text:
Evolutionary ethics

Evolutionary ethics is a field of inquiry that explores how evolutionary theory might bear on our understanding of ethics or morality. The range of issues investigated by evolutionary ethics is quite broad. Supporters of evolutionary ethics have argued that it has important implications in the fields of descriptive ethics, normative ethics, and metaethics.

Descriptive evolutionary ethics consists of biological approaches to morality based on the alleged role of evolution in shaping human psychology and behavior. Such approaches may be based in scientific fields such as evolutionary psychology, sociobiology, or ethology, and seek to explain certain human moral behaviors, capacities, and tendencies in evolutionary terms. For example, the nearly universal belief that incest is morally wrong might be explained as an evolutionary adaptation that furthered human survival.

Normative (or prescriptive) evolutionary ethics, by contrast, seeks not to explain moral behavior, but to justify or debunk certain normative ethical theories or claims. For instance, some proponents of normative evolutionary ethics have argued that evolutionary theory undermines certain widely held views of humans' moral superiority over other animals.

Evolutionary metaethics asks how evolutionary theory bears on theories of ethical discourse, the question of whether objective moral values exist, and the possibility of objective moral knowledge. For example, some evolutionary ethicists have appealed to evolutionary theory to defend various forms of moral anti-realism (the claim, roughly, that objective moral facts do not exist) and moral skepticism.

History
The first notable attempt to explore links between evolution and ethics was made by Charles Darwin in The Descent of Man (1871). In Chapters IV and V of that work Darwin set out to explain the origin of human morality in order to show that there was no absolute gap between man and animals. Darwin sought to show how a refined moral sense, or conscience, could have developed through a natural evolutionary process that began with social instincts rooted in our nature as social animals.

Not long after the publication of Darwin's The Descent of Man, evolutionary ethics took a very different—and far more dubious—turn in the form of Social Darwinism. Leading Social Darwinists such as Herbert Spencer and William Graham Sumner sought to apply the lessons of biological evolution to social and political life. Just as in nature, they claimed, progress occurs through a ruthless process of competitive struggle and "survival of the fittest," so human progress will occur only if government allows unrestricted business competition and makes no effort to protect the "weak" or "unfit" by means of social welfare laws. Critics such as Thomas Henry Huxley, G. E. Moore, William James, Charles Sanders Peirce, and John Dewey roundly criticized such attempts to draw ethical and political lessons from Darwinism, and by the early decades of the twentieth century Social Darwinism was widely viewed as discredited.

The modern revival of evolutionary ethics owes much to E. O. Wilson's 1975 book, Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. In that work, Wilson argues that there is a genetic basis for a wide variety of human and nonhuman social behaviors. In recent decades, evolutionary ethics has become a lively topic of debate in both scientific and philosophical circles.

Descriptive evolutionary ethics
The most widely accepted form of evolutionary ethics is descriptive evolutionary ethics. Descriptive evolutionary ethics seeks to explain various kinds of moral phenomena wholly or partly in genetic terms. Ethical topics addressed include altruistic behaviors, conservation ethics, an innate sense of fairness, a capacity for normative guidance, feelings of kindness or love, self-sacrifice, incest-avoidance, parental care, in-group loyalty, monogamy, feelings related to competitiveness and retribution, moral "cheating," and hypocrisy.

A key issue in evolutionary psychology has been how altruistic feelings and behaviors could have evolved, in both humans and nonhumans, when the process of natural selection is based on the multiplication over time only of those genes that adapt better to changes in the environment of the species. Theories addressing this have included kin selection, group selection, and reciprocal altruism (both direct and indirect, and on a society-wide scale). Descriptive evolutionary ethicists have also debated whether various types of moral phenomena should be seen as adaptations which have evolved because of their direct adaptive benefits, or spin-offs that evolved as side-effects of adaptive behaviors.

Normative evolutionary ethics
Normative evolutionary ethics is the most controversial branch of evolutionary ethics. Normative evolutionary ethics aims at defining which acts are right or wrong, and which things are good or bad, in evolutionary terms. It is not merely describing, but it is prescribing goals, values and obligations. Social Darwinism, discussed above, is the most historically influential version of normative evolutionary ethics. As philosopher G. E. Moore famously argued, many early versions of normative evolutionary ethics seemed to commit a logical mistake that Moore dubbed the naturalistic fallacy. This was the mistake of defining a normative property, such as goodness, in terms of some non-normative, naturalistic property, such as pleasure or survival.

More sophisticated forms of normative evolutionary ethics need not commit either the naturalistic fallacy or the is-ought fallacy. But all varieties of normative evolutionary ethics face the difficult challenge of explaining how evolutionary facts can have normative authority for rational agents. "Regardless of why one has a given trait, the question for a rational agent is always: is it right for me to exercise it, or should I instead renounce and resist it as far as I am able?"

Evolutionary metaethics
Evolutionary theory may not be able to tell us what is morally right or wrong, but it might be able to illuminate our use of moral language, or to cast doubt on the existence of objective moral facts or the possibility of moral knowledge. Evolutionary ethicists such as Michael Ruse, E. O. Wilson, Richard Joyce, and Sharon Street have defended such claims.

Some philosophers who support evolutionary meta-ethics use it to undermine views of human well-being that rely upon Aristotelian teleology, or other goal-directed accounts of human flourishing. A number of thinkers have appealed to evolutionary theory in an attempt to debunk moral realism or support moral skepticism. Sharon Street is one prominent ethicist who argues that evolutionary psychology undercuts moral realism. According to Street, human moral decision-making is "thoroughly saturated" with evolutionary influences. Natural selection, she argues, would have rewarded moral dispositions that increased fitness, not ones that track moral truths, should they exist. It would be a remarkable and unlikely coincidence if "morally blind" ethical traits aimed solely at survival and reproduction aligned closely with independent moral truths. So we cannot be confident that our moral beliefs accurately track objective moral truth. Consequently, realism forces us to embrace moral skepticism. Such skepticism, Street claims, is implausible. So we should reject realism and instead embrace some antirealist view that allows for rationally justified moral beliefs.

Defenders of moral realism have offered two sorts of replies. One is to deny that evolved moral responses would likely diverge sharply from moral truth. According to David Copp, for example, evolution would favor moral responses that promote social peace, harmony, and cooperation. But such qualities are precisely those that lie at the core of any plausible theory of objective moral truth. So Street's alleged "dilemma"—deny evolution or embrace moral skepticism—is a false choice.

A second response to Street is to deny that morality is as "saturated" with evolutionary influences as Street claims. William Fitzpatrick, for instance, argues that "[e]ven if there is significant evolutionary influence on the content of many of our moral beliefs, it remains possible that many of our moral beliefs are arrived at partly (or in some cases wholly) through autonomous moral reflection and reasoning, just as with our mathematical, scientific and philosophical beliefs." The wide variability of moral codes, both across cultures and historical time periods, is difficult to explain if morality is as pervasively shaped by genetic factors as Street claims.

Another common argument evolutionary ethicists use to debunk moral realism is to claim that the success of evolutionary psychology in explaining human ethical responses makes the notion of moral truth "explanatorily superfluous." If we can fully explain, for example, why parents naturally love and care for their children in purely evolutionary terms, there is no need to invoke any "spooky" realist moral truths to do any explanatory work. Thus, for reasons of theoretical simplicity we should not posit the existence of such truths and, instead, should explain the widely held belief in objective moral truth as "an illusion fobbed off on us by our genes in order to get us to cooperate with one another (so that our genes survive)."

Combining Darwinism with moral realism does not lead to unacceptable results in epistemology. No two worlds, that are non-normatively identical, can differ normatively. The instantiation of normative properties is metaphysically possible in a world like ours. The phylogenetic adoption of moral sense does not deprive ethical norms of independent and objective truth-values. A parallel with general theoretical principles exists, which being unchangeable in themselves are discovered during an investigation. Ethical a priori cognition is vindicated to the extent to which other a priori knowledge is available. Scrutinizing similar situations, the developing mind pondered idealized models subject to definite laws. In social relation, mutually acceptable behavior was mastered. A cooperative solution in rivalry among competitors is presented by Nash equilibrium. This behavioral pattern is not conventional (metaphysically constructive) but represents an objective relation similar to that of force or momentum equilibrium in mechanics.

title: Evolutionary ethics


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anselmo Anselmi

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was speedy deleted by user:FCYTravis as nonsense. Later speedied again by RHaworth as reposted nonsense nn-bio. --Blu Aardvark | (talk) 10:31, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Anselmo Anselmi
Prank - Possible the name of a real person, but the content is obviously a prank Outlander 13:57, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete, possibly speedy. --BradBeattie 14:09, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy as personal attack/libel. Kappa 14:41, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete What the hell was that? Hamster Sandwich 15:25, 19 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Nonsense/personal attack. -- BD2412 talk 15:27, August 19, 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

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


text:
Israel Lewy

Israel Lewy (7 January 1841 – 8 September 1917) was a German-Jewish scholar.

Biography
He was educated at the Jewish Theological Seminary and the University in Breslau. In 1874 he was appointed docent at the Lehranstalt für die Wissenschaft des Judenthums in Berlin, and in 1883, on the death of David Joël, he was called to the seminary at Breslau. Lewy's knowledge of Talmudic literature was unusually wide; he was endowed also with an exceptionally acute and dispassionate critical spirit and with a faculty for grasping the proper importance of details.

His first publication was Ueber einige Fragmente aus der Mischna des Abba Saul (Berlin, 1876), in which he showed that the Mishnah collections of the foremost teachers in the period before the final redaction of the Mishnah itself, including that of Abba Saul, agreed as regards all the essential points of the Halakha.

Ein Wort über die Mechilta des R. Simon (Breslau, 1889) was likewise an authoritative work in the field of halakhic exegesis. Lewy also published Interpretation des ersten, zweiten und dritten Abschnitts des Palästinischen Talmud-Traktates Nesikin (ib. 1895–1902), and Ein Vortrag über das Ritual des Pesach-Abends (ib. 1904).

His work and publications later became fundamental cornerstones for the Talmudic studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and from there to all modern day Talmudic studies, being the first to methodically and meticulously gather sources and versions of the words of Jewish sages leading to their origins. He hypothesised that the original name of the unified tractate of the Mishna and Tosefta dealing with monetary issues now called by its three parts (Bava Kama, Bava Metzia and Bava Bathra meaning first second and third gate) was not called Nezikin (damages) but rather Dinei Mamonot (civil law) a more fitting name. In fact, it would probably be a more fitting name for the order (Seder, one of six sections of the Mishna and Tosefta) itself which is called Nezikin although besides damages it includes court laws, punitive laws, and moral laws. But his main proof was shown to be stemmed from a mistake and most sources point to the fact that both the order and the tractate where referred to as Nezikin.

title: Israel Lewy


text: User talk:81.156.176.160

title: User talk:81.156.176.160


text: User talk:65.24.250.24

title: User talk:65.24.250.24


text:
Napier-Railton

The Napier-Railton is an aero-engined racing car built in 1933, designed by Reid Railton to a commission by John Cobb, and built by Thomson & Taylor. It was driven by Cobb, mainly at the Brooklands race track where it holds the all-time lap record (143.44 mi/h) which was set in 1935. The circuit was appropriated for military purposes during the Second World War, and never reopened in that form for racing. It has a W12 engine with 3 different exhaust systems.

History
Between 1933 and 1937, the Napier-Railton broke 47 world speed records at Brooklands, Autodrome de Linas-Montlhéry and Bonneville Salt Flats in Utah.

The car is powered by the high compression version (6.1:1) (RAF specification) of the naturally aspirated Napier Lion, a W12 of 23.944 L capacity, producing 580 bhp at 2585 revolutions per minute (recorded at 5,000 ft – performance at ground level may be different), and 1250 lbft of torque. The 12 cylinders are in three banks of four (broad-arrow configuration), hence the triple exhaust system, and the engine has standard aerospace features such as dual magneto ignition. The non-synchromesh crash gearbox (named for the horrible noises caused by a mis-shift) has 3 ratios. The fuel tank, located in the boat-tail behind the driver, has a capacity of 65 impgal, fuel consumption was approximately 5 mpgimp.

Following the Second World War, the car was, for a short time, repurposed to test the drogue chutes of aircraft.

Postwar owners include Patrick Lindsay and Victor Gauntlett. The car was purchased by Brooklands Museum circa 1997 with the support of the UK's Heritage Lottery Fund and other donors. It is maintained in fully working order and is normally on display in one of the museum's 1930s motoring sheds. The car is run regularly and is usually present at the Goodwood Revival motor race meeting every September.

title: Napier-Railton


text:
Darren Albert

Darren "DJ" Albert (born 28 February 1976) is an Australian former professional rugby league footballer who played in the 1990s and 2000s. A representative winger, he played his club football for the Newcastle Knights (with whom he won the 1997 ARL Premiership), St. Helens (with whom he won the 2002 Super League Grand Final and the 2004 Challenge Cup) as well as the Cronulla-Sutherland Sharks. Albert also represented Country Origin twice in his career (1997 and 2001). He represented New South Wales for one game in the 1999 State of Origin series.

Career in Australia
Albert made his first grade debut for the Newcastle club in round 2 of the 1996 ARL season against the Western Reds where he scored a try in a 22–16 victory.

Albert is remembered for racing over to score the try in the dying seconds of the 1997 ARL Grand Final against Manly that gave Newcastle a fairy tale maiden premiership. After receiving a pass from Andrew Johns 15 metres from Manly's line, Albert stepped inside Manly's Mark Carroll and sped away to score under the posts to give the Newcastle club a 22–16 win over the defending ARL premiers. Albert also played a prominent role in helping the Knights to reach the Grand Final. In the Preliminary final the week before, he raced across from the far wing to tackle a runaway Matt Seers into touch when it appeared the North Sydney fullback was set to score. Newcastle went on to qualify for their first Grand Final appearance with a 17–12 win over Norths.

In the 2000 NRL season, Albert played 12 games and scored 11 tries including a try in the club's preliminary final loss against the Sydney Roosters. Newcastle had led the game 16–2 at half-time but lost 26–20.

Albert played 23 games and scored 16 tries in the 2001 NRL season but missed Newcastle's grand final victory over Parramatta due to a broken ankle.

In 2006, Albert joined Cronulla-Sutherland and played one season with them scoring 12 tries in 23 games. In January 2007, Albert walked out on the Cronulla club with a year remaining on his contract. Cronulla later attempted to block Albert from playing for another NRL or Super League club with then CEO Greg Pierce saying "We are extremely disappointed in Darren's decision, it must be stressed that the Sharks are not releasing Albert from his contract and he will not be able to play football for another club in 2007. We will stop Albert playing in the UK. He doesn't have a release from us so he won't be playing.  He can go over there and play second division if he wants but he can't play in the Super League".

Career in England
Albert played for St. Helens on the wing in their 2002 Super League Grand Final victory against the Bradford Bulls. Having won Super League VI, St Helens contested the 2003 World Club Challenge against 2002 NRL Premiership-winners, the Sydney Roosters. Albert played at in Saints' 38–0 loss.

title: Darren Albert


text:
Alick Bannerman

Alexander (usually "Alick"; also "Alec") Chalmers Bannerman (21 March 1854 – 19 September 1924) was an Australian cricketer who played in 28 Test matches between 1879 and 1893.

Bannerman made his Test debut at Melbourne in 1879, joining brother Charles, his senior by eight years, in the Australian team. "Little Alick" was a small man, his lack of size matched only by his frequent lack of run-scoring. Whereas Charles was an attacking stroke-maker, Alick was ultra-defensive, almost strokeless at times. His nickname, in contrast to that of his brother (the "Pocket Hercules"), was "Barn Door".

A.G. Moyes provides this piece of Bannerman imagery in Australian Batsmen: "At times the crowd found him as wearisome to the flesh as fleas in a warm bed." Wisden Cricketers' Almanack dubbed him "the most famous of all stone-walling batsmen; his patience was inexhaustible."

In his first Test, Alick top-scored (as Charles had memorably done on his debut in 1876/77, hitting 165) with 73.

Alick went to England in 1878 and 1880 as much for his ability in the field as for his batting. He excelled at mid-off, "fast, sure, and untiring, and a wonderfully safe catch," according to Sydney Pardon. In the one hastily arranged Test Match played at the Oval that year (the first ever on British soil), he took Charles's place as Australian opener and scored the first Test run in England, just as the older Bannerman brother had taken the first (off Alfred Shaw) in Australia almost four years before.

In the 28 Tests that Bannerman played from then until 1893, he scored 1,108 runs at an average of 23.03, without ever scoring a hundred. He often found his steady defence coupled at the top of the order with the aggression of such partners as Hugh Massie, George Bonnor, Percy McDonnell and J.J. Lyons. With Lyons at Sydney in the 1891/92 Ashes series, Bannerman played a crucial role in securing the Test (and thus the series) for Australia, who had trailed on the first innings by 163 runs. In the home team's second innings, Lyons and Bannerman put on 174 for the first wicket in 7½ hours, scoring 134 and 91 respectively. Bannerman's knock spanned three days, scoring at a rate of twelve runs an hour. As the bowlers of his time bowled almost twice the number of overs in an hour that they do now, his cumbersome scoring is astonishing. The admittedly accurate William Attewell bowled 204 balls to him during this innings, only five of which brought runs. The frustrated crowd was moved to barracking (the polite sort: they always referred to him as "Good old Alick") and one poet to verse:

 * O Bannerman, O Bannerman,
 * We wish you'd change your manner, man;
 * We pay our humble tanner, man,
 * To see a bit of fun.
 * You're a beggar though to stick it,
 * But it ain't our sort of cricket;
 * They haven't hit your wicket,
 * Yet, you haven't got a run.

The subject of this none-too-flattering ditty was not at all bothered. "Like Gallio of old," wrote Moyes, "he cared for none of these things, concentrating entirely on the job in hand [....] He could irritate, but never overawe, and two of him would have riled even a modern Job."

In the Melbourne Test Match of that 1891/92 series, Bannerman occupied the crease for a total of 7¼ hours, making 45 and 41. This came before his famous knock at Sydney, which reduced him to an average of eleven runs an hour from his last three innings. He could, however, be even slower: during a New South Wales-versus-Victoria fixture in 1890, Bannerman managed 45 not out in 5½ hours. In all matches between the two sides, he scored 1,209 runs for an average of 29.29.

Even the most passive wielders of the willow wand find them waving it about gaily on occasion, and Bannerman was no exception, with the first Sydney Test of Ivo Bligh's 1882/83 tour the most notable example. Going into the match, Australia was two-one down in the series, and it simply had to win this one. A Bannerman edge was spilt, and he decided, on the back of such fortune, to go on the offensive, hitting out in cavalier fashion for a delightfully short innings of 63.

In the third Test of that series (at Sydney again), he made his highest Test score of 94. He had been 68 not out at the close of the second day. As R.D. Beeson, in his book St Ivo and The Ashes (Australia Press Agency, 1883), wrote of his efforts on that evening, "This performance, on such a sodden wicket, was a truly memorable one; and the plucky little batsman was warmly applauded."

All in all, Bannerman made six trips to England, and he enjoyed the actual touring of the Mother Country just as much as he did playing cricket there; indeed, many of his most memorable experiences occurred in places where his contribution on the field was negligible. He played in three of the most historically important matches of his era – the match with the M.C.C. in 1878 that the Australians won in less than a day, that first-ever Test in 1880 and the Ashes-igniter at the Oval in 1882, in which he had one of the better games amongst the batsmen, scoring nine for a strike-rate of 10.34 in the first innings, and a boundary-less thirteen from an hour and ten minutes in the second, holding up one end while Massie launched his famous assault from the other.

In the 1888 Test Match at the Oval, George Lohmann took what Pardon thought was "the finest of all the catches at cover slip ever brought off by George Lohmann". Bannerman could hardly believe his luck, and he went on about it for the rest of the afternoon.

Like his brother had done when his playing days had come to a premature close, Alick took to coaching and umpiring, at which Charles was definitely more controversial and erratic. Alick, meanwhile, was a big traditionalist throughout his days when it came to etiquette and the like, and he took his cricket very seriously. On one occasion, a colleague of his was belting out a catchy number on the field. Alick, unable to endure it any longer, went over to him and read the riot act: "If you want to play cricket, play it; if you want to sing, go and sing; but, for Heaven's sake, don't sing comic songs in the slips!"

He spent much of his later days coaching at the S.C.G. for the New South Wales Cricket Association, and watching closely the progress of any new player whom he had taken under his wing. He also paid close attention to his overall dress and appearance. If he took exception to this, the youngster would know it. "Son," he would tell him. "if you are not a cricketer, you can at least look like one."

He died on 19 September 1924, aged 70 and his funeral proceeded from St Michael's Church in Darlinghurst to the Waverley Cemetery. As his Wisden obituary observed, "Alec Bannerman will be remembered as long as cricket is played".

title: Alick Bannerman


text:
User talk:Garrett~enwiki

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Garrett. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Garrett~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 00:00, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 13:10, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Garrett~enwiki


text: File:D12 - My Band - CD cover.jpg

title: File:D12 - My Band - CD cover.jpg


text:
Ulrich Zasius

Ulrich Zasius (1461 – 24 November 1535 or 1536) was a German jurist.

Biography
Zasius was born at Konstanz (current Baden-Württemberg) in 1461.

After studying at Tübingen he first became episcopal notary at Constance, then town clerk at Baden in Aargau in 1489, and at Freiburg in 1493. From 1496 to 1499 he directed the Latin school at Freiburg.

In 1499 he studied law at the University of Freiburg, was appointed lecturer of rhetoric and poetry there in 1500 and professor of jurisprudence in 1506. In 1502 he was also clerk of court at Freiburg. On April 2 of that year, he joined in with an alliance of burghers and scholars to attempt to expel the Jews of Waldkirch. In 1503, he was appointed legal adviser to the university. In 1505 he authored a treatise assaulting Jewish parental rights which was published in Strasbourg in 1508. In 1508, he was appointed imperial counselor. Applying the tendencies of the Humanists to jurisprudence, he scouted the strained and barbarous comments of the glossators and endeavoured to restore the genuine text. It was probably due to the literary controversies which he had with Eck, that he at first favoured the doctrines of Martin Luther. After 1521 he was a zealous opponent of Luther and died a firm adherent of the Roman Catholic faith.

He died at Freiburg in 1535 or 1536. His juridical works were published posthumously (Lyon, 1548, 1550–1; 3 vols., Frankfurt, 1590).

title: Ulrich Zasius


text:
Inventor (patent)

In patent law, an inventor is the person, or persons in United States patent law, who contribute to the claims of a patentable invention. In some patent law frameworks, however, such as in the European Patent Convention (EPC) and its case law, no explicit, accurate definition of who exactly is an inventor is provided. The definition may slightly vary from one European country to another. Inventorship is generally not considered to be a patentability criterion under European patent law.

Under older U.S. case law, an inventor is the one with "intellectual domination" over the inventive process and not merely one who assists in its reduction to practice. In the contemporary U.S. patent law inventor is defined as the person, who "conceived a claim". The persons who only made prototypes or suggested improvements not claimed in a patent are not inventors.

As the patent application moves through an examination at the USPTO, the original application is usually split into two or more divisional patent applications, which may have different inventors, because of different claims in the applications, and therefore different people, who conceived the claims. Therefore, it is important to write down during the filing of the very first application for each claim, who conceived it.

"Joint inventors", or "co-inventors", exist when a patentable invention is the result of inventive work of more than one inventor. Joint inventors may exist even where one inventor contributed a majority of the work.

European Patent Convention
Under the European Patent Convention (EPC), identifying the inventor of a given invention is theoretically very important since "[t]he right to a European patent (...) belong[s] to the inventor or his successor in title", according to the first-to-file principle. In practice however, the European Patent Office (EPO) never investigates whether the proposed inventor is indeed the true inventor. Indeed, "[f]or the purposes of proceedings before the [EPO], the applicant shall be deemed to be entitled to exercise the right to the European patent".

Court actions relating to the entitlement to the grant of a European patent must be brought before the national court which has the jurisdiction. The jurisdiction is determined in conformance with the "Protocol on Jurisdiction and the Recognition of Decisions in respect of the Right to the Grant of a European Patent" or, in short, the "Protocol on Recognition". Once a final decision is issued by a national court adjudging that the applicant is not entitled to the grant of a European patent, the procedure according to is applicable.

In contrast with U.S. patent law, the applicant for a European patent need not be the inventor. The right to the European patent may validly be transferred before the filing of the application, e.g. by contract, by inheritance, or as a consequence of the "employee's rights" as determined by the applicable national law. However, the inventor has the right to be mentioned as such before the EPO. The EPO does not verify the accuracy of the designation of the inventor. The inventor may waive its right to be mentioned as such in the European patent application and European patent specification.

Inventorship is traditionally not classified as a patentability criterion under European patent law, in contrast with U.S. patent law. However, inventorship can be relevant to patentability in Europe, although in only a limited way. Where a disclosure is made within 6 months preceding the filing date of a European patent application, the disclosure is not taken into consideration if it was due to, or in consequence of, an evident abuse in relation to the applicant or his legal predecessor. Thus the identity of the inventor (who is often the applicant, or their legal predecessor) can be of vital importance.

United States
In the United States, before the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), the inventor or joint inventors had to be named as the applicants. However, under the AIA, that is no longer the only option. This requirement that a patent be issued in the name of the inventors is derived from the intellectual property clause of the United States Constitution Article I, Section 8, Clause 8): The Congress shall have power . . . To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries. (emphasis added) This clause has been traditionally interpreted as that exclusive right to an invention is originally vested with the individual inventor(s). Inventors' employer (or anyone else) can own the invention only as a result of an explicit written contract or license. Such contract may be signed before the invention is made (see hired to invent). The case law on inventorship is currently controlled in the USA by three court precedents: Chou v. University of Chicago (2001), Stanford University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. (2011), and Falana v. Kent State Univ. (2012)

The status as an inventor dramatically alters parties' ability to capitalize on the invention.

An inventor is a party who conceived (not just contributed to the reduction-to-practice) at least one claim to a patent. The courts explain that "[t]he threshold question" of inventorship is "who conceived the invention." Courts recognize that invention is rarely a solitary endeavor. Therefore, conception and "intellectual domination" over an invention is important and "reduction to practice, per se, is irrelevant. One must contribute to the conception to be an inventor." For example, in 1991, consumer group Public Citizen sued the owners of the patent for use of the anti-retroviral compound AZT against HIV Aids, Burroughs-Wellcome. The plaintiffs claimed that several persons at the National Institutes of Health (NIH) who had contributed to the patentable subject matter were not named as "inventors." Controversially, the courts ultimately ruled that the original patent was valid, and no error had been made in excluding the NIH researchers whose work only 'confirmed' the invention.

Generally, conception is "the complete performance of the mental part of the inventive act", and "the formation in the mind of the inventor of a definite and permanent idea of the complete and operative invention as it is thereafter to be applied in practice.." (emphasis added). An idea is usually not "definite and permanent" or "complete" where changes result from experimentation. In this case, other individuals who contribute to the formation of the "definite and permanent" idea are co-inventors.

The naming of inventors is very important for the validity of the patent. Failing to name, or incorrectly identifying inventors, with deceptive intent, can result in a patent being held invalid or unenforceable for inequitable conduct. Ordinarily, the courts presume the named inventors are the inventors so long as there is no disagreement.

An inventor cannot opt out from being mentioned as such in a U.S. patent, even if the patent application was assigned before publication. Assignment of rights in a patent does not alter to whom the patent is actually issued. In fact, an assignee may only have an equitable interest in the patent until it is issued and then legal interest would transfer automatically. If the inventor is dead, insane, or otherwise legally incapacitated, refuses to execute an application, or cannot be found, an application may be made by someone other than the inventor.

An omitted inventor can file lawsuit to have his/her name added to the list of the inventors. Such cases arise very often in Universities: see, for example, Chou v University of Chicago and Olusegun Falana v. Kent State University and Alexander J. Seed.

In 2019-2020, the USPTO has grappled with the question of whether an artificial intelligence machine can be an inventor. In a recent patent application, the USPTO rejected artificial intelligence machines as inventors, but has also sought comments from the public. The American Intellectual Property Law Association has come out against a change in the law until the topic is better understood, but others have suggested temporary measures to collect relevant information until Congress takes up the issue.

Compensation of inventors
There are many ways in which an inventor might be compensated for a patent. An inventor might bring the patented product to market under the protection of the monopoly created by the patent. The inventor may license a patent to another entity for an up-front fee, an ongoing royalty or other consideration. The inventor may also sell the patent outright. Henry Woodward, for example, sold his original US patent on the light bulb to Thomas Edison who then developed it into a commercially successful product.

Inventors who are employees of a company generally sell or assign their patent rights to the company they work for. The extent to which they are compensated will vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and may depend upon any prior employment agreements that are in place. Under Japanese patent law, for example, an employee is entitled to a “reasonable fee" for an invention. In 2006 Hitachi was ordered to pay an employee $US 1.6 million for an invention the employee made that was commercially valuable.  In United States, however, an employee may have to sign over the rights to an invention without any special compensation. Germany has a law on employees' inventions providing strict rules concerning the transfer of rights to an invention to the employer. It also prescribes mandatory compensation of employees for inventions they make. This right to compensation cannot be waived in advance, i.e. before the employer is informed of an invention.

title: Inventor (patent)


text:
If Japan Can... Why Can't We?

"If Japan Can... Why Can't We?" is an American television program broadcast by NBC News as part of the documentary television series NBC White Paper on June 24, 1980, credited with beginning the Quality Revolution and introducing the methods of W. Edwards Deming to American managers that was produced by Clare Crawford-Mason and reported on by Lloyd Dobyns.

The report details how the Japanese captured the world automotive and electronics markets by following Deming's advice to practice continual improvement and think of manufacturing as a system, not as bits or pieces. Crawford-Mason went on to produce; in collaboration with Deming, a 14-hour documentary series detailing his methods through lecture excerpts, interviews, practical demonstrations, and case studies of companies that adopted his methods.

Background
During the 1980s, Japan was seen to be a manufacturing powerhouse while American industry was struggling to keep pace. It was strongly believed that Japanese manufacturing techniques were uniquely developed for and suited to the Japanese culture, and thus unsuited for American culture.

title: If Japan Can... Why Can't We?


text:
Crowning

Crowning may refer to:

 * Crowning, the second stage of childbirth
 * Coronation
 * Marriage in the Eastern Orthodox Church
 * During a wildfire, crown fires may spontaneously ignite in a process called crowning

title: Crowning


text:
How Come (D12 song)

"How Come" is a song by the American rap group D12. It was released in June 2004 as the second single from their second album D12 World. The song was certified Gold by the RIAA.

Content
The song is about the relationship between the members of D12. Eminem makes reference to his relationship to Proof, Kon Artis talks about Eminem and Kim's relationship, and Proof talks about the rift between him and Eminem.

Bizarre and Swift had verses in the extended version, but these were cut from the official release of the song.

Music video
The video depicts members of D12 fighting with Eminem in the Shady Records studio. It shows a detailed strain on the members relationships. They discuss how Eminem rose to stardom, and they can't get a deal. They envy Eminem, but he doesn't think there is anything to envy, the song ends, leaving people wondering, with the members dissatisfied. In the second verse of the song, Kon Artis talks about a time when he claims to have seen Eminem's girlfriend Kim cheating on him. The video ends with a clip of another song from D12 World, "Git Up". The beginning also shows a home video of Eminem rapping at an underground show with Proof and Bizarre.

The accompanying music video for this single is known as "How Come Plus Git Up" and was released in 2004.

Track listing

 * UK CD single

 * European CD single

Notes:
 * This is an extended version of the song, containing Swifty McVay and Bizarre's verses, which were cut off the album version.

Cover

 * A cover version was first performed by English rock band Embrace for BBC Radio 1's Live Lounge show. This version is shortened to Eminem's lyrics on the song, cutting out Kon Artis and Proof. The song was released B-sides to their single "Ashes" and on their album Dry Kids: B-Sides 1997–2005. When the video is played for this song, the song often joins onto a shortened version of the D12 song, "Git Up."

title: How Come (D12 song)


text:
USS Annapolis (PG-10)

The first USS Annapolis (PG-10/IX-1) was a gunboat in the United States Navy. She was named for Annapolis, Maryland.

Annapolis was laid down on 18 April 1896 at Elizabethport, New Jersey, by Lewis Nixon and his shipyard superintendent, Arthur Leopold Busch; launched on 23 December 1896; sponsored by Ms. Georgia Porter, the daughter of Captain Theodoris Porter; and commissioned at New York on 20 July 1897, Commander John J. Hunker in command.

Spanish–American War
Following commissioning, the gunboat operated along the east coast and in the Caribbean Sea engaged in training missions. In March 1898, she was assigned to the North Atlantic Fleet. By April, the U.S. was on the verge of war with Spain over conditions in Cuba. On 18 April, the warship departed New York on her way to the Florida coast. She arrived at Key West on the 25th, the day on which President William McKinley signed a joint resolution of Congress that formalized the fact that a state of war had existed between the U.S. and Spain since the 21st. She made a round-trip voyage from Key West to Port Tampa and back before joining the blockade off Havana on 2 May. She remained there for 19 days. On 8 May, she assisted USS Mayflower (PY-1) in capturing the Spanish sailing vessel Santiago Apostol, bound from Yucatan to Havana with a cargo of fish.

The remainder of that tour passed more or less routinely, and Annapolis retired from Cuban waters on 21 May. She spent eight days at Key West and two weeks at Port Tampa before rejoining the blockade at Daiquiri on 22 June. The following day, the gunboat moved to Guantánamo Bay. On 29 June, while she was on station at Guantánamo Bay with the torpedo boat USS Ericsson (TB-2) and cruiser USS Marblehead (C-11), Annapolis she assisted those ships in the capture of the British steamer Adula. On 13 July, she left the Guantánamo Bay area to make a reconnaissance visit to Baracoa on Cuba's northeastern coast. While at Baracoa on the 15th, she conferred with a group of friendly Cubans and engaged in a brief gun duel with an enemy shore battery near the eastern end of the town. She departed Baracoa that same day and resumed duty at Guantánamo Bay on the 16th.

On the 18th, she received orders to help capture Nipe Bay located about 90 mi up the northeastern coast from Baracoa. Following USS Wasp (1893), USS Leyden (1865), and USS Topeka (PG-35) into the bay on the 21st, Annapolis successfully passed through a known minefield. Inside, the four American ships discovered the SPANISH SLOOP Jorge Juan lying at anchor inside the bay. After a brisk exchange of fire, the Americans bested the Spanish warship in the resulting Battle of Nipe Bay, and she began to sink. Annapolis and the three other ships set about the tasks of completing the capture of the Nipe Bay littoral and removing the mines from the bay itself. The gunboat departed Nipe Bay on 22 July and set a course for Puerto Rico where she assisted the Army in the capture of the city of Ponce on the 30th. For the remainder of the war, she served at Puerto Rico, making one voyage from that island to St. Thomas in the Danish West Indies at the end of the first week in August just before the armistice of 12 August.

Post-war deployment
On 24 August, she departed Puerto Rico and proceeded—via Key West—to the New England coast where she visited Newport, Rhode Island; Portsmouth, New Hampshire; and New York City. Late in October, the gunboat headed back to the West Indies where she cruised for the next six months. Annapolis returned to the New England coast late in April 1899 and operated along the eastern seaboard for the next four months. On 5 September, she was placed out of commission at Norfolk, Virginia.

She was recommissioned on 14 November 1900, Lieutenant Commander Karl Rohrer in command. At the end of December 1900, she departed Hampton Roads, bound for the Far East. Steaming via the Atlantic Ocean, the Mediterranean Sea, the Suez Canal, and the Indian Ocean, the warship arrived at Cavite in the Philippines on 24 April 1901. She remained in the Far East for the next three years. For the most part, the Philippine Islands constituted her sphere of operations. She conducted patrols, carried passengers and mail among the islands, and supported the Army during the first stage of the Philippine–American War. She also participated extensively in the hydrographic surveys made of the islands.

In the summer and fall of 1903, she joined American's Far Eastern fleet for a cruise to Chinese and Japanese waters. During that voyage, she visited Chefoo and Shanghai in China, Kobe and Yokohama in Japan and Tamsui on the island of Formosa before returning to Cavite on 19 November.

The gunboat operated in the Philippines for the next three months, but late in February 1904, she returned to Shanghai for a month. After a week of target practice in Chinese waters from 30 March-8 May, Annapolis headed back to the Philippines, arriving in Cavite on 13 May. However, her stay was brief because she departed Cavite again on 2 June and shaped a course via Yokohama back to the U.S.

Annapolis reached Mare Island, California, later that summer, was decommissioned, and entered the navy yard there for extensive repairs. She was placed back in commission on 25 March 1907, Lt. Cdr. Lewis J. Clark in command, and departed San Francisco, California, on 5 April bound—via Hawaii—for American Samoa. The gunboat arrived at Tutuila, Samoa on 22 May and began duty as station ship. She discharged those duties until 9 September 1911, when she departed Pago Pago to return home. The warship made a stop at Honolulu on the way back, arrived at San Francisco on 9 October, and entered the Mare Island Navy Yard later that day. The gunboat was decommissioned once more on 16 December 1911.

Annapolis remained at Mare Island until recommissioned on 1 May 1912, Cdr. Warren J. Terhune in command. Sometime in May, the warship moved south to San Diego, California, whence she departed the 21st and headed for the coast of Central America. She arrived at Corinto—off the coast of Nicaragua—on 13 June. Conditions in that Central American republic had been unstable throughout the 1900s but, after 1910, became increasingly worse as three factions vied with each other for power. By the summer of 1912, General Manuel Estrada Cabrera—more or less democratically elected under American auspices—had been forced put of office. His vice president—Adolfo Diaz—took over his duties; but, by the end of July, full-scale civil war raged in Nicaragua. Annapolis returned to the Corinto area on 1 August following a six-week cruise along the coasts of Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. The gunboat remained at Corinto for the following four months, periodically sending landing parties ashore to protect Americans lives and property and to restore order in areas where Americans were located. On 9 December, she departed Nicaraguan waters to return to San Francisco where, after stops at Acajutla, El Salvador, and at San Diego, she arrived on 30 December. That same day, the warship entered the Mare Island Navy Yard for repairs.

She completed repairs late in January 1913 and returned to sea on the 20th. The gunboat made a 16-day stop at San Diego before resuming her voyage to Central American waters on 7 February. Annapolis arrived at Amapala, Honduras on 17 February and remained there until 9 March. After a short cruise to the Gulf of Fonseca and to Petosi in Nicaragua on 9–10 March, she returned to Amapala on the 10th and remained there until 23 April.

At that time, she departed the Honduran coast and headed for Mexico where successive coups had unseated first Porfirio Díaz and then his successor Francisco Madero. Gen. Victoriano Huerta seized the reins of government, but others—notably Venustiano Carranza, Emiliano Zapata, Álvaro Obregón, and Francisco "Pancho" Villa—contested his usurpation of power and generally added to the mayhem in Mexico. For the next six years, Annapolis patrolled the Mexican coast investigating conditions, protecting American interests, and assisting American refugees. She spent most of her time along the Mexican coast but returned periodically to California for repairs, provisions, and training.

In June 1918, she moved through the Panama Canal to begin duty out of New Orleans, Louisiana, with the American Patrol. She cruised the waters of the Gulf of Mexico until 25 April 1919, at which time she was detached from the American Patrol. She departed New Orleans early in May and arrived in San Diego later that month. On 1 July, Annapolis was placed out of commission at the Mare Island Navy Yard. Early in 1920, the gunboat was towed to Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, where she was turned over to the Pennsylvania Nautical School on 1 April 1920. She served as a school ship, on a loan basis, for the next 20 years.

At 1915 on the 21st of September, while exercising off the Imperial fortress colony of Bermuda (where she was based at the Royal Naval Dockyard), the Royal Navy cruiser HMS Orion was ordered, in response to a request from the United States Consul for assistance, to make its way towards the position of Annapolis, four hundred miles from Bermuda at 35 degrees North and 54 degrees West. Cadet Robert Hugh Quinn, aboard Annapolis, required an immediate operation for appendicitis and the 7 knot speed of Annapolis would not enable her to reach Bermuda in time. The two ships were in sight of each other by 0858 on the 22nd of September. After Captain Hines of the Annapolis went aboard Orion to meet with its captain, HRG Kinahan, Orion set off for Bermuda by 1038 with the American cadet, entering through the Narrows channel at night and arriving at the dockyard at 0246 on the 23rd of September, from where Quinn was delivered to the Royal Naval Hospital.

Fate
On 17 July, when the Navy adopted its alphanumeric system of classification, Annapolis was designated PG-10. On 30 June 1940, her name was struck from the Naval Vessel Register, and she was turned over to the Maritime Commission for disposal. Presumably, she was scrapped.

title: USS Annapolis (PG-10)


text:
Jim Devlin

James Alexander Devlin (June 6, 1849 – October 10, 1883) was an American Major League Baseball (MLB) player who played mainly as a first baseman early in his career, then later as a pitcher. Devlin played for three teams during his five-year career; the Philadelphia White Stockings and the Chicago White Stockings of the National Association (NA), and the Louisville Grays of the National League (NL). However, after admitting to throwing games and costing the Grays the pennant in the 1877 Louisville Grays scandal, he and three of his teammates were banished permanently from MLB.

Career
Jim Devlin began his career in the first organized professional league, the National Association of Professional Base Ball Players (NA), as an infielder for his hometown Philadelphia White Stockings in 1873, and the Chicago White Stockings in the 1874 and 1875 seasons. In 1876, the NA folded and was replaced by the National League (NL) that lives on to this day. In this year, Devlin began pitching for the Louisville Grays, starting 68 games with an impeccable 1.56 earned run average and leading the Grays in batting with .315. Devlin's best pitch was a "drop pitch", now known as a sinker, which he may have been the first to throw. In 1877, Devlin, the only pitcher on the roster, threw every pitch of his team's 61 games, the only pitcher ever to do so.

Banishment
Led by Devlin and slugger George Hall, the Grays opened up a four-game lead in the NL pennant race by mid-August. However, the Grays suffered a horrendous road trip and endured a seven-game losing streak, which was characterized by uncharacteristic "bonehead" plays and poor pitching. The Grays relinquished their lead and eventually finished second, seven games behind the Boston Red Caps (who subsequently won 20 of 21 games to end the season). Meanwhile, certain Grays were seen around town wearing fancy new jewelry and ostentatiously dining at exclusive restaurants.

At the end of the season, suspicion arose that Grays players were being paid to intentionally lose games. This suspicion increased as the players performed very well in postseason exhibition matches. Furthermore, the Louisville Courier-Journal discovered that utility infielder Al Nichols had received an abnormally high number of telegrams. Courier-Journal writer John Haldeman, who was the son of the Grays' president and who sometimes played second base in the team's exhibition games, was the first to publicly accuse the Grays of throwing games. Team vice president Charles Chase, who had earlier received but disregarded telegrams informing him that gamblers were betting against the Grays in certain games, began an investigation. Devlin and Hall confessed, and Chase demanded that his players allow him to inspect their telegrams. The telegrams confirmed that Nichols was coordinating the games with New York City gamblers. Bill Craver, the team's shortstop, who was the only player to deny the request and who carried a bad reputation from his days in the National Association, was presumed guilty by association and was suspended.

NL president William Hulbert decided to make a stand against gambling. He immediately banned Devlin, Hall, Nichols and Craver from the league for life. Craver, against whom no evidence of gambling was ever found but had refused to comply with the investigation, was outraged and appealed the suspension. Devlin also appealed to the NL for reinstatement every year for the rest of his life. However, Hulbert remained resolute and none of the Louisville Four ever played professional baseball again (according to legend, Devlin literally begged, on his knees, for another chance; Hulbert responded by giving Devlin a fifty-dollar bill ; "This is what I think of you personally, Jim", the league president supposedly said, "[b]ut, damn you, you have thrown a game, you are dishonest, and this National League will not stand for it!"). Devlin even appealed to Harry Wright, one of the game's most influential figures, for help in reinstating him, but Wright never responded to Devlin's requests. Devlin, who found work in Philadelphia as a police officer, died poor of tuberculosis in 1883 and was survived by a wife and son. He is interred at New Cathedral Cemetery in Philadelphia.

title: Jim Devlin


text: File:D12 - How Come - CD cover.jpg

title: File:D12 - How Come - CD cover.jpg


text:
Talk:Jeanette Winterson

real food
In 2003 Winterson opened a shop in East London to sell real food. This is a bit weird. Is this as opposed to all the shops in London that sell fictional foodstuffs? Possibly this is an POV description of organic food, wholegrain food, or something similar. Matthew Platts 14:07, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

self-importance
In the final essay of the book, A Work of My Own, Winterson reaches record levels of self-importance.

Sounds like criticism to me, probably justified in my opinion but hardly NPOV. --Air 10:19, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Question about notability
Is her recent "defense" of homeopathy notable or not enough for inclusion in this article?--A (talk) 15:57, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Religion
I heard Ms Winterson interviewed on the BBC about eight years ago, and she said that she had become a Roman Catholic. Yet this is not mentioned in the article and certainly does not come through in any of the articles and interviews referred to. Has she now abandoned Roman Catholicism? 86.43.194.49 (talk) 09:28, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

I gather that she has now lost her faith and is a non-believer. Ausseagull (talk) 20:29, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I believe has also become a lover of oranges. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.115.101.166 (talk) 02:44, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

Written on the Body
Pls stop the redirect for this page.Zigzig20s (talk) 21:15, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Rabbit stew
So she shot and ate a rabbit from the garden, tweeted about it, and got some blowback. The incident made the news cycle for a day in some of the British media. Does it belong in our article? I thought not and removed an entry sourced to the Daily Mail,, it was re-added and removed again by another editor, and it's now been re-added a third time. I am still inclined to think that this incident didn't receive enough lasting coverage beyond the immediate news cycle to deserve inclusion in our article, per WP:WEIGHT, but the story did get picked up in a number of papers and did draw some responses from literary critics, so reasonable minds might differ, and I am bringing the question here for discussion. If we do decide to keep it, for heaven's sake let's at least cite it to better sources like The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph, and let's follow WP:NPOV and acknowledge that not all the reaction was negative. --Arxiloxos (talk) 19:44, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd support keeping it if it had inspired or featured in her work in any way. As it has not (at least not to date), I think it's frothy trivia. The fact that it's been reported by The Guardian and The Daily Telegraph, however, suggests it is a generally notable incident and thus should be kept. Twitter has a lot to answer for, I guess. But that's the way news is made these days, it seems. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:54, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

There is no reason this should be kept in the article as a significant event in her life. The article currently has the sentence One twitter follower said she would never buy another of her books. While humorous, there is no biographical value in that at all. This seems to be the exact kind of thing WP:RECENTISM was written for. It could arguably be included if there's coverage of it beyond the news spike, but right now it looks flimsy and insignificant.__ E L A Q U E A T E  20:19, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

 * According to the Daily Mail article, she didn't shoot the rabbit, she trapped it. I'd say the WP article phrasing "Winterson caused public outrage when she published a picture of a rabbit she had disemboweled..." is too sensationalistic.  I don't have a strong view on keeping/removing the incident completely, but if it's kept, the description should be toned down, e.g. "Winterson provoked controversy when she tweeted a picture of a rabbit she had caught and cooked after it ate parseley from her garden". 173.228.123.145 (talk) 20:21, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * That is reasonable, and as long as someone can say it's a serious controversy. If it's something like, "Multiple worldwide news sources say the subject wore a non-flattering dress to the Oscars" then it doesn't matter much if it's verifiable it's not the kind of thing that adds value to the article. If it's treated as being an event of import, there's an argument, but not sourced to the food and wine section or tabloid celebrity sections of our sources. __ E L A Q U E A T E  20:30, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Agree. Although even the herb garnish seems a bit much (surely chervil would have been a touch more ironic?) Martinevans123 (talk) 20:35, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * It's also interesting that this kind of thing was put into the article ahead of more significant personal history like her relationship with her adopted mother (no mention at all!). __ E L A Q U E A T E  20:54, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * (Comment moved from noticeboard) This seems like trivia. I don't think we should be chronicling people getting being criticised on Twitter unless there is very widespread coverage or something very noteworthy is involved. Cooking a rabbit really isn't very noteworthy. Formerip (talk) 19:58, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree, this rabbit stew controversy seems trivial. Unless there is some sort of longterm fallout or impact of this incident, I would support deleting it from BLP.--BoboMeowCat (talk) 22:02, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

We can include the incident, but not as a standalone, we can rephrase it as part of the description of her lifestyle as growing her own food, getting up with the sun, etc. The Telegraph article does that very well. As everyone writes above, it's not important enough as a standalone item, but could well be useful color. --GRuban (talk) 22:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * An IP keeps pushing it into the article. Unless we're trying to shame the BLP subject with giving weight to "public outrage on Twitter" and the fact that a single unnamed Twitter user is going to decline purchasing Winterson's books, we should remove this until something mature is suggested or not.__ E L A Q U E A T E  23:30, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * The IP appears to have self-reverted. Formerip (talk) 23:31, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Look again. __ E L A Q U E A T E  23:33, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, so they've self-reverted the self-revert. Revert the self-revert of the self-revert, I guess. I don't think this is an emergency, though. We're not libeling her or anything. Formerip (talk) 23:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Rabbits are people too, you know! (?) Martinevans123 (talk) 08:34, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Politics
She voted Lib Dem in 2010 but she is now a Labour Party supporter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.154.201.170 (talk) 02:18, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * So did I. Doesn't make it a notable fact, especially without a source. See WP:BLP, WP:V and WP:UNDUE. -- Red rose64 (talk) 10:18, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

New novel
,, you two seem to have an interest in this protected article: can you please add her latest work, The Gap of Time, to the bibliography--or better yet, write it up some? Here's the NYT review. Thank you. 66.168.253.87 (talk) 04:46, 24 October 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 16 November 2015
Change relationship status to Spouse Susie Orbach June 2015

Totts006 (talk) 23:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅. Have adjusted infobox, but other editors may adjust. Martinevans123 (talk) 23:09, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 25 July 2016
Please add a reference to Jeanette Winterson receiving the 2014 St. Louis Literary Award. St. Louis Literary Award

Recipients of the Saint Louis Literary Award

British Author Jeanette Winterson Named 2014 Saint Louis Literary Award Recipient

Jeanette Winterson to receive St. Louis Literary Award

LiteraryAwardFan (talk) 16:45, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

 * Padlock-silver-open.svg Not done: According to the page's protection level you should be able to edit the page yourself. If you seem to be unable to, please reopen the request with further details. |editcount&action=query&ususers=LiteraryAwardFan You are autoconfirmed — Andy W.  ( talk  · ctb) 16:10, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Done. -Lopifalko (talk) 17:59, 12 January 2019 (UTC)

Replacement for "... conventional values"
The lead includes "... rebelling against conventional values". Some of the values (and behaviours, etc) she was rebelling against were conventional, in the sense of "the average" or "the norm" (anti-lesbian/gay), but some were fairly extreme. I am not sure what to replace "conventional values" with; here are some possibilities: with "extremely" possibly added to either. It would be good if whatever is put in had a reference. FrankSier (talk) 15:35, 30 September 2018 (UTC)
 * "a restrictive upbringing"
 * "a repressive upbringing"

Euphemisms?
About a "... sensitive teenage girl rebelling against conventional values".

It's more specifically about a sensitive teenage lesbian girl rebelling against evangelical Pentecostal values.

Is the latter so hard to mention that generic euphemisms must be used to avoid unsettling sensitive readers, even at the cost of not being clear about the subject? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.2.1 (talk) 15:22, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jeanette Winterson


text:
I, Lucifer (O'Donnell novel)

I, Lucifer is an action-adventure novel by Peter O'Donnell first published in 1967, featuring the character of Modesty Blaise, whom O'Donnell had created for a comic strip several years earlier. It was the third novel to feature the character.

I, Lucifer introduces parapsychology, a theme that would recur in later books in the Modesty Blaise series; Willie Garvin has the ability to predict danger by his ears prickling, and a villain has the ability to predict future events. The novel also introduces the secondary character Steven Collier, a parapsychologist, who makes numerous future appearances in both the comic strip and the novels. The titular character, depicted as an insane young man who believes himself to be the overlord of the underworld, demonstrates the ability to predict natural deaths.

Plot summary
Modesty Blaise and Willie Garvin are in Paris. Modesty is invited to dinner by René Vaubois, head of the Deuxième Bureau (the French Intelligence Service), on a floating restaurant on the Seine. René asks Modesty for advice regarding a case. High-level people worldwide are receiving death threats, and those who don't pay a ransom end up dead. Most of the deaths are revealed to be natural.

Willie, waiting on the river bank for Modesty's return, encounters Chuli, a criminal whose speciality is planting bombs. Vaubois' car has been wired with explosives. When Modesty, Willie, Vaubois, and Stephen Collier leave the scene, they are followed by a car full of underworld killers, trying to take down Vaubois.

Lucifer, a young man with a ruined mind who had been studying to go into the church when he was seduced by a woman and suffered a nervous breakdown, becoming convinced that he was the source of all sin, the devil himself. A pair of aging puppeteers, Seff and Regina, unable to get work when the music halls closed down, turned to crime. After discovering Lucifer's ability to predict natural deaths, Seff has created a worldwide protection racket.

Modesty is taken prisoner at their base on Sylt and a radio-controlled cyanide capsule is surgically implanted under her skin. The final confrontation takes place on a remote island in the Philippines. Modesty and Willie are forced to fight a duel to the death against each other. Later in a major battle, Modesty risks everything to try to save Lucifer.

title: I, Lucifer (O'Donnell novel)


text:
Clementina Drummond-Willoughby, 24th Baroness Willoughby de Eresby

Clementina Elizabeth Drummond-Willoughby, 24th Baroness Willoughby de Eresby (2 September 1809, London – 13 November 1888, Grimsthorpe Castle) was a suo jure British baroness. She was the daughter of Peter Robert Drummond-Burrell, 22nd Baron Willoughby de Eresby (died 1865) and Sarah Clementina, née Drummond (died 1865). On the death of her brother, Albyric Drummond-Willoughby, 23rd Baron Willoughby de Eresby, in 1871, the Barony of Willoughby de Eresby fell into abeyance between her sister, Charlotte, and her. On 13 November 1871, the abeyance of the barony was terminated in her favour.

She was born and baptised with the name of Clementina Elizabeth Burrell-Drummond. And on 4 May 1872, her name was changed to Clementina Elizabeth Heathcote-Drummond-Willoughby by Royal Licence.

She married Sir Gilbert John Heathcote, 1st Baron Aveland on 8 October 1827 in Drummond Castle. They became parents of:
 * Gilbert Heathcote-Drummond-Willoughby, 1st Earl of Ancaster, who succeeded her in the Barony of Willoughby de Eresby and his father in the Barony of Aveland, and
 * Clementina Charlotte Heathcote (died 1922), who married Vice-Admiral Sir George Tryon (1832–1893) in 1869 and became mother of the 1st Baron Tryon.

She was also Joint (1/4) Hereditary Lord Great Chamberlain from 1870 to her death.

She was buried at St Matthew's Church, Normanton, Rutland.


text:
Wikipedia talk:Conlangs

How to present a conlang on Wikipedia
The main pages of this project discuss how to decide which conlangs are worthy to be mentioned in Wikipedia. After the vote on rules, I am certain there will be some conlangs left, so it is time to think about how to present the survivors. A conlang, no matter how complete, isn't a natural language, so it ought to be presented differently, especially as conlangs as part of fictional works often are very incomplete (to the degree that guessing on grammar and pronuniciation becomes a goal in itself, see Sindarin as compared to Quenya).

I suggest a template/infobox with the following fields (order to be debated later, this is just a listing):
 * Author, authors or whatever committee made the language
 * Internal name for the language, aka. what potential users would call it
 * External names of the language, if different from internal. With external I mean the non-in-conlang name for the language, like "English" is the English name for English, but in French English is Anglais. At least the external name relevant to the wikipedia the article is on should be here
 * Type of language, or purpose. This is the spot for "art", "aux", "enge", "log" etc., with links to definitions
 * How complete the known information about the language is.
 * Is it just mentioned (most languages in fantasy-books)?
 * A list of known words (Lapine)?
 * A discussion about it's abstract structure (Marain, but people sure speculate as to how it looks and sounds)?
 * A full grammar with dictionary (Klingon, not much of a corpus in the prime source, the Klingon Dictionary)?
 * A full grammar with dictionary and corpus (Teonaht, see the web-pages)?
 * etc.
 * If relevant, its claims, like "This is claimed to be a complete language for international communication even if it only has 120 words" (Toki Pona)
 * If it is part of a larger work, like a family of languages or a world, like Almea or Planet Pii or the Star Trekiverse
 * If the former, where and by whom it is used
 * Age: what year/decade it was started or abandoned/complete, our timeline

I'm sure there are more, but this is a place to start. --Kaleissin 14:29:00, 2005-08-19 (UTC)

 * I agree that all these topics ought to be covered for each conlang for which they are relevant. But I would oppose cramming them all into an infobox, because some of them are only relevant to certain kinds of conlang, and others cannot be briefly summarized in an infobox field.  An infobox probably ought only to include name of creator, internal name of language, external name of language, and type of language; everything else should be described at whatever length makes sense in the text of the article. --Jim Henry | Talk 14:44, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I think completeness-info should be in the box too, then you can see at a glance if it is learanable or not, and it separates the auxlangs and artlangs from the wordlists and mentions. --Kaleissin 14:52:01, 2005-08-19 (UTC)

 * So, in what terms would you describe various degrees and kinds of completeness in a short phrase (the space available in an infobox field)? This is not a simple scalar variable; there are several dimensions of completeness that should be described (lexicon size, grammar completeness and originality, expressivity, corpus size, relex vs. original semantics, etc.).  That's why I think it ought to be described however it makes sense in the text of the article, rather than being squeezed into an infobox field. --Jim Henry | Talk 15:25, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Conlang Wikiportal
There is now a Wikiportal about conlangs. Just thought I'd give everyone a heads up. &mdash; {{User:JonMoore/sig}} 17:19, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Template:Language for conlangs
I have done some work on updating language recently. It now has some options that are designed to make it suitable for use for constructed languages. I have updated the ne design on the articles on a number of conlangs (see Esperanto, Interlingua, Ido or Quenya for examples). The colour coding for conlangs is black with white text. There are no plans to allow different types of conlangas to be differentiated by different colours. This is because the template deals with all languages, and there has to be a limit to the number of colours we use (English and Kurdish are both the same shade of green for example). I would hope that more conlangs feel free to make use of the template. Please give me feedback and suggestions about it. In the case of international auxiliary languages, there is often a regulatory body for the language, but no state where it is an official language. Currently, calling also displays a field for official language (because this is most often the case for natural languages). I would like to know what might be a better use for this official status field for conlangs. --Gareth Hughes 12:13, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia talk:Conlangs


text:
Roshen

Roshen Confectionery Corporation (Кондитерська корпорація «Роше́н») is a Ukrainian confectionery manufacturing group. It operates facilities in the Ukrainian cities of Kyiv, Vinnytsia, Ivankiv, and Kremenchuk, as well as in Budapest, Hungary, and Klaipėda, Lithuania. The company's name is derived from the last name of its owner, Petro Poroshenko (Poroshenko), who was the president of Ukraine from 2014 to 2019.

In 2012, the Roshen Corporation ranked 18th in the "Candy Industry Top 100" list of the world's largest confectionery companies. It has a total annual production volume of 410,000 tonnes. The company exports to Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Armenia, Moldova, Estonia, Hungary, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, the United States, Canada, Germany, Romania, Finland, Bulgaria, and Israel. Previously, it also exported to Russia, from which it derived 40 percent of its gross revenue until Russia ceased importing from the company in July 2013. In early 2017, Candy Industry placed ROSHEN in 24th place in the "2017 Global Top 100" of confectionery producers and estimated its annual revenue at $800 million.

Owners and management
Participating in the 2014 presidential election in Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko announced his intention to sell Roshen after his victory to avoid any conflicts of interest. At a press conference on June 5, 2015, in Kyiv, Poroshenko assured that he intended to transfer his stake in the confectionery corporation "Roshen" to the management of a private investment banking company, N M Rothschild & Sons, owned by the Rothschild family. In January 2016, he announced the signing of an agreement on the transfer of these shares.

Banned exports to the Russian Federation
In July 2013, Russia banned all imports of Roshen products due to dissatisfaction with the packaging labeling. Subsequently, Roshen products underwent inspections in Kazakhstan, Belarus, Kyrgyzstan, and Moldova, but no complaints were raised. On 21 October 2013, Russia's ambassador to Ukraine Mikhail Zurabov stated, "There are no problems with the quality of products; they are safe. But there are problems associated with the production technology, using some ingredients not certified by the law." According to the 17 December 2013 Ukrainian-Russian action plan, Roshen products were expected to return to Russian stores by 1 March 2014. However, on 12 March 2014, the acting head of the Russian Federal Service for Supervision of Consumer Rights Protection and Human Welfare, Anna Popova, stated that Ukraine had not yet fulfilled its requirements to allow Roshen products back into the Russian market.

In late March 2014, the Roshen factory in Lipetsk, Russia, was closed down, and its local managing director was charged with "conspiring with unnamed others to use a registered trademark illegally to extract additional profits." Ukraine and the factory workers suspected the factory was closed because of Roshen owner Petro Poroshenko's involvement in Euromaidan and his participation in the 2014 Ukrainian presidential election. According to Reuters, some Roshen factory workers in Lipetsk felt embarrassed to work for Ukrainians "swept up in a wave of Russian patriotism since Moscow annexed Crimea" and gossiped about rumors of how the management "paid Ukrainians more money and were cheating the Russians". On 13 May 2014, Russia banned the sale of Roshen products in Crimea. In April 2017, total production stopped at the Lipetsk factory, leaving 700 people jobless.

As noted, the seizure of property of the Lipetsk confectionery factory, imposed by the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation under a criminal case, made it impossible to sell the factory.

In February 2024, the Oktyarsky District Court of Lipetsk decided to transfer the Lipetsk factory to the ownership of the Russian state.

During the election campaign of the 2014 Ukrainian presidential election, Roshen owner Poroshenko pledged to sell all his shares in Roshen if elected President. Although Poroshenko was elected President, by late December 2014, he was unable to find a buyer for the company. Because of this, in January 2016, Poroshenko transferred his share of the corporation to an independent blind trust. The Bank Ruling Trust has a four-year-old proxy to negotiate the sale of assets.

Production network changes
Roshen closed down its confectionery factory in Mariupol (Ukraine) in 2015 due to the proximity of the Donbas war and an export ban imposed by Russia, which made production there unviable.

The corporation was previously reported to operate a facility in the town of Bershad (Ukraine),, but it is not listed on the corporate website.

In March 2012, Roshen began co-production with a contract manufacturer in Hungary called "Bonbonetti."

Products and brands
"ROSHEN" serves as the overarching brand encompassing all products within the corporation. The name is derived from Poroshenko, the surname of its owner. ROSHEN makes over 350 confectionery items, including chocolate and jelly sweets, caramel, toffee, chocolate bars, biscuits, wafers, sponge rolls, pastries, and cakes. Annually, the corporation produces approximately 300,000 tonnes of confectionery. In 2013, the company had a product range of approximately 200 confectionery items and achieved a total output of 410,000 tonnes.

title: Roshen


text:
Talk:Railton Special

Untitled
Sources differ as to wether superchargers were used
 * says they were
 * Brrokands Society that they were not.

The Napier Railton did not, the Railton Special did. I'll improve the articles. PeterGrecian 11:11, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Merge
Both articles are about the same thing. The only question seems to be which remains as the main article. -De Facto 11:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Two Different Cars
The oldest is at Brooklands, built in 1933 which Brooklands call Napier-Railton but sometimes Napier Railton and had a single Napier Lion and did 160 mph.

 * Brooklands
 * Brooklands discription

The other is in Birmingham Museum of Science and Discovery, built in 1938, did 400 mph and it's keepers call it Railton Mobil Special

The articles about Birmingham Museum of Science and Discovery are confused because it calls it's self by several names including Thinktank. It would be good to fix them.

 * Thinktank press release, Railton Mobil Special

The Mobil is often dropped because it's just a sponsors name. Railton Special   = 400 mph in Birmingham Napier Railton    = 160 mph in Brooklands

It would be a great to rename Railton Special as Railton Mobil Special with redirects.PeterGrecian 14:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

The 1939 version was sponsored by Gilmore Oil, and the car had the Gilmore Lion and crossed American and British flags painted on the nose. Gilmore's slogan was "Roar with Gilmore" and the company was heavily involved with racing and speed trials. It went out of business after World War II. See www.jitterbuzz.com/indwhl.html#cobb for more details and photos

 * Do it! See Help:Moving a page if you're not sure how. - De Facto 18:09, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Will do! PeterGrecian 11:12, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

"Mobil" should not be dropped, because it's a different car (a rebuild of an earlier car). The Railton Special / Railton Mobil Special were separated by 9 years, World War 2, and 50 mph. Andy Dingley (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 17:32, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

speed record
Instead of hair splitting about names, can't the British take pride in that this car remains the fastest piston engine car of all time.

After the Cobb record breaking run it was the jet and rocket cars that then had to be used to take the land speed record. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AT Kunene (talk • contribs) 13:39, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * America took the jet record, then America took the piston record with Goldenrod. The days of Malcolm Campbell are over. MidAtlanticRidgeback (talk) 20:08, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Innovations
I think it would be worthwhile to mention the engine ice cooling system. Using the latent heat of the ice avoided the need for conventional radiators that add drag. This idea was later copied by the record breaking JCB Dieselmax. Oliver Sedlacek (talk) 22:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC) Oliver Sedlacek

title: Talk:Railton Special


text:
Eliezer Löb

Eliezer Löb (1837 in Pfungstadt, Grand Duchy of Hesse – January 23, 1892 in Altona, Hamburg) was a German rabbi. He was educated at the gymnasium of Darmstadt and at the University of Giessen, and received his rabbinical instruction chiefly under Benjamin Hirsch Auerbach, rabbi of Darmstadt, whose daughter he married. At first he was principal of the Jüdische Realschule in his native city, founded by him (1857–61). Subsequently he was called to the rabbinate of Ichenhausen, Bavaria, where he remained until 1873, when he was called to succeed Jacob Ettlinger as chief rabbi of Altona. He contributed to the Jüdische Presse, and prepared for publication H. J. Michael's bibliographical work Or ha-Chayyim but ill health prevented him from completing his labor, which was finished by A. Berliner. A rabbinical work by him, Dammeseq Eli'ezer remained in manuscript. He was a devoted worker for Orthodox communal affairs and was for years a trustee of the Hildesheimer Seminary at Berlin.

title: Eliezer Löb