text:
Talk:Authentic Gospel of Matthew

COMMENT
Ril had some good points forcing us review the sources and revise the article.

Higher Criticism
One of the most important aspects of Higher Criticism in relation to the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew (Authentic Matthew or The Gospel of the Hebrews ) is to recognize its limitations. Scholars have no text to study or analyze. The writings of the Church Fathers, are all we have. Yet there are quite a number of them.

Modern scholars -- the majority of whom are English or German speaking -- are studying the writings of the Early Church, which are in Greek (or Latin). Note this is not Modern Greek, but Koine Greek that was used 2000 years ago. Latin and Koine Greek are extinct languages. Thus nothing can be accepted or rejected with certainty. Therefore, Higher Critics analyzing the GHeb fragments have four general categories:

A.     Highly Probable; B.     Probable; C.      Possible; D.     Unlikely.

Clement
Clement of Rome was a leading presbyter in the early Church. He was probably born shortly before the crucifixion, and, according to Tertullian, was ordained by Peter. Many Church Fathers believed Clement succeeded Peter. His letter to the Corinthians was considered divinely inspired by many.

GHeb-1 and GHeb-2 Scholars are split about GHeb-1 and GHeb-2. Some argue that Clement is quoting from the oral tradition. It is equally ‘possible’ that he is quoting from the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. It is, however, agreed that these two excerpts are not from the Canonical Gospels.

Didache
This document is a formulation of the rules of conduct for Christians. It first appeared about the year 100.

GHeb-3 This version of the Lord’s Prayer is different from the one found in the Canonical Gospels. For this reason, some believe it is ‘possibly’ from the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. It is interesting to compare this fragment with GHeb-47, which confirms that this Lord’s Prayer was found in the Gospel of the Hebrews.

Ignatius
Ignatius was the Bishop of Antioch, Syria, who was born some ten years after the crucifixion.

GHeb-4 This fragment from Ignatius has caused much controversy among scholars because the term “bodiless demon” is used. We know that this excerpt is not from the Canonical Gospels, nor would this term be used in Hebrew. Thus, some have argued that this fragment was written in Syriac but with Hebrew letters.

Jerome affirms “bodiless demon” is in the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. Therefore it is ‘probable’ that GHeb-4 is from the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, and it raises the possibility of Syriac being used.

Papius
Papius was born approximately thirty years after the crucifixion and eventually became a bishop in Asia Minor.

GHeb-5 It is ‘probable’ that this fragment is referring to the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, as that Gospel is mentioned. It affirms that Matthew wrote it in Hebrew. However, there are problems. Papius’ five-volume work has been lost, and this fragment only survives in the writing of Eusebius. Secondly, the text is ambiguous in its wording. The phrase ‘ta logia’ has been interpreted in numerous ways, i.e. sayings, teachings, or even Gospel.

Polycarp
Born some thirty years after the crucifixion, Polycarp is an important link to the Apostolic Age. A strong defender of Orthodoxy, he seems to have been aware of the Gospel of the Hebrews written by Matthew.

GHeb 6-7 These quotes are ‘possibly’ from the oral tradition or possibly from the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. Scholars are not certain as to their source.

Barnabas
A Levite who became one of the earliest Christian disciples at Jerusalem, the writings of Barnabas are an important window on the development of early Christianity.

GHeb 8 It falls into the ‘possible category’ for most of the same reasons mentioned above for GHeb 6 & 7.

Justin
Justin was born 67 years after the crucifixion in Samaria of non-Christian parents. He defended Christianity from the attack by Judaism, wrote an apology of Christianity to Emperor Antonius Pius, and was martyred for his faith. He is an important and reliable witness to the development of the early Church and the New Testament corpus.

GHeb-9 and GHeb-10 It is ’probable’ that these fragments are from the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. The Church Fathers explain that the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew was sometimes referred to as the Gospel of the Apostles. Justin cites as his authority the “Apostles of our Christ” and the “Gospel of the Apostles.” (See GHeb-55) Also, Jesus being ‘begotten’ at His baptism is unique to the Hebrew Gospel.

Irenaeus
This great defender of Orthodoxy in the early Church has much to say about the Hebrew Christian Sect called the Ebionites. He argues that their beliefs are closer to those of the Jews than Christians. Born some eighty years after the crucifixion, his writings are considered reliable by most scholars of ancient and modern times.

GHeb-11 Here Irenaeus states that the Ebionite community uses only the Gospel of Matthew! Other Church Fathers confirm what he writes, but say the Ebionites only use the Gospel of the Hebrews, making it ‘probable’ that the Gospel of the Hebrews was written by Matthew. It is highly unlikely than he is referring to the Canonical Matthean Gospel (see Epiphanius and Eusebius).

GHeb-12 Irenaeus states that Matthew wrote his Gospel for the Hebrews in their own dialect. Biblical scholars agree that Irenaeus cannot be referring to the Canonical Matthean Gospel, which has been shown to be composed in Greek by a person other than Matthew. This raises the ‘probability’ that Irenaeus is referring to the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-13 (See GHeb-11)

Pantaenus
The first head of the Catechetical School at Alexandria, Pantaenus had extensive knowledge of the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-14 This excerpt explains why those who were associated with the school of Alexandria had such extensive knowledge of the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. This document acquired by Pantaenus could not have been the Canonical Matthean Gospel, which was written in Greek by an unknown redactor. Therefore it is ‘probable’ that GHeb-14 is referring to the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

Tertullian
Tertullian was born in Carthage, studied law, and converted to Christianity. GHeb-15 Some scholars say that this quote is from the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. However, the evidence is scanty and therefore must be placed in the ‘possible’ category.

Hegesippus
A contemporary of Irenaeus, Hegesippus was a master of Syriac and Hebrew. He was familiar with Jewish oral tradition as well as Hebrew Christianity, and, more particularly, the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-16 This fragment directly cites the Gospel of the Hebrews and is therefore in the ‘highly probable’ category.

Clement of Alexandria
Clement of Alexandria was the successor of Pantaenus, and thus had access to the Gospel of the Hebrews as Matthew originally wrote it in Hebrew script.

GHeb-17 and 18 and 19 These three will be treated together, as they are from the same work, the Stromateis, and refer to the Gospel of the Hebrews. Waitz and others assign these fragments to the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew and the evidence suggests that it is ‘probable’ that they are correct. From Clements’s text it would appear that these teachings are familiar to Clements’s readers. ‘Seeking until one finds’ and ‘seeing God in your brother’ are themes developed in the Canonical New Testament. Also, it is clear that the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, or it least its teachings, were known to the writers of the Gospel of Thomas.

Origen
Origen is considered one of the greatest scholars of the Early Church. He had an extensive knowledge of Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. He spent most of his life in Alexandria, but later resided in Caesarea, which is where he died.

GHeb-20 This fragment cites the fact that the gospel in Hebrew script was written by Matthew. Most scholars put it into the ‘highly probable’ category.

GHeb-21 This fragment was developed in the ‘Judgment’ of the Gospel of Matthew. However, because it so strongly reflects the poverty theme of the Ebionites, it probably originated with their oral tradition and it is only ‘possible’ that it was ever part of the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-22 Origen cites this fragment as being “of the Hebrews” and since there is no evidence to the contrary, it is ‘highly probable’ that he is correct. This fragment is very important to literary scholars, as this story is found in the Canonical Matthean Gospel. The Matthean redactor treats his Hebrew source in the same way he treats his Marken source. It is tightened, simplified, and unnecessary details such as “scratched his head” are omitted. It is made less Hebrew in nature, for such terms as “sons of Abraham” are omitted. So is the word ‘frates’. According to higher critics, this proves that the quotation originated fred the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-23 It is ‘highly probable’ that this fragment is from the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, as Origen cites it as his source and there is no evidence to contradict him. It is apparent from GHeb-23 that the Gospel of the Hebrews is well known to the Christians at Origen’s time and is causing theological problems that need to be dealt with. Still, the use of the phrase “if any accept” shows that they are not the majority, or maybe they are, but they simply see GHeb as a threat to the doctrine of the Holy Trinity, the virgin birth and the maleness of God. Spong and others have argued that “these doctrines” were developed later in Church history. Higher criticism points to GHeb being composed in Hebrew, for Hebrew has the Holy Spirit as female while Latin and Greek do not. Finally, the Holy Spirit being female and the mother of Christ became more and more abhorrent to the Roman Catholic Church and is an important factor in the Gospel of the Hebrews being excluded in the Canon.

Eusebius
Of all the scholars of the early Church, Eusebius is probably in the best position to give us reliable information about the New Testament corpus and the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. The reason for this is three-fold: 1.     Eusebius was born 227 years after the crucifixion of our Lord. This puts him in the best period of time to know extensively about the early Church writings. A hundred years earlier and one is too close to see the entire picture objectively. A hundred years later and one is too far away from the events.

2.     He was baptized at Caesarea. This mean he was living in the right place and at the right time to give us the best possible information regarding the New Testament corpus that had been developing over the past two centuries. In the city where Origen had resided and taught at the end of his life, Eusebius was heir to the scholarly material collected by Origen and his predecessors.

3.     He was the Church’s first comprehensive historian. Over his life he wrote a meticulous, detailed and extensive history from the time of Jesus to his own time. It can fairly be said he was the Josephus Flavius of Christianity.

Eusebius catalogues all the Church writings of the first two and a half centuries of the New Testament corpus with a view to their authority and reliability. Many of the works he wrote extensively about are no longer in existence, including the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-24 It is ‘probable’ that this was from the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-25

This is an authoritative source that the Apostle Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew before he left to preach to other nations. Since modern Higher Critics and Epiphanius agree this could not be the Canonical Matthean Gospel, and that only the Gospel of the Hebrews was written by Matthew in the Hebrew language, this excerpt ‘probably’ refers to the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-26 This shows clearly that Eusebius knows of both the Canonical Matthean Gospel, which is in Greek, and the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, of which Hebrew Christians are especially delighted.

GHeb-27 Eusebius makes a very important correction. Irenaeus states that the Hebrew Ebionite community uses only one Gospel, which he calls the Gospel of Matthew. Eusebius knows the confusion this can cause. Therefore, he corrects GHeb-3 and GHeb-5 by changing the name of the original Hebrew Matthew to the Gospel of the Hebrews. From Eusebius on the Greek Matthean Gospel written by an unknown redactor is often called the Gospel of Matthew by the Church and the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew is called by many the Gospel of the Hebrews is. Confused?

GHeb-28 Scholars place this in the ‘possible’ category due to its lack of detail.

GHeb-29 It is ‘probable’ that this quotation from Eusebius is from the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, as Eusebius knew that it was the only Gospel used among the Hebrew Christians written in Hebrew script.

Didymus
Didymus was a disciple of Origen. He was also the Head of the Catechetical School of Alexandria. Therefore, he had access to the scholarly works collected by his predecessors, Pantaenus, Clement and Origen. Thus he was familiar with and had access to the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-30 It is highly ‘probable’ that this reference is to the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, as we know Didymus has access to it and he cites it as his source regarding people with two names. It is also obvious that the people to whom he is speaking have full knowledge of this Gospel and recognize it as authoritative. What we cannot know is what aspect of this Gospel makes him believe that Matthew was not called Levi, or why he would consider the Gospel of the Hebrews more authoritative than the Gospel of Luke.

Epiphanius
Epiphanius was the Bishop of Salamis, Cyprus, and spent most of his life battling heretics. The Panarion is particularly helpful in understanding Hebrew Christianity during a time in which the Church was moving away from its Jewish roots.

GHeb-31 Epiphanius was probably the first to write of the Hebrew Christian community called the Nazarenes. They had a copy of the Gospel of the Hebrews, written by “Matthew quite complete in Hebrew, for this Gospel is certainly preserved among them as it was first written in Hebrew letters”. Thus, it would appear they added little of their oral tradition to this Gospel, making it quite reliable. According to Epiphanius, the community of the Nazarenes existed in Beroea, Syria. This group began when the disciples moved from Jerusalem, for they believed that Jerusalem would be destroyed.

According to the Panarion Chapter 29, Epiphanius states that they were not Jews, but Hebrew Christians. The reason the Jews resented them was that they had been Jews of Hebrew stock but preach that Jesus is the Messiah. Except for the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, no other Gospel is mentioned by Epiphanius, and he certainly does not allude directly or indirectly to the Nazarenes composing a Gospel.

GHeb-32 This states that the Gospel of the Hebrews was written by Matthew in Hebrew and was the only Gospel to be composed in Hebrew. This confirms what literary critics have suspected. The Canonical Matthean Gospel was not composed in Hebrew nor did Matthew write it. Rather, Matthew wrote only the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-33 – 38 All these excerpts are taken from the Hebrew Gospel written by Matthew. There is no doubt of this as one reads Panarion Chapter 30.

The problem is that Epiphanius alleges that the Ebionites adulterated the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. Literary analysis has not been conclusve.

Of particular interest is GHeb 35 (see also GHeb10) for it solves the mystery of the Letter to the Hebrews 1:5 For to which of the angels did God ever say, "Today you are my Son; I have become your Father"

Only the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew has the word "today". Therefore the Letter to the Hebrews was based on the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew for the Gospels in the Bible do not contain the word "today".

Jerome
Born 298 years after the crucifixion, Jerome is reputed to be one of the great scholars of the Church. Since the 8th century he was considered to be a Father of the Church and Pius XII found him to be an indisputable witness to the mind of the Church in dealing with the Word of God. Literary scholars agree that he is our greatest source of information regarding the the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. Jerome explains that Matthew wrote the Gospel in Hebrew letters for Hebrew Christians. The library in Caesarea acquired the original work, of which Jerome knew or might even have seen. Yet it was the Nazarene community of Beroea that gave him a copy of the Gospel of the Hebrews.

Jerome translated this copy from Hebrew into Greek and thought of GHeb as being authoritative. However, it must be noted that Roman Catholics and Protestants view Jerome’s works very differently. Roman Catholics view him as if he were some kind of SAINT (quite literally), while many of the Protestant writers have called his work into question. Some Protestants not only maintain that Jerome’s works reflect a lack of scholarly intellect, but go so far as to say they show a lack of Christian integrity. It is maintained that he falsified information and that he even lied about translating the Gospel of the Hebrews into Greek. The historical evidence shows that Jerome enjoyed a good reputation among his contemporaries, had a superior intellect, a Christian education and a deep commitment to the scholarly truth. Today, the writings of Jerome are generally considered to be authoritative.

GHeb-39 The phrase “our bread of the morrow” indicated that this fragment had Hebrew origins, or possibly even Syriac. It further illustrates that Jerome believes that the Gospel of the Hebrews is the "authentic" Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. It is ‘highly probable’ that it was part of the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew because of GHeb 47.

GHeb-40 This fragment was written in Hebrew script. Since Epiphanius states that only the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew was written in Hebrew, Biblical scholars would place this in the ‘probable’ category.

GHeb-41 Probable. GHeb-42 ‘Highly probable’, as the Gospel of the Hebrews is cited. (See discussion on “bodiless demon” in GHeb 4.)

GHeb 43 and 44 It is ‘highly probable’ that these excerpts were part of the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. Jerome says that this is his source and he is dealing with a problem that arises from the Hebrew language. More importantly, he spends considerable effort to explain away a female Holy Spirit. This indicates that both he and the reader recognize the authority of the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

To Jerome, a female Holy Spirit, a Jesus with two mothers (Mary and the Holy Spirit), and the concept of the Holy Spirit coming upon Mary making her with child are clearly disturbing. Yet Jerome feels he cannot dismiss the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew as spurious.

GHeb-45 ‘Highly probable’ – The Gospel is cited.

GHeb-46 ‘Highly probable’ – GHeb cited as source. It should be noted that GHeb 46, 48, 57 and 58 all attest that the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew was translated from Hebrew into Greek.

GHeb-47 ‘Highly probable’ as the Gospel is cited by Jerome.

GHeb-48 See GHeb-46, above. It is also important to note Jerome maintained this Gospel is “authentic” Matthew.

GHeb-49 Epiphanius maintains that only Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew. This excerpt seems to confirm this fact. Thus, it is ‘probable’ GHeb-49 is from the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-50 ‘Possible’.

GHeb-51 ‘Highly probable,’ as Jerome cites this as his source.

GHeb-52 ‘Possible.’ No gospel is actually cited by Jerome, but see GHeb-53.

GHeb-53 ‘Probable,’ if one accepts that only one Gospel was composed in Hebrew letters.

GHeb-54 ‘Probable,’ if there is only one Hebrew Gospel.

GHeb-55 ‘Highly probable.’ This citation clears up many problems. It affirms that the Gospel in Hebrew script is indeed the Gospel of the Hebrews. It also states that this Gospel was written by Matthew. It further states that there is a transcript of the Gospel of the Hebrews in the library at Caesarea as well as at the Nazarene community. It is clear that although Jerome and others refer to the Gospel of the Hebrews as Authentic Matthew, the Hebrew Gospel, etc., that they have only the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew in mind.

Jerome mentions that the Gospel of the Hebrews is sometimes referred to as the Gospel of the Apostles. This is not the Gospel of the Twelve Apostles, which has nothing to do with the Authentic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew.

GHeb-56

‘Highly probable,’ for the Gospel is cited as the source.

GHeb-57 ‘Highly probable.’ This confirms that Matthew wrote his Gospel in Hebrew script, for the Hebrew Christians.

NB: Here it should be noted that much confusion has been caused by the term “Jewish Christian” which is an oxymoron. Judaism is a religion that accepts the Old Testament but does not accept Jesus. Christianity is a religion that accepts the Old Testament and Jesus. Hebrew, on the other hand refers to one’s language, culture, even ethnic origin. Thus, there are Hebrew Gospels, Hebrew Christians and Hebrew Jews, but never Jewish Christians nor Jewish Gospels. Sloppy semantics seem to be a major source of difficulty.

A second error of semantics takes place when GHeb 57 is translated as “permitted me to copy it.” Some scholars then argue that there is no evidence Jerome went to the Nazarene community to copy it, thus the conclusion is inevitable that it was not the Nazarenes who communicated knowledge of this gospel to him.

Sloppy semantics makes it sound as if Jerome was only given permission to go there personally. Actually, the permission was broader than that. Here it is important to go to the original text and study it carefully.

GHeb-58 See GHeb-46.

GHeb-59 ‘Possible.’.

 * Burnett Hillman Streeter, The Four Gospels : A Study of Origins. - He shows that Canonical Matthew was "probably" NOT written by Matthew in Hebrew.

 * P. Parker, The Gospel Before Mark - He raises the "possiblity" that their was an Authentic Gospel of Matthew . Thus he provides a meeting of the minds between old and modern writers.

 * R. Brown, The Birth of the Messiah. - After reading Brown one comes to the conclusion the this Wiki-article is a true and objective reflection of what we know of the Authentic Gospel of Matthew spoken of by the Church Fathers.

--Poorman 04:21, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

A great article
The links are very helpful -- 132.206.33.148 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:59, 19 May 2010 (UTC).

Merging
With the recent merging templates, I believe it would be best to merge all the Jewish-Christian Gospels together into this article (including authentic Matthew). There is a lot of repeated content, often very POV and fringe. Putting the articles together will help achieve a neutral and helpful article. --Ari (talk) 04:38, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Speaking as a general reader, that would make reading easier.. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:17, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * These articles do need work but they are distinct topics that should not be merged. They are on my "to do list" - Ret.Prof (talk) 04:18, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. I have decapitalized "authentic" in English and Latin which better seems to reflect the intent of in quod vocatur a plerisque Matthaei authenticum. As a little request it would be interesting to see in the refs views of whether plerisque is a generalism or whether plerisque refers to Nazareni et Ebionitae. Best regards.In ictu oculi (talk) 05:51, 3 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Again you have a good point. As far a the merge is concerned you have won me over. I am going to be bold and redirect. If get into trouble... well it won't have been the first time. - Ret.Prof (talk) 11:51, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Restoring Authentic Gospel of Matthew after merge
I merged this article in good faith. I now see I "was played" (See Reflections of an Old Geezer at User talk:Ret.Prof and Talk:Gospel of Matthew) Obviously the only way to delete an article is with an AfD. Sorry - Ret.Prof (talk) 04:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Ret prof.
 * 1. The merged content still populates Gospel of the Hebrews. So a restore post merge is duplication.
 * 2. You were not "played," I rather think you played other editors. You seemed fairly eager to move Authentic Gospel of Matthew into Gospel of the Hebrews and present all the POV there as a fact.
 * 3. As far as AfD, so why have you twice within 24 hours (04:04, 17:39, 24 March 2011) unilateraly deleted Hebrew Gospel hypothesis?
 * 4. Why do you continue to delete all content related to the actual text at Gospel of the Hebrews?In ictu oculi (talk) 23:06, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Point # 3
I checked WP Policy and you are correct. I will not merge the POV fork, but post an AfD. As to the other points - Please see talk at the Gospel of the Hebrews Cheers - Ret.Prof (talk) 00:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion

 * I found this AfD 2005 inconcluded and this Not sure what to make of them. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:55, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You might also note that Authentic gospel of matthew is currently a redirect to Jewish-Christian Gospels, which seems kind of strange considering (I think) it is probably best a redirect to this page. Alternately, maybe it should be deleted, as most people (I think) capitalize the "M" in "Matthew." John Carter (talk) 16:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Hebrew Paralipomena section & other comments
My most significant reservation about this article is the length of the above named section. It looks to be, to the uninitiated on this subject (like me) to be, basically, a "copy" of the work in question. More or less, by policy and guidelines, we summarize material, we do not try to reproduce it. If there were an external site that included it all, it might be better to include that as an external link and just summarize the major points of disparity between the "accepted" Gospel of Matthew and this work.

I also have a bit of question regarding the use of the word "authentic". The use of that word implies that all other versions are "unauthentic" or false. Granted, if that is the name most used for this source, as per WP:NAME, then it should be used. Otherwise, maybe something a bit more "neutral", like maybe "Original Gospel of Matthew", might be more appropriate.

The nine links one right after each other in the lead is perhaps one of the other main stylistic reservations about this article. If there would be any way to reduce the number of them, that would probably help as well. The lead could be expanded to provide a better summary of the content as well. John Carter (talk) 16:34, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi John, out of interest, what do you judge the subject of the article is?
 * The Latin of Jerome's authentic is usually translated "original" as you say. Neither the words "paralipomena" nor "authentic" are found in academic texts discussing these issues. Both of these are, in their usage on these Wikipedia articles, neologisms, introduced here by an earlier editor direct from (a) Pick's Latin book title, (b) Jerome's Latin sentence.In ictu oculi (talk) 20:20, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if you mean what the putative subject of the article is, or what the apparent subject of the article, based on the existing content, is. Obviously, the apparent subject of the article is the "Authentic Gospel of Matthew" or "Original Gospel of Matthew," whatever you want to call it. It does seem the majority of the text is about, in some way, the Gospel of the Hebrews, which is an entirely different matter. While there is clearly a theory that the two are identical, it would be POV pushing to assert that in any of the articles. I have seen "authentic Gospel of Matthew" appear frequently when I did a google search for the term, but, of course, I would. Even then, Original Gospel of Matthew was one of the first four or five results, though. My main question with the word "authentic" is that, in general usage, that would imply that the "original" was written by Matthew (given the relationship of "authentic" and "author" which is I think often understood in English), and that the Gospel of Matthew itself wasn't. I'm not sure if the first possibility is part of this theory, and I don't think the latter is an idea necessarily generally accepted now either. Regarding the use of the "paralipomena" word (and I thank you for including it above, it is kinda hard to spell), knowing nothing about this subject myself, I would have to think that it probably shouldn't be used. Certainly, this article could say, in effect, that "source x" is considered to contain some of the text of the subject, and the articles on the various "source x"'s, particularly the shorter ones, could definitely include in full the texts of those fragments. With links from this article to those articles, it would then be possible for someone interested in finding the text to do so. John Carter (talk) 17:29, 20 April 2011 (UTC)
 * HI John. Yes, well the Gospel of the Hebrews content has already been merged into Gospel of the Hebrews. It's not really clear why after merge it was then recreated here.In ictu oculi (talk) 15:17, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, if it is in the main article, then only a short summary section as per WP:SS should be here. Also, out of curiosity, how exactly is this hypothesis different from the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew? From looking at Eerdman's Encyclopedia of the Bible yesterday, and its article on the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, I got the impression (possibly false, of course) that the "Hebrew Gospel of Matthew" is considered by many to have survived as the Gospel of the Hebrews. Is that the case? John Carter (talk) 15:54, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi John, no not all, thats just one of the various OR/POV views in this article.
 * Gospel of the Hebrews = a translation of Matthew from Greek into Aramaic given to Jerome.
 * Hebrew Gospels of Matthew = medieval translation from Latin to Hebrew.
 * Hebrew Gospel hypothesis = a group of related theories. Among which this "Authentic Gospel of Matthew" article might be partly based on/share some ground with a couple of those, but this article (before it was merged to Gospel of the Hebrews, and as it now is reappeared) was heavily POV/OR.
 * In ictu oculi (talk)
 * Well, if the content of this article really is more or less identical to the material regarding that subject, then I would think that WP:NAME should apply and this article should be moved to that title. There is a question as to how individually notable the separate texts currently discussed in Hebrew Gospels of Matthew are - if they are sufficiently notable, and if there is enough encyclopedic content to merit a separate article, I could see that article (or three separate articles, one for each text) existing. That is, if they do meet notability and have enough separate content to merit an article. The Hebrew Gospel hypothesis seems to me to be separate enough for a separate article, although there potentially be questions about various things. Anyway, as you seem to agree that the first two might be, basically, redundant, I think it makes sense to propose this article be moved, and the Hebrew Gospels of Matthew article be merged, at least temporarily, into this article (under the title Hebrew Gospel of Matthew), and am now proposing such. John Carter (talk) 15:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

 * Hi John, sorry, I wasn't clear enough. The main problem is that the content of this article is not going to identical to any objective article since this article is the sandbox/blog of 2006 user(s) Poorman/Melissadolbeer. There is some content that could be merged with Gospel of the Hebrews and has already been merged with Gospel of the Hebrews. WP:NAME should apply to all of these articles, however I now realise that "Hebrew Gospel of Matthew" (the current title of the article about the medieval Jewish translations of Matthew) does not meet the requirements of WP:NAME and is based solely on a fringe view by one author.

I think the two questions are: (1) Given that this article was already merged (and has been restored from a REDIRECT) why not simply go back to the REDIRECT. (2) Does the redirect "Authentic Gospel of Matthew" even deserve to be kept as REDIRECT? In ictu oculi (talk) 21:04, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Proposed move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: closed; this is a redirect. If you would like to move Jewish-Christian Gospels please start a discussion there. ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 19:42, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Authentic Gospel of Matthew → Hebrew Gospel of Matthew –

It seems that this subject is generally better known under the name Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. That being the case, it makes sense to me to move it to its more common name, and I would support such a move. John Carter (talk) 15:44, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * John, thanks, but a merge has already happened to Gospel of the Hebrews 3 or 4 months ago. This page has virtually nothing to do with 14th Century rabbinical translations of Matthew.In ictu oculi (talk) 20:54, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Proposed Merger
I have proposed that the article Hebrew Gospels of Matthew be merged into this article. At present, I cannot see any overwhelming reason for it to be a separate article. Should any individual texts referenced there be proven to be sufficiently notable and to have enough relevant content to merit a separate article, of course, then there would be legitimate grounds for discussing spinout. For the purposes of optimum clarity, I would myself support such a merger. John Carter (talk) 15:53, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi John. Why would an article on Shem Tov ben Isaac ben Shaprut's translation (1375) and two other medieval rabbinical versions of Matthew, be merged into an article (which itself was already merged with Gospel of the Hebrews and deleted) about the Hebrew Gospel hypothesis? I have moved The page "Hebrew Gospels of Matthew" (links | delete) has been moved to "Rabbinical translations of Matthew" which while not a perfect title is at least going to stop confusion.In ictu oculi (talk) 20:51, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

 * The three texts, which are all medieval Hebrew translations of Matthew, have finally been cleaned up, thanks to In ictu oculi, and they should stay that way. All of the rabbinic texts except Shem Tov are close copies of Greek Matthew.  Shem Tov shows some variants which suggest a possible origin from a Latin harmony.  None of these texts have anything to do with a hypothetical original Hebrew Matthew, although there have been editors over the history of the article who think that they do, apparently out of complete ignorance of the subject matter.  I think the name change to Rabbinical translations of Matthew is helpful in attempting to avoid this confusion in the future.  Ovadyah (talk) 18:13, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for choosing to disagree with me after I agreed to IIO's comments below. I would have thought that the comments there were clear enough to indicate my thinking that the points raised above and in the section below were, apparently, valid, and I agreed with the proposal made there. My primary reasons for suggesting the merge were questions in my eyes whether the three specific translations, as entities themselves, qualified as sufficiently notable per WP:N to merit spinout. I still am not entirely sure that they do, but as my own comments below should make clear, I am willing to accept his opinion regarding the matter of notability. John Carter (talk) 18:24, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Why must you take everything so personally? I was responding to the proposal to merge itself.  The fact that you initiated the proposal doesn't mean the ensuing discussion is all about you.  Ovadyah (talk) 18:53, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Having said that, there is no rational basis to conclude that all Hebrew copies of Matthew must somehow be related to each other and to a Hebrew original because they are in Hebrew. I don't know of any modern scholars that would support that conclusion.  Ovadyah (talk) 19:00, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * (ec) First, I note that, while it is nice to have comments on proposals, it is even nicer if those comments themselves seem to be made in a time-appropriate way. I had already agreed to IIO's proposals below before Ovadyah chose to disagree with this proposal. Evidently, he was either unable or unwilling to notice that. Having said that, I can and do see no reason for the proposal to remain active. In response to the point of the copies being related, I don't see how that is necessarily relevant. The question is more about the specific notability of the subject as per WP:N. So far as I have seen, the three works in question may only be sufficiently notable for a separate article if they are taken together as a single topic. If that is the case, whether one editor counts it as "rational" or not, policies and guidelines determine what the content and scope of articles is, not one individual's POV, however well or poorly informed. John Carter (talk) 19:06, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks John, Ovadyah for that. I think what was lacking in the original rabbinical translations of Matthew was recognition of the original context - Jewish apologia in 14thC Spain - wheras the article was originally written on the basis of a 1-man theory that Shem Tov's Touchstone was written using a lost original Hebrew Matthew. Ovadyah, I have taken your point on the Latin harmonies and added ref there from William Horbury Hebrew study from Ezra to Ben-Yehuda 1999 p129. Cheers, both.In ictu oculi (talk) 22:58, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification regarding the original structure of the article. I do however still have a concern that the topic Hebrew Gospel of Matthew, which has a separate entry in the Eerdmans Encyclopedia of the Bible (or is it E Dictionary otB? - I forget) still does not itself apparently have a separate article. I would think that subject would, hopefully, be a bit higher priority for a separate article than this, apparently offshoot, topic. John Carter (talk) 15:07, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Hi John, it must be the Dictionary, 1425 pages (Unlikely that Eerdmans' Family Encyclopedia of the Bible (1978) 328 pages has an article on ... but Wikipedia has two articles: Does the text really require a third article of its own (The Hebrew Matthew translations in Ibn Shaprut's Touchstone)? Particularly seeing as the Touchstone has never even been translated to English, so its impact on the English speaking world would be marginal. Also Ibn Shaprut's Matthew builds on and is followed by other Rabbinical translations, such as the Milhamoth ha-Shem "Wars of the Lord" of Jacob Ben Reuben 12C, which has its own Hebrew Matthew 1:1-16, 3:13-17, 4:1-11, 5:33-40, 11:25-27, 12:1-8, 26:36-39, 28:16-20, so I think taking Ibn Shaprut's Touchstone out of the main rabbinical article would lose all context. It may be that the Eerdman Dictionary entry is just a stub and doesn't mention (or even know about) the 5 other rabbinical translations of Matthew. In ictu oculi (talk) 15:55, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Ibn Shaprut - The Touchstone
 * Rabbinical translations - Ibn Shaprut's Matthew.
 * I'm going to check the source now, actually. As I remember, it is a rather substantial article, as such articles go, being at least a few paragraphs. As I remember, the idea there is, more or less, the same as this one. I am going to the library to check the source now, and hope to return with the full quotation from it for use tomorrow. John Carter (talk) 16:10, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, the Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible, ed. David Noel Freedman, Eerdmans, 2000, on pp. 873-874 has a three-paragraph entry on the "Hebrew Gospel of Matthew" written by George Howard. The first paragraph of that entry is about the early patristic belief that the original text of Matthew was in Hebrew, the second is about Shemtob, and the third is about Munster and de Tillet. The Anchor Bible Dictionary vol. IV, pp. 642-643 has a substantially longer article on the idea of Hebrew versions of Matthew, also by George Howard. So, I'm getting the impression what George Howard says on this subject is more or less universally accepted? His book on the subject is, apparently, called the "Hebrew Gospel of Matthew," which would be a point to support that being the title of the article. I'm not personally convinced that is the strongest point available regarding the title, however, particularly given the title of the article in the Anchor Bible Dictionary by the same author. I do however think, at the very least, there should be at least a subheading in some article, possibly/probably this one, on the Hebrew Gospel of Matthew which could be directly linked to from that redirect page. I do think that there might also be a fair case as per WP:NAME for that actually being the title of the main article, depending on whether the content of this article is basically similar to that of his book. Also, I think that the use of "Hebrew" as an adjective is possibly less problematic than the use of "authentic", "original," or any of a number of other basically synonymous words, at least in part because of the number of potential synonyms which could be used there. However, I acknowledge that I have not read Howard's book, and that your point about the potential ambiguity of entitling all this content by the Hebrew title is also a good one. I do however think that there should be somewhere a section titled Hebrew Gospel of Matthew which that page can be used as a direct redirect to. John Carter (talk) 16:44, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi John
 * >So, I'm getting the impression what George Howard says on this subject is more or less universally accepted?< Hardly, as far as I know no one takes it seriously at all, though only James Carleton Paget, John Duncan Martin Derrett, Bernard Dov Cooperman don't go into details - only William Horbury has written at length why. And a bit unusual that Anchor, let alone Eerdmans, would invite the originator of a 1-person theory to write a dictionary article on his own theory, but I guess neither dictionary could find another author for the subject. Which in itself is a bit of an issue for Wikipedia, it would mean sources were Howard-HGoMbook, Howard-Eerdmans and Howard-Anchor. I'm fine with there being a subheading in some (several) articles, on Howard's Hebrew Gospel of Matthew book which could be directly linked to from that redirect page. In fact I've already tried linking out from Special:WhatLinksHere/Rabbinical_translations_of_Matthew.
 * But I don't think that any of the above justifies retaining all the Authentic Gospel of Matthew which was already merged 6 months ago. I suppose what's left (the redirect) could direct somewhere. But where? In ictu oculi (talk) 17:55, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * In no way disagreeing with your point, I do notice that Howard included his own book in the bibliography of the article in Eerdmans (not that that's a surprise, mind you), and, although I didn't write down the bibliography of the Anchor, I seem to remember it was included there as well. Let me try to find any reviews or comments in journals, specifically academic reviews and comments, on the Howard book today. Yeah, I know you may have/probably have already done so, but there might be additional comments since then. The other sources listed for the Eerdmans article, FWIW, were the Elliott The Apocryphal New Testament, Hennecke/Schneemelcher's New Testament Apocrypha, Klijn's Jewish-Christian Gospel Tradition, and Klijn & Reinink's sole collaboration, whose title I forgot to write down. They apparently discuss the idea at some length as well. John Carter (talk) 18:17, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I should help with Anchor but I've misplaced key to my CD-Rom box. RBL has nothing on Howard's book. Klijn and Reinink, Jewish-Christian Sects, 1973 by any chance? Horbury's review is in JJS 47 (1996), and his appendix in Matthew 19-28 ed. William David Davies, Dale C. Allison In ictu oculi (talk) 19:09, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I personally get the impression that this is, perhaps, a rather infrequently discussed matter in modern literature? I find very little about it in JSTOR either. If so, that might be one of the reasons that there are such few sources available on it. And it may well be that Howard was chosen as the author of these texts based on the fact that he might be one of the few authors who has discussed the matter in independent works at all, and perhaps in no way as an endorsement of his personal theory regarding the matter. And I do note that the article in the Eerdmans book doesn't seem to specifically say anything about Howard's theory, just refering to the works themselves. If that is the case, maybe that would be the best way to proceed in the article, just using him (and the other sources) as sources for the material, and giving only a rather quick discussion on Howard's theory itself? John Carter (talk) 15:18, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Article already merged Oct 2010 with consensus, then restored/duplicated March 2011 without consensus
In ictu oculi (talk) 21:19, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * This article was merged here, at the time based on consensus on the Talk pagem then then restored, but merged content left on Gospel of the Hebrews without consensus. As it is the simplest cleanest way to deal with this is simply revert the restore. All in all the way we've got here is clearly a bit of a mess, but the result should be to leave properly titled/written/referenced articles which would resemble what a normal encyclopedia would have:
 * (1) fragments of a 3rdC Nazarene text preserved in Jerome.
 * (2) 3x 14thC rabbinical Hebrew texts of Matthew
 * (3) the hypotheses of James R. Edwards (2010) etc. which seem notable enough for one article.
 * Sounds good to me. John Carter (talk) 18:07, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Goodo, then we'll leave this as it is for a few days, see if anyone else comments, and if not re-revert. Cheers.In ictu oculi (talk) 23:00, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Authentic Gospel of Matthew


text:
Kenneth Brown

Kenneth Brown may refer to:

 * Kenneth Brown (playwright) (born 1954), Canadian playwright, actor, director, and producer
 * Kenneth Brown (academic) (1933–2010), American peace studies academic
 * Kenneth Brown (author) (Kenneth P. Brown, Jr.), president of the Alexis de Tocqueville Institution
 * Kenneth Brown (cricketer) (born 1967), South African cricketer
 * Kenneth Brown (pastoralist) (1837–1876), Western Australian pastoralist, explorer, and executed murderer
 * Kenneth Brown (journalist) (1868–1958), American journalist
 * Kenneth Brown (interior designer) (born 1971), American interior designer
 * Kenneth Brown (mathematician) (born 1945), American professor working in category and cohomology theory
 * Kenneth J. Brown (born 1925), Canadian-born American labor union leader
 * Kenneth H. Brown (1936–2022), American playwright and writer
 * Kenneth L. Brown (born 1936), American diplomat
 * Kenneth M. Brown (1887–1955), Canadian pulp and paper worker and political figure in Newfoundland
 * Kenneth Francis Brown (1919–2014), American politician and businessman

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

title: Kenneth Brown


text:
Talk:Kenneth Brown

Page merge
I have recently merged the following pages together, because of some confusion between different people being called Ken or Kenneth:
 * Kenneth Brown
 * Ken Brown

Please let me know if there are any problems, thanks. Thebestkiano 16:38, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

 * I have reverted; discussion at Talk:Ken Brown. Hesperian 05:12, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kenneth Brown


text:
Greenhead

Greenhead may refer to:

Placenames

 * Greenhead (Wishaw), Scotland
 * Greenhead, Northumberland, England
 * Greenhead, Scottish Borders, Scotland
 * Greenhead, Staffordshire, England
 * Greenhead College, a sixth form college in Huddersfield, England

Other

 * Greenhead fly, a fly in the family Tabanidae family often considered a pest.
 * Greenhead IPA, an India Pale Ale produced by the Newburyport Brewing Company. It is named after the Greenhead fly.

As Green Head

 * Green Head, Cumbria, England
 * Green Head, Western Australia

title: Greenhead


text:
Aaron Lee

Aaron Lee Soon Yong (born June 7, 1972) is a Singaporean prize-winning poet who writes in English. He was born in Malaysia but received his education in Singapore and became a Singaporean in 1996.

Early beginnings
Aaron began writing poetry during his days at Raffles Institution, a secondary school in Singapore where he befriended other students who would also eventually go on to become published Singaporean writers. By 1990, he had, along with other ex-school mates, Jonathan Kuan Wei Han, Tong Jo Tze, Alvin Pang and Jeffrey Lim, interested a Singapore publisher, VJ Times, in the publication of an anthology of poems contributed by the five writers. This collection, In Search of Words, was published in 1991.

Publications
Lee's first collection of poems, A Visitation of Sunlight, was named one of the best books of 1997 by The Straits Times. The collection was well received and played a part in a late 1990s resurgence of interest in Singapore poetry centred on a new generation of Singapore poets.

In 1999, the title poem of his book was selected for the National Arts Council’s Poems on the Move programme, a national initiative to bring poetry to the masses on public transport.

Lee’s work has been anthologised in such publications as Rhythms: a Millennial Anthology of Poetry (Singapore), the New Straits Times (Malaysia), Anglistik (Germany), and Fifty on 50 (Singapore).

Lee is the co-editor of No Other City: the Ethos Anthology of Urban Poetry and Love Gathers All: the Philippines- Singapore Anthology of Love Poetry  (for which the editors were given an award by the Singapore International Foundation). He has given talks and readings in Malaysia, Germany, the US, the Philippines and Australia.

In 2007, Lee released his second poetry collection, Five Right Angles. The book went on to become a finalist in the Singapore Literature Prize awards of 2008.

He is active in the literary scene in mentoring young poets and conducting school workshops and seminars on creative writing. He is married to an artist and educationist, Namiko Chan. He is a Christian, and his work displays a range of Christian themes and imagery.

In 2014, Lee launched his third poetry collection, Coastlands, at the Singapore Writers Festival. Coastlands documents his life experience as a pilgrim still finding his place in the wider world.

Works

 * A Visitation of Sunlight: Poems 1990-96 (1997, Ethos Books) ISBN 9810095368
 * Five Right Angles: Poems (2007, Ethos Books) ISBN 9789810583682
 * Coastlands (2014, Ethos Books) ISBN 978-981-09-2478-2

Personal life
Born in 1972, Aaron used to reside in Johor Bahru before becoming a Singaporean in 1996. He studied at Woodlands Primary School before attending Raffles Institution after taking his PSLE. After graduating from Raffles Institution, Aaron then studied law at the National University of Singapore Faculty of Law. He married Namiko Chan, a Singaporean painter on June 7, 2003.

title: Aaron Lee


text:
Talk:La clemenza di Tito

Coment
This stub needed some significant help. Some of the "facts" were a bit incorrect, such as the claim that this was Mozart's last opera (a claim that needed qualification, since the sequence was most of "Magic Flute," then all of "Tito," then completion and premiere of "Magic Flute"). Also, the disparaging of "Tito" is sort of old hat; Alfred Einstein was very influential in perpetuating that view, but more recent critics have reassessed the opera and found that it has something worthwhile to say. I added a plot summary with a view to making the entry much more useful. Hope this is found to be of help.--MollyTheCat

Much thanks to Qertis for his/her recent edit of a blunder that resulted from my rearranging wording on the page (i.e., correctly noting that Leopold II was being crowned King of Bohemia in Prague and not Holy Roman Emperor). Excellent catch!-- MollyTheCat 03:41, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

What's the rule regarding character names? And could we stick to it, please? I mean either Italian or English but not both, every time... Safebreaker (talk) 20:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Sesto's and Annio's original singers
I have heard different debates on which of these characters was originally sung by the castrato. I have seen Sesto often. On the other hand, I have seen an article that said Sesto was thought to be the castrato and Annio the mezzo for the longest time and that they recently saw that this was mixed up. I have posted what I have seen on the score on the Neue Mozart-ausgabe as it is an official source. chrisfa678(talk) 19:40, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Plagiarism
The first few paragraphs of the "Background" section are essentially plagiarised from this source:

http://www2.deutschegrammophon.com/special/insights.htms?ID=mackerras-clemenzaditito

 * Is there some way we can just give this author credit? I mean, the background is pretty good, and I wouldn't want to leave a stub on Wikipedia. Could somebody notify the author or --better yet-- get permission to publish it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.103.94.196 (talk) 04:13, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Section Recordings - Met performance 2012
This should be removed, because it was a broadcast, and there is no (legitimate) recording of this performance commercially available. Regards. 81.83.137.111 (talk) 19:28, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on La clemenza di Tito. 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/20091115142821/http://www.earlymusicworld.com/id33.html to http://www.earlymusicworld.com/id33.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) 01:30, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:La clemenza di Tito


text:
Wikipedia:Quebec Wikipedians' notice board/QWMG/Archive

Ceci est une liste des précédents rassemblements du QWMG Montréal. Des comptes-rendus seront ajoutés bientôt!

This is a list of the former gatherings of the QWMG Montréal. Accounts will be added soon!

Lieux / Locations

 * Souper: Le Saloon @ 1333, Sainte-Catherine est (map) (site)
 * Échanges: Bibliothèque nationale du Québec @ 475, De Maisonneuve est (map) (site)

Individus présents / People present

 * Liberlogos 15:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Mathieugp 16:04, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Lawrence Lavigne 19:06, 9 March 2006 (UTC) (18:00-19:00)
 * CJ Withers 06:23, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Compte-rendu / Account
Voici certains sujets abordés lors de la rencontre.
 * Fiablilité de Wikipédia
 * La controverse de la biographie de John Seigenthaler Sr. (voir transcription d'entrevue avec Seigenthaler et Jimbo Wales: [*])
 * A. J. Jacobs & l'Esquire (voir cet article de Libération: ; voir aussi l'expérience en question: [*])
 * La revue Nature et Wikipédia
 * Création prochaine d'un pan révisé de Wikipédia (voir ces articles de Libération et du Guardian:, )
 * L'arrivée de Digital Universe (voir cet article du Spiegel: )
 * Quebec French, l'article et l'histoire
 * Wikipédia à The Colbert Report (voir l'entrevue avec Ariana Huffington ici: )

Lieux / Locations

 * Souper: Les 3 Brasseurs @ 1658, Saint-Denis (map) (site)
 * Échanges: L'Utopik @ 522, Sainte-Catherine (map) (site)

Individus présents / People present

 * Liberlogos 22:45, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Dirac
 * BenoitStandre
 * Delaroyas
 * Lawrence Lavigne 22:15, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Mathieugp 15:15, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Lieux / Locations

 * Souper: Les 3 Brasseurs @ 1658, Saint-Denis (map) (site)
 * Échanges: Saint-Sulpice @ 1680, Saint-Denis (map) (description)

Individus présents / People present

 * Liberlogos 00:48, 3 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Lawrence Lavigne 23:28, September 3, 2005 (UTC)

Lieu / Location

 * Vices & Versa @ 6631, Saint-Laurent (map) (site)

Individus présents / People present

 * Liberlogos 03:02, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Lawrence Lavigne 18:30, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
 * Mathieugp 19:29, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Absences confirmées / Confirmed absences

 * Marianika désolée, répétition pour un show... je suis libre mercredi toutefois si vous tenez à ma présence, moi je n'y tiens pas. Bonne rencontre!

Lieu / Location

 * Vices & Versa @ 6631, Saint-Laurent (map) (site)

Individus présents / People present

 * Liberlogos 4 July 2005 13:55 (UTC)
 * Marianika
 * Marc-André (n'est pas encore membre / not a member yet)

Compte-rendu / Account
Voici les sujets principaux abordés à ce rassemblement. La poursuite ou la remise en cause raisonable des débats est bienvenue dans la section "Discussion". / Here are the main subjects discussed at the last meeting. Pursuing or challenging the debates is welcomed in the "Discussion" section.

 * Deux nouveaux participants ont été acceuillis au sein du QWMG Montréal. Bienvenue!
 * "Montreal Proposition"
 * Marianika & Marc-André ont affirmé être d'accord pour aider à trouver des professeurs pour but d'approuver les articles, comme le suggère la "Proposition".

 * "QLP" ou "PLQ"?
 * Il fut conclus que "PLQ" serait probablement l'acronyme standard à promouvoir sur le Wikipédia, mais cela demeure ouvert à la discussion.

 * René Lévesque
 * Nouvelle résolution à le rendre "featurable". Réflexion lancée au sujet de la nécessité de rendre un certain nombre d'articles québécois méritoires de ce titre, sans s'être entendus pour une liste précise.

 * Louis-Alexandre Taschereau
 * Résolution à vérifier la véracité de l'extrait discutant d'anti-sémitisme.

 * Projets de plus grande collaboration entre Québécois des Wikipédias anglais et français
 * Abordé sans conclusion.

 * L'Amérique française inclut-elle les communautés et peuples n'étant pas directement reliés à la Nouvelle France?
 * Irrésolu.

 * Nouvel hébergement du site des rassemblements
 * Irrésolu.

Lieu / Location

 * Le Laïka @ 4040 Saint-Laurent Boulevard (map) (description)

Individus présents / People present

 * Liberlogos 02:24, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Mathieugp
 * Lawrence Lavigne 05:13, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

Lieu / Location

 * Café L’Utopik

Individus présents / People present

 * Liberlogos
 * Mathieugp
 * Lawrence Lavigne
 * Montrealais

See also:

Lieu / Location

 * Café L’Utopik

Individus présents / People present

 * EvanProdromou
 * Liberlogos
 * Mathieugp
 * Lawrence Lavigne

See also:

Lieu / Location

 * Casa del Popolo

Individus présents / People present

 * EvanProdromou
 * Liberlogos
 * Mathieugp

See also:

Voir aussi / See also

 * Montreal meetups archive on Meetup.com


text:
Martin Freeland

Martin Freeland is a British psytrance artist, record producer and DJ, who has performed under the pseudonym of Man With No Name since 1990. He is best known for the singles "Teleport" and "Floor-Essence", both of which appeared in the UK Singles Chart.

Early work: 1985–1993
Freeland's career began in the mid 1980s, working as a producer and remixer for various dance artists such as Belouis Some and Mirage. In the late 1980s he began producing original material under the names of Positiv Noize, Perfectly Ordinary People and Pisces, with the latter experimenting with the sound of techno with the single "Take Me Higher".

In 1990 Freeland released the single "Way Out West" under the name of Man With No Name. The track sampled lines from the western film, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, and was backed with the acid house track "From Within The Mind of My 909", which was later featured on Richard Sen's 2012 compilation This Ain't Chicago: The Underground Sound Of UK House & Acid 1987–1991 on Strut Records.

Further singles in the early nineties, such as "Geddit?/120 Something" and the EP "From Within", echoed the sound of Detroit techno and British rave. It was during this time that Freeland attended one of the first UK trance parties Concept in Dance, where Paul Oakenfold introduced producer Ian St Paul to Freeland and his music. Following this, Freeland produced several tracks under the MWNN title for two Concept in Dance compilations, Tribal Science and Digital Alchemy. One of these tracks was "Sugar Rush", which would later be released in remixed form as a single.

Goa years: 1994–1998
Having refined his sound to a harder, more melodic style of Goa trance, Freeland worked closely with Ian St Paul, Graham Wood and Raja Ram under the name of The Infinity Project, as well as contributing the single "Teleport" to the first TIP Records compilation. Teleport was simultaneously released on Dragonfly Records, where he again contributed tracks to a number of their compilations.

Back on the Concept in Dance label, Freeland released his first full-length album Moment of Truth. The singles "Floor-Essence" and "Sugar Rush" were taken from the album, though released on Perfecto. Freeland's connection with Perfecto led to him touring with labelmates such as Mozaic and Quivver, while the label's promotional plugging led to his singles reaching the UK Singles Chart.

Freeland also contributed to Positiva's rainforest charity project 'Earth Trance' in 1996 with the track "Osmosis". The compilation project featured tracks by trance artists across the scene and raised money for charity in the process.

The success of Man With No Name was recognised by the end of 1995, with Muzik voting "Floor-Essence" as the twelfth best single of the year, and Moment of Truth being ranked as 26th Best Album of the year. Freeland was also a highly sought-after remixer, although he 'politely refused' to remix JX's 'There's Nothing I Won't Do' when asked by Hooj Choons.

Freeland continued to release material on Perfecto for the rest of the 1990s, with a second album Earth Moving The Sun in 1998.

Progressive years: 1999–2003
In the late 1990s and early 2000s, Progressive psytrance gained popularity, and Freeland's sound altered accordingly. Signing briefly onto Brighton trance label Atomic Records, a few further Man With No Name singles were released, while back on Dragonfly Freeland remixed "Teleport" into a more progressive 'Stripped' mix. A third album, again on Dragonfly, was then released in 2003.

Recent work
The last decade has seen little new material from Freeland, though he continues to tour the globe as Man With No Name. A few new tracks were released on TIP Records' compilation Future Sound Masters in 2005, which sparked rumours of a fourth album.

In 2011, Perfecto Fluoro released three new remixes of the tracks "Floor-Essence", "Sugar Rush" and "Teleport", with contributions from Astrix and Nick Sentience. This was followed by Freeland remixing "Remember Love" by DJ's United, a collaboration between Paul Oakenfold, Paul Van Dyk and Armin Van Buuren.

Remix work
As Man With No Name, Freeland was a popular choice for remixes. Initially remixing tracks for Perfecto labelmates Grace and BT, he went on to remix four singles for Hooj Choons, two for Juno Reactor and even remixed a track for the Human League.

Collaborations and acknowledgments
As well as being a contributor to The Infinity Project, Freeland also produced tracks for Goa artists such as Dino Psaras, Cydonia, Psychaos and Ayahuasca. He also released a track under the name of Yogi & Grey One entitled "Big Trouble in Outer Space", which was later re-released under the Man With No Name title.

French Goa trance group Transwave paid tribute to Freeland, dedicating their track "Land of Freedom" to 'M.W.N.N.'. The track is featured on their album Phototropic (1996).

In 2017 psytrance producer Talamasca dedicated a track on his album A Brief History of Goa Trance to Man With No Name, using melodies from several of his tracks.

Albums

 * Moment of Truth (1996)
 * Earth Moving the Sun (1998)
 * Teleportation (2000)
 * Interstate Highway (2003)

Chart singles
Singles
 * "Way Out West (1990) – UK No. 96
 * "Geddit?/120 Something" (1991)
 * "From Within EP" (1992)
 * "Teleport/Sly-Ed" (1994)
 * "Floor-Essence" (1995) – UK No. 68
 * "Lunar Cycle" (1995)
 * "Paint A Picture" (1996) – UK No. 42 – featuring Hannah
 * "Teleport" / "Sugar Rush" (1996) – UK No. 55
 * "Vavoom!" (1998) – UK No. 43
 * "The First Day (Horizon)" (1998) – UK No. 72
 * "Reincarnation/Revenge" (2000)
 * "Teleport (Remixes)" (2000)
 * "Axis Flip/Lights Out" (2003)
 * "Remixes EP" (2011)
 * "Vice Versa" (2014)
 * Candyfloss Corona (2021)

title: Martin Freeland


text:
List of Atari 5200 games

The Atari 5200 is a home video game console released on November 1982. In total,  games were officially released for the Atari 5200 Super System. Gremlins was the last game released by Atari for the 5200. This list excludes any hobbyist-developed games. See Lists of video games for related lists.

title: List of Atari 5200 games


title: User:Nateji77/Desk


text:
Richard Hull

Field Marshal Sir Richard Amyatt Hull, (7 May 1907 – 17 September 1989) was a senior British Army officer. He was the last Chief of the Imperial General Staff (CIGS), holding the post from 1961 to 1964, and the first Chief of the General Staff (CGS), holding that post until 1965, and, as such, was the professional head of the British Army. He later became Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS) from 1965 to 1967, the professional head of the entire British Armed Forces. He served with distinction during the Second World War, fighting from 1942 to 1945 in North Africa, Italy and Western Europe, became the youngest divisional commander in the British Army, and, after the war was over, he advised the British government on the response to the Indonesia–Malaysia confrontation in the 1960s.

Early life and military career
Richard Amyatt Hull was born in Cosham, Hampshire on 7 May 1907, the son of Major-General Sir Charles Hull, and Muriel Helen Hull (née Dobell), and was educated at Charterhouse School and Trinity College, Cambridge. Hull entered the Royal Military College, Sandhurst and was commissioned as a second lieutenant into the 17th/21st Lancers, a cavalry regiment of the British Army, on 1 November 1926. Posted with his regiment to Egypt in October 1928, he was promoted to lieutenant on 7 May 1931 and to captain on 1 June 1933 before going on to India in October of that year. He served as adjutant of his regiment when it was converted into a mechanised role and, from 1938 to 1939, he attended the Staff College, Quetta.

Second World War
By the time of the outbreak of the Second World War in September 1939, Hull had just returned from India. After serving in the Directorate of Staff Duties at the War Office from February 1940, Hull was appointed Officer Commanding (OC) 'C' Squadron of his regiment, which had also by now returned from India to the United Kingdom, in March 1941 and then, five months later, became the regiment's Commanding Officer (CO). He remained in this capacity until June 1942 when he became GSO1 of the 1st Canadian Armoured Division, which was soon redesignated the 5th Canadian (Armoured) Division. The regiment had been serving as part of the 26th Armoured Brigade of the 6th Armoured Division since the division's formation in September 1940. The division's first General Officer Commanding (GOC) was Major-General John Crocker, passing briefly to Major-General Herbert Lumsden and then Charles Gairdner, before, in May 1942, finally passing to Major-General Charles Keightley, who, like Hull, was a fellow cavalryman.

North Africa
In the days leading up to Operation Torch, the Allied invasion of North Africa, for which the 6th Armoured Division was to take part in as part of the British First Army, Hull was promoted to colonel and became second-in-command (2IC) of the 26th Armoured Brigade. Elements of the First Army landed in North Africa on 8 November 1942, with Hull's regiment being among them. A week later, shortly after landing, Hull was ordered to form Blade Force, based around the 17th/21st Lancers, along with part of the 1st Derbyshire Yeomanry (the 6th Armoured Division's reconnaissance regiment) and anti-tank and anti-aircraft guns, and to capture Tunis as soon as possible (see the run for Tunis). Sending his units by train to Constantine, he arrived there on the evening of 16 November, and, the following day, was on the border of Tunisia. Hull then headed towards Medjez el Bab, which was held by the French against the Germans. The armoured cars of the 1st Derbyshire Yeomanry arrived on 18 November, with the rest of Blade Force arriving soon after, but, lacking infantry support, were unable to capture the bridge.

Hull, with the 36th Infantry Brigade on his left flank, and the 11th Infantry Brigade (both from Major-General Vyvyan Evelegh's 78th "Battleaxe" Division) on his right flank, now decided to turn west, hoping to get to Tunis by a more northern route, with the aid of elements of the U.S. 1st Armored Division. However, this attempt also failed as the Germans had received reinforcements and, by the end of the month, the Allies were on the defensive and forced to withdraw from their positions. In December Blade Force was reabsorbed into the 6th Armoured Division, Hull returning to the 2IC of the 26th Armoured Brigade. For his services in the early stages of the Tunisian campaign Hull was appointed a Companion of the Distinguished Service Order on 11 February 1943.

By February 1943, the brigade was at Thala. In the middle of the month the Germans launched their attack at Kasserine Pass against US troops, forcing them to retreat. Lieutenant-General Kenneth Anderson, GOC of the British First Army, appointed Brigadier Cameron Nicholson, 2IC of the 6th Armoured Division, gave him command of Nickforce, an improvised formation. Nickforce held on until further reinforcements and fought the Germans to a standstill.

Hull was then promoted to brigadier and took command of the 12th Infantry Brigade, part of the 4th Mixed Division (which was composed of the 10th and 12th Infantry Brigades and the 21st Tank Brigade), then commanded by Major-General John Hawkesworth, which had arrived in Tunisia the month before, on 17 April. The brigade was heavy fighting just a week after Hull's assumption of command, where it was involved in taking a key position named Peter's Corner which, despite air and infantry tank support from the 21st Tank Brigade, failed with some 900 casualties, with the Germans putting up a tenacious resistance. Hull's brigade was relieved by the 78th Division's 11th Brigade soon afterwards and, due to its heavy losses, only managed to play a relatively minor role in the First Army's capture of Tunis, which fell on 6 May 1943, the campaign in Tunisia itself coming to an end a week later with the surrender of almost 250,000 Axis troops.

Over a month later, on 19 June Hull returned to the 6th Armoured Division, still commanded by Keightley, where he took over command of the 26th Armoured Brigade from Brigadier Philip Roberts, which was then training in North Africa for operations in Italy, before returning to the United Kingdom, becoming Deputy Director of Staff Duties (DDSD) at the War Office, in December 1943. The appointment was an important department within the General Staff and was responsible for staff training and for the organisation of the army in general. Soon after taking up this position, Hull was, in late January 1944, mentioned in despatches for his services in North Africa.

Italy
Hull remained in this post until August 1944 when, promoted to major-general, he succeeded Major-General Alexander Galloway as GOC of the 1st Armoured Division, then serving on the Italian front, making Hull the youngest divisional commander in the British Army during the Second World War. The division, a pre-war Regular Army formation, was composed of the 2nd Armoured and 18th Lorried Infantry Brigades along with supporting units, and was a veteran of the British Eighth Army that had fought throughout most of the North African campaign and briefly with the First Army in the final stages of the campaign in Tunisia but, since then, had seen no action, with tanks being considered unsuitable in the mountains of Italy. The division was assigned to V Corps, commanded by Lieutenant-General Charles Keightley (who, formerly as Hull's superior as GOC 6th Armoured Division, had been the one to recommend Hull for command of the 1st Armoured Division), with I Canadian Corps and II Polish Corps on its right, next to the Adriatic Sea. The Eighth Army commander, Lieutenant-General Sir Oliver Leese (who had taught Hull at the Staff College, Quetta before the war), intended to launch an offensive to breach the Gothic Line, believing he could reach the Po Valley. The operation, codenamed Olive, began on the night of 25 August, with the 1st Armoured held in reserve. Keightley, the corps commander, planned for the 46th Division, under Major-General John Hawkesworth, to breach the German defences, allowing Hull's division to exploit its success and drive on to the Po Valley.

The 46th Division's progress was initially successful and Keightley decided to bring the 1st Armoured earlier than planned, although the division was, curiously, held back 100 miles from the enemy and, by the time it reached the front, was exhausted. However, on 3 September, the division was committed to battle around the town of Coriano and suffered heavy losses before it was repelled. Reinforced with the 43rd Gurkha Lorried Brigade and a Canadian brigade, the division tried again on 12 September, this time with more success, and the Germans fell back before again halting the division a week later, inflicting heavy losses on Hull's division, particularly in tanks.

On 24 September, however, the division received the news that it was to be disbanded, due to a severe manpower shortage that was afflicting the British Army at this stage of the war, particularly in Italy. As a result of this news, the division ceased to exist by late October, although it was not officially disbanded until 1 January 1945 and the 2nd Armoured Brigade survived as an independent formation, although the 18th Brigade was broken up and the men sent to bring up other units, mainly the 46th Division, which had suffered heavy casualties, up to strength.

Northwest Europe

Following the 1st Armoured Division's disbandment, in late November, Hull succeeded Major-General Philip Gregson-Ellis as GOC of the 5th Infantry Division, another Regular Army formation, then serving in Palestine. Composed of the 13th, 15th and 17th Infantry Brigades, along with supporting divisional troops, the 5th Division, nicknamed "The Globe Trotters" (after having served in nearly every theatre of war), had fought in Sicily and Italy from July 1943 until July 1944 and was resting in Palestine, and was then preparing to return to Italy.

Originally intending to rejoin the Eighth Army in Italy, the 5th Division, after landing there briefly in February, was instead diverted to Northwestern Europe as part of Operation Goldflake to reinforce the British Second Army, commanded by Lieutenant-General Sir Miles Dempsey, for the final Allied offensive on the Western Front, the invasion of Germany itself. The Second Army formed part of Field Marshal Sir Bernard Montgomery's 21st Army Group. The division arrived in Belgium in early March, and on 17 April was assigned to Lieutenant-General Evelyn Barker's VIII Corps, then just a few miles from the western bank of the Elbe river. The division crossed the river after facing light resistance and was not involved in much fighting thereafter and managed to enter the city of Lübeck in Northern Germany on 3 May, just a few days before the end of World War II in Europe. Having been promoted to the substantive rank of major on 7 May 1945, Hull was appointed a Companion of the Order of the Bath on 5 July 1945.

Shortly after the war in Europe came to an end, it was proposed that Hull would exchange places with Major-General Lashmer "Bolo" Whistler, GOC of the 3rd Infantry Division, and take the division to the Far East to fight the Japanese, with Whistler becoming GOC of the 5th Division in Hull's place. However, the surrender of Japan in September 1945 cancelled these plans and Hull remained with the 5th Division on occupation duties in Germany until May 1946.

Postwar

Promoted to colonel on 13 April 1946, he again succeeded Major-General Philip Gregson-Ellis, this time as Commandant of the Staff College, Camberley in May 1946, an assignment appointed to only the most promising officers. Having been promoted again to major-general on 13 June 1947, he became Director of Staff Duties at the War Office in September 1948 and Chief Army Instructor at the Imperial Defence College on 1 January 1951. He became chief of staff at headquarters Middle East Land Forces on 26 January 1953. He was appointed GOC British Troops in Egypt on 15 June 1954 and, having been promoted to lieutenant-general on 29 September 1954 and advanced to a Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath in the New Year Honours 1956, he became Deputy Chief of the Imperial General Staff on 5 October 1956. He was appointed Commander-in-Chief Far East Land Forces on 25 June 1958 and, having been promoted to full general on 13 February 1959, and advanced to Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath in the Queen's Birthday Honours 1961.

Hull became Chief of the Imperial General Staff on 1 November 1961 (restyled Chief of the General Staff in April 1964). In this capacity he advised the British government on the response to the Indonesia–Malaysia confrontation. Having been promoted to field marshal on 8 February 1965, he was appointed Chief of the Defence Staff, the professional head of the British Armed Forces, on 16 July 1965. He finally retired from the British Army on 5 August 1967. He was also appointed Colonel of the 17th/21st Lancers from July 1947, Honorary Colonel of the Cambridge University Contingent from 30 May 1958 and Colonel Commandant of the Royal Armoured Corps from April 1968.

In retirement he became a Non-Executive Director of Whitbread. He was appointed Constable of the Tower of London from 1 August 1970, Lord Lieutenant of Devon from 5 October 1978 and a Knight Companion of the Order of the Garter on 23 April 1980.

His interests included shooting, fly fishing and gardening; he knew every plant in his garden by their English, Latin and local name. He died of cancer at his home, Beacon Downe in Pinhoe on 17 September 1989, at the age of 82.

Family
In 1934 he married Antoinette Labouchére de Rougement; they had a son and two daughters.

title: Richard Hull


text:
Andy Secombe

Andrew James Secombe (born 26 April 1953) is a Welsh actor and author.

Early life and education
Born in Mumbles, in south Wales, Secombe is son of comedian/singer Harry Secombe (whom he later impersonated in a Goon Show special). He attended the City of London Freemen's School in Ashtead, Surrey.

Acting
Andy Secombe is an award-nominated stage, screen and radio actor. He trained at the Central School of Speech and Drama after which he spent several years criss-crossing the country both touring and in rep. His early career included seasons at both the Old Vic (King Lear, The Rivals) and the Young Vic (Hamlet, Stags and Hens, Coriolanus and What a Way to Run a Revolution). Other theatrical performances includes Godspell, Guys and Dolls, Around the World in Eighty Days, Long Days' Journey into Night, Benjamin Britten's A Midsummer Night's Dream, The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy Live! tour and The Invisible Man in the West End. He was recently Offie-nominated for playing Mr Gillie in the play of the same name at the Finborough Theatre.

On television he was a regular on both Playschool and Playaway and also appeared in the BBC TV children's sketch show Fast Forward and played Rover the Dog in Chips' Comic. He was one of the five in Five Alive and a regular on The Brian Conley Show. Other television appearances include Star Cops, Amnesty Beausire, Executive Stress, The Legend of Robin Hood, The Bill, Casualty, The Detectives, Unreported Incident, Britannia and Killing Eve.

In film, he is best known for providing the voice of Watto in the Star Wars prequels and in tie-in media relating to the Star Wars franchise. He also voiced Quello, another Toydarian, in Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic II: The Sith Lords.

He has contributed vocals to a number of video games, including Nelly Cootalot: The Fowl Fleet and two entries in the Broken Sword series of games. For Penguin Audiobooks, he has recorded four novels by Mexican author Oscar de Muriel: The Strings of Murder, A Fever of the Blood, A Mask of Shadows and Loch of the Dead. He also regularly reads books for the Royal National Institute of Blind People (RNIB) and has also performed in radio productions, recently playing Reverend Wavering in the internet radio series Wooden Overcoats.

In March 2017, he starred in four episodes of the third series of The Missing Hancocks for BBC Radio 4; episodes that were originally aired in 1955 in the second series of Hancock's Half Hour starring his father Harry, after Tony Hancock had disappeared.

Writing
In the 2000s, Secombe focused on writing. He has penned five fantasy novels, including Limbo, Limbo Two: The Final Chapter and The Last House in the Galaxy. Looking for Mr Piggy-Wig (2008), about a post-nuclear Britain after the 'New Battle of Britain' is described by The Guardian as "best taken as a spoof on the genre". Endgame (2009) was criticised by Publishers Weekly for its "two-dimensional, clichéd characters and the tiresomely predictable story line".

In 2010 he published the book Growing Up with the Goons which is a memoir about growing up in the shadow of his father.

title: Andy Secombe


text: Talk:Evangelical Press Association

title: Talk:Evangelical Press Association


text:
Phantom Corsair

The Phantom Corsair is a prototype automobile built in 1938. It is a six-passenger 2-door sedan that was designed by Rust Heinz of the H. J. Heinz family and Maurice Schwartz of the Bohman & Schwartz coachbuilding company in Pasadena, California. Although sometimes dismissed as a failure because it never entered production, the Corsair is regarded as ahead of its time because of its futuristic features, and styling cues such as faired-in fenders and a low profile.

Design
The Phantom Corsair's steel-and-aluminum body measured just 57 in in height and incorporated fully skirted wheels and completely flush fenders while forgoing running boards. The car also lacked door handles, as the doors were instead opened electrically using push-buttons located on the exterior and the instrument panel. The instrument panel also featured a compass and altimeter, while a separate console above the windshield indicated when a door was ajar or if the car's lights or radio were turned on. The Corsair's body was mated to the "most advanced chassis available in the United States" at that time, the Cord 810. The Lycoming 80º V-8 engine-powered Cord chassis also featured front-wheel drive and an electrically operated four-speed pre-selector gearbox, as well as fully independent suspension and adjustable shock absorbers. Though these features from the Cord 810 chassis were all retained on the Phantom Corsair, the chassis was modified in order to accommodate the Corsair's large body. The body measured an impressive 237 in long and 76.5 in wide, enough to accommodate four people in the front row, including one person to the left of the driver. The back seats could only hold two passengers, however, in large part because of space limitations posed by on-board beverage cabinets. Though weighing a hefty 4600 lb, the Phantom Corsair could achieve speeds of up to 115 mph because of its modified, naturally aspirated 125 bhp Lycoming engine as well as its aerodynamic shape.

Production
Rust Heinz planned to put the Phantom Corsair, which cost approximately $24,000 to produce in 1938 (equivalent to about $370,000 in 2010), into limited production at an estimated selling price of $12,500. However, Heinz's death in a car accident in July 1939 ended those plans, leaving the prototype Corsair as the only one ever built.

The Phantom Corsair now resides in the National Automobile Museum (also known as The Harrah Collection) in Reno, Nevada.

Media appearances

 * The automobile was featured as the "Flying Wombat" in the David O. Selznick film The Young in Heart (1938), starring Janet Gaynor, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., Paulette Goddard, and Billie Burke.
 * The Corsair was featured in a segment of the Popular Science film series in 1938.
 * Versions of the Corsair (referred to as the "Manta") feature as unique unlockable vehicles in the 2002 video game Mafia and its 2020 remake.
 * The Corsair is one of the 15 rare drivable vehicles featured in the 2011 video game L.A. Noire.

title: Phantom Corsair


text:
User talk:Steven Owen

Do not edit user pages to add personal attacks. Evil Monkey∴Hello 04:35, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Blocked permanently; this is the latest in a long line of accounts created by a small boy with too much time on his hands and a grudge against User:Chadbryant (see ). --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 09:31, 12 July 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Steven Owen


text:
Helen Merrill

Helen Merrill (born Jelena Ana Milcetic; July 21, 1929) is an American jazz vocalist. Her first album, the eponymous 1954 recording Helen Merrill (with Clifford Brown on EmArcy), was an immediate success and associated her with the first generation of bebop jazz musicians. After an active 1950s and 1960s, Merrill spent time recording and touring in Europe and Japan, falling into obscurity in the United States. In the 1980s and 1990s, she was recorded by EmArcy, JVC and Verve, and her performances in America revived her profile. Known for her emotional, sensual vocal performances, she continues to perform today, her career now in its sixth decade of concerts and recordings.

Early life and career
Jelena Ana Milcetic was born in New York to Croatian immigrant parents. She began singing in jazz clubs in the Bronx in 1944 when she was fourteen. She had three sisters and a brother who died before she was born. By the time she was sixteen, Merrill had taken up music full-time. In 1952, Merrill made her recording debut when she was asked to sing "A Cigarette for Company" with Earl Hines; the song was released on the D'Oro label, created specifically to record Hines' band with Merrill. Etta Jones was in Hines' band at the time and she, too, sang on this session, which was reissued on the Xanadu label in 1985.

Merrill was signed by Mercury Records to their EmArcy label. In 1954, Merrill recorded an eponymous LP, which featured trumpeter Clifford Brown and bassist Oscar Pettiford. The album was produced and arranged by Quincy Jones, who was twenty-one years old. The success of Helen Merrill prompted Mercury to sign her to an additional four-album contract.

Merrill's follow-up was the 1956 LP Dream of You, which was arranged and conducted by Gil Evans. His arrangements for Merrill laid the foundation for his work with Miles Davis.

Abroad
After recording sporadically through the late 1950s and 1960s, Merrill spent much of her time touring Europe, where she enjoyed more commercial success than she had in the United States. She settled for a time in Italy, recording an album there and doing concerts with jazz musicians Piero Umiliani, Chet Baker, Romano Mussolini, and Stan Getz. In 1960, arranger and film composer Ennio Morricone worked with Merrill on an EP, Helen Merrill Sings Italian Songs, on the RCA Italiana label.

Parole e Musica: Words and Music was recorded in Italy with Umiliani's orchestra in the early 1960s while Merrill was living there. Merrill sings in English, but each song is preceded by an Italian translation of its lyrics, spoken by Fernando Caiati.

She returned to the U.S. in the 1960s but moved to Japan in 1966, staying after touring there and marrying Donald J. Brydon,Tokyo-based Asia Bureau Chief of United Press International, in April 1967. She developed a following in Japan that remains strong decades later. In addition to recording while in Japan, Merrill became involved in other aspects of the music industry, producing albums for Trio Records and co-hosting a show on FEN (Armed Forces Radio and Television Service) with Bud Widom in Tokyo.

Later career
Merrill returned to the U.S. in 1972. She recorded a bossa nova album, a Christmas album, and a Rodgers and Hammerstein album. In 1987, she and Gil Evans recorded fresh arrangements of Dream of You, which they released under the title Collaboration. It was the bestreceived of Merrill's 1980s albums.

In 1987, she co-produced Billy Eckstine Sings with Benny Carter. In 1995, she recorded Brownie: Homage to Clifford Brown. In 2000, she released Jelena Ana Milcetic a.k.a. Helen Merrill, which drew on her Croatian heritage as well as her American upbringing. The album combines jazz, pop, and blues songs with traditional Croatian songs sung in Croatian. She released the album Lilac Wine in 2003.

In his Biographical Guide to the Great Jazz and Pop Singers, jazz critic Will Friedwald writes that Merrill "improved with age," and that her "albums of the nineties and aughts represent a dramatic improvement over her vintage work."

Personal life
Merrill has been married three times, first to musician Aaron Sachs (1948–1956), then to UPI vice president Donald J. Brydon (1967–1992), and finally to arranger-conductor Torrie Zito, a marriage that lasted until his death in 2009.

She is the mother of one child, Allan Preston Sachs, born in New York in 1951 from her first marriage to Aaron Sachs. He was later known professionally as Alan Merrill, and was a successful singer and songwriter who wrote and recorded the original (1975) version of the rock classic "I Love Rock N Roll" as lead vocalist of the British band Arrows. He died in 2020.

As leader/co-leader

 * Helen Merrill arr. by Quincy Jones (EmArcy, 1955) – recorded in 1954
 * Helen Merrill with Strings arr. by Richard Hayman (EmArcy, 1955)
 * Dream of You arr. by Gil Evans (EmArcy, 1957) – recorded in 1956–57
 * Merrill at Midnight with Hal Mooney and his orchestra (EmArcy, 1957)
 * The Nearness of You arr. by David Carroll (EmArcy, 1958) – recorded in 1957–58
 * American Country Songs arr. by Chuck Sagle (Atco, 1959)
 * You've Got a Date with the Blues (MetroJazz, 1959) – recorded in 1958
 * Helen Merrill Sings Italian Songs (RCA Italiana, 1960)
 * The Artistry of Helen Merrill (Mainstream, 1965) – recorded in 1964
 * The Feeling Is Mutual with Dick Katz (Milestone, 1967)
 * Sings Screen Favorites (Nivico, 1968)
 * A Shade of Difference with Dick Katz (Milestone, 1968)
 * Helen Sings, Teddy Swings! with Teddy Wilson (Catalyst, 1970)
 * Sposin' with Gary Peacock Trio (Victor (Japan)/Storyville, 1971)
 * John Lewis/Helen Merrill with John Lewis (Mercury, 1977)
 * Autumn Love (Catalyst, 1977)
 * Something Special (Inner City, 1978)
 * Chasin' the Bird (Inner City, 1980)
 * Casa Forte (Trio, 1980)
 * Rodgers & Hammerstein Album (DRG, 1982)
 * The Complete Helen Merrill on Mercury (Mercury, 1985)
 * No Tears, No Goodbyes with Gordon Beck (Owl, 1985)
 * Music Makers (Owl, 1986)
 * Jerome Kern Album (Victor, 1986) – a.k.a. Sings Jerome Kern
 * Collaboration with Gil Evans (EmArcy, 1988) – recorded in 1987
 * Duets with Ron Carter (EmArcy, 1989)
 * Just Friends (EmArcy, 1989)
 * Christmas Song Book with Art Farmer, and Mel Tormé (1 tr) (JVC, 1991)
 * Clear Out of This World (Antilles, 1992) – recorded in 1991
 * Brownie: Homage to Clifford Brown (Verve, 1994)
 * You and the Night and the Music (Verve, 1997)
 * Jelena Ana Milcetic a.k.a. Helen Merrill (Gitanes, 2000) – recorded in 1999
 * Lilac Wine (Sunnyside, 2003)
 * Helen Merrill Sings the Beatles (Victor (Japan), 2003) – recorded in 1970

As guest
With Billy Eckstine and Benny Carter
 * Billy Eckstine Sings with Benny Carter (Verve, 1986)

title: Helen Merrill


text:
Palmer Park (Chicago)

Palmer Park is an urban park at 201 E. 111th Street on the far South Side of Chicago, Illinois, USA.

History
Palmer Park was created in 1904 by the South Park Commission. Under the guidance of superintendent J. Frank Foster, the commission opened ten new neighborhood parks, including Palmer Park, in an effort to create breathing space and recreational areas in the city's crowded tenement districts. These parks were built by Olmsted Brothers landscape architects and D.H. Burnham and Co. architects. The park is named for Potter Palmer, a successful businessman and real estate investor concerned with the development of Chicago. Palmer was responsible for reclaiming the acres of swampland north of the city's business district, which were developed into the Lake Shore Drive area. He built the original baseball field for the Cubs' predecessor, the Chicago White Stockings, and built the Palmer House Hotel.

In 1934, the city's 22 independent park commissions were consolidated into a new unified system, and Palmer Park became park of the Chicago Park District. Park district art director James McBurney painted three murals for Palmer Park as a Works Progress Administration project with money from the federal government. The three are: "Native Americans," "Explorers," and "Dutch settlers." Other noteworthy McBurney murals are found at the Wentworth School, Tilden High School, and Woodlawn National Bank.

Facilities
The park, located just south of Gwendolyn Brooks College Preparatory Academy is open daily from dawn to dusk, with free admission. Facilities at the park include baseball fields, an indoor gym, meeting rooms, an outdoor swimming pool, and tennis courts.

title: Palmer Park (Chicago)


text:
Caverns of Sonora

The Caverns of Sonora, a National Natural Landmark, is a unique cave located 8 mi west of the small city of Sonora, the seat of Sutton County, Texas. It is a world-class cave because of its stunning array of calcite crystal formations, especially helictites. These helictites are found in extreme abundance, often with a rare purity and complexity. One formation is so densely packed with them, it has been dubbed the "snake pit". The founder of the National Speleological Society, Bill Stephenson, said of the cave after his first visit: "This is the most indescribably beautiful cave in the world, its beauty cannot be exaggerated, not even by a Texan."

History

The cave is formed in 100-million-year-old (Cretaceous) Segovia Limestone, of the Edwards Group. The formation of the cave itself probably occurred between 1.5 and 5 million years ago. The cave is formed primarily along joints, which allowed gases to rise up from depths of around 1.5 mi to then depths of about 300 ft. At this depth, the gases mixed with water in the aquifer. The resulting highly acidic water dissolved out the limestone, forming the cave. Between 1 and 3 million years ago, the water drained from the cave. The famous mineral formations, known as speleothems, all formed after the water drained from the cave.

The cave's most famous formation was the butterfly. It was the only known formation like it in the world. It was formed by two fishtail helictite growths that share the same attachment point of the cave wall. In November, 2006, about a third of the right wing was broken off of the formation.

Development
The first quarter-mile of the cave was known to local ranch-hands by the early 1900s. It was known by the name Mayfield Cave, after the landowner, Stanley Mayfield. In 1955, Stanley gave permission to four cavers from Dallas, who discovered a further seven miles, including what are now considered the most scenic areas.

Today, 2 mi of trail have been developed from the 7 mi of explored cave. A steel gate was installed on June 15, 1957, at the entrance to protect the cave from vandalism. The cave was then renamed "Secret Cave" to protect its location. In 1957, Jim Papadakis a member of the National Speleological Society, geologist and professional photographer fell in love with the cave. During Jim's many trips to the cave, he observed that the delicate cave formations were being destroyed by negligent explorers. Jim realized the only way to protect the "Secret Cave" would be to open it to the public as a showcase cave with guided tours. In February 1960, Jim negotiated a lease with Stanley Mayfield to develop the cave. The cave project began, which included a fenced access road, two miles of power line, a telephone line, a water-well was drilled and a small visitor center was built. Jim hired friend and caver, Jack Burch to help construct the trails and install electrical lighting which provided safe viewing for public tours.

The closest town is Sonora and the name is so pretty Jim decided to name the cave, “Caverns of Sonora.” The Cave was opened for public tours July 16, 1960. In 1961, Jim sold the Caverns of Sonora to nine Sonora investors. They formed a corporation with Stanley Mayfield at the head. In April 1963, the Texas House of Representatives gave the Caverns of Sonora a special citation. On December 1, 1965, the National Park Service included the Caverns in the National Register of Natural Landmarks.

title: Caverns of Sonora