatment in 1863. The letter when he was 56 cited here seems to contradict your assertion about him no longer complaining about certain symptoms. I've got some relevant secondary sources bookmarked, and hope to return to this subject shortly. ... dave souza, talk 09:26, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanx for the thanx...and for also realizing that we need to fill out info on Darwin and Gully. My links to Darwin's letters are straight-forward, verified, and certainly reliable.  I wrote above that he was still a sick "cookie" and not "cured" of his indigestion by Gully, though he never again wrote that he was so sick that he couldn't work one day in every three (as he did earllier).  Darwin did re-visit Gully clinic in 1863, though didn't he see Dr. James Smith Ayerst (another homeopathic physician) who took over Gully's practice?  In any case, I'm glad to work with you on this.  DanaUllmanTalk 14:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

 * I had forgotten about this article until today. I look forward to working with others to provide both primary and secondary sources here. First, however, I would like to get some clarity about biographical material and OR.  If I am quoting from the person about which this article is focussed, is this really OR? DanaUllmanTalk 06:22, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. See WP:NOR and WP:NOR . . dave souza, talk 23:48, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey Dave...you've been editing various Darwin articles for a while, so I respect your opinion on my new question: Why is it that there are so many references allowed to Darwin's letters, and yet, when I posted something in the past with a reference to one of his letters, it was deleted for OR? Something is funny here. DanaUllmanTalk 19:10, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Maybe it is the way you add quotes - like by adding them with a lot of editorializing or OR etcetc... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.84.144.193 (talk) 19:54, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Dr Edmund Smith
The reference given to support the description of Dr Edmund Smith as "a homeopathic physician" does not do this. The letter on the page of The correspondence of Charles Darwin referred to is Letter 2502 on the Darwin Correspondence Project (wouldn't it be better to refer to the online version of the same text so that others can more easily check it for themselves?), and says, "Dr Smith, I think, is sensible, but he is a Homœopathist!! & as far as I can judge does not personally look much after patients or anything else." We do not know whether, by "he is a Homœopathist!!" Darwin means he practices as a homoeopathic doctor, uses homoeopathy as an adjunct to the "Water Cure", or is merely a supporter of homoeopathy. The description of Smith as "a homeopathic physician" is not supported - this looks like OR or SYN. A footnote to the letter says that several hydropathic doctors, such as J.M. Gully, also used homoeopathy; not that they were also "homeopathic physicians". Darwin, by the way, seems not to have had a very high opinion of Smith. In another letter he says, "I doubt whether Dr Smith would have suited you: they all say he is very careful in bad illness; but he constantly gives me impression, as if he cared very much for the Fee & very little for the patient." Is it worth mentioning Darwin's opinion of Smith in the article? Brunton (talk) 19:42, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

I would also question whether, in the absence of any evidence that he acted as a homoeopath for Darwin, Smith's status as a homeopath is relevant in an article about Charles Darwin's illness and treatment. If there is a consensus to reinstate this, I would also question the use of the term "homeopathic physician" rather than simply "homeopath". This is hardly current usage, and the word "physician" is redundant as the article has already established that Smith was a doctor. The current descrition of Smith as a "surgeon and hydropathic doctor" is derived from a RS. Brunton (talk) 10:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

An Explanation for Dyspepsia
The symptoms of abdominal pain and vomiting sound a lot like the experience of hiatus hernia, where the stomach protruded through the diaphragm into the chest cavity. The symptoms are exacerbated by meals and by tension arising from stress. Given that Darwin was fearful of becoming a social and scientific outcast for most of his life until the Royal Society began to be dominated by evolutionists in the decade before his death, he certainly suffered from stress. A social shyness with strangers that probably was the cause of his hermit-like existence at Downe village would also have been a source of stress when visiting strangers had to be received. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hfinger (talk • contribs) 02:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the thoughts, however "no original research" policy means that we can only add such information if they can be verified as published by a reliable source. It's worth reading Browne on his life at Downe, which was certainly not "hermit like". . . dave souza, talk 08:16, 18 June 2008 (UTC)

Was Darwin's Illness Caused by Helicobacter Pylori?
The newest theory (12th Feb 2009 GMT) comes from Barry Marshall who maintains that Darwin actually had the ulcer causing bacterium Helicobacter pylori- the discovery for which Warren and I won the Nobel Prize in 2005. Actually, almost everyone had this gastric infection in Victorian England so one can hardly argue that Darwin did not have it. The ubiquitous bug causes ulcers in 10% of infected persons and causes dyspepsia in another 10% or so. Helicobacter explains Darwin's lifelong illness. I will have time to update this post in the coming weeks but cannot provide a definitive reerence until my speculations are published elsewhere. So far the paper has been rejected, which, with my track record, could be a plus. Upon reflection and review of these pages however, one can see that the whole entry is one of speculation based on opinion. I need not repeat what is already posted, suffice to say that much of it could be Helicobacter and/or peptic ulcer. A review of epidemiology of Helicobacter and Ulcer in the 19th century, by Sonnenberg, is here. Barjammar (talk) 07:07, 13 February 2009 (UTC) Barry Marshall (barjammar)

Multiple Sclerosis
This observation is purely personal. I have multiple sclerosis. I have or have had the same symptoms as Darwin. Optic neuritis (black spots before the eyes, as cited above) which I have had, is considered by some to be diagnostic of the disorder. My Flatley (talk) 05:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry to hear that. As you'll know, MS is very variable and for us to include the possibility, we'd need published verification that it's been put forward by an appropriate expert. My own feeling is that van Wyhe is right to say in his recent biography that "we will probably never know exactly what he suffered from". . . dave souza, talk 09:41, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Chagas – re cause of illness
copied from Talk:Charles Darwin
 * In response to the cause of Darwins illness is suspected to be Chagas transmitted by a blood sucking bug. it would make perfect sense considering that he suffered from heart palpitations. I also saw a piece on Darwin where they suspected that it was a manchuka bug. I can not seem to find that specific name but that was what the locals referred to as manchuka bug (the show I was watching.) When this bug was shown it looks exactly like a triatomine bug aka the kissing bug. I have included some reference on this bug. If I am correct in saying there should be in Darwin`s journal(s) from his time in south america, he apparently mentions that during one night he was bit by this supposed bug. Since the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention state that triatomine bugs do carry the protozone parasite symbioticly in there system, it would also make sense. it is suspected that several million have Chagas, most do not know they have it.
 * The centres for disease control and prevention mention the possible ways to get chagas is the bug defacating on you after being bit, eating food that wasnt properly cooked with the fecal matter of the bug in the food, congenitally, accidental lab exposure, blood transfusion or organ transplant. considering he was having stomach and heart problems which are linked to chagas, being bit by this bug makes the most sense.
 * The only way to be sure is either finding some autopsy of Darwin or confirming if his journals report this.
 * references
 * triatomine bug
 * kissing bug
 * centres for disease control and prevention: chagas
 * detailed info on chagas from cdc
 * from elle quence (i do apologize if anything in my post is not in compliance with wiki, first post and still getting use to where everything is) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elle quence (talk • contribs) 04:59, 18 April 2009
 * Thanks, we've got to be careful to avoid adding previously unpublished research or conclusions, and can't put together unrelated articles unless they specifically make the suggestion that this was the cause of Darwin's own problems. The balance of opinion is that the cause will remain unknown, as a new autopsy is most unlikely to happen. Anyway, it's worth looking over this article to see if our discussion of the issue can be improved. . .dave souza, talk 08:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Stay at Ilkley
The article text is a bit confusing. My understanding is that when he first went to Ilkley he stayed at Wells House spa. Later, when his family came up to join him, he stayed with them at nearby North View House, Wells Terrace (now Hillside Court, Crossbeck Road). 25 May 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.75.85 (talk) 12:15, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for raising this, the text did seem a bit unclear. Going by Freeman, from Oct.2–Dec.7 he was at Wells Terrace, Ilkley (CD there when Origin published), and "Ilkley nr Otley, Yorkshire. 1859 Autumn CD to water cure there, stayed at Wells Terrace. CD was there when Origin was published." The Correspondence Project describes Dr Smith as "Proprietor of Ilkley Wells hydropathic establishment, Ilkley," so I've clarified it on that basis. If you've a source for the two part move, we can cite that and modify the statement accordingly. . . dave souza, talk 12:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Here is the info:

Darwin Correspondence Project www.darwinproject.ac.uk Letter 2502: to W.D.Fox, from Wells House, 6 Oct 1859. CD has a sitting room and bedroom at Wells House and mentions that he as received a letter from Emma Darwin asking him to find a house nearby so that she can come to Ilkley. Letter 2498: to William Darwin, from North House, Wells Terrace, 14 Oct. CD mentions that the family will join him there in a few days time. 25 May 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.148.75.85 (talk) 20:53, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Good stuff, have clarified the article a bit using these sources. Tnanks muchly, dave souza, talk 21:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Here is a nice view of Ilkley from behind White Wells House, with Wells House and Wells Terrace (Hillside Court) visible at the bottom of the moor. www.darwin200.org/darwins-britain/ilkley.html 8 June 2009. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.120.204 (talk) 10:14, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Very informative photo, obviously it's under copright but if a Wikipedian takes their own photo and uploads it (it has to be under a suitable "free license") that would make a good illustration of the article, unfortunately the current Ilkley photos don't seem to include White Wells House or Wells Terrace. . dave souza, talk 10:48, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Other possible causes
There's a lot of what appears to be Original Research in this section - will remove the reasoning, and leave only the cited sources in a while. If anybody knows of good research into these causes (or even links to relevant people positing them) then put 'em in! BananaFiend (talk) 16:02, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Papers relating to Darwin's illness will appear in the Christmas (2009) editions of the British Medical Journal and The Medical Journal of Australia and will be available on line. Darwin had the Cyclic (Cyclical) Vomiting Syndrome, a well-defined but little known disorder associated with mtDNA abnormalities. Look up the entry in Wikipedia, go to the CVSA website/ forums, type any of Darwin's symptoms into the search engine and see what comes up. For example, try 'eczema'. Haymanj (talk) 18:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Since the paper has been published, this Cyclic vomiting syndrome possibility seems better supported than the others in this section, and could merit a subsection of its own. Disclaimer: I helped review the outline historical aspects of the paper, but make no claim to any medical knowledge and, if anything, share the view of historians such as John van Wyhe that we'll never really know what the illness was. Any expert commentary on the paper will be welcome. . . dave souza, talk 20:35, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

sorry
I wrote in the edit summary that there's a whole article about darwin and religion and I'm just trying to make this article to the point but the system didn't accept what I wrote for some reason.

So if there are no objections I''m going to change the article back now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.142.213.139 (talk) 05:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Your changes were reverted by various editors, not by "the system", so if you want your edit to stick, please make the case for the change here in accordance with WP:TALK and get consensus before making the change. Thanks, . dave souza, talk 09:14, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Vote for change to the opening of the article
The opening states "leaving him severely debilitated for long periods of time, incapable of normal life and intellectual production." This statement has no source and I strongly doubt that this is true. I vote we delete this, or find a reliable source to support it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Averagejoedev (talk • contribs) 17:12, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, it seems rather exaggerated, though Darwin was clearly debilitated for significant periods. The quote doesn't come up in searches in DarwinOnline or the letter project, so have removed it and substituted "in some ways this may have helped his work" with a quote which already appears in the context of that issue, plus a new more direct citation. Thanks for your comments, dave souza, talk 22:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Palpitations pre start of voyage
This was cited to but I can't get access to that. More usefully, Woodruff 1968 shows the source to be CD's autobio p. 64 so will cite them instead. . dave souza, talk 08:57, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Crohn's disease - case closed?
It now seems pretty certain that Darwin suffered from Crohn's disease. This was proposed in 2007 in the Royal society Journal of the History of Science, and in a Channel 4 Documentary broadcast today it was confirmed by Professor Stephan Schuster who sequenced part of his genome and found "a total of twenty-one markers for Crohn’s disease, five of them being diagnostic, including the major marker on chromosome 16". I'm no expert but that sounds pretty conclusive to me. How is the best way to present this in the article - is it case closed? Richerman   (talk) 23:09, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Chronic Fatigue?
I suffer from chronic fatigue and think Darwin might have, too.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Charles Darwin's health. 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/20100906002432/http://www.lifescientist.com.au:80/article/359136/feature_diagnosing_darwin/ to http://www.lifescientist.com.au/article/359136/feature_diagnosing_darwin/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050719075058/http://omni.cc.purdue.edu:80/~sbenning/el102c/Darwin.html to http://omni.cc.purdue.edu/~sbenning/el102c/Darwin.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051004000953/http://www.queendom.com:80/articles/mentalhealth/etiolpsy.html to http://www.queendom.com/articles/mentalhealth/etiolpsy.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050719075058/http://omni.cc.purdue.edu:80/~sbenning/el102c/Darwin.html to http://omni.cc.purdue.edu/~sbenning/el102c/Darwin.html

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) 23:11, 19 November 2016 (UTC)

Another possibility not so far listed is Vestibular Migraine. I suggest this would account for many of his more chronic recurrent symptoms and the cyclical nature of his illness. It would certainly explain his problem with protracted seasickness, which can be a trigger for vestibular migraine. This type of migraine is less commonly associated with headache which is not a major feature of Darwins illness. Putting aside the daily flatulence in the description below the majority of the symptoms are common to vestibular migraine.

"For 25 years extreme spasmodic daily & nightly flatulence: occasional vomiting, on two occasions prolonged during months. Vomiting preceded by shivering, hysterical crying, dying sensations or half-faint. & copious very palid urine. Now vomiting & every paroxys[m] of flatulence preceded by singing of ears, rocking, treading on air & vision. focus & black dots – All fatigues, specially reading, brings on these Head symptoms ??" [31]

Migraine is a disabling condition and often associated with significant psychological distress including symptoms of anxiety. Precipitants include stress and motion sickness both associated with Darwins condition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seabeggar (talk • contribs) 09:59, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Health of Charles Darwin


text:
Robert Stanes

Sir Robert Stanes (13 May 1841 – 6 September 1936) was a British businessman and philanthropist in India who founded United Nilgiri Tea Estates (UNTE) in Coimbatore.

Stanes was born in Aldgate, London, the eighth of nine children of James Stanes (12 March 1796 – 3 February 1880) and Sarah Poultney Stanes (née Worth; 26 April 1806 – 15 July 1843). James Stanes was a glass and china shipping merchant who established the Stanes' presence in India by sending several of his sons to the country. In 1848, James Stanes junior (1830–1852), the second son, arrived in southern India and established the Runnymede Coffee Estate near Coonoor in Madras Presidency. He was drowned in May 1852 while traveling near Kulhutty. Later that year, following the death of James Stanes junior, William Henry Stanes (12 May 1826 – 31 January 1865), his eldest brother, was sent to India. He was followed by the fourth son, Thomas Stanes (6 January 1837 – 30 January 1905), who arrived at Madras on the SS Hindustan on 26 June 1855. James Stanes senior visited his sons William and Thomas in Madras Presidency in 1855, accompanied by his third son, Henry Thomas Stanes (1835–1917), who ran the London end of the family's businesses. The greatest impact in India was made by Robert Stanes, the youngest son, who arrived in India on 24 December 1858 on his father's ship the SS Trafalgar while still a boy of seventeen.

Robert immediately launched himself on a successful career as a coffee planter in Coimbatore. Five years later he established the first inland coffee-curing plant in India, In 1885, Stanes & Co went out of business. Stanes recalled that "the firm suffered great losses and Messrs Stanes Watson failed in business, which led to the collapse of my firm. I had to begin all over again, all that I had was 500 rupees" (about £40 at that date). Failure in business was at that time a disgrace and Robert Stanes's son, Fred, who was five at the time, remembered both the shame and also having to return to England on a cargo boat. Stanes wrote that "my dear wife endured it all without a murmur and with the greatest patience". He started again and the business again prospered. By the time of his death he owned cotton mills, coffee and tea plantations, coffee curing plants, motor works and tire retreading plants; Coimbatore is still a major industrial city today, largely through Stanes's contribution.

When Coimbatore City Council was formed, he became chairman. He set up the Stanes School in the city in 1862. His elder brother, Thomas Stanes, had established the Stanes School in Coonoor, in 1858.

In 1913, he was awarded the Kaiser-i-Hind Gold Medal for services to Coimbatore and to education and he was knighted in the 1920 New Year Honours.

Sir Robert died in Coimbatore in 1936 and is buried alongside his wife, Harriet Huntingdon Harris (1843–1901), at All Saints church, Coonoor.

title: Robert Stanes


text:
Ohio State Route 105

State Route 105 (SR 105) is an east–west state highway in the northwestern portion of the U.S. state of Ohio. Its western terminus is at an interchange with Interstate 75 in Bowling Green that doubles as the southern terminus of State Route 64, and its eastern terminus is at State Route 19 in Oak Harbor. For its final 0.4 mi, the route overlaps State Route 163 which continues east.

History
SR 105 was commissioned in 1923, routed from 4 mi east of Bowling Green to Oak Harbor along its current alignment. Its western terminus was at then SR 34, later became U.S. Route 6 (US 6). The entire route was paved by 1934. Between 1967 and 1969, it was extended west to current western terminus, along the former US 6 alignment.

title: Ohio State Route 105


text:
Cod Liver Oil (song)

"Cod Liver Oil" is a song about a traditional medicinal drink for many Newfoundlanders. Cod liver oil in the traditional way of manufacture was sun cured and served in bottles in its raw form. The song was written by Johnny Burke (1851–1930), a balladeer from St. John's, Newfoundland. It has been recorded by Burl Ives, Gordon Lightfoot, Irish band The Dubliners, and by Newfoundland folk rock band Great Big Sea on their album The Hard and the Easy.

The song is played to the melody of the traditional Irish sean-nós song "An Lacha Bacach" (Irish: The Lame Duck), as famously portrayed by Nell Ní Chróinín.

title: Cod Liver Oil (song)


text:
Bishop O'Connell

Bishop O'Connell may refer to:

Catholic bishops in the United States

 * Anthony O'Connell (1938–2012), a confessed child molester who served as a cleric, and the first Bishop of Knoxville, Tennessee
 * Bishop Denis J. O'Connell (1849–1927), bishop of the diocese of Richmond, Virginia
 * David M. O'Connell (born 1955), bishop of the Diocese of Trenton
 * David G. O'Connell (1953–2023), auxiliary bishop of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles

Other meanings

 * Bishop O'Connell High School, parochial secondary school in Arlington, Virginia

title: Bishop O'Connell


text:
Calycanthaceae

The Calycanthaceae (sweetshrubs or spicebushes) are a small family of flowering plants in the order Laurales. The family contains three genera and only 10 known species, restricted to warm temperate and tropical regions:

They are aromatic, deciduous shrubs growing to 2–4 m tall, except for Idiospermum, which is a large evergreen tree. The flowers are white to red, with spirally arranged tepals. DNA-based phylogenies indicate the Northern  Hemisphere  Calycanthus and Chimonanthus diverged from each other in the mid-Miocene, while the Australian Idiospermum had already diverged by the Upper Cretaceous and likely represents a remnant of a former Gondwanan distribution of Calycanthaceae.

The oldest definitive fossil of the family is Jerseyanthus from the Turonian of New Jersey; the even earlier Araripia from the Aptian of Brazil and Virginianthus from the Albian of Virginia may also represent members of the family, but may also be stem-Calycanthaceae or more basal Laurales. In 2024, Araripia was placed in its own order, Araripiaceae.

In the APG IV system of 2016, Calycanthaceae is placed in the Laurales order in the magnoliids clade.

title: Calycanthaceae


text:
Bahr

Bahr may refer to:
 * Bahr, Central African Republic, village in Haut-Mbomou Prefecture, Central African Republic
 * Bahr, Iran, village in Bushehr Province, Iran
 * Bahr, village near Straßburg, now: Barr, Bas-Rhin, Alsace, France
 * Bahr, Netherlands, hamlet in Gelderland, Netherlands
 * Bahr (surname)
 * Bahr (toponymy), a component of Arabic placenames meaning "sea" or "large river"

title: Bahr


text:
HPY

HPY may refer to:
 * Baytown Airport, in Texas, United States
 * Happy Air, a defunct Thai airline
 * Heartland Payment Systems, a subsidiary of Global Payments
 * Helsingfors telefonförening, now Elisa, a Finnish telecommunications company

title: HPY


text: User talk:84.16.32.99

title: User talk:84.16.32.99


text: User talk:208.3.250.39

title: User talk:208.3.250.39


text:
Talk:Inchmurrin

Untitled
Surely the short stub I wrote at first wasn't a coyright violation. Could it be restored? PatGallacher 18:16, 2005 July 19 (UTC)
 * The copyvio text has been deleted and your revision has been restored. RedWolf 18:13, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

In the High Castle?
I've read the Duchess of Albany fled King James I to Balloch Castle, on Loch Lomond. Is it on Inchmurrin, or elsewhere? Trekphiler 18:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Is it really the biggest freshwater island in the UK? This site, on Upper Lough Erne, looks a lot bigger to me? https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@54.1547929,-7.4238381,5148m/data=!3m1!1e3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.209.6.40 (talk) 18:24, 6 December 2018 (UTC)

Clan crusader?
I deleted this
 * "(?reference to death of chief in 1439 in a battle with the MacLeans of Duart. )"

as unsubstantiated & uncertain. Confirm it, or leave it out. TREKphiler  hit me ♠  21:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * In addition to the quoted source:
 * has it that "Sir John Colquhoun of Luss was killed here in 1439 during a raid led by Lachlan MacLean."
 * has "John Colquhoun: Death: 24 SEP 1439 in Inchmurren, Dumbarton, Scotland (murdered)"
 * that "by 1439 he (Iain Colquhoun of Luss) was dead, like his King, killed by those he had treated so badly."
 * To me it seems that the 1417 event is less well supported. I'm sure that over the centuries other Colquhouns died at the hands of MacLeans! Primary sources will be lacking. Comments welcome. Finavon (talk) 22:49, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Well, when it's included as "(?reference)", it's unclear to me if it's substantiated, unattested, unclear, or something else. I'm a touch leery of web sources, but if you count 'em solid sources to ref the death of a chief as described, go ahead & put it back.  TREKphiler   hit me ♠  01:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Web Refs are not the most reliable, but several seem to support this. I welcome the input of any historians with something more robust! Finavon (talk) 08:44, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Having read through Worsley, I'd say that his book is not entirely reliable either, but I've been wanting to expand the Lomond Islands articles for a while, and a middling reference is better than no reference, and can lead one onto a better one.--MacRusgail (talk) 18:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 18:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Inchmurrin. 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/20090710015304/http://lochlomond-islands.com/ to http://www.lochlomond-islands.com/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080921112627/http://www.incallander.co.uk/islands.htm to http://www.incallander.co.uk/islands.htm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 02:55, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Inchmurrin. 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/20070928075358/http://www.loch-lomond.net/islands/inchmurrin.html to http://www.loch-lomond.net/islands/inchmurrin.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160112070238/http://www.thehaggis.com/EZ/sh/sh/page08.php?PHPSESSID=rpc6ml72rmbrlc85ifaluniiv3 to http://www.thehaggis.com/EZ/sh/sh/page08.php?PHPSESSID=rpc6ml72rmbrlc85ifaluniiv3

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) 19:57, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Inchmurrin


text:
Talk:Isabelle Huppert

Awards
Seems that these are not just duplicated, but are being triplicated across this article, this article and this article. Why do we need to include all the awards on this article when it's split off to it's own article? Not to mention all the BLP issues across the three of them with only the stand-alone awards list making any attempt to source information. I suggest that the awards tables are removed from this article (something I did, but was reverted) as a starting point.  Lugnuts  Precious bodily fluids 19:01, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Sourcing is definitely a concern. What you had was definitely better than the entire listings that were there before. It doesn't need to be fully replicated here when a separate article exists for them. Filmography can mention some awards, but I certainly wouldn't have all of them on that page either. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:17, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I agree that awards tables should be removed from the main article eventually. As I stated in my previous edit summaries; before removing the awards tables, the List of awards and nominations received by Isabelle Huppert needs a lot of work and update, as complete tables are omitted and as well as MOS:FILM issues in the existing ones. --TonyIsTheWoman (talk) 19:20, 24 January 2017 (UTC)
 * If the other article needs to be updated, then move the awards over there. If this article is the only one that's being kept up to date, then the awards article should be deleted. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:56, 24 January 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Isabelle Huppert


text:
Orca (1977 film)

Orca (also known as Orca: The Killer Whale) is a 1977 American horror thriller film directed by Michael Anderson and produced by Dino De Laurentiis, starring Richard Harris, Charlotte Rampling and Will Sampson. The film follows a male orca tracking down and getting revenge on a fishing boat and its captain for killing the whale's pregnant mate and their unborn calf.

Upon release, the film was a minor box office success, but received mostly unfavorable reception from critics and audiences alike due to its similarities to the film Jaws, released two years prior.

In 2004, Paramount Home Entertainment released Orca on Region A DVD. In 2017, Umbrella Entertainment released Orca on Region B Blu-ray with a new 4-minute interview with Martha De Laurentiis. On June 30, 2020, Scream Factory released Orca on Region A Blu-ray with an improved video transfer.

Plot
Captain Nolan is an Irish Canadian fisherman living in South Harbour, Nova Scotia who catches marine animals in order to pay off the mortgage on his boat, the Bumpo, and eventually return to Ireland. Nolan's crew is currently looking for a great white shark on behalf of a local aquarium, but the aquarium's representative, Ken, is targeted by the shark. An orca intervenes and kills the shark, saving Ken's life.

This switches Nolan's target to the much more valuable orca. He attempts to harpoon the creature, but accidentally strikes a female orca instead, leaving her with a fatal wound. Nolan and his crew get the orca on board, where she subsequently miscarries. The captain hoses the dead fetus overboard as her mate looks on, screaming in anguish.

The enraged male tries to ram Bumpo. Nolan's first mate, Novak, cuts the dead female loose to distract their attacker but the orca jumps the boat and takes him with it under the ocean. The following day, the orca pushes his now-dead mate onto the shore. Al Swain, who heads the local fishermen's union, berates Nolan for his actions after finding the dead female orca. Nolan agrees to kill the male, as the presence of an angry orca is causing the fish that are vital to the village's economy to migrate. The orca continues its vengeance by sinking several fishing boats and rupturing underwater oil pipes to deprive the villagers of fuel.

Rachel Bedford, a colleague of Ken's and an experienced cetologist, shows Nolan how similar orcas are to humans and tells him that, "If he (the orca) is like a human, what he wants isn't necessarily what he should have."

Nolan confesses to Bedford that he empathizes with the orca, as his own wife and unborn child had previously been killed in a car crash caused by a drunk driver. Nolan promises Bedford that he will not fight the orca, but that night it attacks his home on the seafront, resulting in injured crewmember Annie losing her left leg. After seeing her in the hospital, Nolan recruits his only other remaining crewman, Paul, along with Ken, Branford, and Jacob Umilak, a Mi'kmaq hunter, to pursue the orca.

The crew begins to follow the orca after he signals Nolan to follow him. Ken (who was saved by the orca at the beginning of the film) is leaning over the side when the orca surfaces and grabs him with its jaws, killing him. They follow the orca until they reach the Strait of Belle Isle, but when Paul loses his nerve and tries to flee in the lifeboat, the orca smashes it and he drowns. The next day, the orca maneuvers Nolan to collide with an iceberg. The captain manages to harpoon the whale just as he and Bedford escape from the sinking Bumpo, but Umilak is crushed beneath an avalanche of ice just after sending out an SOS.

Nolan and Bedford hide on an iceberg, although Nolan slips onto another so that the orca will separate them and save her life. The orca jumps onto the ice, causing it to tilt and sending Nolan into the water, before catching him with its tail and hurling him to his death against the ice while Bedford looks on helplessly. With his revenge complete, the orca swims southward under the ice, while a helicopter is seen coming to rescue Bedford.

Cast

 * Richard Harris as Captain Nolan
 * Charlotte Rampling as Rachel Bedford
 * Will Sampson as Jacob Umilak
 * Bo Derek as Annie
 * Keenan Wynn as Novak
 * Robert Carradine as Ken
 * Peter Hooten as Paul
 * Scott Walker as Al Swain
 * Don "Red" Barry as Dockworker
 * Yaka and Nepo as The Orca.

Production
Producer Luciano Vincenzoni was first assigned to give the film a head start after being called by Dino de Laurentiis in the middle of the night in 1975. Upon admitting that he had watched the film Jaws, Vincenzoni was instructed by de Laurentiis to "find a fish tougher and more terrible than the great white". Having had little interest in sea life beforehand, Vincenzoni was directed to killer whales by his brother Adriano, who had a personal interest in zoology.

Filming took place in the town of Petty Harbour, about 20 kilometres south of St. John's.

The main orcas used for filming were trained animals from Marineland of the Pacific and Marine World Africa (Six Flags Discovery Kingdom), though artificial rubber whales were also used. These models were so lifelike that several animal rights activists blocked the trucks transporting them, confusing them for real orcas. The shark used early in the film was captured by noted shark hunter Ron Taylor. The scenery meant to represent a remote polar region of Labrador was fabricated in Malta by designer Mario Garbuglia.

According to Vincenzoni, Richard Harris had begun to drink heavily on set after reading a tabloid magazine and seeing a photograph of his wife Ann Turkel on a beach with a younger man. He reportedly intended to stop performing and fly to Malibu in order to kill them, relenting only after getting into a brawl which resulted in Vincenzoni getting a black eye. The 46-year-old Harris insisted on performing his own stunts in the polar sequences and was nearly killed on several occasions.

Reception
The film grossed $3.5 million from 775 theatres in its opening weekend and went on to gross $14,717,854 in the United States and Canada.

On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film holds an approval rating of 9% based on 35 reviews and an average rating of 3.6/10. The site's critical consensus reads: "Content to regurgitate bits of better horror movies, Orca: The Killer Whale is a soggy shark thriller with frustratingly little bite." A contemporary review published by Variety called the film "man-vs-beast nonsense", and lamented that "fine special effects and underwater camera work are plowed under in dumb story-telling." Richard Schickel of Time wrote that the filmmakers behind Orca "thumbed heavily through the literature of the sea in their search for dramatic cliches", and called the film "inept" and "suspenselessly shot". Gary Arnold of The Washington Post criticized the film's special effects and referred to it as "essentially a rehash of an earlier De Laurentiis hit, Death Wish, with the killer whale in Charles Bronson role."

Orca has been unfavorably compared to Jaws. Both Schickel and Arnold drew comparisons between the films, and Bob Thomas of the Associated Press called it "just another attempt to copy Jaws". Dave Kehr of the Chicago Reader called the film an "incoherent blend of Moby-Dick, King Kong, and Jaws, hindered by what appears to be extensive reediting". However, Richard Harris enjoyed his experiences during filming and took offence at comparisons between Orca and Jaws.

title: Orca (1977 film)


text:
GE B23-7

The GE B23-7 is a diesel locomotive model that was first offered by GE in late 1977. Featuring a smaller 12 cylinder version of the FDL engine, it is the successor to GE's U23B produced from early 1968 to mid 1977, but at 62 ft long is exactly 2 ft. longer. It competed with the very successful EMD GP38-2. General Electric also produced a variant, the BQ23-7, No. 5130-5139, for the Seaboard Coast Line. A total of 537 B23-7's were built for 9 U.S. customers and 2 Mexican customers.

A B23-7A is a 12-cylinder B23-7 with horsepower boosted to 250 per cylinder or 3,000 horsepower. In 1980 the Missouri Pacific ordered three B23-7A's (#'s 4667-4669, later UP #'s 257-259) and tested them system-wide. The result was the GE model B30-7A, B30-7 with a 12-cylinder FDL prime mover. They were not renumbered into the B30-7A series on the MP because they lacked Sentry Wheel Slip and had different engine governors.

13 B23-7's were built by GE of Brazil in Dec.1979 for United South Eastern Railways(FUS) no.522-524 and National Railways of Mexico(NdeM) no.9130-9139. 17 B23-7s were built from GE kits in Mexico as Ferrocarriles Nacionales de México no.10047-10052 and no.12001-12011.

Southern Railway's 54 units had Southern's "standard" high-short-hoods.

title: GE B23-7


text:
Adam Sinclair

Adam Antony Sinclair (born 29 February 1984) is an Indian field hockey player and from Tamil Nadu. Among other leading sporting events he was a member of the Indian field hockey team at the 2004 Summer Olympics in Athens and at the 2006 Asian Games in Doha, Qatar.

Early life
Sinclair hails from Coimbatore. While at school, he was the best in field hockey at Stanes Anglo Indian Higher Secondary School, Coimbatore. He captained the school team and led the school to win many tournaments. He was elected Head Boy for 2001. He was also the captain of the "Panthers" and led them to victory in the Intra School Sports Event in 2001. He did further studies in PSG College of Arts and Science, Coimbatore.

Career
He made his international debut in May 2004 during a Four Nation Tournament in Gifu (Japan). Sinclair has played for the Chennai Veerans, Chennai Cheetahs has played club hockey in Germany, and as of September 2011 was playing center-forward for the Indian Overseas Bank hockey team.

Athletics
Sinclair has also won accolades and medals as an athlete in the triple jump, high jump and long distance running events.

Personal life
He got engaged to his girlfriend Vyshali Nair on 6 May 2011. On 24 April 2012, the couple exchanged nuptials in an intimate Hindu wedding at their Chennai home and a Catholic wedding on the 4th May 2012 in Coimbatore.In October 2013 the couple had their first child, a son named Zoran. On 16 October 2017, the couple welcomed their second child, a girl named Zaya. The Children's names are of multiple origins and the first syllables of the kids' names were the inspiration for Adam's sportswear and equipment brand and Sports academy ZOZA.

title: Adam Sinclair