text:
User talk:Urban909

Please see my edit to George Bush Intercontinental Airport
I left the source citing the distance even though it was incorrect because it was the airport's website.

If that number had appeared in another source, I would have deleted it and either removed the statement, or replace the statement with a more accurate number with a source. Just because a statement has a source does not mean that the source is correct. When we have an obviously incorrect source and a more accurate source AND the ability to verify the more accurate source with personal experience (driving up to the airport), then there is no doubt that the incorrect source should be removed.

You also seemed to have a predilection for keeping this source in the article (and I don't blame you, because it is from their website), so I tried to at least interpret the source to make it a little more accurate.

I still don't see where they get 23 miles from, though. Google maps driving directions gives: Even from the southernmost end of downtown to directly to the passenger dropoff at the most distant point is still under 23 miles. This is for driving miles and not "north of downtown" but "from the southernmost point in downtown," and to the "drop-off area," not to "the airport," and you need to loop around downtown to get this number.
 * 20.4 miles from "Houston, TX" to "IAH". Note that this starts within downtown Houston, so the number of driving miles that IAH is "north of downtown Houston" would be:
 * 19.8 miles.

If we're talking about direct "as the crow flies" miles, which is what the previous wording suggested, it's even more difficult to see where this source gets its numbers. 23 miles gets you from downtown almost to The Woodlands. Or 23 miles will take you to the northern exit for Kingwood. Again, these are driving directions. In both cases, you can see how you if there were a direct path heading up to the airport, you would pass it well before 23 miles.

So, we should either remove the statement, replace it with a better statement (and source), or interpret the source so that it is at least not too inaccurate. Ufwuct (talk) 16:27, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Notability of Jay Baker
A tag has been placed on Jay Baker requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jasynnash2 (talk) 15:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Image:180px-TerminalCBushAirportHouston.jpg
A tag has been placed on Image:180px-TerminalCBushAirportHouston.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image is a redundant copy (all pixels the same or scaled down) of an image in the same file format, which is on the Commons, and all inward links have been updated.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on  explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ViperSnake151 15:23, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Valiant Airways
A tag has been placed on Valiant Airways requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. — RHaworth 10:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program in Houston
Hi! I'm leaving you this message because you're listed as a Wikipedian from Houston. The Wikipedia Ambassador Program is currently looking for Campus Ambassadors from the Houston area, to help with Wikipedia assignments at Texas Southern University. Classes at TSU will be participating in the Public Policy Initiative for the Spring 2011 semester, and the role of Campus Ambassadors will be to provide face-to-face training and support for students on Wikipedia-related skills (how to edit articles, how to add references, etc.). This includes doing in-class presentations, running workshops and labs, possibly holding office hours, and in general providing in-person mentorship for students.

Prior Wikipedia skills are not required for the role, as training will be provided for all Campus Ambassadors (although, of course, being an experienced editor is a plus).

If you are interested in being a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador, or know someone in Houston who might be, please email me or leave a message on my talk page. Thanks!--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:58, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of List of points of interest in Albuquerque, New Mexico for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of points of interest in Albuquerque, New Mexico is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of points of interest in Albuquerque, New Mexico until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Marcus Qwertyus (talk) 11:18, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Notification of automated file description generation
Your upload of File:Centralave2.jpg or contribution to its description is noted, and thanks (even if belatedly) for your contribution. In order to help make better use of the media, an attempt has been made by an automated process to identify and add certain information to the media's description page.

This notification is placed on your talk page because a bot has identified you either as the uploader of the file, or as a contributor to its metadata. It would be appreciated if you could carefully review the information the bot added. To opt out of these notifications, please follow the instructions here. Thanks! Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 14:13, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Pride: Houston
You are invited to participate in Wiki Loves Pride 2014, a campaign to improve coverage of LGBT-related content on Wikipedia throughout the month of June. On June 21, there will be a multi-national edit-a-thon, if you wish to participate. Here is the project page for Houston: Meetup/Houston/Wiki Loves Pride 2014. Ways to help? Create or improve LGBT-related articles, host an edit-a-thon at a local coffeeshop, library or other location, or photograph LGBT culture and history in the Houston area. Visit the project page for more information, and if you are interested in contributing, just add your name to the list of supporters or add the results of your work. Thanks for your consideration! -- Another Believer ( Talk ) 20:36, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File source and copyright licensing problem with File:Centralave2.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Centralave2.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status and its source. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously.

If you did not create this work entirely yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. You will also need to state under what licensing terms it was released. Please refer to the image use policy to learn what files you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. The page on copyright tags may help you to find the correct tag to use for your file.

Please add this information by editing the image description page. If the necessary information is not added within the next seven days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please also check any other files you may have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is [ a list of your uploads]. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —innotata 08:12, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Ed Carpenter (artist) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ed Carpenter (artist) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Ed Carpenter (artist) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. BD2412 T 22:12, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Copyright problem: Ed Carpenter (artist)
Hello Urban909! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Ed Carpenter (artist), but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted material from other websites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from source(s), and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate your contributions, copying content from other websites is unlawful and against Wikipedia's copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are likely to lose their editing privileges.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

It may also be necessary for the text to be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.
 * Have the author release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License (CC BY-SA 3.0) by leaving a message explaining the details at Talk:Ed Carpenter (artist) and send an email with confirmation of permission to "[mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org ]". Make sure they quote the exact page name, Ed Carpenter (artist), in their email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to [mailto:permissions-en@wikimedia.org ] or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Ed Carpenter (artist). See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Ed Carpenter (artist) with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

See Declaration of consent for all enquiries for a template of the permissions letter the copyright holder is expected to send.

Otherwise, you may rewrite this article from scratch. If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:Ed Carpenter (artist) saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Kbabej (talk) 23:26, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:Urban909


text:
User:Alex Nisnevich/Desk

= Open Tasks =

= Closed Tasks =

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

title: User:Alex Nisnevich/Desk


text:
Gerald Butler (judge)

Gerald Norman Butler, QC (15 September 1930 – 28 February 2010) was an English judge, who was the senior judge at Southwark Crown Court. He was born in Hackney, London.

Career
Butler was called to the bar in the Middle Temple, 1955. His career was interrupted by National Service; he was a 2nd lieutenant in the Royal Army Service Corps, 1956–57. He became a QC in 1975. He was a Recorder of the Crown Court, 1977–82, a Circuit Judge, 1982–97, and senior judge at Southwark Crown Court, 1984–97.

General

 * Who's Who 2008
 * Gerald Butler's obituary The Times
 * Telegraph obituary

title: Gerald Butler (judge)


text: Template:Events at the 1900 Summer Olympics


text:
User talk:Fallstorm

Welcome from Redwolf24
Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We as a community are glad to have you and thank you for creating a user account! Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

Yes some of the links appear a bit boring at first, but they are VERY helpful if you ever take the time to read them.

Remember to place any articles you create into a category so we don't get orphans.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome.

Redwolf24

P.S. I like messages :-P

Welcome as well
Welcome! I noticed your question on Clueless newbies. The first thing to note is that you were not logged in when you posted that question; the contribution was attributed to an IP address. If you are editing from your own computer, you can click the "Keep me logged in" button; otherwise, remember to log in so we can attribute your edits to you! Now, what specific policies do you wish for more information? I would be happy to help you. Just drop me a note (click on the "A note?" link in my signature and then click edit) or ask the help desk. Anyways, here are a couple of relevant policy pages: Be Bold!, No personal attacks, and tutorial. Just let me know if you need any more help. Once again, welcome! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 22:29, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Nice to see you at RC
Nice to see you still active. Keep on truckin' editing! Redwolf24 04:46, 16 July 2005 (UTC) By the way, take a gander at RfA. :)

Chimp
I replied on my page. Also I see you're from Central Washington University, I live in Bothell, KingCo. Ever hear of it? Redwolf24 06:18, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

 * replied. Redwolf24 07:18, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Fallstorm


text:
Talk:Stevie Crawford

fact check?
I've tried to make this more readable, but I'm not sure if I quite understood the original, and some of the original stats might have gotten transcribed incorrectly. Can someone with sports knowledge check that the information is still accurate? --Alynna 17:00, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Through the passage of time, this article is currently looking fine. This article gives all the useful information we need. Bobo. 05:08, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Stevie Crawford. 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/20110605013939/http://www.thecourier.co.uk/output/2008/07/23/sportstory11696503t0.asp to http://www.thecourier.co.uk/output/2008/07/23/sportstory11696503t0.asp

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) 16:31, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Stevie Crawford


text:
The Oaks

The Oaks may refer to:

Australia

 * The Oaks, New South Wales, a small town near Sydney

United Kingdom

 * The Oaks, Ascot, an 18th-century country mansion later renamed the Royal Berkshire

 * The Oaks railway station, Bromley Cross, Lancashire

Alabama

 * The Oaks (Tuscumbia, Alabama), listed on the National Register of Historic Places in Colbert County, Alabama
 * The Oaks (Tuskegee University) at Tuskegee University, the house of Booker T. Washington, listed on the National Register of Historic Places

California

 * The Oaks, Los Angeles County, California, a place in California
 * The Oaks (Monrovia, California), also known as William N. Monroe House, in Los Angeles County
 * The Oaks, Mendocino County, California, an unincorporated community
 * The Oaks, Nevada County, California, a neighborhood or community
 * The Oaks (Thousand Oaks, California), a regional shopping mall located in Thousand Oaks, California

Florida

 * The Oaks Mall, a mall in Gainesville, Florida

Louisiana

 * The Oaks (Hardwood, Louisiana), listed on the listed on the NRHP in West Feliciana Parish, Louisiana
 * The Oaks (Keachi, Louisiana), listed on the National Register of Historic Places listings in De Soto Parish, Louisiana

Mississippi

 * The Oaks House Museum, in Jackson, also known as The Oaks

New Jersey

 * The Oaks Historic District (Merchantville, New Jersey), listed on the National Register of Historic Places listings in Camden County, New Jersey

South Carolina

 * The Oaks (Coronaca, South Carolina), listed on the NRHP in Greenwood County, South Carolina
 * The Oaks (Frogmore, South Carolina), listed on the NRHP in Beaufort County, South Carolina
 * The Oaks (Winnsboro, South Carolina), listed on the NRHP in Fairfield County, South Carolina

Virginia

 * The Oaks (Christiansburg, Virginia), listed on the NRHP in Montgomery County, Virginia
 * The Oaks (Kents Store, Virginia), listed on the NRHP in Fluvanna County, Virginia
 * The Oaks (Staunton, Virginia), listed on the NRHP in Staunton, Virginia
 * The Oaks (Warrenton, Virginia), listed on the NRHP in Fauquier County, Virginia\

Horse races

 * Cheshire Oaks (horse race), at Chester Racecourse, England
 * Epsom Oaks (officially The Oaks Stakes), at Epsom Downs Racecourse in Epsom, Surrey, England
 * Kentucky Oaks, at Churchill Downs in Louisville, Kentucky
 * Irish Oaks, at Curragh Racecourse in County Kildare, Ireland
 * Lancashire Oaks, at Haydock Park Racecourse, Merseyside, England
 * Yorkshire Oaks, at York Racecourse, England

Other sports

 * Oaks (greyhounds), a greyhound race at Belle Vue Stadium in Manchester, England
 * Romania national rugby union team, nicknamed Stejarii (The Oaks)

Other uses

 * The OaKs (band), a band from Orlando, Florida
 * The Oaks (TV series), a Fox television show
 * The Oak Ridge Boys, a Country/ Gospel quartet

title: The Oaks


text:
Talk:Convex function

I'm not sure what the opinion at Wikipedia is on the matter of accessibility of the material. When I come here, however, I am not looking for mathematically concise definitions of what I look up, nor do I handle well the high level description that requires knowledge of many other technical terms.

A paragraph describing the significance of the defining equation would be nice.

 * For me at least, this page is exactly what I was looking for about convex functions.

Correct Definition
Should the definition read "for all x,y" instead of for any?
 * To anyone used to reading math (and maybe most who aren't), it's the same thing. But the change might improve clarity some small amount. Dchudz 17:08, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

But anyone writing math would never say 'for any', as strictly this requires the condition to be satisfied just for some, and not for all instances. In this article, I am missing the 'useful theorems' section for higher dimensions, as well as a generally better treatment for the high dimensions. But, I still appreciate your work!
 * You are mistaken about 'for any'. 'For any' is equivalent to ∀, 'for some' is ∃.--92.219.6.7 (talk) 09:02, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Merge with concavity?
Honestly, think that's a bad idea. Although the two concepts are so completely intertwined as to be two sides of the same coin, people come to Wikipedia for answers, not answer-hunting (reference the post above). I suppose it's possible that the merge could be done in such a way as to not be too confusing, but take a look at supermodular to see what can happen when things get thrown together (read the title, and then the definition; but then I suppose I'm supposed to fix it, not just sit back and complain). All in all, it would probably be better just to interlink the two (concavity and convexity) religiously -- say a link to concavity in the main definition. This is a good page right now: concise and exactly what people are looking for. Don't see much need to change it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Semanticprecision (talk • contribs).
 * OK, I did not do any merge, rather moved concavity (which is now disambig) to concave function. Things might still need merging in the future, but at least for now the meaning of concave set and concave function are separate and not in the same article (with concave function taking the lion share of the room). Let us see how it goes. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 00:28, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

 * In February 2005, I merged convex and concave function in the German Wikipedia (de:konvexe und konkave Funktionen). IMHO it is very difficult to maintain the versions for convex/concave funtion in a consistent way, and it is easy to write the article in not too confusing way. To avoid problems like in supermodular, clearly the title should mention both (e.g. convex and concave functions, as in the German version). --NeoUrfahraner 09:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Removing link to Additive Inverse
The link from "opposite" ("The opposite of a convex function is a concave function") to the additive inverses page seems a bit gratuitous. I'm removing it. --Dchudz 14:13, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The example with f(x)=x4
I didn't want to modify the article, but there is something suspicious to me. It says: A twice differentiable function of one variable is convex on an interval if and only if its second derivative is non-negative there; this gives a practical test for convexity. If its second derivative is positive then it is strictly convex, but the converse does not hold, as shown by f(x) = x4.

More generally, a continuous, twice differentiable function of several variables is convex on a convex set if and only if its Hessian matrix is positive semidefinite on the interior of the convex set.

Shouldn't the Hessian reduce to 2nd derivative in one-dimensional case? The example function f(x) = x4 is convex and its second derivative 12x2 is nonnegative, so I don't see why the converse does not hold. Moreover in the previous sentence it says "if and only if", so the converse MUST hold. Did I miss something ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.37.136.53 (talk) 09:55, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
 * As far as I see, the article says that if the second derivative is strictly positive, then the function is strictly convex, but if the function is strictly convex, its second derivative need not be strictly positive, with $$x^4$$ being a counterexample (this function is indeed strictly convex, but the second derivative is not strictly positive, it also takes the value 0). Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 15:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice! what if the second derivative is f``(x)=A(x-x1)^2(x-x2)^2 ? The second derivative is zero at 2 points. "f(x) defined on an interval is called convex (or convex downward or concave upward) if the graph of the function lies below the line segment joining any two points of the graph." ... it should be on or below a line? you could have a continuous set of points where f(x) is zero. -Alok 09:25, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

semi-strictly convex
what is "semi-strictly convext" of a function? Jackzhp (talk) 02:09, 30 November 2008 (UTC)

Strongly convex
It would be great to add a section with the definition of a strongly convex function; or, make a page for "strongly convex" (since it appears that it doesn't yet exist) and then link to that page. 71.130.221.31 (talk) 02:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Well, I'd like to know what a "strongly convex" function is? --Bdmy (talk) 12:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

 * If a function is twice continuously differentiable, then is is convex if and only if its second derivative is never negative (and it's strictly convex if in addition the second derivative is never zero). A strongly convex function's second derivative is bounded away from zero.

 * Following Boyd and Vandenberghe's book, we have:
 * A twice continuously differentiable function is "strongly convex" if
 * $$ \nabla^2 f(x) \ge mI $$
 * for all $$x$$ in the domain. The inequality is with respect to the positive semidefinite cone.

 * This let's us extend one of the fundamental properties of a convex function (that a convex function is always above a tangent plane) to the following:
 * $$ f(y) \ge f(x) + \nabla f(x)^T (y-x) + \frac{m}{2} \|y-x\|_2^2 $$
 * for all $$x$$ and $$y$$ in the domain. If the function were merely convex, the final term with the $$m$$ wouldn't be there, and if the function were merely strictly convex, the final term wouldn't be there either, but the inequality would become a strict inequality.
 * The constant $$m$$ depend on the function, and we need $$m > 0$$ otherwise it's not useful. Strongly convex functions are generally nicer than just convex functions when solving an optimization problem. Lavaka (talk) 21:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

 * I added this to the main page, since it's not too long and I think it's useful (but probably doesn't deserve it's own page).
 * I'm sure about my comments regarding strong convexity, however I'm unsure about some of the strict convexity comments (as the x^4 discussion above shows. update: I'm fixing my strict convexity comments Lavaka (talk) 02:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

 * Dear Lavaka, your comment above may be misunderstood as stating a C2 function is strictly convex if and only if its second derivative is strictly positive ; such statement is wrong; and I corrected it in a previous version of this article. The correct definition of strictly convex is now in the article; and it is the definition found in many books (such as link the rockafellar book). Mennucc (talk) 13:17, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi folks. I'm wondering if there's a typo in the final example in the "Strongly convex functions" section. Shouldn't $$f'$$ be replaced by $$f''$$ in the sentence starting "For example, consider a function $$f$$ that is strictly convex"? 67.186.29.135 (talk) 18:15, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I have added a useful result: "A twice continuously differentiable function $ f $ on a compact domain $$X$$ that satisfies $$f''(x) >0$$ for all $$x\in X$$ is strongly convex. The proof of this statement follows from the well-known Weierstrass theorem, which states that a continuous function on a compact set has a maximum and minimum." Surprisingly I cannot find this result in any book. The proof is straightforward although I can formalize it if needed. Erikjm (talk) 20:23, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Equivalent definition
I was just told that an equivalent definition is the following: a function is convex if at any point we can find a suppporting line (a line through the point that lies entirely below the function), i.e. f is convex if for any a, there exists an m such that $$f(x) \ge f(a) + m(x-a)$$ for all x. (It's easy to see why if that condition is true the function is convex, but I can't immediately think of a proof for the other direction.) Wondering if someone knows a source.... I could only find Springer EOM, which indicates that maybe this definition is equivalent to midpoint convex. Shreevatsa (talk) 01:15, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

 * In the real case you just need to take the value m to be between the left- and right-derivatives of ƒ at a (assuming a is an interior point of the domain, otherwise you can't do it in general). In several dimensions, what you need is more or less the finite dimensional part of the Hahn-Banach theorem.  --Bdmy (talk) 11:21, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

 * Is it not possible that f does not have left- and right-derivatives at a? Anyway, so what is the condition equivalent to? (There is a cute proof of Jensen's inequality assuming this condition: take a to be E[X], then take expectation.) Shreevatsa (talk) 00:12, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

 * A (finite) convex function on an interval is continuous in the interior of the interval, and has left- and right-derivatives at every interior point a. This can be found in most books on functions of one real variable, together with an illustration of the fact that the "slopes" are increasing: when a < b < c,

 * $$ \frac{f(b) - f(a)}{b - a} \le \frac{f(c) - f(a)}{c - a} \le \frac {f(c) - f(b)}{c - b}.$$

 * (imagine, or draw for yourself, the picture that goes with these inequalities) --Bdmy (talk) 12:34, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

This is somehow related but have anyone see this equivalent definition, something like: a function is convex if and only if for any arbitrary E
 * $$\sup_{\partial E} f = \sup_E f $$

where I don't remember what E should be :) a compact set?. The above is incorrect in the way it is written; I don't remember the exact formulation. I also remember the converse of Jensen inequality is true (under some conditions). (This was an exercise in Rudin's real and complex analysis.) So, it should give another equivalent definition. -- Taku (talk) 13:42, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Convex Decreasing
It would be good to have a picture of a convex decreasing function as well. See Indifference curve. Trogsworth (talk) 19:12, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Counterexamples
It'd be really wonderful if along with some examples we could supply some interesting counterexamples. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.65.169.203 (talk) 03:16, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

 * I agree. In particular, it would be great if one of the first pictures showed a typical example of a convex and a non-convex function (all 1d of course) side by side, so that people can get a general idea just by looking at that and be done with it (if that was all they needed, which it often is). --92.209.35.171 (talk) 15:12, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Problem
The article says:

Suppose ƒ is a one variable function defined on an interval, and let

 * $$ R(x,y) = \frac{f(x) - f(y)}{x - y}$$

(note that R(x,y) is the slope of the red line in the above drawing; note also that the function R is symmetric in x,y). ƒ is convex if and only if R(x,y) is monotonically non-decreasing in x, for y fixed (or viceversa). This characterization of convexity is quite useful to prove the following results.

I have a problem with that: Consider the function $$ f(x)=x^3 $$. Its slope is $$R(x,y) = x^2 + xy + y^2$$. Consider the slope for y=2 fixed. Then we have $$R(x,2)=x^2+2x+4$$. On the interval $$[-1,\infty[$$ this function is monotonically non-decreasing. However, ƒ is not convex on that interval.

HermanMansta (talk) 23:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

necessary conditions on 2nd derivative for strict convexity
Regarding telling whether a function is strictly convex by looking at its 2nd derivative, it's interesting that the only counter-example ($$ f(x) = x^4 $$) is one where $$ \, f''(x) $$ is only zero for a single value of $$ x $$. I would speculate that for any example of a differentiable function that is strictly convex but doesn't have a strictly positive 2nd-derivative, that its 2nd derivative would still be positive almost everywhere.

I'm just speculating, but would it be correct to make the following change?

Current wording:
 * $$f\,\!$$ strictly convex if $$ f''(x) > 0 \,\!$$ for all $$x\,\!$$ (note: this is sufficient, but not necessary)

I'd suggest:
 * $$f\,\!$$ strictly convex if and only if $$ f(x) \ge 0 $$ for all $$x\,\!$$ and the set $$ \{x \, : \, f(x)=0\} $$ has zero Lebesgue measure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bleachpuppy (talk • contribs) 22:07, 30 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Technically, a convex function doesn't have to have second derivatives everywhere; all we know is that the first derivative exists almost everywhere and is increasing (for convex) and strictly increasing (for strictly convex). It's likely you're correct about the second derivative condition; however, since it's not obvious, we need a reference.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 23:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

 * Look at Rademacher's theorem, which is proved in L.C. Evan's book on fine properties of real functions and probably in Francis Clarke's (SIAM-reprinted) book on nonsmooth analysis. Jeff Cheeger gave an interesting proof some years ago, which is especially interesting for metric measure spaces. Older references include Busemann's book on convex surfaces.  Kiefer.Wolfowitz  (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

ashutosh yadav
i want to discuss a simple topic related to convex function —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.124.247.13 (talk) 19:17, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Proper
I'm proposing that Proper convex function be merged into Convex function. If "proper convex function" is at all notable, it should be noted that a "proper convex function" on ℝn corresponds exactly to a convex function on a convex subset of ℝn. Some of the properties remain the same, although the infimal convolute is simpler to define for total functions to the extended real line than for partial functions to the real line. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 15:44, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

 * The definition of the conjugate convex was exactly my intention for including the example of an improper convex function. What was your motivation for reversing it as wrong and unsourced? I would state that it is obviously true (the epigraph is indeed convex). I can not source it, as it is an example I made up. However, other examples can be found in standard textbooks (for example Rockafellar, Convex Analysis). Should one better copy such an example and refer to it, instead making up a own example? Duzian (talk) 16:47, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

 * Your example is not convex in any sense. However, let me add to the reason that a partial convex function and a "Proper" convex function are the same concept.
 * Concepts:
 * A function f on a (convex) set contained in ℝn to ℝ is "partial convex" if for any two points $$x_1$$ and $$ x_2 $$ in the domain X of f and any $$t\in[0,1]$$,
 * $$f(tx_1+(1-t)x_2)\leq t f(x_1)+(1-t)f(x_2).$$
 * A function g on ℝn to ℝ+ is "extended convex" if it does not take the value −∞, and if for any two points $$x_1$$ and $$ x_2 $$ in ℝn and any $$t\in[0,1]$$,
 * $$g(tx_1+(1-t)x_2)\leq t g(x_1)+(1-t)g(x_2).$$

 * It can easily be seen that these are the same concept, if we define a function with empty domain to be convex: To get from the first to the second, just define g to be +∞ where f is not defined, and to get from the second to the first, you let f be g restricted to the points x where g(x) is finite.
 * And then, a "proper" convex function is an extended convex function which takes a finite value, which corresponds to a non-empty convex function.
 * This section, if we can find a source, supports what proper convex function should contain. Even if we can't find a source for that, the usage is rare, so it should still just redirect to convex function.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 17:28, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

 * I have zero doubts about your above arguments and you are right it is a strong argument to merge the sections. However, you do not address improper convex functions (which means they do take the value $$-\infty$$). Here is a good reason for having a section on proper convex functions: In optimization problems from engineering the term "closed proper convex function" is frequently used as a synonym for well-behaved function, especially when arguing if a minimum over a convex set is attained. This avoids some technically difficulties. Therefore one might wonder what a proper convex function is, and the difference to an improper convex function. I believe that the following function is an improper convex function
 * $$f(x) = \begin{cases} -\infty, & \mbox{if } x \le 0 \\ 0, & \mbox{if } x=0 \\ +\infty, & \mbox{if } x \ge 0 \end{cases}$$
 * Its epigraph is according to the definition
 * $$\mbox{epi} f = \{ (x, \mu) \, : \, x \in \mathbb{R}^n,\, \mu \in \mathbb{R},\, \mu \ge f(x) \} \subseteq \mathbb{R}^{n+1},$$
 * is $$\{ (x, \mu) \, : \, x < 0 ,\, \mu \in \mathbb{R} \} \cup \{ (x, \mu) \, : \, x = 0 ,\, \mu \in \mathbb{R} \mu \, \ge 0\}$$, which I believe is a convex set. However, the definition via the line segments fails. How, do you use the line segment definition to argue: "Your example is not convex in any sense". Finally, I would suggest to enrich the proper convex function section with an example for an improper convex function. For the convex function section I would add a remark that the test for convexity ("if and only if part) does not hold for functions on the extended real line. Duzian (talk) 18:34, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You may be right. However,
 * Your function appears to be convex in the regular sense if you define +∞ + (−∞) to be +∞, as seems appropriate for the semi-continuous nature of convexity, and
 * The only way a function on ℝ taking a value of −∞ somewhere can be convex in either sense is, if the function is −∞ on an interval, +∞ outside the closure of of the interval, and possibly finite at the finite endpoints of the interval.
 * We would need evidence that someone uses the term in that sense. The extension to +∞ can be looked at as a shorthand for partial functions, but -∞ is something new, and may not actually be used.
 * — Arthur Rubin (talk) 01:09, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Optimization and properness
Extended real-valued functions are useful for representing life-and-death constraints: Their violations receive the value of positive infinity (which is not a minimum for most erv functions). This is the keypoint, which is now absent from the article.

Please follow the terms of Rockafellar and Wets or the latest book by Borwein and Vanderwerff: There is no need for OR proposing to reformulate the basic terms of an established subdiscipline. Kiefer .Wolfowitz 18:57, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Explanation of revert
KW's edit summary in reverting my edits to the lead was: "convex functions need not be defined on intervals, but frequently are defined on higher dimensional sets". But this certainly suggests that he had not read past the first two sentences of the lead, where it says "More generally, this definition of convex functions makes sense for functions defined on a convex subset of any vector space." I have also moved the more equation-based definition of convexity to a "Definition" section, with some copyedits. We should keep WP:LEAD and WP:MTAA in mind. I don't see any reason that the lead should contain any equations at all. Sławomir Biały (talk) 22:15, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

Moved from User talk:Sławomir Biały:

 * I'm glad that you showed understanding that a convex function may be defined on a higher dimensional set.
 * However, you wrongly removed the epigraphic definition, and I hope that you would restore it soon.

 * Also, imho, it would be better to remove the primitive phrasings "concave up", etc. to the end of the introduction, perhaps in their own paragraph. The reader should meet the definition immediately, and not have to jump over many deprecated alternative definitions.

 * Thanks,
 * Kiefer.Wolfowitz (Discussion) 22:18, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

The epigraph definition also remains in the first paragraph of the lead. Also, I'm not really sure that "concave up" means the same thing as convexity. This is a pointwise property, that the graph of a function locally lies over the tangent hyperplane, which is slightly different. There is, of course, a strong connection between this and convexity, and in many cases of interest they are the same, but I don't think that the two should be equated in the article. Any thoughts on this? Sławomir Biały (talk) 22:28, 24 April 2011 (UTC)

 * I have removed the reference to "concave up" from the lead. This probably bears mentioning later on, but I think it best to discuss it further to determine in what setting.   Sławomir Biały  (talk) 22:34, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I agree that a discussion of subdifferentiability and zero subgradients should be in the body, not in the lead. Kiefer .Wolfowitz 18:45, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I would avoid using "concave up" and "concave down"---which used to be traditional in calculus books in the USA, alas, and only a small improvement over "bathtub shaped" or "U-shaped". Kiefer .Wolfowitz 18:47, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Joining any two points
The start of article is confusing "joining any two points of the graph; or more generally, any two points in a vector space." what is any two points? requires more explanation.Osmankhalid2005 (talk) 18:05, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

some questions about the section regarding the properties of convex function
In the section about the properties of a convex function it is said that if f is contiuous on some open interval, then it has one sided derivatives. As a consequence, it's differentiable at all but at most countably many points. How is this conclusion inferred from the one sided derivaatives? And what happens if f is convex on closed interval? Million of thanks for answerring these questions! :) 46.19.85.157 (talk) 10:27, 11 February 2014 (UTC) ???132.66.85.52 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:30, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
 * We should have a source for the material, but not only does it have one-sided derivatives, but the "derivative" from I × {-,+} (with lexicographic ordering) is nondecreasing (or nonincreasing; I didn't check which). Hence the sum of all the jumps (in a subinterval) is finite.  Hence there are at most countably many jump points (in a subinterval).  But the interval is a union of countably many subintervals, and a countable union of countable sets is countable.
 * If I is a closed interval, then you can work with the interior; it's no longer the case that one-sided derivatives exist. — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 07:55, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

spaces between words
The letter "f" (denoted function) needs to have a space before the successor word. what doesn't happen here. Please fix it up :) 46.19.85.89 (talk) 15:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Can you give an example? — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 14:45, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

History/Origin
Please explain the history of this term, and why such graphs are called convex (viewed from below) and not concave (viewed from above). —DIV (120.17.118.20 (talk) 13:29, 8 October 2018 (UTC))
 * I think historical overview belongs to Convex optimisation. AVM2019 (talk) 04:21, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Obscure leading sentence
What is the import of "in a Euclidean space (or more generally a vector space) of at least two dimensions" in the first sentence? I don't find anything like that mentioned elsewhere in the article. McKay (talk) 06:21, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

"Strictly convex" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Strictly convex. Please participate in the redirect discussion if you wish to do so. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:50, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

Convex down & Convex up
"In introductory level math books, the term convex is often conflated with the opposite term concave by referring to a "concave function" as "convex downward". Likewise, a "concave" function is referred to as "convex upwards" to distinguish it from "convex downwards"."

One of the concave function mentions is wrong and must be replaced with convex.

Since I am not familiar with these terms someone who knows them from those calculus books mentioned should do the edit.

--Christian Brech (talk) 21:18, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

Needs link to operator convexity
There is a powerful generalization of convexity to matrices called *operator convexity*, and there are at least two related variations of Jensen's inequality (the trace Jensen inequality and the operator Jensen inequality) for matrices. It would be nice if there were some link to it or mention of it in this article. (A search engine directed me to this page after searching for "integral representations of operator convex functions", and there isn't a link to head in the right direction.) 60.250.123.226 (talk) 17:42, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Unclear reference to drawing/image
In the Properties Section, Functions of one variable, 1st bullet point, there is an unclear reference to a drawing. Recommend the wording 'is the slope of the purple line in the above drawing' be changed to include a reference to the specific image (it is the first image) or the article be reformatted to include the image nearer to the reference. Fantasticawesome (talk) 19:05, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Convex function


text:
User talk:Doppelgangland

Welcome from Redwolf24
Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We as a community are glad to have you and thank you for creating a user account! Here are a few good links for newcomers:
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Merging, redirecting, and renaming pages
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

Yes some of the links appear a bit boring at first, but they are VERY helpful if you ever take the time to read them.

Remember to place any articles you create into a category so we don't get orphans.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome.

Redwolf24

P.S. I like messages :-P

One More Thing, you signed my page with (5 tildes), this could've been a typo, but remember to use 4. No worries, I did it myself at first. Three for name, Five for date, four for name and date (preferred). Redwolf24 17:07, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Hey, I saw your question to Redwolf24; he's away at the moment, so I thought I'd answer. Yes, you can change your username, see Changing usernames. -- Essjay ·  Talk 12:45, July 15, 2005 (UTC)

 * You're welcome! (In the other sense of welcome...) -- Essjay ·  Talk 12:11, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

Test
--Doppelgängland (talk) 12:38, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Copyright
If an image is copyrighted, generally we say do not upload it. Everything at Wikipedia is released under the GFDL license by default, so copyrighted images can't be used (because they can't be released). If you know enough about copyright law to make a determination about the "fair use" doctrine, you can decide if it qualifies as fair use, and if it does, you can upload it and tag it with. If you're at all unsure, however, the best policy is to not upload the image. I am not an attorney, so I can't give you legal advice, but my personal advice (and the policy I follow) is to not upload any image I'm unsure of. Hope this helps. -- Essjay ·  Talk 13:02, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

MAME list
A list of roms for MAME wouldn't be that useful for Wikipedia. We already have lists of arcade games and Neo-Geo games, which make up the bulk of MAME's games, so it would really be redundant to list them. On top of that, it might not be ethical (or, more importantly, legal) for us to write something that helps facilitate illegal downloads. And Wikipedia is not supposed to be used as a replacement for old websites anyways. If you really need a rom list, you can find one outside of Wikipedia if you look hard enough. -- LGagnon 21:10, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I understand what you mean now. Still, this sort of info is better suited for individual games' articles than for a list. -- LGagnon 21:44, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Català
He afegit el català dins de List of revived languages, si us plau, si t'ho vols mirar i corregir-ho em farà un gran favor, és que el meu anglès no és gaire bo. Gangleri2001

Moltes gràcies. Però si t'hi fixes bé, veuràs que al Mirandès també hi surt allò de "while never really endangered" i jo crec que en el català també s'ha de posar, perquè el català mai ha estat en un perill seriós d'extinció. Gangleri2001

Per què no col·labores també en la viquipèdia catalana? podries traduir els articles sobre els temes que t'agraden, necessitem més gent per allà.

Dawn's hair
RE Restless (Buffy episode):

 * Boy, are you a quick reverter! But come on, it's Dawn and deep down you know :) It's generally agreed on the fan-forums, but if you are waiting for a written statement by Michelle, forget about it. Now more seriously, I have contributed a lot to project Buffy and I believe I deserve some more leeway. It's annoying to have changes reverted so fast and furiously.

 * Abaraibar 21:52, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, Abaraibar. My "unsourced" reversions aren't based on edit times, personalities, or reputations. Fan speculation, no matter how substantial, isn't a reputable source. You're right that I want it to be Dawn, but without the face, the willowy girl with the long hair could be any of a million California girls (or, more accurately, a thousand aspiring young actresses). I'll take a statement from Michelle, Joss, any of the crew, or a credit buried somewhere in the DVD — even an outtake where the girl accidentally revealed her face and it was cut for being too obvious (or obviously not) — but it's gotta be sourced or it's speculative original research. If you're so anxious to help Buffy work on Wikipedia, why don't you help me clean up the 144 existing articles to provide some common structure that follows Wikipedia style guidelines? Besides the Pretentious Capitalization of Headers, I can't tell you how many erroneous "episode X of season Y", previous and next episode links, and other simple problems I've fixed when all I was trying to do was add Wikiquote links for each specific episode. There's plenty of work left even on this basic stuff. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:26, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

 * … or you could add actual synopses to the episodes, as I see you've done quite recently with "New Moon Rising" and some other eps. Sorry I missed those critical contributions. If you're adding those, I'll be happy to finish the scut work of structure myself (though I'd like help if anyone else wants to chip in!). One suggestion: could you add character links to your synopsis texts? We should keep in mind that we're trying to inform not just Buffy fans, but anyone reading Wikipedia. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:31, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Adminship
To become an admin, you follow the directions at WP:RFA. For you, you make a page called Requests for adminship/Abaraibar and at that page write Save the page, then answer the questions.

However, it pains me to tell you that you will not pass an RfA if you run now. You only have about 5 headers on your talk page, and less than 500 edits. Watch your edit count, and when it gets to about 2000, it's time. Also, interact with people some more, vote at AfD's, check Special:Newpages and Special:Shortpages and WP:CSD the new pages which meet any of the categories there and revert any blank pages to before the blanking... There's a lot to do :) R  e  dwolf24  (talk)  Attention Washingtonians!  23:20, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Buffy episodes
Thanks for your kind words. I am happy to see you improved The I in Team (Buffy episode). I hope I'll get to do significantly more on eps when I have time -- I've done a few S1 eps all the way, and I hope to bring some others up to snuff :) MosheZadka

Buffy eps
Thank you very much - it's so nice to receive compliments!! Merry Christmas!!! NP Chilla

Removing empty sections on Buffy pages
''You should not do that. All episodes (or most of them) have the same structure waiting to be filled in, so they have a similar look and feel. Removing them, even if they are empty, is self-defeating in this project. Abaraibar 08:13, 23 December 2005 (UTC)''

I understand your point. On the other hand, for readers (not editors), the empty sections will most likely seem ugly and clumsy details, no?, hence my main logic as to removing the ones from that particular article, being aware that as soon as someone was available to do so, they would be filled out. An healthy alternative, in my opinion, would be indicating the correct structrue in each page's talk page, hence reducing the page's uglyness yet reminding editors of how to go about building the page. Also, some of the categories are, in and of themselves, questionable, as I've seen discussed (though, I'm afraid and sorry, I can't recall where) elsewhere - "Writing And Acting" in particular seems prone to subjectivity in and of itself. Regardless, I suppose this is a question of the editing majority's interests over my opinion, so, I won't repeat it, and I do apologize. :) Best regards!, Zeppocity 01:04, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

-

Well, it IS rather hard to be absolutely methodical about 144 pages, is it not? :), so, I don't know. I'll try and see what seems appropriate. But sometimes, as said, it just looks plain... bad. Sorry for redundance; insanely long day. Cheers, and Merry Christmas!, Zeppocity 01:30, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Buffy and Angel eps
Hi, you said I should be more careful in changing other people's work. I was just wondering what you were referring to? And what do you mean by my 'questionable reasons'? Thanks. --Cooksey 22:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Hannigan
You are very welcome. She is so beautiful and yummy that she deserved a better picture. The other picture where she is a young teen (1994) holding the flute - it was just dumb luck finding that. God Bless MonkeyHateClean 19:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Everybody loves Bread
Good job on wikipedia. really, you're doing a great job.

(Breadfan 02:23, 8 January 2006 (UTC))

Edit count
According to Kate, the edit counter should still work when a user is renamed. I don't know why it's not working for any of the people I renamed today. Perhaps it's just lagged, so I would recommend trying it again in a day, and then reporting it in if there are still problems. Angela. 17:44, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Thief in Garden image
Regarding, which you stated that you personally photographed and uploaded, would you consider uploading a lower-resolution image? 415 KB may seem small for an image, but on Wikipedia's overworked image server, it actually loads quite slowly. I think it would be more useful when referenced in articles (such as Tronica) if it were smaller and loaded more quickly. --JerryOrr 01:30, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Move picture to Wikimedia Commons
I would like to use the picture "Image:Tigerbowling.jpg" you uploaded in another language wiki (Dutch). I don't feel much of uploading it myself to the Dutch wiki just to avoid unnecessary duplications of the file. So, would you be so kind to move the image from the English wiki to Wikimedia Commons. The image is then available for any wiki. Thanks. 83.160.24.25 20:44, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I would do it if I could or knew how, but I believe that only Sysops can move images and I am not one yet. I suggest you ask one to do it for you. By the way, it would be best if you got yourself a user name and talk page. Answers are normally post in the talk page of the user posting the question, not here. Cheers. --Doppelgangland 08:49, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I see you've aslo uploaded an MSX computer image ("Image:Sony hitbit 10p.jpg"). I hope you can move that one (and others) too.

 * Instructions:
 * Wiki Commons can be found/reached:
 * at the bottom of the mainpage you'll find an Wikipedia Commons icon. Just click on it.
 * or use this link: Wiki Commons
 * you probably have to register (it's best (easiest) to use the same username).
 * upload your images by clicking on "upload file" at the left of the Wiki Common Main page
 * don't rename the existing file names just keep the original file names so existing links to that file are not broken and don't have to be fixed later.
 * categorize (if necessary) your pictures into the right categories (to find an appropriate category preform a search for similar or related items)
 * Then delete the file name of your local Wikipedia (it's no longer necessary, it's in Commons now)
 * You're done.

 * Example. Use this category for the MSX computer image ("Image:Sony hitbit 10p.jpg"): "Category:MSX" without the ". 83.160.24.25 12:01, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Reverts to Goth Subculture
Thanks for taking the time to discuss the reverts at my talk page. The addition of Paradise Lost in that part of the article doesn't really convey Goth Rock (proper)'s growth. Add to this that Paradise Lost is not typically played in Goth clubs nor typically associated with the Goth scene and the whole insertion of that band just seems a bit fruitless. No doubt that somewhere down the line Gothic Doom metal bands like Paradise Lost took influences from Goth Rock, but I think you'll find that had I not reverted it someone else would have. If you feel very strongly about the subject, please consider discussing it in the Goth (subculture) talk pages. The reason I reverted the sentance about HIM is because it felt tacked on. Further up in the same paragraph contentious bands are already mentioned "Thus while industrial or heavy metal bands such as Marilyn Manson, Jack Off Jill, Nine Inch Nails, Type O Negative, Lacuna Coil, Dimmu Borgir, Cradle of Filth, and Mortiis were often labeled as "goth" by the media, this categorization was strongly resisted by goths and indeed also by fans of the bands." If you'd like to add HIM to that list I don't think anyone would object, but it already seems like there are more than enough examples as is. Again, as with the Paradise Lost subject, if you still feel strongly about it one way or the other please bring it up in the Goth talk pages and we'll see where it goes from there. Thanks for being level headed about everything, and I'm sorry if it seemed like I was stepping on toes.--Adrift* 16:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Buffy Checklist
Hiya, just letting some people who regularly work on Buffyverse articles know there is now a checklist for non-episode articles in place to highlight articles needing work on, and articles coming into completion. It is available at the main project page, since this is where the 'WikiProject Buffy template' on the discussion page of all Buffyverse pages directs people:

 * WikiProject Buffy

It mainly discludes episode articles since they are dealt with at WikiProject Buffy/Episodes

Thanks -- AnGeL X 17:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about the revert
I have limited knowledge about the article & the edit at a glance looked like blanking vandalism. Also the lack of an edit summary made it even more suspicious. Anyway I have now reverted back to your IP version. I guess this was just an unfortunate misunderstanding. Vandalism reversion is a task where tempers tend to run high. Thanks for remaining cool & civil.

Srik e it ( talk ¦  ✉  ) '' 16:39, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Image:Buffyep50.jpg
This image is a copyrighted image which is used on Wikipedia under the fair-use rationale. Kindly remove it from your userpage, as the use of this image constitutes infringement of copyright policies under the US Copyright Act. Regards, -- Andy123  (talk) 12:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Buffy the Vampire Slayer under peer review
As a Wikipedian who contributes to Buffy-related articles, you maybe interested to know that Buffy the Vampire Slayer is currently under peer review at Peer review/Buffy the Vampire Slayer. It is hoped that this article might soon become a featured one. Feedback about the article at the forum, on how it might be improved upon is hugely appreciated. Thanks. -- Paxomen 17:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Featured article candidate review: Buffy article
Hi

Just letting WikiProject Buffyverse members know that the article 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer' has recently been nominated as a candidate to become a featured article. Should it become a featured article, it will be possible for the article to appear on the Wikipedia main page on March 10th 2007, the 10th anniversary of Buffy (the premiere, "Welcome to the Hellmouth" aired March 10th 1997).

Any feedback you can offer to improve the article and/or to either object or support the nomination would be wonderful:

Featured article candidates/Buffy the Vampire Slayer

-- Paxomen 17:31, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Alias
I have to assume that your comment to my alter ego was about the "inactive" tag which has been added to the project. If so, you should know a few things. One, you can make the page active again by simpling introducing a modification to the page, as that would have been some activity. Two, I haven't checked so I'm not sure, but maybe you haven't done that much to publicize the project. The Guide has some pointers about how to publicize it. Maybe you could institute some of the proposals there. Also, please note that it was marked as inactive, not marked for deletion. All that means is that the project page has had no activity in the past three months; it does not mean that it is at all being considered for deletion. However, if you do wish to abandon the project, you might want to contact WikiProject Television, or some similar group, and propose that your project merge into theirs. Anyway, I hope that this response clarifies things a little. If you have any comments or further questions, I will generally respond faster at my regular talk page than at B2T2. Thank you. Badbilltucker 14:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

Saying hi
You told me to say hi to you a while ago. Here I am!

Hello. Sharkface217 20:12, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Sunnydale High
An article that you have been involved in editing, Sunnydale High, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Articles for deletion/. Thank you. Mdsummermsw (talk) 19:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Image deleted at Commons
Hi Doppelgangland, I saw your question at commons:usertalk:MichaelMaggs. The image was transferred to commons by user:liftarn, and thus deleted here at Wikipedia. Subsequently it was nominated for deletion and deleted commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Image:Thiefgarden.jpg. You could do two things to get the image restored. Either ask for undeletion at Commons here, or ask the admin (user:Rettetast) who deleted your original upload here at Wikipedia to restore that one since it was deleted pr CSD and the image no longer excists at Commons. Hope this helps.

A different matter: you should fix the "Please add new comments in new sections by clicking here"; it directs to what I suppose is your former user talk. Regards, Finn Rindahl (talk) 01:14, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that in taking the photograph you have infringed the copyright in the design shown on the screen and also the printed cartoon figure at top left of the case. So, I am afraid the photograph is not free and cannot be hosted on Commons. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 18:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

I am afraid that Commons takes copyright very seriously, and that we are looking for truly free images not images we can get away with. The policy is at Commons:Commons:Precautionary principle. There are a couple of options you might consider: (1) Upload the image to Wikipedia rather than to Commons, with a fair use rationale (Commons does not accept fair use, but Wikipedia does); (2) blank out or blur the screen and the cartoon and re-upload to Commons. There is no copyright in the overall shape of the product, and once the copyright elements are removed there would be no problem. I hope that helps. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 17:41, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of No Place Like Home (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

The article No Place Like Home (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * Not notable episode without critical 3rd party references to verify notability. Redirect to List of Buffy the Vampire Slayer episodes.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing  will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. feydey (talk) 07:44, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

MfD nomination of WikiProject Alias
WikiProject Alias, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:WikiProject Alias and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You are free to edit the content of WikiProject Alias during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. JJ98 (Talk) 23:03, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of In the Dark (Angel)

The article In the Dark (Angel) has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable episode, fancruft, only one valid source.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:56, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of I Fall to Pieces (Angel)

The article I Fall to Pieces (Angel) has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * Non notable, no secondary sources.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 23:36, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of I Fall to Pieces (Angel) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article I Fall to Pieces (Angel) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/I Fall to Pieces (Angel) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 05:08, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of In the Dark (Angel) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article In the Dark (Angel) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/In the Dark (Angel) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 05:09, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Actronics

The article Actronics has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * Not notable

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Epeefleche (talk) 08:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Replacement (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

The article The Replacement (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Article's been tagged for notability concerns since 2014. No clear indication that this episode is especially significant. No significant real-world information provided."

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonIago (talk) 13:46, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Tronica for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Tronica is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Tronica until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Kirbanzo (talk) 17:50, 19 December 2018 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Bringers of the First Evil

The article Bringers of the First Evil has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Fails WP:GNG."

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TTN (talk) 20:56, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of The Prom (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)

The article The Prom (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Doesn't appear to satisfy WP:NTVEP. Tagged for notability concerns since 2014."

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. DonIago (talk) 16:51, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Parting Gifts

The article Parting Gifts has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Unreferenced entry consisting entirely of plot with nothing to indicate any sort of notability"

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  Grey joy talk 21:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of Touched (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Touched (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Touched (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. MB 00:36, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Nomination of The Replacement (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Replacement (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/The Replacement (Buffy the Vampire Slayer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. MB 00:43, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Same Time, Same Place

The article Same Time, Same Place has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Appears to fail WP:GNG"

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

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

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Donald D23  talk to me  23:04, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:Doppelgangland


text:
L'affiche rouge

"L'Affiche rouge" is a song from the album Les Chansons d'Aragon (1961) by Léo Ferré. Its lyrics are based on the poem Strophes pour se souvenir (Strophes to remember) which Louis Aragon wrote in 1955 for the inauguration of a street in the 20th arrondissement in Paris, named "rue du Groupe Manouchian" in honor of 23 members of the FTP-MOI executed by the Nazis in the Mont-Valérien. The affair became known by the name of the Affiche rouge ("Red Poster") because the Germans plastered Paris in the spring of 1944 with thousands of red posters denouncing those executed as immigrants and Resistants.

The poem paraphrases Missak Manouchian's last letter to his wife.

title: L'affiche rouge


text:
Set the Fire

Set the Fire is the debut full-length album by Canadian alternative rock band 54-40, released in 1984 on Mo-Da-Mu.

Although no longer in print, Set the Fire and its predecessor Selection were re-released in 1997 on the album Sound of Truth: The Independent Collection.

Track listing

 * 1) "Set the Fire"
 * 2) "A Big Idea"
 * 3) "Around the Bend"
 * 4) "Cha Cha"
 * 5) "One Place Set"
 * 6) "What to Do Now"
 * 7) "Lost My Hand"
 * 8) "Sound of Truth"
 * 9) "Broken Pieces"

title: Set the Fire


text: Category:54-40 albums

title: Category:54-40 albums


text:
Marianne de Pierres

Marianne de Pierres (born 1961) is an Australian science fiction author. Born in Western Australia, she finished her undergraduate studies at Curtin University in Perth and later studied a Postgraduate Certificate of Arts in Writing, Editing and Publishing at the University of Queensland. In 2019, she completed her PhD in Creative Writing at the University of Queensland.

Throughout her writing career she has been actively involved in promoting Speculative Fiction in Australia and is the co-founder of the Vision Writers Group with Rowena Cory Daniells, and ROR – wRiters on the Rise, a critiquing group for professional writers. She was also involved in the early planning stage of Clarion South.

Publications
The greater body of her work has seen publication in the UK and Australia. In 2004, her series of novels with the protagonist Parrish Plessis, a postapocalyptic bodyguard and bounty hunter, was published in the United Kingdom through Orbit Books and in 2005 in the United States through Roc Books. The novels in this series include Nylon Angel, Code Noir, and Crash Deluxe and have been adapted into a role-playing game. Her second series, Sentients of Orion comprises four books: Dark Space, Chaos Space, Mirror Space and Transformation Space, published in the United Kingdom through Orbit Books. Transformation Space won an Aurealis Award for Best SF novel in 2011.

In 2008 de Pierres began writing humorous crime under the pseudonym Marianne Delacourt. To date there are four novel novels in the Tara Sharp series: Sharp Shooter, Sharp Turn, Too Sharp and Sharp Edge. The first three novels were published by Allen and Unwin then later re-released by Twelfth Planet Press with the fourth book being released in 2017. The first novel, Sharp Shooter received a Davitt Award in 2010 for Best Crime novel by an Australian woman. The Tara Sharp series was optioned for film and TV by Hoodlum Productions, Brisbane.

Her young adult series, Night Creatures (Burn Bright, Angel Arias and Shine Light) was published by Random House, Australia. It featured a collaboration with Australian indie singer, Yunyu, who wrote songs to accompany the release of first two books.

In 2014, Angry Robot Books published her Peacemaker urban fantasy, crime, Western series.

Critical Work Based on de Pierres Fiction
Boshoff, Dorothea, ‘Situated Knowledges - love in the time of patriarchy: lack of positive intimacy in Marianne de Pierres’ The Sentients of Orion.’ International Society for the Study of Gender and Love. Conference paper, 2020

Aliaga-Lavrijsen, J. Pregnancy, Childbirth and Nursing in Feminist Dystopia: Marianne de Pierres’ Transformation Space (2010). Humanities 2020, 9, 58

Boshoff, Dorothea, ‘Becoming Alien(ated): A case study examining intimacy and loneliness in selected works by Marianne de Pierres.’ (2020)

Boshoff, Dorothea and Deidre Byrne. 'He Said, She Said: Fake News and MeToo in Marianne de Pierres’ Sentients of Orion.’ Messenger from the Stars Journal: On Science Fiction and Fantasy. No. 4 (2019): 88- 102. Guest Eds.: Danièle André & Cristophe Becker.

Turcotte, Gerry. ‘The Caribbean Gothic Down Under: Caribbean Influences in Marianne de Pierres’ Parrish Plessis Novels.’ Caietele Echinox. 35. 237-243. 10.24193/cechinox.2018.35.15. (2018)

Boshoff, Dorothea. ‘Crafting Positions: Representations of Intimacy and Gender in The Sentients of Orion.’ PhD. University of South Africa, (2017)

Weaver, Roslyn. ‘The End of Human: apocalypse, cyberpunk and the Parrish Plessis novels.’ ''Apocalypse in Australian Film and Fiction: a critical study. Critical explorations in science fiction and fantasy''; 28, McFarland Press, (2011)

Her complete bibliography is available from her website.

Abridged Bibliography
Source

Awards and nominations
As Marianne Delacourt

External resources

 * Marianne de Pierres' official website

title: Marianne de Pierres


text:
Heaven Up Here

Heaven Up Here is the second album by the English post-punk band Echo & the Bunnymen, released on 29 May 1981. In June 1981, Heaven Up Here became Echo & the Bunnymen's first Top 10 release when it reached number 10 on the UK Albums Chart. It was also the band's first entry into the United States album charts when it reached number 184 of the Billboard 200. The songs "A Promise" and "Over the Wall" were released as singles.

Recorded at Rockfield Studios near Monmouth in Wales, Heaven Up Here was co-produced by Hugh Jones and the band. An album generally well received by fans in the United Kingdom and by critics, Heaven Up Here won the "Best Dressed LP" and "Best Album" awards at the 1981 NME Awards. The album has also been listed at number 463 in Rolling Stone magazine's list of the 500 greatest albums of all time.

Background and recording
After the public and press interest garnered from Echo & the Bunnymen's debut album, Crocodiles, the band released the Shine So Hard EP which maintained their profile. Work then soon began on their second album, Heaven Up Here. Following musical differences between the band and Crocodiles producers Bill Drummond and David Balfe, Hugh Jones was brought in to produce Heaven Up Here. Jones had previously engineered Crocodiles and co-produced Shine So Hard with Drummond, and would later go on to produce the band's 2005 album Siberia. The band were also given an additional producer credit. The album was recorded at Rockfield Studios near Monmouth in Wales during March 1981.

In the liner notes to the 2003 remastered version of the album, lead singer Ian McCulloch said that he constantly had the American rock band the Velvet Underground's song "What Goes On" in the back of his mind. He also stated that the band wanted to record a soul album. In the same liner notes, bassist Les Pattinson said that the band was often lazy and hence had hired rehearsal space at the Ministry in Liverpool. He said this made them work harder and develop "language" in the rhythm. According to guitarist Will Sergeant, McCulloch considers Heaven Up Here to be Sergeant's album because he was bossy and a control freak during the recording.

Music
In 1981, music magazine NME described the album as darker and more passionate than 1980's Crocodiles. Record Mirror also said that the band sang the blues and devoted themselves to existential sadness. They went on to note that the album offered "an anatomy of melancholy, resplendent with the glamour of doom". Melody Maker disagreed when in 1981 they said "the Bunnymen are continuing to play majestic, uplifting music that will shine through the dark days ahead of us". In the 2002 book Turquoise Days: The Weird World of Echo & the Bunnymen, author Chris Adams said that in 1995 McCulloch had said, "That spikey edge [of the album] still stands up." In relation to their style of music, in 1980 McCulloch had said, "I always say 'We're a rock band'. Because I'm proud of that." He added, "I like rock music [...] I prefer being good or great within that basic format [...] I just prefer basic songs."

In his 2005 book Rip It Up and Start Again: Post Punk 1978–1984, British music journalist Simon Reynolds described the sound of Heaven Up Here as having been filled out with "guitar overdubs, keyboard glints, vocal multitracking and atmospheric vapours". Comparing Heaven Up Here with Joy Division's 1980 album Closer, Reynolds said they are "harrowed by the same things [...] hypocrisy, distrust, betrayal, lost or frozen potential". However, he said that "Closer shows Ian Curtis fatally mesmerized by his own dread visions, Heaven Up Here ultimately turns its face towards the light" with the tracks "No Dark Things" – which he describes as renouncing "death-wishful thinking" – and "All I Want" – which he describes as "a blasting celebration of desire for desire's sake" and "pure intransitive exhilaration".

Cover
The photograph used on the front and back cover of the album was taken by photographer Brian Griffin. The picture shows the band on a wet beach in the south Wales seaside town of Porthcawl; there are dark clouds in the sky and the sun is low on the horizon causing the band to be silhouetted. The picture was taken on a day off from recording the album. The original album's cover art was designed by Martyn Atkins. According to Griffin, they used buckets of fish offal to entice the gulls to fly into shot. He also stated that both Drummond and Rob Dickins, head of their record label Korova, hated the pictures from the shoot, and that he and Atkins had to fight for them to be used on the sleeve. The cover received the "Best Dressed LP" award in the 1981 NME Awards. Reynolds said that the band's manager, Drummond, saw them as representing "cold, dampness, darkness".

The front cover picture of the original album was kept for the 2003 reissue. However, the design was altered slightly by graphic designer Rachel Gutek of the design company guppyart. The release contained an expanded booklet written by music journalist Max Bell giving the background to the album. The booklet also contains a number of photographs which are credited to Sergeant and Pattinson.

Releases
The album was originally released as an LP by Korova in the United Kingdom on 29 May 1981. It was then released in the United States by Sire Records on 24 June 1981. It was released elsewhere on Korova, although with a different catalogue number. Side one of the LP contained five tracks and side two had six. The album was first released on CD on 16 May 1988.

Along with the others of the band's first five albums, the album was remastered and reissued on CD in 2003 containing five bonus tracks – these releases were marketed as 25th anniversary editions. "Broke My Neck (Long Version)", recorded at Tistedal Studios in Norway on 7 June 1981, is the B-side of the 12-inch single "A Promise" – an edited version was used as the B-side of the 7-inch single. The other four bonus tracks were recorded live at the Manly Vale Hotel in Sydney, Australia, on 11 November 1981. The reissued album was produced by music historian Andy Zax and producer Bill Inglot.

The only single from Heaven Up Here released worldwide was "A Promise" on 10 July 1981. The single stayed on the UK Singles Chart for four weeks and reached number 49. Later that year, "Over the Wall" was released as a single in Australia only.

Reception
Heaven Up Here was generally well received by the music press and critics. In a 1982 interview with the band for the NME, rock journalist Barney Hoskyns described the album as "one of the most superior articulations of 'rock' form in living memory." Later reviews have continued to receive the album well: AllMusic reviewer Aaron Warshaw said that McCulloch "sings with soaring abandon and passion throughout the album" and that Sergeant's guitar playing was at its "angular finest". Not all reviews were positive: Robert Christgau of The Village Voice said that he held "no brief against tuneless caterwaul, but tuneless psychedelic caterwaul has always been another matter." In his 1999 book From the Shores of Lake Placid and Other Stories, the band's manager Bill Drummond said "The album is dull as ditchwater. The songs are unformed, the sound uniformly grey."

Heaven Up Here sold well in the United Kingdom, staying on the UK Albums Chart for a total of 16 weeks and reaching a peak of number 10 in June 1981. The album was the first release by Echo & the Bunnymen to make it onto the American charts when it reached number 184 on the Billboard 200.

In 2012, the album ranked number 463 on Rolling Stone magazine's list of the 500 greatest albums of all time. The NME ranked the album number 39 on its list of the 50 greatest albums of the 1980s and number 51 on its list of the greatest albums of all time. The album also received the NME's 1981 best album award. Reynolds described the award as "essentially an anti-New Pop protest vote by post-punk's silent majority".

Legacy
The song "The Disease" was covered — re-titled as "From Heaven" — in 2024 by American industrial metal band Static-X for their album Project Regeneration Vol. 2; it is based on an archival vocal recording of late frontman Wayne Static who passed away in 2014.

Track listing
All tracks written by Will Sergeant, Ian McCulloch, Les Pattinson and Pete de Freitas.

 * Side one
 * 1) "Show of Strength" – 4:50
 * 2) "With a Hip" – 3:16
 * 3) "Over the Wall" – 5:59
 * 4) "It Was a Pleasure" – 3:12
 * 5) "A Promise" – 4:08

 * Side two
 * 1) "Heaven Up Here" – 3:45
 * 2) "The Disease" – 2:28
 * 3) "All My Colours" – 4:06
 * 4) "No Dark Things" – 4:27
 * 5) "Turquoise Days" – 3:51
 * 6) "All I Want" – 4:09

 * 2003 reissue bonus tracks
 * 1) "Broke My Neck" (long version) – 7:22
 * 2) "Show of Strength" (live) – 4:41
 * 3) "The Disease" (live) – 1:53
 * 4) "All I Want" (live) – 3:09
 * 5) "Zimbo" (live) – 3:52

Personnel
with:
 * Echo & the Bunnymen
 * Will Sergeant – lead guitar
 * Ian McCulloch – vocals, rhythm guitar, piano
 * Les Pattinson – bass
 * Pete de Freitas – drums
 * Les Penning – woodwind
 * Technical
 * Hugh Jones – producer, engineer
 * The Bunnymen – producer
 * Martyn Atkins – album design
 * Brian Griffin – photography
 * Andy Zax – producer (reissue)
 * Bill Inglot – producer (reissue), remastering
 * Dan Hersch – remastering
 * Claes Neeb – engineering on "Broke My Neck" (long version)
 * Rachel Gutek – album design (reissue)

title: Heaven Up Here


text:
Hesperocyparis goveniana

Hesperocyparis goveniana commonly known as Californian cypress and Gowen cypress, is a species of western cypress that is endemic to a small area of coastal California near Monterey. It was formerly classified as Cupressus goveniana.

Distribution
The tree is endemic to the Monterey Peninsula in coastal Monterey County, located on the Central Coast of California, in the Western United States.

The tree is found in small, scattered populations, and not in large forests of its species. Hesperocyparis goveniana occurs with Hesperocyparis macrocarpa (Monterey cypress), in the two groves where the Monterey cypress occurs naturally, in Monterey County. Outside of California, Hesperocyparis goveniana has been introduced to Robinson Crusoe Island in Chile.

It is on the IUCN Red List of endangered species.

Description
Hesperocyparis goveniana is an evergreen tree with a conic to ovoid-conic crown, very variable in size, with mature trees of under 1 m on some sites, to 50 m tall in ideal conditions.

The foliage grows in dense sprays, dark green to somewhat yellow-green in color. The leaves are scale-like, 2 - 5 mm long, and produced on rounded (not flattened) shoots.

The seed cones are globose to oblong, 11 - 22 mm long, with 6 to 10 scales, green at first, maturing brown or gray-brown about 20–24 months after pollination. The cones remain closed for many years, only opening after the parent tree is killed in a wildfire, thereby allowing the seeds to colonize the bare ground exposed by the fire. The male cones are 3 - 5 mm long, and release pollen in February/March.

Typically cones of H. goveniana are smaller than those of H. macrocarpa.

Taxonomy
Hesperocyparis goveniana was first described and given the scientific name Cupressus goveniana by George Gordon in 1849. It was described from a specimen grown in the gardens of the Royal Horticultural Society from seed collected by Karl Theodor Hartweg. It was named by Gordon for the then secretary of the society, James Robert Gowen. In 2009 genetic research into the relationships of Cupressus and Juniperus lead to the reclassification of almost all the new world species into a new genus, Hesperocyparis by Jim A. Bartel. This move has been disputed, but as of 2024 Plants of the World Online (POWO), World Flora Online (WFO), and the USDA Natural Resources Conservation Service PLANTS database (PLANTS) all list Hesperocyparis goveniana as the correct name.

The varieties or subspecies, formerly included under Cupressus goveniana include:
 * Cupressus goveniana var. goveniana — reclassified as Hesperocyparis goveniana.
 * Monterey County, strictly coastal, within 3 km of the coast and below 200 m altitude. Foliage dark green, not rough, with leaf tips not spreading; cones globose.

 * Cupressus goveniana var. pigmaea, reclassified as Hesperocyparis pygmaea — Mendocino cypress (vulnerable species).
 * Mendocino and Sonoma counties, coastal, within 10 km of the coast and below 500 m altitude.

 * Cupressus goveniana var. abramsiana, reclassified as Hesperocyparis abramsiana — Santa Cruz cypress (endangered species).
 * Santa Cruz and San Mateo counties, in the Santa Cruz Mountains 10 - 20 km inland and at 300 - 760 m altitude. With yellow–green foliage slightly rough-textured from the acute and slightly spreading leaf tips; cones often oval.

title: Hesperocyparis goveniana