text: Category:Colonies in antiquity

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

title: Category:Colonies in antiquity


text: User talk:130.20.170.194

title: User talk:130.20.170.194


text:
Talk:The Bible and homosexuality/Archive 1

 * It might be best to take all the "liberal" views as a section and then have a seperate "conservative" views section. That would look better then mixing the two together in what looks like a tit for tat game.  Also Lev. 18 only deals with male homosexuality and not female homosexuality.

Concerning the issues below: the article is supposed to present the arguments actually utilized by the two opposing sides, regardless of whether Vizcarra (or anyone else) personally believes these arguments to be valid or not. I have modified the wording somewhat based on some of his objections, but in the end these arguments need to be included for balance regardless of his objections - removing any argument one personally disagrees with is normally considered vandalism, and will be dealt with as such. 66.216.226.34 01:05, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Please read Vandalism before making such claims, especially the section Bold Edits. Any sources that list each objection? Otherwise any of these claims may be as well deleted. You deleted Hallsal's argument, which is (according to your own definition) vandalism. --Vizcarra 02:11, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * First of all: the citation from Halsall which you added was redundant, since a similar definition of "raca" was already provided - there was no need to have two cited.
 * Secondly: since most of the arguments on both sides currently lack citations, you cannot give that as an excuse for selectively deleting only those you personally disagree with, while leaving the others in place.
 * Neither can you judge my actions. I delete objections with no source if they don't make sense to me. I added my reasoning here in the talk page with the hopes that someone can provide the source. By the way, I added Halsall's discussion about the word raca, since it is sourced. --Vizcarra 23:41, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Ok, I'll accept the addition of Halsall's definition, although I still think it's redundant to have two definitions given (yes, the other was unsourced, but it's still unsourced after adding a different person's interpretation of the word). Some of the language you added left out a few words and needs to be cleaned up, however. 66.216.226.34 23:57, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * You are welcome to remove the unsourced raca definition, or use it as part of the introduction of the paragraph. You are welcome to clean up the paragraph as well. --Vizcarra 23:59, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Finally: since the text in this article (which was originally part of an older article) had already been worked out through the consensus of a number of editors, a consensus had already been reached on this version - you have been trying to undo all of that by deleting anything you personally disagree with. It is that which is properly defined as vandalism. 66.216.226.34 05:12, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * First of all. I'd like you to focus on the facts and not on "conspiracies". I am not entertainment silly accusations anymore. You are showing many characteristics of an Internet troll since you seem to seek controversy. I am not.
 * I provided Halsall's citation, because there was no other, in fact there was a "source required" tag, which I removed after providing Halsall's citation.
 * Any consensus was on the original article "Christianity and homosexuality" and not this one. I'm not trying to "undo all" don't be dramatic. The article has a lot of "sources required" and NPOV, which I'm trying to eliminate. I'm trying to contribute to make this a better article and you haven't done much more than resort to accusations, which I won't entertain any longer, if you have arguments about the article or about any edits, then you are welcome to post them here. I delete what I don't agree with, yes, because I want to improve the article, that is why I post here my arguments for deleting the section for discussion, not between you and me since I am beginning to consider that fruitless but for a consensus (which is more than two people).--Vizcarra 17:21, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * You ask me to refrain from accusations but then accuse me of being a "troll" - the latter label being ironically applied because I tried to prevent the unwarranted deletion of material which a number of editors had worked out by consensus when it was originally drawn up.
 * I never accused you of being a troll but rather your actions, ("You are showing many characteristics of an Internet troll since you seem to seek controversy." The "since you seem to seek controversy" is what makes me believe your actions corresponds to those of a troll. Not because I "tr(ied) to prevent unwarranted deltion". --Vizcarra 20:22, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I already presented the reasons why these portions of the text were included, and I tried to show good faith by modifying the wording based on some of your objections. It is yourself who has "sought controversy" and refused to compromise. 66.216.226.34 18:55, 20 July 2005 (UTC).
 * Like I said, I'm not entertaining accusations for long, so if you seek consensus you would have to raise the discussion to an appropirate level. If you want to add the objections, add the sources where they originate from. This article is not about your, mine, or any other wikipedian's opinions. Let's keep it that way. --Vizcarra 20:22, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

No comparison?
"Concerning Christ's lack of any specific denunciation of homosexuality, it was also the case that Christ's recorded sermons never specifically condemned sins such as murder, theft, rape, kidnapping, or any number of others, but that doesn't mean that Christ approved of these things." 66.216.226.34.

 * Let me parse it for easier analysis. "Concerning... homosexuality, Christi didn't specifically condemned murder, theft, rape, kidnapping". So homosexuality is in the same category? It is unnecessary to put crimes at the same category as homosexuality. Notice I never mentioned the word "sins" until now, but the word "crimes". You cannot make an analogy here because homosexuality is not a crime (at least generally, at least in most countries). He didn't have to mention those crimes because he never advocated criminal activities. In fact, he advocated obeying the government " "Give to Caesar what is Caesar's, and to God what is God's" (so I'm sure that if not paying taxes was not OK, not killing, stealing, raping and kidnapping would not be OK as well). Wikipedia is not a soapbox: "Wikipedia articles are for facts, not debate". I indicated you several times how putting homosexuality at the same level of crimes because Jesus didn't "specifically condemn" either is not appropriate and you keep trying to get through. --Vizcarra 16:54, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * There seems to be a lack of communication here. The point of that section was to present the opposing view given to the claim by gay activists that since Christ never specifically condemned homosexual sex in His sermons, therefore it must be allowed - to which the opposing side responds by pointing out that the above argument is a non-sequitur since there were a great many other sins that Christ never specifically condemned (blasphemy, murder, theft, rape, etc, etc). The passage was simply pointing this out: your objections have nothing whatsoever to do with the context. 66.216.226.34 23:16, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * The point was understood the first time I read it. What I objected is using the examples of crimes not especifically condemned by Jesus and pack them in a category of crimes+homosexuality that Jesus did not condemn. Homosexuality is not a crime, so if you have a list of "sins" not condemned by Jesus that are not also crimes you are welcome to list them since it would be a more appropriate list. --Vizcarra 23:58, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I included blasphemy, which is not a secular crime. But it would make no difference whether the sins in question are also crimes or not: the issue is that Christ did not specifically condemn a great many sins, and yet we still consider them sins because they are defined as such in the rest of the revealed doctrine. The issue of secular crime has no possible relevance to this topic at all, and yet you're using it as a justification for deleting any opposing viewpoint which you personally dislike. 66.216.226.34 00:52, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Jewish society
"Since Jewish society in that era already condemned homosexual intercourse and these other actions, there was presumably no need to specifically condemn them all one by one."
 * Jesus did condemn certain habits of Jewish society, such as the "stoning of the adulterers". --Vizcarra 17:11, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Again, you're entirely missing the point, which was as follows: the passage was noting that Christ never specifically condemned actions such as sodomy (and rape, blasphemy, etc), because there was no need to do so - Jewish theology already condemned these things. Christ did condemn certain aspects of Jewish theology which deviated from the true Divine Law, but there was no need to re-confirm everything that was in keeping with the Divine Law. 66.216.226.34 23:16, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I think it is you who is missing the point. My point is about what "Jewish society" condemned and what Jesus did not condemn. Not because Jewish society condemned homosexuality we must imply that Jesus also condemned homosexuality. The Jewish society condemned association of Jews with "tax collectors" who were considered traitors, and Jesus did not only not condemn association with tax collectors, but Apostle Matthew was one. The Divine Law condemned the eating of impure animals and Jesus did not, Jesus said that what makes you impure is what comes out of your mouth and not what comes in through the mouth. --Vizcarra 23:58, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * But unlike these other cases, Jesus never overturned the rule against sodomy - that's the distinction. You're taking cases in which Christ *did* modify Jewish theology and trying to claim that such would also apply to cases in which Christ didn't modify it - which is a non-sequitur unless you're also going to make the same argument for all the other elements of Jewish theology that Christ did not specifically mention (e.g., Christ never specifically re-iterated most of the Ten Commandements, but we nevertheless assume that He upheld them nonetheless).
 * In any event, I do not need to convince you personally of this principle: the article is designed to present arguments given by people on both sides of the issue, regardless of whether you personally agree with these arguments or not. You have no right to remove material just because you don't agree with it. 66.216.226.34 00:52, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Marriage
"... in conformance with the Biblical ordinance that marriage should be between one man and one woman (Genesis 1:27 and 2:24, cited by Jesus himself in Matthew 19:3–6 and Mark 10:5–9."

The passages of Genesis do not mention the wordd marriage. The passages of the new testament only condemn divorce. --Vizcarra 21:48, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Genesis 2:24 most certainly does refer to marriage: "Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife". It doesn't need to specifically use the word "marriage" in order to refer to the sacrament. :None of the above should need to be painstakingly pointed out, nor do you have any justification for removing so much material based on the specious arguments you've been using. 66.216.226.34 23:16, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * You are right "wife" does imply marriage. However it does not say that "marriage should be between one man and one woman". I am actually providing my "justification for removing so much material" and I should remind you about the Wikipedia etiquette now that you have started using words such as "specious" but given that you don't even have a user page I may be wasting my time dealing with a troll. --Vizcarra 23:58, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I think one definition of a "troll" is someone who removes the opposing viewpoint in an article which is supposed to present both sides of an issue. The marriage argument is based on the fact that the Biblical descriptions of marriage only refer to arrangements between a man and a woman; but in any event the issue does not come down to whether you personally agree with the argument or not: the article presents the arguments which are actually made by both sides. Please stop deleting one side of the debate. 66.216.226.34 00:52, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Pro vs. Anti-Homosexual
I have to admit, the layout of this article is ridiculous, Dividing each point into its own anti- and pro-homosexual seems redundant: simply summarising the opinions of both parties, and all those inbetween, in each section should be suffucient. What is more, we should be avoiding the use of such terms as "pro-homosexual".Axon (talk|contribs) 12:54, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. How about a table with the arguments that justify each position? Or we can have sections like "Matthew 5:22, supporters of homosexuality (is don't know how else to call it) interpret this passage as... (citation). (citation) argues that the passage instead...". --Vizcarra 16:37, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

 * I don't think a table is suitable either: why not just use natural language to explain one side, then the other, and so forth? Also "supporters of homosexuality" is possibly weasel words: it would be better to reference and list who exactly is using this argument instead. Axon (talk|contribs) 16:59, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

An additional issue is that it isn't even a 2-sided thing. There are many different shades of interpretation not just an "extremely pro Homosexuality" and an "extremely anti Homosexuality" one. 19:23, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Nobody is talking about "extreme" positions here, just pro-leaning and anti-leaning, is there any other?. The point of the article is the illustrate the reality that both positions use the same publication, the Bible, to support their views and what sections of it are used to support their views.--Vizcarra 21:33, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * to cast it as a dichotomy is what is misleading. Homosexuality isnt something that people are only pro-everything or anti-everything. It has different facets, and each is supported by different shades of opinion. Pro- and anti- is an extremely artificial division.     23:28, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Then we can have anti-gay, pro-gay and swing-gay. (or red, blue and purple) --Vizcarra 03:12, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * That is still a false dichotomy - you are implying that "gay" is something that you have to have the same opinion of every single facet. I.e. that you are either against EVERYTHING to do with "gay" or for EVERYTHING, or intermediate about EVERYTHING. But that simply is not the case.     07:26, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Dichotomy is about two oppinions. And what I'm implying is that (as it is explained in Homosexuality and Christianity) the Bible is used by both pro- and anti-gay groups to justify their views. If you know of any other group you are welcome to include it, but that is where this article originated from (and spun off because of the size of the original article). Then, again, the article can be expanded to be a list of passages that address the topic of same-sex relationships. The problem is that it is quite controversial because anti- and pro-gay groups have very different opinions about what single passage implies, but the best thing it can be done from a NPOV is to include arguments from anti- to neutral to pro-gay. --Vizcarra 18:41, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * You are presenting "100% of facets to do with homosexuality" as something you are either 100% pro or 100% anti. This is an extremely false dichotomy - not a single one of those percentages reflects reality.     19:10, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Both sides need to be presented for an article to be objective. Do you have any alternative way of presenting the article? --Vizcarra 22:26, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * It is the idea that there are 2 sides which is extremely misleading. In reality, it is not polarised into an US vs. THEM war, however much some people would like to characterise it thus.     07:19, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't think it is misleading to say that there are (at least) two sides, because there are those who claim homosexuality is anti-christian and those who claim it isn't. There is an entire article about the topic Homosexuality and Christianity. And both sides of the opinion use scriptures from the Bible to justify their views. In a world where everybody had the same opinions there would be only one side to the story: the truth. But this isn't one and people have different opinions of what the truth is and all opinions must be taken into account. Of course pro and con opinions are the most notable, a lot of people don't care either and that is a position probably not worth writing much about it. --Vizcarra 17:56, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
 * (a) Since when were we discussing whether homosexuality was or was not anti-christian. We were discussing what people think the bible says.
 * (b) Even amongst those who think homosexuality is "anti-christian", this is a false dichotomy, some think homosexual acts are "anti-christian", but not homosexuals, others think that homosexuals are intrinsically "anti-christian", etc. There is a wide variety of viewpoints, over a wide variety of facets. You are presenting things as if it is everyone who disagrees slightly with a single aspect of homosexuality disagrees with 100% of everything, which is simply a lie.     ( ! | ? | * ) 08:04, 2 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Even that is misleading. I think some of the "pro-homosexual" readings are unsubstantiated and incorrect, but I am certainly not "anti-homosexual." - SimonP 21:54, July 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * I see your point. In that case the article could have a broader scope of discussing passages that mention homosexuality or homosexuality-related verses, with no anti- or pro- judgments. --Vizcarra 22:24, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Lots of tags!
Holy crap, folks. I understand that this is a contentious article, but do we really need so many tag templates included? How about leaving out at least the wikify and copyedit tags, so that some content actually makes it onto the first screen of text? -GregoryWeir 18:03, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes we do. Thanks. ( ! | ? | * ) 18:29, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Either the cleanup or the wikify and copyedit tags should be removed, in my opinion. The template messages page says of the cleanup tag, "Please do not use this in combination with the more specific cleanup tags." Additionally, the attention and cleanup tags are rather redundant. Both do not need to be there. The presence of so many tags is silly. We only really need the deletion tag, the neutrality tag, and one cleanup-type tag. -GregoryWeir 13:52, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup is different to wikify and copyedit
 * Cleanup - has structural and content issues
 * Wikify - has formatting issues
 * Copyedit - has issues over english usage

The article has all three problems. ( ! | ? | * ) 20:40, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Another user has removed some of the tags, and I agree with their choice. The cleanup tag is general, and indicates that there are lots of problems with a page, or that problems are very general. The others are more specific. It is not useful to have several different tags at the top of the page. The tags exist to let readers know that the page is not up to Wikipedia standards and should be taken with a grain of salt as well as not taken as representative of the site as a whole. With so many tags there, it looks as if people are fighting over the article and someone's trying to make it look bad (which may be true, but we don't want to look petty). -GregoryWeir 21:06, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

VFD results
This article has survived a VFD nomination with the result of No consensus. --Allen3 talk 10:06, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

There was a consensus on cleaning and removing unsourced passages. Also the pro- and anti- seems flawed. The article should not contain original research. Let's try to move in this direction. --pippo2001 03:30, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Deleting nonsense
I deleted: Pro-homosexual view

 * This passage condemns acting against one's nature. Claiming that homosexual intercourse is unnatural is a false premise, and is widely attested in nature, for example there is a large group of homosexual penguins currently in a german zoo. It is not in a homosexual person's nature to have heterosexual intercourse because they have no attraction to the opposite sex. Heterosexuals acting out of their nature and being promiscuous by having homosexual intercourse for pleasure even though they have no homosexual attractions are what this passage condemns not homosexuals.

As an answer to:
 * For this reason God gave them up to degrading passions. Their women exchanged natural intercourse for unnatural, and in the same way also the men, giving up natural intercourse with women, were consumed with passion for one another. Men committed shameless acts with men and received in their own persons the due penalty for their error.

The passage clearly defines what natural is. I do not agree with this definition. However arguments must be reasonable. In any case: whose opinion is this? If this is original research, it cannot stay on wikipedia. --pippo2001 01:14, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

"Natural intercourse" = "talking", so someone is going to have to do some interpretation somewhere to turn it into "heterosexual sexual activity". ( ! | ? | * ) 20:49, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

If you are serious: ok. So if "Natural intercourse" = "talking", than this passage is saying that men did not talk with women anymore, and committed shameless act with other men. Maybe you think that it is implied that men should not talk to other men? You can imagine if they can do anything else.... We cannot strech things that are rather clear. (My personal position is: who cares?, but that's another thing.) --pippo2001 00:28, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Intercourse means something very similar to interaction. Intercourse only became a synonym for sexual intercourse very recently, thus the name of places like Intercourse, Pennsylvania. The passage is saying that whatever it was that the men did that was natural and involved women was given up, and were consumed by passion for other men. The thing that was done between men is not specified as being the same or related to the thing that was done between women. Indeed, passion only took on sexual terms recently - one can argue passionately without the argument being sexual. All it says is that men stopped doing something with women that was in their nature, and did something with much feeling with each other, for which they felt no shame and were punished.
 * This could, for example, refer to gambling, and lactation, it could, technically, be read to mean that "men gave up using women for the natural act of obtaining breast milk (the natural thing with women), and started fiercely fighting inappropriately for no good reason with other men (the passionate thing between men), without feeling shame, which resulted in wounds and being ostracised by the community (the punishment)". Obviously this is a very unusual and somewhat contrived reading. But the point is that we cannot interpret the meaning based on how we use words now when that wasn't how words were used when it was written.     ( ! | ? | * ) 16:28, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Good. You say: All it says is that men stopped doing something with women that was in their nature, and did something with much feeling with each other, for which they felt no shame and were punished. I don't see how animals behaviour may shed any light on what is natural and not. There is one straightforward interpretation of the text. And then there are yours. We cannot do your job of finding old meanings of the words, since the text was in greek or other languages and the traslation in English is recent. It is not an 17th century English translation. You understand that we cannot go back to the original text and that all this is original research, like much of the rest of the article, and should all be deleted. --pippo2001 18:09, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Just because the translation is modern does not make it accurate. E.g. Leviticus 18:22 contains the somewhat obscure phrase "lay layings of", most translators translate it as "have sex with" because the alternative and equally valid "sleep in a bed used by" is not acceptable to them due to their POV when they can use the former.
 * I would very much like the whole article deleted as POV and original research as well, so I agree with you here, but it was recently VFD'd and didn't reach consensus - it can be re-VFD'd but not for a few days.     ( ! | ? | * ) 19:10, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm merely going to point out that the allegedly "obscure phrase" you're referring to - "lo tishkav" - is used with an unambiguously sexual meaning in Genesis 19:34, 26:10, 30:15-16, 34:2, 35:22, 39:7, Exd 22:16, 22:19, etc. The meaning is not legitimately in doubt, and the literal translation is not relevant - like many phrases, the actual meaning differs from the literal translation. 66.216.226.34 20:38, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean that a modern translation is by definition accurate. I meant that we cannot do the interpretation of this text as if it was written in ancient English. So one has to go back to the original... I'd agree to delete this page. --pippo2001 20:42, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The full verse is "V'et zachar lo tishkav mishk'vey eeshah toeyvah hee".
 * The text is quite clear on the male part - using the word 'zachar', but the female part in the text is not a precise counterpart to it. If it were so, the text should have used the term 'nekevah' which is to zachar as female is to male. However, the term 'eeshah' is used, which is more properly a counterpart to 'eesh' and the two are similar to the English pairing of man/woman. The text therefore has a rather striking and awkward male/woman pairing. Further, the word 'eeshah' is also commonly used specifically for 'wife' and therefore can speak more specifically to that relationship where offspring are intended to occur.
 * Actually, this passage could be viewed as a prohibition against heterosexual sex as well, as the entire verse can be read as a prohibition against having sex with a man using the sex of a woman, no matter what the sex of the partner of the man is (e.g. a woman).
 * Or alternately, taking into account the full context in which it appears, it can be understood to mean "Ritual anal sex between two men in a Pagan temple is forbidden", but that would be obvious, and no prohibition on normal homosexuality whatsoever.     ( ! | ? | * ) 12:24, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Now here's an interesting explanation of the matter: you said the phrase is "a prohibition against having sex with a man using the sex of a woman, no matter what the sex of the partner of the man is" - which is truly indecipherable. Just as Pippo had to ask (farther above) whether you're serious with all this, I have to ask the same.
 * Let me re-word that for you - "a prohibition against having sex with a man who is taking the position and style of a woman in sex, no matter what the sex of the partner of the man is"     ( ! | ? | * ) 01:49, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The rewording is still illogical: you first concede that the passage prohibits the audience (i.e., the men of the tribe) from "having sex with a man", but you then conclude by saying "no matter what the sex of the partner of the man is". Since both of the people involved would be men, how on earth do you possibly justify the latter phrase? 66.216.226.34 03:13, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * In any event, that's not how the phrase was used, nor was it interpreted that way by the people who knew the language - you can't take the word-by-word meaning of an idiomatic expression and use that as an excuse to play semantic games with the text. 66.216.226.34 14:10, 13 August 2005 (UTC)
 * How do you know that wasn't how the phrase was used? How do you know it was used the way you think it was used? There is no evidence outside the text, so its all guesswork.     ( ! | ? | * ) 01:49, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The Hebrew language was used for a very long time in sources outside of the Bible, and the Bible itself was interpreted by many people who knew the language fluently: we don't need to interpret this passage based solely upon itself, and it isn't merely a matter of guesswork. Moreover, there are many revealed sources which confirm the long-accepted meaning of the passage, such as the revelations to St. Hildegard (in which God bluntly and unambiguously denounces any sex between two men or between two women). You're picking out one phrase in isolation, redefining it however you see fit rather than going by its well-established meaning in Hebrew, and then using that redefinition to reject all the other sources which further confirm the well-established meaning. 66.216.226.34 03:13, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Interpreting the passage in any way not done by experts in the field or in the historical interpretation is original research. --Noitall 13:15, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Pro Homosexual doesnt relate to the bible
Is it me or does the pro homosexual does not relate to the bible? unsigned
 * Could you explain what you are referring to?     ( ! | ? | * ) 20:48, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Ril, I have reverted your changes. I don't object to them all, but holding to a particular interpreation of a passage does not require an ant- or pro homosexual view. Many liberals will concede the traditional exegesis of a passage, whilst not holding its ethics to be normative. --Doc (?) 01:59, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * They aren't "my changes". They are the original titles of the passage. I.e. my reverts restore the article rather than change it from how it was. The change was the one that put the POV interpretation in.     ( ! | ? | * ) 16:18, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I'd say even more. It is the whole structure of the article to be misleading. People may agree sometimes with the 'pro-homo' and other times with the 'anti-homo'. There are not two clearly opposing schools confronting eachother. There is the institutional interpretation of of the Bible. And there are the many other possibilities, challenging some interpretations, challenging the translation. Or simply not caring about the ethical implications. This article is very badly conceived. In any case, I support Doc's edits. --pippo2001 03:24, 14 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree that "pro-" and "anti-" homosexual is a very false dichotomy, and if you scroll up you will see that I argue that case above extensively. I really don't believe the article should be structured like that, although I still haven't worked out how to do it properly, I really would like it deleted all-together as a POV trap, but there was no consensus at the last VFD as to what to do with the article, so we are stuck with it for a few days.     ( ! | ? | * ) 16:18, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The problem with the "dispute" is that most of the interpretations are not generally accepted by experts in the field nor were they they historical interpretations. If they are not and are not sourced, they need to be deleted.  --Noitall 13:21, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia should contain factual information; I wonder if every Christian would subscribe to the label "revealed" with regard to the writings of Hildegard. After all we are talking about the Bible. Anyway the reporting about the various discussions seems to be a bit 'coloured'and not neutral - as required in an encyclopaedia.

NPOV
This article strikes me as having a decidedly right-leaning slant. Full disclosure: I do not consider myself to be aligned with any particular political agenda, but I do think wikipedia should include more than one side of a debate. MPS 20:53, 20 October 2005 (UTC)


text:
SEAT 124

The SEAT 124 is a small family car produced by the Spanish manufacturer SEAT in its Zona Franca, Barcelona and Landaben, Pamplona plants between 1968 and 1980. The car was very successful in Spain having sold 896,136 units, and was produced in 4-door, 5-door station wagon (Familiar) and 2-door coupé (Sport) ( versions under various engines and trim levels.

History
The SEAT 124 model derived from the Italian Fiat 124 car and represented a great step forward for the automotive era in Spain when it was introduced. It aimed at the middle class, as it combined generous offerings and livability but at the same time in an accessible to buy and own package.

During its launch time SEAT already sold the SEAT 1500, SEAT 600D and SEAT 850 models, and by the time the 124 model was retired it was succeeded by the SEAT Ritmo, fabricated in Spain from 1979 onwards.

In 1975 the model underwent a facelift by Giorgetto Giugiaro; the circular front headlights were replaced by rectangular ones and its rear was altered amid several modifications, while the SEAT 124 and SEAT 1430 ranges were unified under a single model officially named SEAT 124D versión 75. In 1976 production of the car was transferred from the Zona Franca to the Landaben plant in Pamplona, newly acquired from Authi, resulting in the elimination of the '124 Familiar' 5-door station wagon versions.

The four-cylinder twin-barrel carburetted 1197 cc motor originally delivered 60 CV (DIN), however in 1973 a new derivative was implemented with the introduction of the SEAT 124 LS which offered 65 CV (DIN).

The variants equipped with the Twin Cam motor, victorious for decades in all-type competition, were generally known as FL which had been the internal code name used by the brand.

Its engine soon became famous for its nerve and offered high performance in many circumstances: either as a taxi cab, a police car, an ambulance, a hearse, or even a fire truck. As a race car, it won numerous competitions and trophies driven by pilots like Salvador Cañellas and Antonio Zanini amid others. Modified for this purpose in order to be used in rallies, its engine displacement was raised to reach as much as 2090 cc. In the 1977 Monte Carlo Rally, where Zanini finished third, the 124s were fitted with the same 1.8-liter 16-valve engine as the Fiat 131 Abarths.

More Sport versions were made with 1600 cc (1970–72), 1800 cc (1972–75) and 2000 cc (1978–79).

Its sibling, the SEAT 1430 also originated from the Fiat 124 range when the latter received several elements borrowed from the higher-class Fiat 125 and gave birth to the Fiat 124 Special edition presented in 1968.

Versions

 * 1: SEAT 124 (FA) 1968-1971
 * 2: SEAT 124 Lujo (FB) and SEAT 124 L (FB-02) 1968-1971
 * 3: SEAT 124 D (FA-03) 1971-1975
 * 4: SEAT 124 D Lujo (FB-03) 1971-1973
 * 5: SEAT 124 LS (FB-05) 1973-1974
 * 6: SEAT 124 D "Extras" (FB-11) 1974-1975
 * 7: SEAT 124 D Versión ´75 (FL-00) 1975-1980
 * 8: SEAT 124 D Versión ´75 LS (FL-03...) 1975-1980
 * 9: SEAT 124 D Versión ´75 Especial 1430 ( FL-10/11/12) 1975-1980
 * 10: SEAT 124 D Versión ´75 Especial 1600 (FL-40/45) 1976-1979
 * 11: SEAT 124 D Versión ´75 Especial 1800 (FL-80/82) 1976-1978
 * 12: SEAT 124 D Versión ´75 Especial 2000 (FL-90) 1978-1979
 * 13: SEAT 124 5p (FJ) / SEAT 124 D 5p (FJ-02) / SEAT 124 D Versión ´75 5p (FN) 1969-1976

title: SEAT 124


text:
List of Accounting Principles Board Opinions

Accounting Principles Board Opinions, Interpretations and Recommendations were published by the Accounting Principles Board from 1962 to 1973. The board was created by American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA) in 1959 and was replaced by Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) in 1973. Its mission was to develop an overall conceptual framework of US generally accepted accounting principles (US GAAP). APB was the main organization setting the US GAAP and its opinions are still an important part of it. All of the Opinions have been superseded in 2009 by FASB's Accounting Standards Codification.

Accounting Interpretations
The American Institute of Certified Public Accountants issued Accounting Interpretations between 1968 and November 1973, when the Financial Accounting Standards Board took over the issuing of interpretations in June 1974. The Interpretations were not considered pronouncements from the Accounting Principles Board, but Richard C. Lytle, the administrative director of the Accounting Principles Board, was responsible for their preparation. The Interpretations originally appeared in the Journal of Accountancy. For Interpretations see section 9551 of the final edition of the APB Accounting Principles, Volume 2, Original Pronouncements as of June 30, 1973. The interpretation numbers come from the Financial Accounting Board's Original Pronouncements as amended 2008/2009 Edition, volume 3. Also, consult this volume for detailed listing of amendments, deletions, and other changes to the individual interpretations prior to 2009 (when the Accounting Standards Codification was issued.) Also, consult Fasb Pre-Codification AICPA Copyrighted Standards for those Interpretations (AIN-APB 9, 18, 20, 21, 26,and 30) that were finally superseded by the Codification.


text:
Talk:Life Insurance Corporation

Copyright problem removed
Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: https://www.financialexpress.com/industry/banking-finance/lics-adani-group-share-holdings-fall-below-purchase-value-tank-11-from-cost-to-below-rs-27000-crore/2991753/. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)

For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, provided it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you. MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 17:40, 29 September 2023 (UTC)

Legal name of the subject entity
The subject entity's legal name is LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA, vide Section 3 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 whereas the Page title is just Life Insurance Corporation (omitting the words "of India"). It may also be noted that the logo clearly shows the full legal name of the entity. It is unclear as to why the legal name is not shown on the article, especially when the fact is that this entity is a statutory Corporation unlike companies registered under the Companies Act. Sreekrishnan Narayanan (Talk) 08:02, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Life Insurance Corporation


text:
Talk:Pete Postlethwaite

Old TV play
I saw Pete in an old TV play where he played the boss of a small plant hire company. He was being threatened by a crime boss played by Terence Rigby. Does anyone know the name of the play? Gillean666 16:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Picture
This actor's picture is unrecognisable. Could someone try and find a replacement?

Last of the Mohicans ?
His filmography shows Last of the Mohicans...What character did Postlethwaite play in that film? Engr105th (talk) 16:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

 * IMDB lists the character as Captain Beams. Micahmedia (talk) 06:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

 * He's the British officer sent to arrest Hawkeye, Daniel Day Lewis's character. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.84.26.82 (talk) 02:34, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Importance of testicular cancer questioned
An IP raised a concern that the fact that "Postlethwaite was diagnosed with testicular cancer in 1990, and had one testicle removed" should not be included in the article. Just refactoring their complaint to the proper forum. ~SunDragon34  (talk )   00:08, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

 * If the problem is that the reference is a blogspot, there is an interview in the Guardian which also brings it up, and is more authoritative, which I used to replace the old support the other one. Also re-arranged the paras so it's not such a blunt intro to the section. If the IP just wants to leave it out of the article because it's not nice or important enough to have in there, Pete Postlethwaite seems keen to include his bodily journey in interviews. To avoid censoring the article, I see no reason for it to be taken out. I feel using adding the stronger reference improves the article, so thank you for noticing that item, Julia Rossi (talk) 04:26, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

 * A biography is about a person's life. For anyone who has (had) cancer, it is a significant event in their life. Therefore, such information is relevant, important, and should be included. Nietzsche 2 (talk) 14:48, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Date of birth
I'm giving up trying to correct the page - lazy journalists will just have to carry on quoting the wrong birth date in their articles and Wildhartlivie can carry on deleting correct information when presented to him/her (and no I don't think Pete is going to send you a copy of his birth certificate...).

For those that are interested, Pete was born on 7 February 1946. The Yahoo reference is wrong but Wildhartlivie informs me it is from a reliable source - presumably this means that it cannot be incorrect.

Ah well, Wikipedia 1 Accuracy 0 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.239.224.186 (talk) 19:20, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Please be so good as to not misrepresent what has gone on here. You changed the birthdate and cited your own personal knowledge as the source. Then you changed it and cited it to IMDb. You were informed that IMDb is not permissable as a source of biographical information because it (like your submission here) is user submitted and is therefore not considered a reliable source. I provided you with the link to WP:RS, which explains reliable sourcing to you and suggested if Mr. Postlethwaite would like to have his birthdate corrected that he contact WP:OTRS and submit verification. We can no longer take your word for proof than we can that of "lazy journalists'. The simple fact is that we cannot use IMDb and we cannot use your personal knowledge to source a change in birthdate. Your snarky attitude and commentary is not necessary nor does it solve your dilemma. Thanks for the sarcasm, though, we seldom get that from snarky editors who claim to know. Wildhartlivie (talk) 20:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * So was it 7 Feb or 16 Feb? The article currently has 7, the Telegraph obit has 16. Rothorpe (talk) 23:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * We should find a few obituaries that agree on the same date and cite all of them. Jim Michael (talk) 04:16, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Son, William John Postlethwaite
There's very little on his son (or daughter), save the line "William John (born 1989), a drama student at LAMDA"

I believe his son is also an actor (from memory) and was in a Film4 production where he played the lead role as that of a runaway kid on the streets of London. Maybe it was a different Postlethwaite, or maybe it was Pete in this film, if so it doesn't seem to be listed in his Filmography. Maybe I've just my wires mixed up.

Does anyone have any more information about William John's career or current status? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yabbox (talk • contribs) 20:11, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Being the child of a person that is Wikinotable does not necessarily make that person Wikinotable themselves. Whether or not WJP is notable enough to sustain an article on Wikipedia depends entirely on his own work, per the notability guideline WP:NACTOR. Mjroots (talk) 08:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

County of birth
He was born in Warrington in 1946, at which time it was in Lancashire; therefore this article should give Lancs as his county of birth. Since 1 April 1974 it has been in Cheshire. Jim Michael (talk) 12:24, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * All the information both online and writen state that he was born in Cheshire   Bihco (talk) 18:23, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Here, here, here - all account towards the contrary. Besides, from warrington council literature: "In 1974, various county boundary changes took Warrington administratively out of the county of Lancashire and placed it in the county of Cheshire", thus concluding that he was born at the time when Warrington was in Lancashire. To suggest he was born in Cheshire, implies an overuling of previous facts, which is inappropiate. If, for example, Warrington becomes apart of the new county of Monsterland in a new administrative county shake-up next year, I would therefore hope this page will be edited accordingly to read "born in Warrington, Monsterland".--94.168.21.175 (talk) 18:50, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Warrington is enough information. There is no need to include other redundant information in the article. Bjmullan (talk) 18:55, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Jesus was born in a stable - if the stable was now a car park could we say that he was born in car park? LOL. Warrington, Lancashire(1946) Brakn (talk) 18:55, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Jesus was not born in a stable (all the accounts state that there was no room at the inn), so that would be rewriting history Bihco (talk) 19:53, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * We should not be rewriting history. Text should say something like "Poslethwaite was born in Warrington, which was then in Lancashire..." Mjroots (talk) 18:58, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Death
He died of Cancer today 188.102.78.135 (talk) 11:20, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Seems appropriate... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 14:41, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Was it lung cancer? I know he was literally a chain smoker. (92.10.121.41 (talk) 16:49, 3 January 2011 (UTC))

 * It was testicular cancer. May he rest in peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 211.30.120.46 (talk) 14:16, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Where's the evidence of him having died of testicular cancer? He had it in 1990, had the affected testicle removed and recovered. We only know he died of cancer, not which type. Jim Michael (talk) 15:40, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

"A month later the Government announced a change to its policy on coal"
The implication of this line is that the Government's change of policy was a result of Postlethwaite's intervention. Is there any evidence for this? If this is not the intended implication, why is this u-turn mentioned in the article rather than any of the many other u-turns of recent years? There appears to be a suggestion that the coal u-turn was connected in some way to Postlethwaite, otherwise why is it in the article at all?Hobson (talk) 15:24, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I came to this page to make much the same comment. Postlethwaite seems to have been a nice person but it doesn't seem credible that he had any significant influence on the outcome regarding the power station. The line undermines the article as a whole and has no place. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.187.233.172 (talk) 21:29, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

It is perhaps mentioned in order to assure readers that he did not "turn in" his OBE after all. Though it may imply he played a greater role than he actually did, it's simply meant to round out the story. If it could be edited to something along the lines of "A month later the Government announced a change to its policy on coal, though there is no evidence of his individual activism playing a direct role in this outcome," that would be satisfactory.

Seminary
Pete Postlethwaite also entered seminary in london in the 1950's but left before becoming a priest. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.192.248.215 (talk) 22:21, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Sponsored chair
When the Watershed Media Centre in Bristol constructed its third cinema in 2004, it allowed its patrons to sponsor a chair. Pete Postlethwaite was the first person to do this, and there is now a chair in the cinema with a small plaque with his name on. The sources for this are included in the Watershed Media Centre article and I suggest that it's worth adding the fact into this article, but I'll leave that judgment to other editors. MartinPoulter (talk) 14:37, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Removing Aeon Flux from films Pete is best known for.
I don't feel like Pete's role in Aeon Flux is worthy of being considered one of his best known works given that Aeon Flux is one of the worst films of the decade. I'm removing it from the list in the opening paragraph. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.6.253.41 (talk) 12:43, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Pete's marriage and his daughter's birth date
Pete began his relationship with Jacqueline Morrish in 1987, but they were not legally married until 2003. Their daughter, Lily, was born in 1996, not 1992, as the current article states.

Page 132 of his autobiography, A Spectacle of Dust, mentions Lily's birth year. On this and the following page, Pete mentions being together with Jacqui for "many, many years" before he proposed. On this page and on the following page he mentions a commitment ceremony they had in Greece, where he mentions that his family wishes that they would have gotten married instead and worn a wedding ring. Page 133 also mentions his son Will asking him why he and Jacqui had not yet gotten married.

Among others, these sites mention the date of their eventual marriage as 2003:

Find My Past co.uk

Who's Dated Who

Celebrity Weddings

Famous Dead

Tracy58 (talk) 23:47, 28 February 2013 (UTC)Tracy58

Who is who?
"He left behind two children, William John (born 1989), a drama student at LAMDA, and Lily Kathleen (born 1996), his wife and his mother."

Seriously, who is who? --87.212.167.60 (talk) 17:13, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Postlethwaite's Role in Sharpe Series.
The episodes of Sharpe that Mr. Postlethwaite appeared in are listed under the heading "Film", when maybe they should go under "Television." The entries on Sean Bean's page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sean_Bean for his role in the same episodes are listed under his "Television" heading instead of "Film". I'm not sure which is correct, but I feel they should match. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.68.75.215 (talk) 02:46, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Pete Postlethwaite. 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/20150923211122/http://www.craveonline.com/culture/130154-crave-online-predicts-the-2011-oscar-nominations to http://www.craveonline.com/culture/130154-crave-online-predicts-the-2011-oscar-nominations
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110304124603/http://www.inthenews.co.uk/news/entertainment/film/daniel-day-lewis-pays-tribute-to-pete-postlethwaite-$21385579.htm to http://www.inthenews.co.uk/news/entertainment/film/daniel-day-lewis-pays-tribute-to-pete-postlethwaite-$21385579.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120328073336/http://www.acmi.net.au/aust_bryan_dawe_presents.aspx to http://www.acmi.net.au/aust_bryan_dawe_presents.aspx

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) 03:12, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

The Usual Suspects
Pete had a starring role in the movie the Usual Suspects. One of his greatest performances. Would somebody please add it? I tried but could not see a way to do it working through the codes. I don't know how to do that. I'm not an experience to Wikipedian editor. Blaquercia (talk) 07:40, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

I see it is mentioned further down. I suggest it be added at the top section of the page, as I think it is one of his most well recognized roles. Blaquercia (talk) 07:44, 19 January 2020 (UTC)

Irish Origins?
Despite the Irish Independents statement that Pete Postlethwaite had no Irish ancestry, I believe his mother was of Irish descent. The surname Lawless is found over much of Ireland. Pete's maternal grandmother was surnamed Lally another Irish name common in Galway and Mayo. The fact that they were Catholic would indicate some Irish connection as well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.146.57.244 (talk) 16:59, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pete Postlethwaite


text:
Timothy Thomas

Timothy Thomas may refer to:

Timothy, Tim, or Timmy Thomas may refer to:

 * Timothy Thomas (record producer), part of duo R. City with his brother Theron Thomas
 * Timothy Thomas, an unarmed African American man shot and killed by a Cincinnati Police Department patrolman sparking the Cincinnati riots of 2001
 * Tim Thomas (athlete) (born 1973), Welsh pole vaulter
 * Tim Thomas (basketball) (born 1977), American professional basketball player
 * Tim Thomas (ice hockey, born 1963), American ice hockey defenseman
 * Tim Thomas (ice hockey, born 1974), American professional ice hockey goaltender
 * Tim Thomas (kickboxer) (born 1983), Muay Thai kickboxer
 * Timmy Thomas (1944–2022), American R&B singer

Fictional characters

 * Reverend Tim Tom, a character from the TV sitcom The Middle
 * Timothy Thomas Turner or Timmy Turner, a main character in The Fairly OddParents

title: Timothy Thomas


text:
Port of Victoria (Texas)

The Port of Victoria is a shallow-draft port in Victoria, Texas (United States). It was opened in 1968 by creation of a 35-mile barge canal (dredged to a depth of 9 feet) linking Victoria, Texas to the Gulf Intracoastal Waterway (GIWW). (Coincidentally, it was Victoria that held the first meeting in 1905 which led to the creation of the GIWW, a fact noted on the Port's logo and on its website. )

In March 2002, the Port completed a deepening of the canal to 12 feet, the same depth as the GIWW, to better facilitate traffic between the two.

The Port serves the city of Victoria and the nearby regional area. It is connected by rail via Union Pacific (with trackage rights to both BNSF Railway and Kansas City Southern), by road via U.S. Highway 59 (which is in the process of being upgraded to Interstate 69), U.S. Highway 77, and U.S. Highway 87, and by air to Victoria Regional Airport.

In February 2005, the Port of Victoria and the Port of Houston signed a Memorandum of Understanding to facilitate barge traffic between the two ports, as a means of reducing traffic and emissions on the area highways.

title: Port of Victoria (Texas)


text:
Talk:Wing warping

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 September 2018 and 7 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Akhargis1. Peer reviewers: Liv venema, Hedgie101.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 13:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to HowStuffWorks readers
HowStuffWorks currently cites this page as an example for their "How Wikis Work" article. As such we are seeing an above average number of test edits and other minor edits from first time visitors. When reverting please remember to not bite the newcomers.

To any new anonymous users coming here for the first time, please consider using the Sandbox for experimental edits. Or better yet, find an article in your area of expertise and improve it. If you get hooked, consider creating your own user account and becoming a fully fledged Wikipedian. -- Solipsist 16:58, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

CADES link
I can't find any information on this company. I can find references to www.cadestech.com which is an Indian engineering company that does some aerospace design, but nothing obvious in connection with wing morphing or NASA. There is also a French finace company called CADES. -- Solipsist 15:07, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Hmmm... I think the Indian engineering company is a possibility, but it's not located in Europe. Since it's unverifiable, I'll remove the text, since by leaving it in and fixing it, I effectively took responsibility for it. --Deathphoenix 15:26, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Extra info
Following was removed: It was ussually done by pulling the braces or struts in opposing corners. Say that each of your wings is attached to the side of the fuselage by two braces, one near the front of the wing (e.g. attached to the bottom of the front spar) and one near the back of the wing (e.g. attached to the bottom of the aft spar). If you want to bank left, you can pull the brace near the front of the left wing (making the left wing twist its front down and its back up, making less lift) and the brace near the back of the right wing (making the right wing twist its back down and its front up, making more lift). And vice versa for banking right. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.167.237 (talk) 08:25, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Montgomery's lateral control device
I have read the patent for this very patiently, and with a sincere effort to understand it - I honestly believe that I have got the general gist, and that the Montgomery patent, interesting as it is, does not actually describe "wing warping" in the sense of this article. The "extra sources" do not, to be honest, look awfully reliable either, among other things, they reek of "special pleading".

A properly researched description of Montgomery's method of achieving lateral control may well prove an interesting article in its own right - or be compared with wing-warping, ailerons, and other methods (successful and otherwise) to achieve lateral (roll) stability/control, in a more general article - called perhaps Lateral Control (aircraft) or something like that.

In the meantime - it's a simple matter of relevance. This article is very specifically about a method of lateral control that was very clearly invented by the Wright Brothers, and (incidentally) was very soon superseded. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 03:55, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

 * I have had a look at Zanonia's edit to the aileron article - these seem to be altogether more apt and relevant (in context). --Soundofmusicals (talk) 04:12, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

List (and incidental remarks)
I'm sure that no one would argue for a complete list of aeroplanes between 1903 and 1915 that used wing-warping for lateral control - it would obviously overwhelm the article. We probably have about enough examples now - but any additions really need to be quite distinctive - given that the early Fokker monoplanes ALL had wing warping (for instance) we probably don't need to mention more than one of them in a "representative" list, if you can see my point. For the moment I have simply trimmed the list of this kind of duplication - eventually we might have a different kind of list altogether, still thinking about this one.

Another edit - this time a straight reversion of an accurate and patently "good faith" insertion, also deserves an explanation. We are talking about wing-warping here. Any mention of related topics, such as ailerons, needs to be reasonably relevant. It is quite true that the ailerons fitted to some of the early Antoinettes were aerodynamically quite horrific - they were attached to the most flexible part (the trailing edge) of a very flexible wing, and on top of that were pretty flexible themselves! One could go into exactly why this is unlikely to provide predictable lateral control, (read Wheeler, if you can get hold of a copy) but this kind of thing obviously belongs (if anywhere) in an article about ailerons, or perhaps one about lateral control in in general. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 15:40, 10 May 2015 (UTC)

I will be working on this article for a school project and I found some sources that will be helpful

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/article/morphing-wings/

http://news.mit.edu/2016/morphing-airplane-wing-design-1103

https://airandspace.si.edu/exhibitions/wright-brothers/online/fly/1899/breakthrough.cfm

https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/soro.2016.0032

https://arc.aiaa.org/doi/abs/10.2514/6.2007-1707

Akhargis1 (talk) 23:13, 17 October 2018 (UTC)Akhargis1

olivia's peer review
It seems like you have a lot of good information so far in your article. You also have a lot of sources which can be helpful for readers. When reading what you have written so far, it seems to be a little confusing but that might just be because you're adding to an existing article? It looks like you truly read through multiple articles to get a general understanding for yourself so you don't accidentally plagiarize. Overall, I think you have a pretty good neutral understanding of your topic!

title: Talk:Wing warping


text:
Talk:Baalat Gebal

Section
Same as Baltis? --Tydaj 16:59, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Recent page move
recently moved this page from Baalat Gebal to this location. While moving the page may be legitimate, I don't think "Ba'alat, Lady of Byblos" meets the WP:Common name criterion. Sources don't seem to treat "Lady of Byblos" as an integral part of the goddess' name. They often simply use "Baalat" or "Ba'alat", and when they don't, they use "Baalat (or Ba'alat) Gebal". For instance, the two common reference works on Egyptian deities (The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt and The Routledge Dictionary of Egyptian Gods and Goddesses) both say "Baalat". The relevant entry in Dictionary of Deities and Demons in the Bible also does so, though it is discussing all uses of that generic term and not simply the goddess of Byblos (but it says "The majority of attestations of bʾlt as a divine name are associated with the goddess of Byblos").

I think it will be difficult to determine which permutation of the goddess's name is most common in the sources—I don't know how to use Google Ngrams to filter for a shorter version of a term (i.e., finding when "Baalat" is mentioned but "Gebal" is not), and the variable use of the glottal-stop symbol complicates things further. But I feel fairly certain that the current title isn't the right one. A. Parrot (talk) 01:00, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

 * Ba(')alat or Ba(')alat Gebal is indeed the norm. The move is basically vandalism and the user who performed it as far as I can tell did not add any substantial information to the article (or to any other articles about ANE deities, for that matter). They also seem to operate under the assumption it's impossible for a city to share a name with a deity which is nonsensical: there is also Ashur and Assur, Belet Nagar, Belet Terraban, probably half a dozen if not more other well attested local "Belets" and "Baalats," Ilhalab ("the god of Halab"), Urkitum ("the Urukean"), Halabatu ("the Halabean")... It was actually reasonably common all over the Ancient Near East.
 * I'd say that judging from titles of pages of other deities with etymologically related names (Baal Hammon, Baal) it would be perfectly fine to go back to Baalat Gebal over Ba'alat Gebal (currently facing a similar dilemma regarding the Ugaritic Shatiqatu/Sha'tiqatu), but either is fine as long as the title is restored. I think the article needs a rework though, the information right now is not very rigorously presented, which is an additional problem, but I guess that's beside the point.
 * As a side note: even if the deity of a city was sometimes just referred to with the title Baal/Baalat/Bel/any cognate thereof, I'm pretty sure it's best to stick to the full names to avoid confusion. The Ugaritic Baal and Marduk's "Bel" epithet are the only exception from this rule I can think of and look where that lead the former guy - pratically no own article (even though Ugaritic culture is difficult to mix together with a bunch of disjointed sources from a completely different period like the Baal article does at the moment)... HaniwaEnthusiast (talk) 21:26, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Resurrecting this topic after a few months. I can find virtually no evidence in favor of the baffling new title. Meanwhile, the following sources firmly refer to the tutelary goddess of Byblos as "Baalat Gebal" or variants of this name, without ever making the assertion she did not share the name of her city:
 * The Phoenician History of Philo of Byblos: A Commentary by Albert I. Baumgartner; the form used is "Baalat Gebal". Search through the site of the publisher reveals around 20 results for this query, with the spelling varying between Baalat Gebal and Ba'alat Gebal.
 * Studies in the Ebla Pantheon II by Alfonso Archi (the epigrapher of the Ebla excavations); the form used is "Baalat-Gebal" (p. 420). Jstor additionally brings up 110 other results for the query Baalat Gebal. Both here and on the Brill site, the newest results are from the 2020s, so you can't even make an argument that this name has been since proved to be incorrect.
 * Last but not least: even wikipedia uses the correct form elsewhere, see Temple of Baalat Gebal or Yehawmilk Stele. The only exception anywhere online seems to be a single user, User:Sir blue, who never edited the page otherwise. and went radio silent shortly after the change, around a year ago. This is long overdue for a fix. I know the number of people on wikipedia who pay any attention whatsoever to articles of deities from this region is in the single digits, but this is getting grotesque and I'm puzzled why nobody intervened right away. HaniwaEnthusiast (talk) 19:58, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Baalat Gebal has a history longer than a single edit, so only administrators have the technical ability to move this article to that title. If we agree on that title (it seems fine to me), I can put in a request at WP:Requested moves. It doesn't look like Sir blue is going to argue, and given how little attention this page receives, I very much doubt anyone else would. A. Parrot (talk) 20:24, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I am aware, that's the only reason why I didn't do it myself. I'm sorry if the message came across as too emotional, this sort of stuff is widespread and it's just hard to keep up with it. Fixing one article means you discover 5 more which require work.
 * On a more constructive note, I am aware of the lack of attention to this page, which is unusually short for one focused on the main deity of a reasonably well researched city. I have a bibliography prepared for the article and plan to work on it in in the foreseeable future, I really think we can do better than defining her as "Qudšu, who is Asherah" like the article currently does (note the most recent articles advise against the everlasting quest for "true" name of Baalat Gebal, which is a much needed breath of fresh air). Jo Ann Hackett's criticism of the puzzling dogma of interchangeability of goddesses sadly still applies. HaniwaEnthusiast (talk) 22:00, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
 * I've made the request. A. Parrot (talk) 22:23, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Baalat Gebal


text:
User talk:Thelark

Your edit to Jimmy Wales in which you claimed that he was responsible for the September 11 attacks has been reverted. Also, please do not troll VfD debates. If you continue to make malicious edits like that, I can assure you that you will be blocked from further editing. --Idont Havaname 16:59, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

File:BrianandGirlinVegas.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BrianandGirlinVegas.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 19:40, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

title: User talk:Thelark


text:
Almirante Padilla-class frigate

The Almirante Padilla-class frigates is a series of frigates operated by the Colombian Navy. The designation of this class is Type FS 1500 and there are four ships in service. The ships were built by Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft (HDW) at Kiel, West Germany in the 1980s, with the first vessel commissioning in 1983 and the last in 1984. The frigates have undergone significant modification over their careers with the 2012 Orion Program Upgrade significantly modernising the vessels. Two similar ships operate as the Kasturi-class corvettes in the Royal Malaysian Navy.

Design and description
Colombia ordered four frigates of the West German Type FS 1500 design in 1980 with the first ship intended to be delivered in 1982. The Colombian Navy intended to upgrade these frigates as funding became available as they became the most powerful ships in their arsenal with the retirement of the older destroyers. Two vessels of a modified design serve with the Royal Malaysian Navy. They initially had a standard displacement of 1600 t that by 2009 had been reduced to 1500 t and a fully loaded displacement of 1850 t that climbed to 2100 t by 2009. The ships originally measured 95.3 m long overall and 90 m between perpendiculars with a beam of 11.3 m and a draught of 3.5 m. This was later increased to 99.1 m long overall maintaining the same beam but increasing the draught to 3.7 m. They initially had a complement of 92 which rose to 94 by 2009. The ships are equipped with fin stabilizers.

Propulsion
The Almirante Padilla class is powered by a CODAD propulsion system. The frigates were powered by four MTU 20V 1163 TB92 diesel engines driving two shafts and developing maximum 23,400 hp and 21000 hp sustained turning two controllable pitch propellers. These were the first ships to mount these engines. This gives a maximum speed of 27 kn, and a range of 7,000 nmi at 14 kn. The ships carried 200 t of fuel and were capable of generating 2,120 kW of power.

Electronics
Almirante Padilla-class frigates were initially equipped with one Thomson-CSF Sea Tiger air search radar, one Castor IIB fire control radar. The Sea Tiger radar had a range of 110 km for a target 2 m2 and the Castor IIB radar, a range of 15 km for a 1 m2 target. a Thomson-CSF Vega II fire-control system (FCS) and two Canopus optronic directors. The vessels had a Krupp Atlas AS04-2 hull-mounted sonar, a Racal Scimitar electronic warfare jammer and two Dagaie chaff launchers. The ships have been improved through the years later receiving Thomson-CSF TAVITAC combat action data systems and Argo AC672 electronic support measures.

Armament
The frigates were originally armed with eight MM 40 Exocet anti-ship missiles in two quad mounts located amidships, each carrying a 165 kg warhead with a range of 70 km. The Almirante Padilla class were also armed with an OTO Melara 76 mm/62 calibre Compact naval gun, mounted forward firing 6 kg projectiles to a range of 16 km, 85 rounds per minute. For anti-submarine warfare, the vessels were equipped with six 324 mm torpedo tubes in two triple mounts sighted to either side of the aft superstructure using Whitehead A244S torpedoes carrying a 38 kg warhead with a range of 7 km.

For anti-air defence, the frigates were initially armed with twin-mounted Breda 40 mm guns and four Emerlac 30 mm guns in two twin mounts. By 2009 the 30 mm guns had been removed. The twin-mounted 40 mm guns are situated aft of the landing platform at the rear of the ship and are capable of firing 300 rounds per minute to a range of 12.5 km. A space was left in front of the bridge to allow for the later installation of surface-to-air missiles (SAMs). The French Mistral SAM system was chosen composed of two twin Matra Simbad launchers. The Mistral SAM has a warhead of 3 kg and a range of 4 km for use against sea-skimming missiles.

Aircraft
The Almirante Padilla class does have a hangar facility, and thus can embark a helicopter. The landing platform aft is suitable for a Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm MBB Bo 105 CBS-5 or the Eurocopter AS-555-SN Fennec helicopters for over-the-horizon targeting. The landing pad was extended aft by 2 m to accommodate Bell 412 helicopters.

Orion Program Upgrade
The Orion Program Upgrade was a mid-life refit performed by the Thales Group. In January 2012, Thales Group delivered the first upgraded Almirante Padilla-class frigates to the Colombian Navy. The equipment upgrades included a series of new sensors including the Smart-s Mk2 radar, TACTICOS combat system, Sting-EO Mk2 naval fire control tracking system, MIRADOR electro-optical multi-sensor surveillance, tracking and fire control system. For defence, the vessels were upgraded with the Vigile Radar Electronic Support Measures (RESM) system and TERMA SKSW DL-12T decoy system. They were given new MTU M-93 engines and new communication systems. In addition, OTO Melara DART ammunition and 16 SSM-700K Hae Sung I (Sea Star) anti-ship missiles were ordered. In September 2014, Colombia fired the DART guided ammunition from the Oto Melara 76 mm Strales. The testing was performed aboard Caldas.

Service history
The Almirante Padilla-class frigates are used primarily to patrol Colombia's exclusive economic zone and perform anti-narcotic patrols in Colombian waters. The frigates have also taken part in naval exercises such as UNITAS and PANAMAX. The frigates can also be used to resupply outlying military posts on Colombian islands.

title: Almirante Padilla-class frigate


text:
Residuary estate

A residuary estate, in the law of wills, is any portion of the testator's estate that is not specifically devised to someone in the will, or any property that is part of such a specific devise that fails. It is also known as a residual estate or simply residue.

The will may identify the taker of the residuary estate through a residuary clause or residuary bequest. The person identified in such a clause is called the residuary taker, residuary beneficiary, or residuary legatee. Such a clause may state that, in the event all other heirs predecease the testator, the estate would pass to a charity (that would, presumably, have remained in existence).

If no such clause is present, however, the residuary estate will pass to the testator's heirs by intestacy.

At common law, if the residuary estate was divided between two or more beneficiaries, and one of those beneficiaries was unable to take, the share that would have gone to that beneficiary would instead pass by intestacy, under the doctrine that there was no residuary of a residuary. The modern rule, however, is that the failure of a residuary gift to one beneficiary causes that beneficiary's share to be divided among the remaining residuary takers.

title: Residuary estate


text:
Category:Megarian colonies

Colonies in antiquity founded by Megarians.

title: Category:Megarian colonies


text:
Walter Isaacson

Walter Seff Isaacson (born May 20, 1952) is an American historian and journalist best known for having written biographies of important public figures, including Benjamin Franklin, Albert Einstein, Steve Jobs, and Elon Musk. As of 2024, Isaacson is a professor at Tulane University and, since 2018, an interviewer for the PBS and CNN news show Amanpour & Company.

He has been the president and CEO of the Aspen Institute, a nonpartisan policy studies organization based in Washington, D.C., the chair and CEO of CNN, and the editor of Time.

Isaacson attended Harvard University and Pembroke College, Oxford as a Rhodes scholar. He is the co-author with Evan Thomas of The Wise Men: Six Friends and the World They Made (1986) and the author of Pro and Con (1983), Kissinger: A Biography (1992), Benjamin Franklin: An American Life (2003), Einstein: His Life and Universe (2007), American Sketches (2009), Steve Jobs (2011), The Innovators: How a Group of Hackers, Geniuses, and Geeks Created the Digital Revolution (2014), Leonardo da Vinci (2017), The Code Breaker: Jennifer Doudna, Gene Editing, and the Future of the Human Race (2021) and Elon Musk (2023).

Isaacson is a professor at Tulane University and an advisory partner at Perella Weinberg Partners, a New York City-based financial services firm. He was vice chair of the Louisiana Recovery Authority, which oversaw the rebuilding after Hurricane Katrina, chaired the government board that runs Voice of America, and was a member of the Defense Innovation Board.

Early life and education
Walter Seff Isaacson was born on May 20, 1952, in New Orleans, Louisiana, the son of Betty "Betsy" Lee (née Seff) and Irwin Isaacson. His father was an electrical and mechanical engineer, and his mother was a real estate broker. He attended New Orleans' Isidore Newman School, where he was student body president. He also attended the Telluride Association Summer Program (TASP) at Deep Springs College.

Isaacson studied at Harvard University, where he majored in history and literature and graduated in 1974. At Harvard, Isaacson was the president of the Signet Society, a member of the Harvard Lampoon, and a resident of Lowell House. He later attended Pembroke College, Oxford, as a Rhodes scholar, where he studied philosophy, politics, and economics (PPE) and graduated with first-class honours.

Media
Isaacson began his career in journalism at The Sunday Times in London, followed by a position with the New Orleans Times-Picayune. He joined Time magazine in 1978, serving as the magazine's political correspondent, national editor, and editor of new media before becoming the magazine's 14th editor in 1996.

Isaacson became chairman and CEO of CNN in July 2001, replacing Tom Johnson, and only two months later, guided CNN through the events of 9/11. Shortly after his appointment at CNN, Isaacson attracted attention for seeking the views of Republican Party leaders on Capitol Hill regarding criticisms that CNN broadcast content that was unfair to Republicans or conservatives. He was quoted in Roll Call magazine as saying: "I was trying to reach out to a lot of Republicans who feel that CNN has not been as open to covering Republicans, and I wanted to hear their concerns." The CEO's conduct was criticized by the Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) organization, which said that Isaacson's "pandering" behavior was endowing conservative politicians with power over CNN.

In January 2003, he announced that he would step down as president of CNN to become president of the Aspen Institute. Jim Walton replaced Isaacson as president of CNN.

Isaacson served as the president and CEO of the Aspen Institute from 2003 until 2018, when he announced that he would step down to become a professor of history at Tulane University and an advisory partner at the New York City financial services firm Perella Weinberg Partners. In November 2017, the Aspen Institute named Dan Porterfield, the president of Franklin & Marshall College, as Isaacson's successor.

In March 2017, Isaacson launched a podcast with Dell Technologies called Trailblazers, which focuses on technology's effects on business. In 2018, Isaacson was named as a contributor for the Amanpour & Company airing on PBS and CNN that replaced The Charlie Rose Show.

Writing
Isaacson is the author of multiple published books, including Kissinger: A Biography (1992), Benjamin Franklin: An American Life (2003), Einstein: His Life and Universe (2007) and American Sketches (2009). He additionally co-authored with Evan Thomas the work The Wise Men: Six Friends and the World They Made (1986).

On October 24, 2011, Steve Jobs, Isaacson's authorized biography of Apple Inc.'s Jobs, was published by Simon & Schuster, only a few weeks after Jobs's death. It became an international best-seller, breaking all records for sales of a biography. The book was based on over forty interviews with Jobs over a two-year period up until shortly before his death, and on conversations with friends, family members, and business rivals of the entrepreneur.

In October 2014, Isaacson published The Innovators: How a Group of Inventors, Hackers, Geniuses, and Geeks Created the Digital Revolution, which explores the history of the key technological innovations that were prominent in the digital revolution, most notably the parallel developments of the computer and the Internet. It became a New York Times bestseller. Writing for the New York Times, Janet Maslin described the author as "a kindred spirit to the visionaries and enthusiasts" whom Isaacson wrote about.

He is the editor of Profiles in Leadership: Historians on the Elusive Quality of Greatness (2010, W. W. Norton).

His self-titled biography of Leonardo da Vinci was published on October 17, 2017, to positive reviews from critics. In August 2017, Paramount Pictures won a bidding war against Universal Pictures for the rights to adapt Isaacson's biography of da Vinci. The studio bought the rights under its deal with Leonardo DiCaprio's Appian Way Productions, which said that it planned to produce the film with DiCaprio as the star. Screenwriter John Logan (The Aviator, Gladiator) has been tapped to pen the script.

His book The Code Breaker: Jennifer Doudna, Gene Editing, and the Future of the Human Race was published in March 2021 by Simon & Schuster. It is a biography of Jennifer Doudna, the winner of the 2020 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for her work on the CRISPR system of gene editing. The book debuted at number one on The New York Times nonfiction best-seller list for the week ending March 13, 2021. Publishers Weekly called it a "gripping account of a great scientific advancement and of the dedicated scientists who realized it."

Isaacson's biography of Elon Musk was published by Simon & Schuster on September 12, 2023. It was shortlisted for the 2023 Financial Times Business Book of the Year Award.

Government
In October 2005, the Governor of Louisiana, Kathleen Blanco, appointed Isaacson vice chairman of the Louisiana Recovery Authority, a board that oversaw spending on the recovery from Hurricane Katrina. In December 2007, he was appointed by President George W. Bush to the chairman of the U.S.-Palestinian Partnership, which seeks to create economic and educational opportunities in the Palestinian territories. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton appointed him vice-chair of the Partners for a New Beginning, which encourages private-sector investments and partnerships in the Muslim world.

He also served as the co-chair of the U.S.-Vietnamese Dialogue on Agent Orange, which in January 2008 announced completion of a project to contain the dioxin left behind by the U.S. at the Da Nang air base and plans to build health centers and a dioxin laboratory in the affected regions. In 2008, he was appointed to be a member of the Advisory Committee of the National Institutes of Health. In 2009, he was appointed by President Obama to be chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which runs Voice of America, Radio Free Europe, and the other international broadcasts of the U.S. government; he served until January 2012.

In 2014, he was appointed by New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu to be the co-chair of the New Orleans Tricentennial Commission, which planned the city's 300th-anniversary commemoration in 2018. In 2015, he was appointed to the board of My Brother's Keeper Alliance, which seeks to carry out President Obama's anti-poverty and youth opportunity initiatives. In 2016, he was appointed by Landrieu and confirmed by the City Council to be a member of the New Orleans City Planning Commission. He is a member of the U.S. Department of Defense Innovation Advisory Board. In 2018, he was appointed by New Orleans mayor-elect LaToya Cantrell to be co-chair of her transition team.

Positions
Isaacson is an advisory partner at Perella Weinberg, a financial services firm. He is the chairman emeritus of the board of Teach for America and is on the boards of United Airlines, Halliburton Labs, The New Orleans Advocate/Times-Picayune, New Schools New Orleans, Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Rockefeller Foundation, the Carnegie Institution for Science and the Society of American Historians, of which he served as president in 2012.

In March 2019, Isaacson became the editor-at-large and senior adviser for Arcadia Publishing, where he was to promote books for the company as well as be involved in editing, new strategy development, and partnerships.

Isaacson is an Associate of the History of Science Department and a member of the Lowell House Senior Common Room at Harvard University. He is also an honorary fellow of Pembroke College, Oxford. Walter Isaacson is a special professor of history at Tulane University. He teaches the course "The Digital Revolution" every spring and the course "Law and U.S. History" every fall. His courses often feature prominent guest speakers such as author Michael Lewis, Kickstarter founder Perry Chen, and billionaire businessman James Coulter. At Tulane, Isaacson co-chairs the annual New Orleans Book Festival.

Honors
In 2023, Isaacson received the National Humanities Medal from President Joe Biden. The White House citation of Isaacson's award emphasizes that his "work, words, and wisdom bridge divides between science and the humanities and between opposing philosophies, elevating discourse and our understanding of who we are as a Nation".

Isaacson's book Steve Jobs, about the life of the entrepreneur, earned Isaacson the 2012 Gerald Loeb Award.

In 2012, he was selected as one of the Time 100, the magazine's list of the most influential people in the world. Isaacson is a fellow of the Royal Society of Arts and was awarded its 2013 Benjamin Franklin Medal. He is also a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, the American Philosophical Society and an Honorary Fellow of Pembroke College, Oxford.

In 2014, the National Endowment for the Humanities selected Isaacson for the Jefferson Lecture, the U.S. federal government's highest honor for achievement in the humanities. The title of Isaacson's lecture was "The Intersection of the Humanities and the Sciences".

He has honorary degrees from Tufts University, Cooper Union, William & Mary, Franklin University Switzerland, University of New Orleans, University of South Carolina, City University of New York (Hunter College), Pomona College, Lehigh University, Duke University, and Colorado Mountain College, where the Isaacson School of Media and Communications is named after him. He was the 2015 recipient of The Nichols-Chancellor's Medal at Vanderbilt University.

title: Walter Isaacson


text:
Louis de Pointe du Lac

Louis de Pointe du Lac is a fictional character in Anne Rice's The Vampire Chronicles series. He begins his life as a mortal man and later becomes a vampire. He is the protagonist who tells his story in Interview with the Vampire (1976, the first book of The Vampire Chronicles). He also features in The Vampire Lestat, The Queen of the Damned, The Tale of the Body Thief, Memnoch the Devil, The Vampire Armand, Merrick, Prince Lestat, Prince Lestat and the Realms of Atlantis and Blood Communion: A Tale of Prince Lestat''

Mortal
Louis de Pointe du Lac is born in France on October 4, 1766, to a Roman Catholic family who emigrated to North America when he was very young. His mother, sister and brother, Paul, live just outside New Orleans on one of their two indigo plantations, named Pointe du Lac after the family. Louis' brother, who insists that he has religious visions, dies after a terrible quarrel with Louis. Louis blames himself for his brother's death, becoming self-destructive, cynical, and desperate. He longs for the release of death, but lacks the courage to commit suicide. He takes to frequenting taverns and other places of ill repute, instigating fights and duels in order that someone might kill him.

Vampire
During an incident in a tavern, Louis catches the eye of the vampire Lestat de Lioncourt. Lestat appears to Louis as an angel and offers him an alternative to his desperate, meaningless life. Lestat, upon seeing for the first time Louis's "fine black hair" and deep green eyes, and sensing his passion, is seduced not only by Louis's beauty, but also by his tragedy and human heart; "He seduced the tenderness in me." Lestat makes Louis into a vampire at the age of 25, his immortal companion in 1791, and lives with Louis for nearly 70 years.

However, Lestat is damaged from his experiences in France and the Old World. He is not as gentle a tutor or as much of a friend as Louis would like, one of the central themes in Interview with the Vampire. An example of this is an anguished comment recalled by Louis in his memoir, where he muses: "I was thinking how sublime friendship between Lestat and me might have been; how few impediments to it there would have been, and how much to be shared."

While Louis and Lestat are often at odds with one another, they eventually form an uneasy truce, with Lestat coming to regard Louis as a kind of soulmate, albeit one who resists his "teachings" on killing and living life as a vampire.

Interview with the Vampire details an ersatz familial relationship between Louis, Lestat and a third vampire, Claudia. Louis, in a moment of weakness, feeds from a five-year-old orphan he finds in an abandoned house within the plague-ridden section of New Orleans. Lestat contrives to make her into a vampire to, in his own words, "bind Louis to [him]." In giving Louis Claudia to love and look after, he curses Claudia by condemning her to the form of a little girl.

Louis accepts his "family", taking the "maternal" role with Claudia and finding contentment in their townhouse at Rue Royale. Claudia, however, matures psychologically but remains in her child form. After decades of being trapped in the form of a small child, she comes to hate both of her "parents" for giving her immortality. She rebels against Lestat, poisoning him and setting their home ablaze with Lestat inside in 1860. She escapes with Louis to eastern Europe to look for other vampires. After years of searching and becoming disillusioned, they travel to Paris.

In Paris, they find fifteen vampires who have disguised themselves as human actors pretending to be vampires at the Théâtre des Vampires. However, in the eyes of this coven of vampires, Louis and Claudia are criminals. The coven finds out that both attempted to kill their maker Lestat, and believe they ought to pay for their crime with their lives since killing fellow vampires is against the rules of the vampiric lifestyle. Louis escapes death after Lestat pleads for his life. Claudia is exposed to the sun and destroyed.

Louis burns down the Théâtre, killing the vampires there as revenge for Claudia's death and drifts through the world with the Theatre's former leader, Armand, whom he had fallen in love with. They separate in the late 1980s in New Orleans.

In the early 1920s, Louis claims to have discovered Lestat in New Orleans, lost in a catatonic state. Louis turns his back on him in pity and disgust. (This may be a fabrication by Louis to lead Daniel to Lestat's haunt, on which Lestat remarks in his memoir, "Louis [...] had all but drawn a map and placed an X on the very spot in New Orleans where I slumbered [...] and what his intentions were, were not clear." Lestat also mentions, in The Tale of the Body Thief, that Louis "made up" this scene. In The Vampire Lestat, Lestat does not mention meeting Louis again in New Orleans before undertaking his long sleep.)

Louis and Lestat are reunited at the end of the novel The Vampire Lestat in 1985 when Lestat is a rock superstar. In the events of The Queen Of The Damned, Louis and other vampires come together at Maharet's house in the Sonoma Compound to fight against Akasha.

Louis is one of the only vampires to refuse the powerful blood offered by Maharet and Lestat, preferring to gain strength with age. However at the end of Merrick, one of the Vampire Chronicles, Louis puts himself into the sun after making Merrick a vampire. Lestat, David Talbot, and Merrick then give Louis some of their blood (Lestat and David's containing the power of some of the oldest and most powerful vampires in the world) to save Louis's life. It is noted by David Talbot that with this transfusion of blood Louis may have lost some of his humanity and become more vampiric in nature and has become almost equal to Lestat in power.

In Prince Lestat and the Realms of Atlantis, Louis leaves Armand and his home at Trinity Gate to reunite with Lestat, who has now taken up the role as leader of the vampire tribe. Lestat requests Louis return with him to the chateau in France as his companion and confidante; Louis agrees and becomes consort to Lestat, taking an active role in solving the dilemma the tribe face in that novel.

Fledglings

 * Madeleine
 * Merrick Marie Louise Mayfair

Appearances in other media
In Neil Jordan's 1994 film adaptation of Interview with the Vampire, Louis is portrayed by Brad Pitt.

Louis appeared as the character in the short-lived Broadway show Lestat: The Musical composed by Elton John and Bernie Taupin, and was played by Jim Stanek.

Jacob Anderson portrays Louis in the 2022 television series by AMC.

title: Louis de Pointe du Lac