text:
Jack Duckworth

John "Jack" Duckworth is a fictional character from the British ITV soap opera Coronation Street, played by Bill Tarmey. The character debuted on-screen during the episode broadcast on 28 November 1979. Jack was introduced by executive producer Bill Podmore. Tarmey had previously appeared as a background character in many episodes featuring scenes in the Rovers Return, including some occasional speaking lines.

More than twenty years after first appearing, Tarmey eventually cut down filming due to problems with his health and often contemplated leaving the series. In April 2010, it was announced that Tarmey would leave the series for good later that year. His last appearance was broadcast on 8 November 2010, with ITV also airing a tribute documentary for him. Having been in the show for 31 years, he was one of the longest-serving characters.

Jack's storylines have focused on his long-standing marriage to his wife Vera (Liz Dawn) which has been complex and at times been described as "rocky". Other storylines include coping with his wayward son Terry (Nigel Pivaro) and his hobby for pigeon keeping. In his final storyline, he was portrayed as having incurable non-Hodgkin lymphoma. Jack has been characterized through his "joyless and gloomy" life in which he has a string of dead-end jobs and his wife's death, but continued to pass witty remarks on life. Television critics have described Jack as a loveable rogue type character and have favoured his relationship with Vera. His exit storyline was fairly documented in the media, receiving positive reactions and many state he is fondly remembered for his love of pigeons.

Backstory
Whilst Jack is working a fairground ride, the waltzer, he meets Vera Burton (Liz Dawn), and they soon begin a relationship. When Vera announces that she is pregnant with his baby, Jack agrees to marry her. Even after discovering this is a false alarm, Jack still takes her hand in marriage. During a trip to the United States, Jack confesses to being two years younger than Vera is aware, as he had lied at their wedding, making out that he was older than he really was in an attempt to impress a young Vera. Since they had not been legally married, they make their marriage official by tying the knot in the famous Little White Wedding Chapel in Las Vegas. A pregnant Vera gives birth to a son, whom they named Terry (Nigel Pivaro).

1979–2010
Jack makes his first appearance on 28 November 1979 when Vera forces him to attend the wedding of her friend and colleague Ivy Tilsley's (Lynne Perrie) son Brian (Christopher Quinten) to Gail Potter (Helen Worth). He returns in 1981 and for almost two years, appears on a recurring basis. Jack and Vera move into the street in 1983, much to the dismay of many of Weatherfield's residents. Prior to Jack's 1979 debut, Bill Tarmey often appeared as an extra in The Rovers Return Inn, playing darts. Jack later has an affair with Bet Lynch (Julie Goodyear), which he later regrets. Jack enrols with a video dating agency in 1983, referring to himself as "Vince St. Clair" and obtains a white suit, gold medallion and phoney trans-Atlantic accent. Vera also takes part in this. She refers to herself as "Carole Munroe", and is shocked when she sees Jack's video. She arranges to meet him in The Rovers Return, wearing a ginger wig, claiming to be a rich widow. When she turns around, Jack is shocked to see his wife staring back at him and she chases him out of the pub much to the amusement of the other customers.

Vera is almost tempted into having an affair with Lestor Fontaine, but is soon to realise that she cannot leave Jack. In 2000, Vera worries that she may die in an operation, and confesses to Jack that she had an affair during the early years of their marriage, meaning there is a possibility that Terry is not really Jack's son. Jack confesses to his friend Curly Watts (Kevin Kennedy) that unbeknownst to Vera, he had knowledge of the affair, and had beaten her lover up; though he claims that he believes Terry to be his own son as he reminds him too much of himself.

Terry causes trouble for Jack and Vera through his various relationships with women. He dates neighbour Andrea Clayton (Caroline O'Neill) in 1985 and she becomes pregnant, sparking a feud between the Claytons and the Duckworths. At Ivy's engagement party to George Wardle in The Rovers, Jack asks Andrea's father Harry Clayton (Johnny Leeze) if they are sure Terry is the father and Harry punches him. The Claytons later move away. In 1992, Terry is released from prison to marry his pregnant girlfriend Lisa Horton (Caroline Milmoe) and uses the ceremony to escape. Lisa moves to Weatherfield from her home town of Blackpool and begins a relationship with local bookie Des Barnes (Philip Middlemiss) and moves in with him, a decision which infuriates Vera. While Jack is more sympathetic towards Lisa, knowing Terry will never stand by his wife and child, he nonetheless feels he has to side with his wife. Lisa gives birth to a baby boy whom she names Tommy and five months later, Lisa is killed after being run over by a car, and Jack and Vera are delighted when Tommy comes to live with them. Jack and Vera find it hard to cope financially, but Terry takes Tommy off of them and sells him to Lisa's parents Jeff and Doreen Horton and he goes to live with them in Blackpool. Jack and Vera are devastated and a furious argument with Terry follows, resulting in Jack punching Terry and disowning him. Jack and Vera had another grandson, Brad, after Terry's fling with Tricia Armstrong (Tracy Brabin). Jack also develops a paternal relationship with Tricia's son from her first marriage, Jamie (Joseph Gilgun).

Jack and Vera later became foster parents for Tyrone Dobbs (Alan Halsall), whose mother had been imprisoned for assault. Jack considers Tyrone as more of a son than Terry had ever been. Jack is fond of pigeons though Vera hates them, and she once tricks him into believing that she has cooked him a pigeon pie. Jack once agrees to sell his dead body for a large amount of cash to an artist (Maggie McCarthy) who enjoys painting stuffed humans, so he could buy Vera a Christmas present. When Vera discovers this, she argues with the woman, who then turns up, inspired by Vera. They agree to both pose nude for the artist, but on condition that they would be buried as normal. The Duckworths celebrate their Golden wedding anniversary with a party at The Rovers in August 2007. After the couple plan to relocate to Blackpool, Jack discovers Vera has died in her sleep in her armchair on 18 January 2008, devastating many of Weatherfield's residents. This prompts Jack to abandon the move to Blackpool and stay in Weatherfield, although he still offers No. 9 to Tyrone and his girlfriend Molly Compton (Vicky Binns); though they insist that he remain as a lodger. Months later, Jack's grandson Paul Clayton (Tom Hudson), having returned to Weatherfield previously, confesses to the police to burning down Valandro's, Leanne Battersby's (Jane Danson) restaurant. He also confesses this to Jack who is disgusted with his grandson's behaviour and tells him that he is Terry's son. Despite his disgust, Jack offers Paul £10,000 that he has received from the house, on the condition that Paul faces prison. However, Paul cannot face it and decides to flee the country. This reassures Jack that Paul is different from Terry. When Molly's aunt Pam Hobsworth (Kate Anthony) later moves into No. 9, Jack decides to spend a few months in Blackpool. Upon his return, he describes at Tyrone and Molly's wedding in January 2009 that Tyrone is the son he and Vera had always wanted. Later that year, Jack meets Connie Rathbone (Rita May), a widow and fellow pigeon enthusiast. The two become good friends, although Tyrone feels that Jack's behaviour is disrespectful to the memory of Vera. Jack soon goes on holiday with Connie to Spain and lies to Tyrone and Molly that he is returning to Blackpool. When he comes back, Tyrone discovers the truth and is unhappy with Jack. Tyrone begins to soften towards Connie but is still shocked when Jack announces that he is moving in with Connie and he leaves Weatherfield on 21 September 2009.

Following his moving in with Connie, Jack's appearances on the show became intermittent. In November 2009, Jack and Connie join Tyrone in the Rovers for a drink. After Connie leaves, Jack tells Tyrone that he is worried that she wants more than companionship. Jack then hides out at Tyrone's until Connie catches up with him and reveals it is only a misunderstanding about her sleepwalking, much to Jack's relief. Jack and Connie join Tyrone, Bill Webster (Peter Armitage) and Pam on Christmas Day 2009. Jack is present once again in early-2010, when Molly and Tyrone are having marriage difficulties and is seen in the Rovers after the funeral of Blanche Hunt (Maggie Jones) in May 2010. Jack appears on 9 September 2010 to visit Molly, after she has just given birth, and is told her and Tyrone's son will be named Jack in honour of him. In October 2010, Jack moves back in with Tyrone and Molly and they suspect that he has fallen out with Connie. Jack initially tells Tyrone that he has simply missed living with them both. However, when Connie turns up at the house and cryptically demands why Jack hasn't told them the real reason for his stay, he is forced to reveal the truth. On 8 October 2010, Jack tells Tyrone that he has an incurable form of non-Hodgkin lymphoma and only has weeks to live, leaving Tyrone devastated. He returns to No. 9 to live out the remainder of his days, and makes Tyrone promise that they will make the most of his last few weeks. During his final weeks, Jack strives to perform acts of kindness for those around him. He sends Sally Webster (Sally Dynevor) tickets for the opera after hearing her say that she always wanted to go. After seeing Emily Bishop (Eileen Derbyshire) collecting money in the Rovers to repair the roof of the local church, he anonymously donates over £2,000 to the fund. When Ashley Peacock (Steven Arnold) confides in Jack about problems that he is having with his wife Claire (Julia Haworth), he attempts to reconcile the couple by encouraging them to talk to one another. After baby Jack's christening on 5 November 2010, Jack is devastated when he overhears a conversation between Molly and Kevin Webster (Michael Le Vell), in which Kevin reveals that he is the father of baby Jack, and not Tyrone as the result of the affair they had.

On 8 November 2010, Tyrone organises a party for Jack's 74th birthday in the Rovers Return. Jack reveals to Molly that he overheard her and Kevin discussing baby Jack's paternity. Jack does not condemn Molly and he admits he and Vera had both done the same as she had to each other, but tells her that Tyrone never would and pleads with her to move the family away from Weatherfield. Later, after seeing Tyrone and Molly happy together with baby Jack, he decides to quietly slip out of his own party saying his final words to Peter Barlow (Chris Gascoyne) and then waving goodbye to Ken Barlow (William Roache), who raises a glass to him as he leaves. Jack goes home and whilst listening to a Matt Monro record "Softly As I Leave You", which Tyrone had given him as a present, he dies in his armchair and is joined by the ghost of Vera, who tells him off, yet again, for his scruffy appearance. She tells Jack she'll be late for a bus and Jack's spirit leaves his body and gets out of his chair and dances with Vera and they share a kiss. Some time later, Tyrone, Molly and Connie return home to find Jack dead in his chair, and a tearful Tyrone says his last words to him "Good Night Dad". Jack and Vera's ashes are later scattered off Blackpool Pier by Tyrone and Connie.

Casting
Unlike the creation process with many other roles, no auditions were held for the part of Jack. Actor William Tarmey had previously been an extra in the serial, and in 1978 he played the small credited part of "Jack Rowe". He was offered the guest role of Jack Duckworth for two episodes in November 1979. Of his previous credits, Tarmey states: "I'd worked on Coronation Street for about ten years throwing darts in the background and whilst doing that I was doing little cameo parts, on other programmes." Tarmey was later asked back for a handful of episodes in 1981 and was eventually asked to become a regular cast member a year later. Tarmey had prepared for this with the help of fellow cast members and of this he adds: "I've had so many helping hands through the years from Jean [Alexander] and Liz [Dawn] and Julie [Goodyear] and Bill [Roache] [who played Hilda Ogden, Vera Duckworth, Bet Lynch and Ken Barlow respectively], from them all".

In 1997, executive producer Brian Park axed a number of characters; Tarmey has stated he was so tired of seeing his fellow cast members worrying about their jobs that he asked to be written out, but Park decided to keep him on. In 2001, the serial imposed a series of cuts on salaries as part of cost-cutting efforts. This resulted in Tarmey considering leaving, but producers decided against lowering his salary and convinced him to stay. In 2004, Tarmey extended his contract further along with his on-screen wife Dawn. In June 2008, he spoke of his desire to continue in the role.

From September 2009 onwards, Tarmey filmed on an episodic basis. In a storyline, Jack moved away from Coronation Street but continued to make occasional appearances at the Rovers and in the cafe. The reason for this was due to Tarmey's increasing health problems. On 9 April 2010, it was announced that Bill Tarmey had quit his role of Jack in the show's fiftieth anniversary year. Speaking of his decision to quit, Tarmey stated: "I've had the most amazing 30 years playing Jack. Because of him I've made fantastic friends and travelled all over the world. I'll be sorry to say goodbye." Filming Jack's final scenes upset Tarmey, of this he stated: "It was delightful. And very moving. It was a case of 'Pass the hand towel' [...] you know, filming those scenes was difficult. I'm leaving my other family. I've worked with all these people for 30-odd years and it was impossible for me to act or watch the death scene and cut that off."

Characterisation
ITV publicity describe him as being fond of pigeons and betting whilst disliking household chores. Stuart Heritage of newspaper The Guardian describes Jack as having "a constant downbeat aura of a person who knows that his entire life has been a joyless procession of gloomy disappointments." Another reporter of the newspaper, Mark Lawson, described Jack as "A pigeon-fancying, flat-cap-wearing, wise-cracking, philandering, Sinatra-loving Lancashire lad, Jack epitomised the vivid character comedy in which the serial specialises."

In 1991 Tarmey spoke of Jack's changes in attitude over his early years in the book Life on the Street. "Jack has settled down and matured a bit, he has accepted things with a kind of middle-aged resignation", Tarmey stated. He also branded Jack's days of chasing "birds" as over and some of his greatest loves as being "booze and barmaids". Jack has a "strange moral code" when it comes to his marriage. Tarmey brands one of Jack's good qualities as being the fact he is not a thief, but did add "He regards stealing Alec Gilroy's (Roy Barraclough) beer as one of the perks of his job".

"Jack and Vera"
Jack's relationship with Vera Burton (Liz Dawn) was always up and down, they had a rocky marriage and sometimes Jack appeared to show little care for her. Tarmey describes the first few decades in the following manner: "He would never knowingly hurt people and he loves Vera, although he doesn't always like her. He will defend her to the death, unless the chap slagging her off is bigger than he is! Jack is not a thief either!" In their "hey-day" they were dubbed as the modern day Stan (Bernard Youens) and Hilda Ogden (Jean Alexander) In their early days, Jack and Vera both had their fair share of dalliances. In 1982, whilst Vera was entertaining her own boyfriend, Jack had developed an attraction towards Bet Lynch (Julie Goodyear). Tarmey recalls the scenes in which Jack and Bet flirt, stating he was nervous and had to have Goodyear's help. They believed the storyline was a turning point for the two and was written with wit. Dawn opines: "It was very cleverly written, because Vera knew that Jack had a girlfriend on the side but she didn't know the other woman was Bet. So she chose Bet as someone to confide in, and she really opened her heart. It was quite moving as well as funny." This led to a classic showdown in the Rovers.

In another storyline Jack's son Terry sells his baby Tommy Duckworth (Darryl Edwards), leaving Jack and Vera devastated. When Jack and Vera realise what he has done, Jack punches Terry. The scenes made viewers happy to see Terry getting what hurt. Tarmey himself felt sadness because he knew how Jack felt: "When I first saw the script I was very sad [...] I worked out the punch with Nigel and I missed him by a whisker. Since then I've had letters saying "Well done for cracking him one" from little old ladies, young women, kids, guys."

On 8 November 2010 Tarmey made his final appearance, with Jack dying in his armchair at his old Coronation Street house, following a birthday party at the Rovers. In Jack's final death scene he sees visions of Vera, which Dawn returned to film. Producer Phil Collinson explained why they decided to include her: "It's something I've heard a lot. People say, 'When my mother was dying she saw my father' [...] It's a story I've heard a few people say. We're storytellers at the end of the day. Yes it's Coronation Street and yes it reflects real life, but we're storytellers." Whilst Executive producer Kieran Roberts opined that he would be surprised if anyone thought it was the wrong decision.

In other media
Jack appears in a theatrical version of the story of Coronation Street titled "Corrie!" in which Jack and Vera are shown as Terry sells their grandchild.

Reception
In January 1985, David Porter of current affairs magazine, Third Way, criticised Coronation Street's attitude towards employment, stating that being unemployed seemed to not be a problem for some characters as they were either "loved layabouts" or "acknowledged rogues", like Jack. In Dorothy Catherine Anger's book Other worlds: society seen through soap opera she brands Jack as one of the "middle aged men" who "over the years have, stymied their wives' efforts to be accepted as respectable". Dorothy Hobson in her book Soap Opera stated that marriages never seem to last in the genre, but added that Jack and Vera were an exception, in her opinion it was because although he loved her, he was terrified of sex. Ian Wylie of The Guardian branded Jack and Vera as "one of TV drama's most enduring – and real – double acts". Channel Five's soap opera reporting website Holy Soap brands Jack's most memorable moments as being "his Vince St Clair alias" and "when Jack returned home to find Vera had died in her sleep." The website has also branded him a "pigeon fancier" What's on TV describe Jack stating: "Had a famously rocky marriage to Vera but widower Jack Duckworth (William Tarmey) has mellowed over the years. Once a bit of a jack-the-lad, he's now more of a 'Jack the kipper', as he's enjoying retirement and taking life easy."

TV critic Jim Shelley for the Daily Mirror spoke of his regret that Jack Duckworth would be leaving the show: "Soap characters come and go, but it's a genuine shame that, after 31 years, Bill Tarmey is finally leaving Coronation Street. It's hard to think of a more popular or nicer character than Jack Duckworth. Decent people are few and far between in soaps. Viewers loved Stan and Hilda Ogden for example. But you couldn't say that they were as warm or reassuring a presence as Jack. Of course he was part of one of the great loving couples/double acts in Street history." 11.64 million viewers tuned in to see Jack's final appearance.

Jack's final scenes on the show were praised by fans and critics alike. Jim Shelley called Jack's death scene with the ghostly appearance of Vera, "one [of] the most moving scenes ever seen in soap". Mark Lawson of The Guardian described Jack and Vera's last dance as a great piece of social realism. As a tribute to the character ITV broadcast a short documentary profiling Jack's life in the serial. 7 million viewers tuned into watch the show. Stuart Heritage of The Guardian stated that Jack had iconic accessories which are his "golden-era glasses" stuck together with Elastoplast and his vest. They also commented on his pigeon keeping hobby, stating: "Forget Vera Duckworth, the one true love of Jack's life was his flock of pigeons." Lucy Mangan writing for The Guardian reviewed the serial's theatrical piece Corrie!, stating: "The scene in which Terry arrives to take his son away from grandparents Jack and Vera is enough to precipitate a Proustian rush of tearful memories. All those years of misery the wretched Terry caused his parents – oh, Jack's bitter resignation! – come flooding back." In the Morley Observer & Advertiser a columnist expressed their disappointment Jack and Vera were onscreen when he wanted to watch football and opined "difference is that the dramatic acting in the football is better". In a 2021 Radio Times poll, Jack and Vera were voted as the joint fifth "soap pub landlord", receiving 6% of the votes.

title: Jack Duckworth


text:
Talk:I Wanna Be Santa Claus

Fair use rationale for Image:I Wanna Be Santa Claus Ringo Starr albumcover.jpg
Image:I Wanna Be Santa Claus Ringo Starr albumcover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 00:26, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Possible Deletion
I don't know that this album is relevant enough to have its own article - aside from it being one of Ringo's worst, it didn't touch the charts and had no singles or appearances from ex-Beatles, etc. I think it could be deleted with no harm done. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zabboo (talk • contribs) 15:52, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:I Wanna Be Santa Claus


text:
Category:A Nightmare on Elm Street (franchise)

__NOGALLERY__


text:
Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Failure of imagination

KEEP - Failure of Imagination is an important concept, useful for instructing managers who haven't given terrorism much thought as it relates to business continuity. Keep and expand.


text:
Endostatin

Endostatin is a naturally occurring, 20-kDa C-terminal fragment derived from type XVIII collagen. It is reported to serve as an anti-angiogenic agent, similar to angiostatin and thrombospondin.

Endostatin is a broad-spectrum angiogenesis inhibitor and may interfere with the pro-angiogenic action of growth factors such as basic fibroblast growth factor (bFGF/FGF-2) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF).

Background
Endostatin is an endogenous inhibitor of angiogenesis. It was first found secreted in the media of non-metastasizing mouse cells from a hemangioendothelioma cell line in 1997 and was subsequently found in humans, e.g. in platelets. It is produced by proteolytic cleavage of collagen XVIII, a member of the multiplexin family that is characterized by interruptions in the triple helix creating multiple domains, by proteases such as cathepsins. Collagen is a component of epithelial and endothelial basement membranes. Endostatin, as a fragment of collagen 18, demonstrates a role of the ECM in suppression of neoangiogenesis. Pro-angiogenic and anti-angiogenic factors can also be created by proteolysis during coagulation cascades. Endogenous inhibitors of angiogenesis are present in both normal tissue and cancerous tissue. Overall, endostatin down regulates many signaling cascades like ephrin, TNF-α, and NFκB signaling as well as coagulation and adhesion cascades. Other collagen derived antiangiogenic factors include arresten, canstatin, tumstatin, α 6 collagen type IV antiangiogenic fragment, and restin.

Structure
Human monomeric endostatin is a globular protein containing two disulfide bonds: Cys162−302 and Cys264−294. It folds tightly, has a zinc binding domain at the N-terminus of the protein, and has a high affinity for heparin through an 11 arginine basic patch. Endostatin also binds all heparan sulfate proteoglycans with low affinity. Oligomeric endostatin (trimer or dimer) binds mainly with laminin of the basal lamina.

Biological activity
In-vitro studies have shown endostatin blocks the proliferation and organization of endothelial cells into new blood vessels. In animal studies endostatin inhibited angiogenesis and growth of both primary tumors and secondary metastasis.

Mechanism
Endostatin suppresses angiogenesis through many pathways affecting both cell viability and movement. Endostatin represses cell cycle control and anti-apoptosis genes in proliferating endothelial cells, resulting in cell death. Endostatin blocks pro-angiogenic gene expression controlled by c-Jun N terminal kinase (JNK) by interfering with TNFα activation of JNK. It reduces the growth of new cells by inhibiting cyclin D1. As a result, cells arrest during G1 phase and enter apoptosis. Alteration of FGF signal transduction by endostatin inhibits the migration of endothelial cells through disruption of cell-matrix adhesions, cell-cell adhesions, and cytoskeletal reorganization. By binding integrin α5β1 on endothelia cells it inhibits the signaling pathways of Ras and Raf kinases and decreases ERK-1 and p38 activity. Endostatin binding and clustering of integrins causes co-localization with caveolin-1 and activates non-receptor tyrosine kinases of the Src family involved in the regulation of cell proliferation, differentiation, and mobility. Other receptor interactions include the VEGF-R2/KDR/Flk-1 receptor on human umbilical vein endothelial cells.

Endostatin may prevent activity from certain metalloproteinase. Several studies have focused on the downstream effects of endostatin reception. These studies have estimated that endostatin may significantly affect 12% of genes used by human endothelial cells. Although endostatin signaling may affect this vast number of genes, the downstream affects appear surprisingly limited. Endostatin reception seems to only affect angiogenesis that arrives from pathogenic sources, such as tumors. Processes associated with angiogenesis, such as wound healing and reproduction, are seemingly not affected by endostatin. The result is possible because pathogenic-derived angiogenesis usually involves signaling through integrins, which are directly affected by endostatin.

Cancer
Although this process by which endostatin works is not fully understood, it involves metalloproteases and endopeptidases that digest components of the extracellular matrix. Several similar endogeneous angiogenic factors are produced from matrix components in this fashion. For example, perlecan degradation can yield endorepellin which functions as an anti-angiogenic factor. Collectively, these products are thought to balance regulation between pro-angiogenic and anti-angiogenic factors outside epithelial and endothelial layers.

Among anti-angiogenesis inhibitors, endostatin has a wide range of anti-cancer spectrum targets, increasing its significance since synthetic inhibitors usually have single targets and struggle with toxicity. Endostatin has several characteristics that may be advantageous to cancer therapy. First of all, endogenous endostatin has been described as "the least toxic anti-cancer drug in mice". Furthermore, neither resistance nor toxicity to endostatin occur in humans. Also, endostatin has been estimated to affect 12% of the human genome. This reveals a broad spectrum of activity focused on preventing angiogenesis. This is very different from single-molecule therapies, and may change how cancer therapies are designed: drugs may be designed to target a wide range of genes instead of one particular protein. However, endostatin does not affect all tumors. For example, cancers that may have extreme pro-angiogenic activity through VEGF may overcome the anti-angiogenic effects of endostatin.

Possible cancer treatment
Endostatin is currently being studied as part of cancer research. Prior results indicated that endostatin can be beneficial in combinations with other medicines, but endostatin alone gave no significant improvements in tumor/disease progression.

Phase I
In a Phase I clinical trial of Endostatin, of the 19 patients treated, 12 were switched out of the trial by their physicians due to continued progression of their disease. Two patients continued to be treated, and the remaining patients withdrew on their own. The trial, designed primarily to demonstrate safety, indeed showed that the drug was safe and well tolerated (at the dosages used).

Phase II
In a Phase II clinical trial of Endostatin, 42 patients with pancreatic endocrine tumors or carcinoid tumors were treated. Of the 40 patients which could be evaluated for a radiologic response, none experienced partial response to therapy, as defined by World Health Organization criteria.

The conclusion from the trial was that, "Treatment with Endostatin did not result in significant tumor regression in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors."

Phase III
A phase III clinical trial was carried out on 493 histology or cytology-confirmed stage IIIB and IV NSCLC patients with a life expectancy >3 months. Patients were treated with Endostar (rh-endostatin, YH-16), a recombinant endostatin product, in combination with vinorelbine and cisplatin (a standard chemotherapeutic regimen). The addition of Endostar to the standard chemotherapeutic regimen in these advanced NSCLC patients resulted in significant and clinically meaningful improvement in response rate, median time to progression, and clinical benefit rate compared with the chemotherapeutic regimen alone.

Clinical significance
Endostatin may also be useful as a therapeutic for inflammatory diseases like rheumatoid arthritis as well as Crohn disease, diabetic retinopathy, psoriasis, and endometriosis by reducing the infiltration of inflammatory cells through invading angiogenesis. Down syndrome patients seem to be protected from diabetic retinopathy due to an additional copy of chromosome 21, and elevated expression of endostatin.

title: Endostatin


text:
Talk:History of the United States/Archive 1

See: Talk:History of the United States for recent talk.

Approach
Note from bleeding heart history student: Hey, I just wanted to complain a bit about what you are doing. Your approach is far off from a traditional encyclopedia or scholarly work, 1. it uses extremely subjective language in its word choices. 2. You cite no reference sources. 3. You take things that are arguable interpretations and state them as though they were facts. This is what is done in high school history books, but I happen to prefer that something that is quite arguable be left as 'some people think x and some people thiink y'. This lets the reader open up to new ideeas and exercise their own gray mellon rather than being force fed the pet peeves of some crusty old academic. 4. You tend toward the 'history is a war timeline' way of presenting our past, which is depressing as hell. is there not more to the story of mankind that who slaughtered whom?

Note from Jimbo Wales: I really like the way the following discussion is going. What I'm interested to see is whether and to what extent we might be able to achieve some consensus on a basic 3-screen history of the United States.

Anyhow, it will be very interesting to see what we might hammer out as mutually acceptable to reasonable people who disagree. So far, things don't look good. :-) BryceHarrington is citing Noam Chomsky, who I regard as a lunatic.  And TimShell is posting highly inflammatory pictures of genocide.

Will it break down into a flame war? Or does the ability of others to come in and "tone down" the discussion at will mean that flame wars can be avoided?

It sure is fun and addictive to watch to find out!

We don't want the HistoryOfUnitedStates to be a large pile of pro-American propaganda, like virtually all histories of that country are. However, we also don't want it to be a large pile of anti-American propaganda. So I think we should carefully discuss each controversial point that comes up before writing about it.

The American civil war

Bryce stated that this was not so much about racial issues as economic issues, and Tim disagreed therewith. Which of these points, exactly, are you disagreeing with? If it's the racial one - wasn't the north willing to reverse it's stance on that particular issue? Not being American, I don't really know...

The claim that emanicpation was an attempt to destroy the Southern economy is certainly false. The emancipation took effect after the war, when the Southern economy was already ruined. So I have to challenge that point. Of course, ask 10 American historians about the Civil War, and you will get 10 different theories, so it's hard to say what should be included here. - TimShell

WWII

I'm not sure why it's so important to mention the SovietUnion invading Poland, since that had nothing to with the causes of the war. Inasmuchas the allies never went to war with them.

The invasion might be worth mentioning as it was a direct consequence of the secret Ribbentrop-Molotov pact, which Hitler kept until invading the Soviet Union in 1942 (Operation Barbarossa) - WojPob (Germany invaded on Sept. 1st and the SovietUnion on Sept. 17th 1939 - BTW)

...Please note I'm not saying it's not worth mentioning altogether. For a discussion of WWII, one could scarce leave it out. I just don't think that the details of how the war started are particularly relevant to the history of the US, except in so far as to give them a just casus belli.

Attitude towards NativeAmericans

Someone wrote that the Nazi FinalSolution was perhaps modelled on U.S policy towards Native Americans. I think this is ludicrous on many levels. Even if it were true that some Nazis viewed it as the same thing (something I don't really know about), that view is itself ludicrous. We're talking about a serious estimate of 6,000 dead in a variety of unfortunate incidents, versus a serious estimate of how many millions dead as the result of a deliberate genocide? -- Jimbo Wales

For the record, there were deliberate attempts to annihilate the native americans. I can give you two incidents in particular. One, which happened hortly before the American revolution, was the deliberate spreading of smallpox among the Pontiac. The second is the deliberate annihilation of the Six Nations, to quote Washington:

 * "The immediate objects are the total destruction and devastation of their settlements, and the capture of as many prisoners of every age and sex, as possible...that the country not be merely overrun but destroyed."

This took place as punishment for their alliance with the British. But certainly it's not how they would have treated the Canadiens, and the Oneida and Tuscora were not spared for their neutrality. In short, it might not have been the coordinated and causeless hatred of the nazis, but certainly it was far from a series of incidents that devastated the natives. Please don't consider this as a specifically anti-American sentiment, since as you can see above it was a continuation of the British attitude, and common to imperialist powers in general.

''I agree, the treatment of the Native Americans was ugly, but comparing it to the Nazi Holocaust is really pushing it. We are talking about a total of 6,000 dead (according to TimShell over on Indian Massacres, anyway) versus millions. --Jimbo Wales''

Ok, I'm not trying to say that they're tragedies of equal magnitudes. But remember North America was populated fairly sparsely at the time (possibly a result of smallpox), except for the Aztecs and Mayans down in Mexico, whose downfall in the case of the Aztecs probably had to do as much with their own bloody subjugation of neighboring tribes than as a result of the conquistadores. (600 hundred spanish using the weapons of 1519 should have been an easy win for the Aztecs. The Mayans evidently overfarmed, and were already gone as a major political power.) I'm merely saying that though the nazis were dealing with a lot more people, so many that they had to develop all sorts of horrifyingly ingenious methods of doing so, the underlying motivations seem comparable.

There's a tendency to think of the holocaust as a singularly awful point in history. The sad thing is, it's not. It's just that the Nazis were better at what they were doing then most others who have tried, and have received a lot more publicity. But most countries that have ever been powerful, have some sort of deliberate genocide on their hands.

There is also some stuff left on Ward's wiki that probably wouldn't hurt to consider.

Chomsky seems to be applying Lenin's theory of imperialism. The competing theory, that nations grow wealthy by increasing the productivity of their labor, has the advantage over Lenin's of being supported by the evidence.

R.J. Rummel has done history's most exhaustive study on the issue of governmental mass murder. He has calculated the total number of deaths by studying each reported instance of murder and adding them all up, for all of the most destructive regimes of the 20th century (the total for the century came in around 170 million). For perspective, he has done similar research on pre-20th century political mass murder. He was able to document an estimated 6000 deaths of Native Americans at the hands of the United States government. If you wish to argue that there were more than this, please indicate when and where each incident occurred and how many people were killed in each incident. This is recent history in an area with a free press and a literate population - if these events occurred, they would have been documented. Where are the bodies? If the evidence was destroyed, where is the powerful centralized organization that systematically disposed of the evidence over thousands of miles (a powerful centralized oganization would be necessary for a task of that scale). Where are the directives from Washington (there is official documentation of all the modern genocides - why not this one)? Where are the eye-witness accounts (there are eye-witness accounts of all the modern genocides - why not this one)?

A collaborative project like this one could be a valuable tool for this kind of research. We can start of page for IndianMassacres and begin compiling an exhaustive list of incidents.

(curiously, Rummel just sent me this illustration:)

http://aristotle.bomis.com/~tshell/Bodies-Everywhere4.jpg

- TimShell

Okay, okay, I don't wish to be thought of as a lunatic, or be punching bag filler, so I'll depart.

I began with the history again. I'm not from the US, so I think I can be a bit more impartial...I haven't written anything that should cause controversy, yet.

 * See also : History of United States

Biased
I think that this article, and presumably the source upon which it is based, is very biased and anti-American. Of course, there have been dark moments in United States history, but what about the rest? What about freedom? What about a nation of ideas and laws, not of men? How about the incredible wealth generated by freedom? How about the United States role in saving the world from fascist/socialist tyranny in World War II? Surely these deserve some positive treatment here... --Jimbo Wales

''I think the article is being remarkably fair. What you mention above are all great theoretical traits, but have been fairly inconsistent in application. In particular I think you will find that when times are difficult, ideologies are neglected. America's record in dealing with other nations is especially poor - one of genocide and imperialism. Their involvement in WWII is praiseworthy, but like everyone else their tactics were Draconian.''

''This isn't to say America isn't a good country; I would say it's running on the better side of par. But I think this is fairly close to what a real, objective summary (maybe a little bit of negative propaganda but nothing compared to the positive stuff you normally get) would look like. Leaves out good things, but also bad things, being a summary.''

''Meanwhile, instead of going ahead and adding good and deleting bad and deleting good and adding bad, and so forth, I suggest we have a separate discussion on what is an appropriate take here on History of United States/Discussion. Leave this as is for now, and know that it is controversial. --JoshuaGrosse''

Joshua, here is my view: I think we shouldn't aim for objectivity; we should aim for lack of bias. The way to achieve lack of bias is to explicitly acknowledge within the article itself points on which there is disagreement, and make sure that the body of the article does not betray any particular position on these disagreements. Thus, lack of bias is not achieved by striking a middle position between the views that the U.S. had a glorious wonderful history and that it was dark and evil. It is achieved by relating what objective facts everyone can agree on, and then making explicit what points people disagree about.

By the way, anyone is free to change this article at any time, you know. :-) -- Larry Sanger

''My bad, what I meant was a treatment which is accurate rather than opinionated, not completely detached. Of course anyone can edit the article at any time, but rather than have it completely rewritten whenever some pro/anti zealot comes along, or have it completely filled with the reasons for every position, I figured the latter could be collected on a separate page. Only now we have two of those....''

- Perhaps the sensible thing to do here would be to create an outline covering major historical periods and topics, creating links to each subcategory, and then allowing the subcategories to be filled in over time.

''I agree this should be done, but not at the expense of a decent over-view. Especially not when the eras are so event oriented. For instance, the Spanish-American war is of great importance to American history. But where does it fit into the categorization scheme - the industrial age? That topic sounds like, by default, it should be about trains and factories, not wars. So, in short, I think the page should be kept as summary first, and sub and related topics second.''

''As to my second comment, please neglect it - apparently I missed out on how the slashes work. That's pretty cool.'' --JG

I don't disagree with all of the assertions Bryce made. Some of them I do, and overall, I think the initial summary was very biased and ignored many of the essential facts of US history. Also, I do not concede that "we've" been very naughty or that "we've" done many bad things. It is certainly true that the government of the United States has done many bad things - it has, in a word, acted like every other government that has ever existed. But I did not consent to or willingly participate in these things, so I refuse to consider them in the first person. A society, and the government that rules (I might say, oppresses) it, are two very different things. This theoretical point has significance here - a history of the United States should not be merely a history of the actions of the government of the United States. It should be a history of the society as well - a history of what people do when they are free of governmental interference: invent, create, produce, experiment with different belief systems, and pursue happiness according to their own lights. - TimShell

Tim has excellent points. I second them. The bit about not focusing exclusively on the government is gold. I also think that you needn't feel responsible for the actions done many years before your birth by a government which you now have <<1/280,000,000th of a say in. Simplifications need to be proven helpful before they are adopted. I hold up your guilt as an example of the harm they can do. If you feel bad that some things happened in history (and are still happening), I would think anger at the perpetrators and sympathy for the victims more appropriate responses. These can motivate one to help make things better without being such a burden. Don't you show, by your recognition of the wrong, some distance from it? Sorry, I just don't think you deserve the burden of guilt, so I rambled on trying to fix your psychie or something. I appologize.

That having been said, this is a wiki. The obvious answer, and likely among the best, has been given: write a middle way account and people can link off to pessimistic (or optimistic) interpretations & elaborations as they see fit. Writing the middle way shouldn't be that hard. Let anyone add what they want, and if someone objects to something, off to another page it goes. --PhillipHankins

I have to say here that I feel that the notion that this article can be written with lack of bias or objectivity is fundamentally at fault. Ultimately you are trying to paint a picture of the actions of millions of people over 200 years in a few lines. The extraordinary degree of selectivity this requires is in itself an expression of bias. For instance I suggest that you compare the history of the US, and that which has been written about the USSR. Even their relative sizes is an expression of bias.

History is not and can never be about presenting an unbiased view point. Objectivity is not the point, its merely one tool in the telling of history. To my mind the only way to cope with this situation is to leave the front page of "history of the US" as straight forwards facts and figures (when it was formed, by who, from who, and where it is now), and then link in views from there with an expression of the opinion of the general views of the authorship. Phil Lord

Please add information on how that native peoples of the Americas were massacred in order for this country to exist. This type of massacre is common through out all human history so it not unusual but it should be mentioned. Please also mention that the early American economy and fortunes were due to the enslavement of both native Americans and native Africans. Could it not be said that this country was built on the backs of slaves? This is also not unusual in the course of human history but it should be mentioned. If it was you and your family who were uprooted, raped ,pilaged, and murdered would you want the people who did that to write you out of their history and to pretend that their history was glorious and pristine? Or would you rather they not re-write history in their favor and to remember who they stepped on to get where they are? Thank you. (Moved from /History)

Anyone interested in the issue of Indian massacres can visit out Indian_Massacres page. We are trying to compile a complete list, and add up the total. So far, we've counted about 6000. - Tim

And on a slightly less accusatory note, a quick note about the phrase "In 1776, representatives of the thirteen North American Colonies...". First, there were, at a minimum, sixteen colonies: Quebec, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island were going concerns in 1776, and that's not even touching on British colonies in the Caribbean. I grant you that Quebec is a bit of a black sheep, but as currently phrased it should count in the "thirteen". In any case, Nova Scotia is definitely not an exception -- unless I'm misremembering, representatives were invited to the party but declined (I believe because of the large British naval base at Halifax). I can't find my copy, but I think Samuel Eliot Morison discusses this a bit in his "History of the American People." I'm not sure what to make of P.E.I., but I do know it came into existance in 1769.

I'd suggest a rewrite to "In 1776, representatives of a large majority of the British colonies in North America (thirteen in all), etc., etc." I'm open to suggestions from those with a little more expertise in the matter -- my interest in the American Revolution is entirely from the standpoint of British Empire history, not US History.

I did find a website that throws a little light on the matter:

http://www.alts.net/ns1625/nshist02.html

-PaulDrye

The article implies that the sinking of the Lusitania was directly responsible for the US entry into the war. Actually, the Lusitania was sunk in 1915, and the US did not enter the war until 1917.

That thing of the Lusitania is enoguh inconsistent and incredible but seems to have been a repeated myth of US historiography.

Moreover, that historic memory seems to be pretty selective, there is not a single word to be said about some of the imperial ventures oF USA:
 * 1898 invasion by USA of Spanish colonies of Cuba, Phillippines and Puerto Rico.
 * the civil wars that ensued in Cuba and Philippines after the indepedence against the American intervention.
 * 1903 intervention in Colombia to achieve the independence of Panama and to fetch the zone to build the canal.

Perique des Palottes, 2002/07/24

Yes, the Lustiania thing is not the reason the US entered WWI. The final drop was the so-called "Zimmermann telegram", which was intercepted and decoded by the British. It contained an - outrageous - proposal by Germany to Mexico to invade the USA in trade for German arms and support, which would prevent the USA from intervening in Europe. Jheijmans 04:23 Jul 24, 2002 (PDT)

The following (from United States) needs to be integrated into this article (and other appropriate articles):

The North American continent was first colonized by asian nomads that crossed the frozen Bering Strait sometime around 20,000 BC. These tribes quickly spread out, reaching Cape Horn roughly 10,000 years later. Although several large, centralized civilizations, such as the Inca in the Andes and the Aztec and Maya in Central America, developed in the western hemisphere, no comparable civilization occured in North America, due to lack of domesticable crops. Corn, which had been transmitted from Mexico, had begun to be farmed in the Mississippi valley by the 15th century AD, but the arrival of Europeans cut short any further development.

Many natives of North America as the Europeans found them were semi-nomadic hunter-gatherers; others were tribally based, more sendentary and agricultural. Many formed tribes in response to European colonization. Well-known tribes include the Huron, Mohawk, Apache, Cherokee, Sioux, Mohegan and Iroquois.

After the European discovery of America by Christopher Columbus in 1492, many explorers from Europe explored the continent, with the Spanish, French, English, Dutch and Swedish establishing colonies. Many of the English colonists were religious refugees.

As England put more taxes and other requirements on its colonies in America, thirteen colonies decided to declare themselves independent in 1776. After a war with England (American Revolution), this culminated in the formation of the United States of America.

As the country expanded to the west, a conflict grew between the southern states and the northern states. In the north, slavery had been abolished, but this was unthinkable in the south, where the economy depended heavily on slave labor. The industrialized north also favored protectionist tariffs, while the agricultural south strongly opposed them; this conflict was arguably more important than slavery. The southern states seceded from the Union, forming the Confederate States of America (Confederacy), which led to the American Civil War. This war ended in 1865, with the Confederacy surrendering.

The country grew into a major industrial power, fed by millions of immigrants, from Europe and Asia. The United States remained neutral at the outbreak of World War I in 1914, but was drawn into the conflict. After the war ended with the Treaty of Versailles, which penalised Germany and the Ottoman Empire as the losers of the war, the USA went back to neutrality.

The United States once again remained neutral at the start of World War II, but after a Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, the Americans declared war on Japan and joined the allied forces led by Great Britain and the Soviet Union. They succeeded in defeating the Germans by May 1945, while Japan capitulated after two atomic bombs in the same year.

After the war, Europe became divided between countries allied with the communist Soviet Union, and countries allied with the United States. These two superpowers became archenemies, leading to the so-called Cold War, which never involved in a real war between the superpowers. With the fall of communism in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe between 1989 and 1991, the United States were left as the world's only superpower.

I really don't like the waving flag. It is annoying and my eyes keep getting drawn to it when I'm trying to read the darn article. Thank God I have a browser that can turn off annoying annimations but the vast majority of our visiters can't do this. Please remove the ani gif. --mav

 * Here's another vote for the non-animated flag, please. --Anon

 * Flag replaced. --mav 22:38 Oct 11, 2002 (UTC)

 * I didn't get to see the animated flag, but I vote against it any way :). Another thing...I'm not sure what is a flag doing anyway in an article about the history of the US.

I would vote for putting a few historical flags near the places where it was adopted (like, the 13 star flag at the begining, an so on, until the 50 star flag when hawaii was granted statehood.--AN

 * What a great idea! Now we just need a source for the images. --mav

 * Maybe a reference to Flag of the United States and a rewrite there would be more appropriate? Jeronimo

 * Take a look at the conversation I'm having with isis on her Talkpage. They shouldn't be too hard to do. BTW, do you guys think we need some policy on multiple identical flag images or not? Scipius 22:58 Oct 11, 2002 (UTC)

 * Having multiple images doesn't seem to be too important either way, but having an annoying waving flag alongside text is a problem. --mav

-- Since you're looking for sources of some of the older US flags, here's a link: http://www.usflag.org/toc.flags.html --

I suggest include a section about history of territory composition of the U.S.A.', i.e.:
 * The Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. The parts of the Trust that are or are not still a territory of the U.S.A
 * Outer Continental Shelf Lands defined in the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act.
 * Canal Zone. Did it go back to Panama with the Canal in 1999?.

 * I believe that the Canal Zone has been surrendered. -Smack 05:23 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)

-- This article requires substantial work. So far I’ve been splitting it up and adding content. It remains a work in progress. 172

Should the Timeline of United States history be included in the boilerplate table? -Smack 05:23 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Don Geronimo

untitled
To expand this Wikopedia entry - The Don and Mike show is "the best thing on the radio". Go to to www.donandmikewebsite.com to find out if they are on in your town. Listen for one week (when Don gets back, you'll hear fantastic chemistry) and you'll see why I felt compelled to write this. Don, Mike, Rob, Buzz and the rest of the crew really do make you laugh and make you feel at home. You can also try www.wjfk.com to get a live stream of the show from 3-7PM Eastern.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.37.49.77 (talk) 03:16, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

lol, they must not have been that funny. and re don falling off a stage, its sad to say but i don't think anybody cared except the sycophant "Citrus Heights Dave" or whatever he calls himself. 66.87.2.31 (talk) 21:31, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Farce Extreme.
Don Geronimo is NOT coming to XM Radio. Period! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.200.116.5 (talk) 15:56, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
 * If he did, and brought Mike, Rob, Buzz and even Joe, I'd sign up.  Do you think B.A. would come back then.  She could get some new cords. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Theyallrock (talk • contribs) 02:01, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Met Freda in high school?
That seems wrong, and contradicts Freda's article, but I'm not sure so I won't change it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.10.73 (talk) 20:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah i think your right, though i am pretty sure that they did attend the same High School, i think she would have been a year or two ahead of him, and i dont think they knew each other at the time they attended. Also i am not even sure that Don even graduated from Magruder, i could be wrong but didnt he start in radio while he was in high school, and wasnt that a station in Wisconsin? Also it makes it seem like they were like sweethearts or something, anyway the phrasing would kind not jive with the idea that Freda is Dons second wife. --Boothy443 |  trácht ar 07:32, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

freda was don's second wife. don was married once before and has a daughter that he has little contact with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.133.233.124 (talk) 16:49, 26 August 2011 (UTC)

Peter North
Who is the Peter North mentioned in this article? Wikipedia has the name Peter North as a disambiguation page. So that does not help. Coyets 13:33, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Peter North (porn actor) a.k.a. "The North Pole". --Tischlerpaul 18:32, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Any Aspergers-riddled editors here?
Just checking.

WINX
It's not clear why WINX, Geronimo's first station was removed from the article, especially since it's well sourced. Putting it back--RadioFan (talk) 03:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Don Geronimo. 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/20110711132457/http://www.sacbee.com:80/2011/07/09/3757763/rise-guys-leave-khtk-for-sf-station.html to http://www.sacbee.com/2011/07/09/3757763/rise-guys-leave-khtk-for-sf-station.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.radio-online.com/cgi-bin/$rol.exe/headline_id=n17597
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051221190223/http://www.wboc.com/Global/story.asp?S=3578160 to http://www.wboc.com/Global/story.asp?S=3578160
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120312055323/http://www.radioink.com/Article.asp?id=1997881&spid=24698 to http://www.radioink.com/Article.asp?id=1997881&spid=24698

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) 07:35, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Don Geronimo. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.radio-online.com/cgi-bin/%24rol.exe/headline_id%3Dn17597
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100602004218/http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/26/2778321/don-geronimo-returns-to-khtk-midday.html to http://www.sacbee.com/2010/05/26/2778321/don-geronimo-returns-to-khtk-midday.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:59, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Don Geronimo


text:
William Butts

Sir William Butts (c. 1486 – 22 November 1545) was a member of King Henry VIII of England's court and was the King's physician.

His portrait was painted by Hans Holbein the Younger in 1543, and he was knighted in the following year. His granddaughter Anne was married to the son of Sir Nicholas Bacon, Lord Keeper.

Career
According to recent sources, William Butts was the son of John Butts, auditor of Crown Revenues and later a Custodian of Wards, and his wife Elizabeth, and he was born in Norwich, Norfolk, although his family was also connected with Fulham, Middlesex.

He was educated at Gonville Hall in the University of Cambridge. He took his B.A. in 1506-07, his M.A. in 1509 and was awarded his M.D. in 1518. He was admitted a Member of the College of Physicians in 1529. He worked with George Owen and Thomas Wendy.

Religion
Sir William Butts played an important role in King Henry's relations with Thomas Wolsey, while the Cardinal lay sick at Esher in 1529/30. He was a known Protestant and close associate of Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, and of Catherine Parr, the sixth wife of Henry VIII. His family later became significant leaders of the Puritan faction in Norfolk.

He died on 22 November 1545. The Fulham historian Faulkner identified Butts's original monument as an altar-tomb or tomb-chest of English marble against the south wall of the chancel of All Saints Church, Fulham, on which was his brass effigy in armour as a knight, with a brass scroll on one side inscribed "Myn Advantage". His arms were shown at each corner of the stone, "Azure 3 lozenges gules, on a chevron or, between 3 etoils or". His epitaph in Latin verse, conceived by John Strype to have been composed for Butts by his dear friend Sir John Cheke, was at first mounted on the wall of the church, but had become so worn out by 1627 that it was restored by Leonard Butts, Esq., of Norfolk. It contains six lines of elegaic Latin: "Quid medicina valet, quid Honos, quid gratia Regum: Quid popularij Amor, mors ubi saeva venit? Sola valet PIETAS, quae structa est auspice Christo: Sola in morte valet, caetera cuncta fluunt: Ergo mihi vitâ fuerit quando omnia Christus, Mors mihi nunc lucrum vitaque Christus erit." ("What helpe be Physick, Honours, what the Thanks of Kings, What help the Peoples Love, when cruel Death shall come? PIETY vaileth alone, in Christ propitious made: This onlie stands in death, all else doth flie away: So then since Christ in Life was all in all to me, So Death to me my gain and Christ my life shall be.")

Family
Sir William Butts married Margaret Bacon of Cambridgeshire.

They had three children,
 * (Sir) William Butts of Thornage, Norfolk (c1506 - 1583) (m. Joan Bures). Butts was a patron of literature. After his death a collection of poems, A Book of Epitaphes (1583) was published in his memory by Robert Dallington. He is also the subject of a notable portrait by Holbein. His tomb at Thornage has (above) a heraldic quartering for Butts with Bacon, shown also on the tomb-chest, dexter: for his wife, sinister, is a quartering for Bures, "Per chevron indented sable and ermine, in chief two lions rampant or". The central blazon on the tomb chest is the impalement of Butts with Bures.
 * Thomas Butts of Great Ryburgh, Norfolk (m. Bridget Bures), who participated in the 1536 voyage of Richard Hore to Newfoundland, and survived to tell the story to Richard Hakluyt.
 * Edmund Butts of Barrow, Suffolk (m. Anne Bures). They had been seven years married when he died in 1548: he was buried at Barrow, and Anne survived him as a widow for 61 years, dying in December 1609. She is buried with a fine monumental brass effigy with verses and a fillet inscription set in black marble in the church at Redgrave, Suffolk. Their daughter Anne Butts married Sir Nicholas Bacon, 1st Baronet, of Redgrave (c. 1540-1624).

The three wives were sisters, the daughters of Sir Henry Bures (died 1528) of Acton, Suffolk, and his wife Anne, daughter of George Waldegrave and Anne Drury. Their mother remarried c. 1528 to (Sir) Clement Heigham (died 1571), whose stepdaughters they became.

title: William Butts