text:
Talk:Cribbage

Legality of pub play
Can someone cite the legality of playing cribbage in british pubs for wager? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.50.92.120 (talk) 11:39, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Well section 6 of the 1968 Gaming Act has dominoes and cribbage as exceptions for licensed premises, however the pub could always apply for a license to hold other games - for example a low stakes poker night. However with the new Gambling Act 2005, it seems that dominoes and crib have lost their exclusivity. The new law reads

Sections 279 & 280: Exempt gaming 706.    This section authorises the provision of gaming facilities on alcohol licensed premises, provided the gaming complies with certain conditions. No further authorisation is required to make the gaming lawful, provided the conditions are complied with. 707.    The conditions are as follows: * The facilities are limited to equal chance gaming; * Stakes and prizes for the gaming must not exceed any limits as to value or amount prescribed by the Secretary of State; * No amount may be deducted or levied from amounts staked or won; * No participation fees may be charged (and this includes membership subscriptions, see section 344(3)); * The games played may only take place on one set of alcohol-licensed premises, i.e. there may not be any linking of games between premises; and * Children and young people must be excluded from the gaming. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.159.71.24 (talk) 11:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Question About Statistics Section
This statement seems meanless to me:

 * The dealer will always peg at least one point in 2 player, 6 card cribbage (unless opponent pegs out before all the cards are played).

It says that the dealer will always peg at least one point, unless there are circumstances that make them score zero points. If there are no objections I will remove it.

meshach 01:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

 * It means that unless the game ends before a round of pegging finishes, the dealer must always peg at least one point - it's impossible for the dealer to score zero in pegging. Not well worded, I'll grant you. So I'll reword it and return it - see what you think. - DavidWBrooks 01:38, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

 * I Understand now - I had to think about that one for a while. Looks good
 * meshach 20:09, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Dubious variant rules
I have played Cribbage for an awful long while and I've never heard of this (removed from the main article):

"In one (unfriendly, but nevertheless common) variation, the non-dealer does not have the right to cut the deck before the deal. In this variation, the dealer may choose to offer the cut; a naive or inattentive opponent will cut the deck and hand it back, whereupon the dealer immediately pegs one point; a knowledgeable opponent, though, will simply accept the deck, whereupon that player becomes dealer for that hand. Any player can not win the game by "peggin" points into "the hole"."

Cribbage has many optional, local, obsolete and obscure extra rules which I think properly belong on a specialist site - it seems best to me to concentrate here on the basic concepts. Keithlard 16:37, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

 * I've also been playing Crib most of my life and have never heard of this variation (not to deny it can and is played that way somewhere). I agree with your edit, mainly because there is nothing in the article to verify this variation. Agent 86 17:22, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

It may not be Hoyle, but I (and everyone I know who play) NEVER cut the cards. This is due for nearly the opposite reason it might be a "competitive" (i. e. betting) game. The reason is simple: it symbolically shows you don't believe your opponent has stacked the deck. A gentleman's game--no cheats. The point taken when the offered cut is made is mere gamesmanship. Most people play just a dime a point anyway, so it's usually no real issue, just innocent trickery. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jason S. Klepp (talk • contribs) 01:13, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

As the author of (most of) the paragraph complained of, I have restored it as I originally wrote it. I have also been playing cribbage for a long time, and I encounter this variation quite often. Other than that, I don't know what manner of direct evidence I can offer that will satisfy you. You may, perhaps, though, take it as indirect evidence, that the ACC website sets out its contrasting official rules upon this same point so emphatically. Clayton D. Jones 09:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Whether any of us has heard of it or plays it or likes it etc is immaterial. What is needed before this variation gets added back in is a verifyable source. Abtract 11:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll just mark it down as under the control of a true believer, then, and leave it to your pleasure. Have fun!

Clayton D. Jones 23:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

"go" interrupting a run
"This is regardless of the order of play, as long as no non-run-making card or a "go" stands in the way, so if the cards played are 6,6,4,2,3, then the player who plays the 3 will score three for a run (4,2,3 i.e. 2,3,4). However, if the order is 2,5, "go",6,7, then no points are awarded for the 5,6,7"

 * Is there any cite for a "go" interupting a run? The ACC doesn't seem to have anything in their rules regarding it, nor have I seen that rule mentioned anywhere else.  I think the point intended is that runs can't reach back to before the count was reset, but 3, "go", 2, A is still a run if the total remains at 31 or less. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.232.15.84 (talk) 13:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

 * I can't find a source that says a go interupts a run. I think that line should be taken out unless someone can give a source.  --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 00:16, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

skunk, double-skunk
"Some cribbage boards are marked with an "S" in place of "90" because a losing player is said to be "skunked" if, when the game ends, that player has 90 or fewer points. (In betting games, this would double the wager; for example, if playing for a quarter per game, then a player who is "skunked" typically owes two quarters)."

 * I see no dispute about this, except that all three card game rule books that I have say that skunk (or "lurch") occurs at the half-way mark and make no mention of double-skunk. Furthermore, I find on the internet one mention that "standard" cribbage has no skunking. Anyone know the history of when these variations took precedence and seem to have become "standard."? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rsilbe (talk • contribs) 04:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

How the cards are dealt and box is formed in different versions of crib
Hi I like the crib wiki. I have played crib for a long while, but have never had the rules formalised for me. It seems that we have been playing all the correct rules with the exception of the flush in the box only counts if it contains the turn up card too, but I don't think it happens often enough to matter.

What I would like to have seen is a better description of how the cards get delt and the number of cards that end up in the crib. I know for 2 players, generally 6 cards are delt and each player puts 2 in the box, giving 4 cards for both players and box. Also in 3 & 4 player crib 5 cards are delt and 1 is put in the box (with 1 delt to the box in 3 player) again giving 4 cards for players and box. But how on earth does it work with 6 player?, or when playing 7 card crib? Does the crib end up with a huge advantage due to the extra cards?

Also I have been told that in crib you should only shuffle the deck at the beginning of the game and should NOT shuffle between rounds. The collecting of the cards however is not strict they are simply all placed to the bottom of the deck (obviously you do not then cut the pack or you would end up playing with the same cards again) and the next round is delt. The reason I was given is that it helps improve the hands over time, but I suspect it might have more to do with the elderly people that tend to play the game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin lester (talk • contribs) 15:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Don't shuffle between hands? That's a new one to this life-long cribbage player. But regional variations exist, of course - as well they should. Uniformity is so dull!
 * This article is dangerously close to violating (if not already in violation of) one of the rules of What wikipedia isn't - we're not a "how-to" guide. The idea isn't that you can print out this article and use it as your sole guide to learning and playing cribbage; doing that creates such a huge morass of information that it's of no use to the casual reader. So let's not try to explain every nuance of crib size or dealing patterns in all the variations - there are a zillion Web sites for that. - DavidWBrooks 16:16, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

 * There is a mathematically elegant variation where the six dealt cards per player and the starter (13 total) are not shuffled back into the deck, but rather are "discarded." This limits the game to four deals (13x4=52), two by each player.  A player with a good memory would know the exact contents of his opponent's final hand.  However, I can't find any references to it, so I put it here. --205.201.141.146 16:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Highest Possible Score
This section is incorrect:

The highest possible score in six-card cribbage is 29, for a holding of 5, 5, 5, J with a starter of a 5 of the same suit as the Jack. This scores:

"fifteen sixteen" - for J-5 four times and 5-5-5 four times,

"and twelve" - for four 5s,

"and one for his nobs makes twenty-nine."

If a player is holding four fives and turns up a jack then one extra point can be awarded (Two points are awarded to the dealer when a jack is turned up as the starter card, while only one point is awarded in the above example. However, this can only be achieved from the dealer position. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.181.76.70 (talk) 18:54, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Not true: the two for his heels are awarded when the jack is turned up, and therefore do not count as part of the score of the hand. 65.93.148.105 20:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC) (Can't figure out how to indent properly..)

 * add up the points as stated above: 16 for the 15's, 12 for the 4 5's and 1 for his knobs. The Jack must be in your hand to recieve one for his knobs (provided that the jack matches the suit of the cut card, in this case the cut has to be a 5) Thats correct.

 * Youre Right about the wording, it doesnt work in cribbage. "If a player is holding four fives and turns up a jack then one extra point can be awarded (Two points are awarded to the dealer when a jack is turned up as the starter card, while only one point is awarded in the above example. However, this can only be achieved from the dealer position." 2 for his heels do not count as part of the hand (you do have to be the dealer to recieve 2 points from a jack being cut, but it is immediatley given to the player, it isnt added when the hand is counted), but you dont have to be the dealer to recieve 1 for his knobs (jack in hand matching the suit of the cut card) a simple rewording will fix the issue i guess. hope this clears it up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.178.184.14 (talk) 14:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

a Flush or not
I've been playing cribbage round English pubs in Oxford and the South East (mostly country pubs) since the 1960s and in 40 years have never come across any game where a flush scored anything. My hunch is that somebody's been trying to humour a poker player who couldn't get the hang of crib! Does anyone have a source for flushes scoring? Cuirmichael 00:51, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow - you're kidding, right? A flush is definitely part of standard scoring here in the U.S., where I've played it in a half-dozen states since the '60s. For older reference, it is part of the scoring in "Games for Two," by Mrs. Prescott Warren published in the U.S. in 1930 by Harcort, Brace. Perhaps this is an across-the-pond difference that should be mentioned in the article. - DavidWBrooks 01:23, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

 * No it is not a pond difference I was taught by my grandmother, a cockney, and a flush was counted even if it didn't include the starter and I can cite "The Penguin Book of Card Games", as British as you can get, edition 1987 page 338 and others.Abtract 23:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

eight card cribbage
A friend and I have developed an 8 card cribbage game for 2 players at present. Each player is dealt 8 cards. Two are put in a crib to yourself and 2 are given to the opponent's crib, thus giving each player a 4 card hand and a 4 card crib. Everything else is played the same as 6 card. The scores are higher and the game is faster.69.144.224.101 02:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)R.J. Wilson

Latest edits
Let's work together on this.
 * 1) check this before you change my 'their' to avoid the awkward 'his or her'
 * 2) heels is when the jack is exposed on the deal but knibs and knobs refers to a jack of trumps exposed some other time (not on the deal turn up). Abtract 22:23, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Please be cautious with the "revert" edit summary - it implies vandalism, which is incivil. As for checking, it works both ways. Agent 86 22:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * what would you like me to check?Abtract 22:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I have checked nibs nobs and have corrected accordingly :) Abtract 09:06, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't want to make a big point about this but according to the American Cribbage Congress, Heels and Nibs are interchangeable for the starter but nobs is unique for other Jacks of trumps ... site is quite clear, and it makes semse otherwise if nobs meant both how would we know which it was?. Your site seems to be a fairly rough commercial site with back of envelope rules ......... Abtract 18:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * We don't all live in America, but in 30 years of play throughout western Canada I can tell you the interchangeable use of the term is pretty common. However, you're quite correct that verification is important, but I'm not about to go out and check out every book I can on the game so that link had to suffice for now. Agent 86 19:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The problem with that,as I'm sure you well know, is that it is immaterial what you tell me about interchangeabilty or indeed how many years you have played crib, or indeed where you played it ... what is important is what has been published by reputable sources. The ACC is clearly a reputable source, whereas the site quoted to support nobs as an alternative to heels strikes me as being a little amateurish. Here is a professional looking site which only mentions heels http://www.compendia.co.uk/cribbage.htm and this here is another http://www.pagat.com//adders/crib6.html, the Penguin Book of Card Games 1987 also makes no mention of nobs for heels and neither does Card Games by Hubert Phillips 1953. Incidentally I have played crib in western Canada (Edmonton) and I have never heard this usage of nob. I intend to make an edit that reflects this weight of opinion Abtract 23:45, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Feel free to do so, despite "weight of opinion" not making the interchangeability of the term untrue. I have never denied that there are organized associations that have an agreed set of rules that do not include the alternate terminology referred to. However, unless players are members of these associations they are not beholden to their lock-step rules. I simply provided evidence for the edit and to show that there is a basis in fact that the term has been and can be used interchangeably. If you re-read my comment it is clear my edit was not based on personal experience. I proffered the comment about variations anecdotally, not in support of the edit or as a source. That all said, I have to agree with Clayton D. Jones and will leave the article to your pleasure. Agent 86 00:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Form of article
A recent edit has made me stand back and think about this article. I believe it is too much like a "how to play manual" and not enough like an encyclopedia article. Also it tries to cover the waterfront and thereby loses its impact. I suggest that the article needs simpifying with fewer examples and much less "how to play" type info, in particular the strategy section should be removed or greatly reduced. Abtract 10:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I don't know; chess has a strategy section, and it has been a featured article. For poker, on the other hand, the strategy material and list of hand rankings have been split off into separate articles. Could we do something like that here, creating a separate article ("Cribbage—play and strategy" or similar) for the examples and strategy? Deor 22:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

The initial paragraph
While the reference to poker may be unnecessary, I think the initial paragraph as I had it is better. The point of it should be to give the basic structure of the game. Listing the ways to score points duplicates information below, provides no real advantage to the reader, and looks rather opaque. There's no particular reason to include that list in the first paragraph as opposed to, say, a list of cribbage slang. I will rewrite the paragraph myself for now. HonoreDB 08:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC) Flushes, straights, and n-of-a-kind. i.e. anything that scores points in poker scores points in cribbage. The system by which the hands are formed is also quite poker-like. I realize that the uniqueness of cribbage is a point of pride, but references to more conventional games can be very useful in making it more accessible. It's not like people will see the poker reference, think "Oh, I know how to score a hand now; it's just like poker" and toddle off without actually reading the rules. HonoreDB 01:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree with your intention, but I see no reason why to make a comparision to such a different game as poker. Other than having flushes in common, I'm hard pressed to think of any significant similarities. I've re-written the intro, mostly by reorganizing some of the contents. Agent 86 18:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

It's closer to rummy than poker, surely? [Dave, oldbloke.livejournal.com] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.88.201.48 (talk) 10:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Higest score by dealer
Can anyone confirm the highest possible score by the dealer in six card is 66? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thsawytscha (talk • contribs) 07:57, 9 June 2007(UTC)

 * The dealers score of 66 includes hand, crib and pegging. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thsawytscha (talk • contribs) 07:59, 9 June 2007(UTC)

spilikins
The article already gave "streets" as the name for the rows on a cribbage board, so I added "spilikins" as the name for the pegs. Dictionary.com defines spilikins as "One of a number of small pieces or pegs of wood, ivory, bone, or other material, for playing a game, or for counting the score in a game, as in cribbage." Still, my edit keeps being reverted. Can someone give a reason why a dictionary is not an adequate source? --Arctic Gnome (talk • contribs) 20:37, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

 * It is a very good source ... consider putting it in the article as I have done. Abtract 21:54, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

His Nibs
Does this game have to do with the sarcastic honourific "His Nibs"? I notice it redirects here. 81.178.79.253 22:58, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Deals, Prison Game?
Two questions about the article. When is a new deal made? When the article refers to "counting" as a skill used, this is not counting in the sense used by blackjack players, if there is a new deal every 13 cards. Second; a friend said this game is both popular and important in US prisons. Anybody know if this is true? How does one play it in a cell? Cherrywood (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 21:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Counting is not a skill that has significant use to gain advantage in Cribbage. You do have to be able to keep a running total of the card values in order to play. That's about it.
 * Quite a variety of games are played in prisons (for example see the discussion at ). Outside of the highest-security facilities, prisoners don't spend all of their time in cells. Presumably most play happens during recreation periods. -Stellmach 19:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

re-write
I have largely re-written the article to make it more encyclopedic and less like a "how to" manual. This has included creating two new articles for Cribbage (strategy) and Cribbage (statistics). Abtract (talk) 22:47, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Cuts
The rules on cutting are incorrect in this article. The cards are supposed to be dealt first, without a cut being offered. This arose as cribbage is a gentlemen's game and no honorable gentleman would dare cheat, therefore it would be insulting to ask for a cut. If the cut is offered or requested, then the opposing (or calling, in multiplayer) player should recieve two points for honor. After the deal and the making of the crib, then deck should be cut by the non-dealer and the top card exposed. If the wrong person cuts (or the dealer exposes without a cut) then the person who was supposed to cut gets two honor points. I've never played with the order presented in this article nor have I talked to anyone plays with any other rules than what I have just stated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.41.3.2 (talk) 00:30, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

How many players?
OK, we know that two-player cribbage is more original/better/more fundamental (take your pick) than having three or more players, but the three-or-more player angle needs to be covered. I'm thinking that there are three main ways of doing this: My preferred option is the first. The distinctions between two-player and more-player are, actually, quite slight. Any attempt to separate, say, rules, scoring, examples and so on from two-player from more-player would result in quite a bit of repetition of the two-player text in the more-player section to make it clear. Going as far as creating more than one page would result in further duplication: references, images and so on.
 * covering two-player and more-player description/rules/etc. within the main article text,
 * making the main article text on the two-player version, with a separate section on more-player rules, or
 * having separate Wikipedia pages for two-player and more-player.

I'm going to work on integrating more-player details into the main text, while attempting to keep the message that the two-player version is the main one. TimR (talk) 12:41, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Personally, I don't see that the information already present under "Variations" is insufficient. Deor (talk) 13:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Fair point, let me try again. If you simply explain the way in which the game is played for two players, then when you want to expand that to three, you have to introduce new ideas: play passes clockwise, the person who starts is on the dealer's left, play can continue between two players once one has said "go". What I've put together is what I think is a reasonable compromise: the description of play, scoring, etc. applies just as much to three and four players as it does to two, meaning that the "Variations" section can be fairly straightforward. Are you happy with the text as it is [ at this point]? TimR (talk) 14:52, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

One of the reasones I re-wrote the article a while back was because it had grown messily complex and was too much like a "how to play" manual. This was in part because it tried to cover all the variations. It seemed to me that as an encyclopedia article it needed to concentrate on the main variant ("the game") and just give passing reference to the others ... no-one trying to learn a card game would (should) come to wikipedia, they would go to a book on card games. Please bear trhat in mind when making changes along the lines you propose. Abtract (talk) 18:13, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm going to disagree with that. I would definitely expect a Wikipedia article on a card game to include the rules of the game. TJRC (talk) 06:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Of course ... but not a manual describing every possibility, advice, anecdotes, etc. Some of the card games articles had got overly complicated and weighed down with many uncited 'local rules' and variations on the game. Actually Crib wasn't too bad but Hearts is the one that started me on this train of thought. Anyway I'm not saying don't edit as you were suggesting but just bear in mind What Wikipedia is not. Abtract (talk) 07:20, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I have just read through the article again and I think you have gone much too far. The examples you give with their wonderful illustrations are exactly the sort of thing you would expect to see in a card playing manual and not in an encyclopedia, they overwhelm the article and make it difficult to follow the plot. I also have some detailed disagreements but my main one is as stated above, I believe it is much more useful to the reader to concentrate on the base game (2 player) and mention the variants ... readers can then go to a card playing book or a friend for the rest; WP is not a tuition manual and this is what you have made it (with the best of intentions I know). I would remove all the illustrated passages however nice they look ... I wonder if any other editors have views on this subject? Abtract (talk) 07:34, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

 * OK, I take your point. You did a great job in [ this edit], taking [ this version], which had a lot of useful, but unorganised facts in it, to [ this version], where it's a lot more organised and readable. I have been trying to follow on from that by i) continuing to make the content clearer, and ii) adding examples to illustrate what was being said. I accept that Wikipedia shouldn't be a place for detailed tuition on how to play the game, but I agree with TJRC above, and do think that there is a place in Wikipedia for a reasonably detailed description of the mechanics, and so on. I also agree that this shouldn't be too much, or too detailed to get in the way of the general reader.
 * I had a look at chess to see how that had been put together to address these questions, and was interested to find quite a long section on rules, with a link to a separate article containing even more detail. I like the compromise which this offers: some content on the main article page on the rules, as this is an important part of the description of the game as a whole, and then more detail accessible to the reader, if required. It looks to me as if this is the way we could go with this article. TimR (talk) 10:33, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey if we could make it like Chess then we would have achieved something. I am going to start a new section because we have moved on quite a bit from the original "how many players". Abtract (talk) 11:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Developing the article
Sarting from [| this position] my main difficulty is with the illustrations; they are beautifully done but very intrusive (imho). I suggest that as a start we have a new sub-article (to go along with Cribbage (strategy) and Cribbage (statistics)) called maybe Cribbage (examples). This would retain the good work but would allow the eye to more freely take in the main article. Abtract (talk) 11:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Great! If we're going to go along the lines of chess, how about we go for Rules of Cribbage (compare: Rules of chess) where we can move most/all of the illustrations, along with all of the detail of play and scoring and variations, and leave summaries of these in the main article? TimR (talk) 11:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * agreed but please move all the illustrations —Preceding unsigned comment added by Abtract (talk • contribs) 03:43 March 9, 2008
 * Just a comment -- I just love how TimR and Abtract are working collaboratively and egolessly to improve this article. Way to go, guys. TJRC (talk) 17:15, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

"While"/"Whilst"
Just to forestall what looks like an edit war in the making: User:76.15.180.207, although it's true that "whilst" is archaic in American English, it's still very much in use in British English. Normally, it's not a valid edit to "correct" an article from British spelling to American spelling; especially in an article about a game that is British in origin. However, that being said, I think it is a better to use "while" here, because that is correct in both British and American usage, and "whilst" reads archaicly to American readers. -- TJRC (talk) 17:08, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * OK no problem. Abtract (talk) 17:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Muggins
I see no mention of the muggins rule, which sates that an opponent can claim any score due to a hand that is not declared by the player. Is this common rule? Martin Hogbin (talk) 12:25, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
 * It's mentioned in the article Rules of cribbage, linked from the "Rules" section here. Deor (talk) 12:33, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

You are right that there is a version of Crib called Muggins - where your opponent can claim points for scores which you do not notice. However, I think that this is not all that commonly played. ACEOREVIVED (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:16, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

10 card cribbage.
Hello to all. I was looking through some Royal Canadian Legion websites & I noticed one branch listed a night of 10 card crib. As an ex matlot, I played crib by the hour, day, week , month & any other time frame there is but I have never heard of this game before. I am waiting to hear back from the branch but the chair is away. So, I wondered if anyone here has had experience with this game, this 10 card cribbage. My RCL branch, in London,Ontario, was recently visited by the OPP & RCMP in company with a local officer, who told us we were contravening the Ontario crimminal code by having Texas Hold'em games night at the branch. Altho we did not take any rake, because we sold food & beverages to the players, we were making money from the illegal activity. SO close up we did & I have been looking for a suitable replacement game that doesn't contravene the act. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Galtio (talk • contribs) 01:17, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Doubts about translation
How can I translate and oublish this page in Spanish? Cribbage is not so common in Spanish Languages countries and I would like to spread this game through Mexico —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quiyonor (talk • contribs) 22:29, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Request for article on Cribbage Variants
There are quite a few variants of Cribbage, such as Auction Cribbage or Cut-Throat Cribbage, Solitaire Cribbage and also Seven-Card Cribbage, so would it be too much to ask for an article on these? One of the most popular versions is where three players play and have five cards each, and only put out one for the box. ACEOREVIVED (talk) 19:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC) ACEOREVIVED (talk) 19:37, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Merger complete
✅ All information from Cribbage (strategy) has been merged into this article. Northamerica1000(talk) 01:38, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

tournament cribbage section
Would it be beneficial to add a section on tournament cribbage (brief rules amd rules differences from casual cribbage play) to this article? FarScapePhx (talk) 20:11, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Match Point Scoring - variation of tournament rules?
Under Match -> Match Point Scoring is listed:

Variation of Tournament rules - 2 points(win) - 3 points(skunk) - 4 points(double-skunk) - no extra points (triple-skunk)

I've never come across this variation (it's not used in American Cribbage Congress sanctioned tournaments) and wondered if anyone had some sort of documentation showing that this variation is used on a regular or widespread basis or has experience in tournaments where this is played. If not, I think we should consider deleting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FarScapePhx (talk • contribs) 20:21, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of strategy section
The merger to this article of what was originally a separate article, "Cribbage (strategy)" (modeled on the Chess strategy article), was the result of a discussion at Articles for deletion/Cribbage (strategy). Though willing to entertain the idea of the section's removal, I think that its exclusion requires a fresh discussion and a consensus that it's inappropriate. I've therefore undone the summary deletion by Seraphimblade, who is certainly welcome to initiate such a discussion. Deor (talk) 10:51, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * It appears you've already initiated it, and thanks for doing that to explain the revert. The reason this needs to be removed is for the same reason as the previous "strategy" article—while it's alright to have a brief blurb on general strategy if there are sources discussing the game in that vein, a full-blown instruction manual "how to" guide is out of scope. Unfortunately, only a couple of factoids in that section are referenced, and those not referenced all that well, so it appears that section is mostly personal knowledge and unsalvageable. It's also been tagged as problematic for over a year, though only the out of scope/"howto" issue was solved. The fact that it's largely unreferenced and looks to be essentially a personal essay from personal knowledge is the larger issue. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:18, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Please let me know if you have any additional objections, else I'll go ahead with removal later today. Seraphimblade Talk to me 14:37, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * There has to be someone watching this article other than you and me, though they may not have checked the talk page in the last two days. I want to hear from other editors whether they think that a strategy section of any sort is appropriate. If the presence of one is thought to be OK, no doubt the one currently in the article can be referenced and trimmed where necessary. On the other hand, if no one gives a damn, you might as well just delete it. Of the editors who contributed to the relevant "Developing the article" section above, it looks like Abtract is basically inactive and TimR hasn't edited in a few weeks, but I'm unwilling to just cast aside the "merge" result of the AfD when the editors there could easily have voted instead to delete the material. Why not give it a week to see whether anyone else comments here? Deor (talk) 16:40, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with doing that, but I was also curious if you had any objections to what I'd said beyond the AfD being a merge previously. Perhaps we can agree on something, or at least start down that road while waiting? Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with the strategy section. Just as in the game of go there are extremely common moves (like ko or snap back) which are not explicitly part of the "rules" which are still mentioned in the go article, a good cribbage player will be familiar with at least the most basics of strategy (not starting the sequence with a 5, not splitting a pair of 7s to the crib etc...). Of course wikipedia isn't a den of gaming strategy but we ought to give room for what is second nature to most players. In my humble opinion. --Shabidoo | Talk 02:12, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. The Go material is problematic too, as it doesn't really cite any references. All content must be referenced, and not based on personal knowledge, even if some consider it "second nature". Do you know of any good sources on cribbage strategy that might be worth citing here? Seraphimblade Talk to me 16:36, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

Re: Throwing defensively to the crib
How do you cut to 12 from a 8-7-6-2 hand? From my perspective, you can cut to 9 (ace), 10 (5 & 9), 11 (deuce), 14 (6 & 8) and 16 (7) but no 12s. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.37.125.38 (talk) 15:00, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cribbage. 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/20080516084713/http://www.crhc.uiuc.edu/~steve/humor/cribbage.html to http://www.crhc.uiuc.edu/~steve/humor/cribbage.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:33, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Inventor credit
The Wikipedia article on Sir John Suckling credits him with the invention of cribbage; however, he is not even mentioned in this article. Further research needed? SedonaJon (talk) 16:29, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

I am retracting this comment. Apparently I misread something. SedonaJon (talk) 16:33, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cribbage


text:
Poetic Terrorism

Poetic Terrorism is the fifth studio album by the Norwegian rock band BigBang, released in April 2005. The album was produced by Øystein Greni and recorded at his Grand Sport Studios. It was mixed by American producer and engineer Sylvia Massy, known for her work with Tom Petty, Prince, R.E.M. and Johnny Cash.

Overview
Øystein Greni described the record as minimalistic and reminiscent of the Dinosaur Jr. and Hüsker Dü era punk rock. According to the frontman, what distinguishes the record is its minimalistic indie production and variety. This is Bigbang's first album without an instrumental track or acoustic ballad.

It is also the band's first album since Waxed in 1995 to be released through Greni's Grand Sport Records indie label. The four-year Warner Norway deal ended with Radio Radio TV Sleep as Greni opted to produce his own records.

A different version of "On Your Mind" was previously released on the Smiling For EP in 2001. An alternative version of "Not a Rolling Stone" was included in a two-track EP of the same name released later in 2005, which also featured documentary footage and a Saturn Freeway video.

Personnel
Bigbang Additional personnel
 * Øystein Greni – lead vocals, guitars, percussion
 * Erik Tresselt – bass, backing vocals
 * Olaf Olsen – drums, percussion, backing vocals

 * Christian Engfelt – engineer
 * Helge Sten – engineer (additional)
 * Nils B. Kvam – engineer (additional)
 * Sylvia Massy Shivy – mixer
 * Kalé Holmes – mixer (assistant)
 * Rich Veltrop – mixer (assistant)
 * Vlado Meller – mastering
 * Ståle Storløkken – keyboards (track 3, 4, 9 and 10)
 * Nikolai Eilertsen – guitar (track 8), piano (track 7)
 * Christer Engen – drums (track 8)
 * Hege Rimestad – violin (track 2)
 * Lise Sørensen – violin (track 2)
 * Bjørn Asper – horns (track 7)
 * Svein Greni – horns (track 7)
 * Tarjei Grimsby – horns (track 7)
 * Tara Creme – arrangements (track 11)
 * David Hernando – conductor (track 11)
 * The Bratislava Symphony Orchestra – orchestra (track 11)
 * Maria Orieta – piano (track 11)
 * Thor S. Greni – creative supervisor (track 2 and 4)
 * Joachim Trier – creative supervisor (track 1, 3, 5 and 11)
 * Nils Vik – photograph
 * Sebastian Ludvigsen – photograph
 * Dimitri Kayiambakis – artwork

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

title: Poetic Terrorism


text:
Living with the Land

Living with the Land (originally Listen to the Land) is a slow-moving boat ride consisting of a dark ride and greenhouse tour located within The Land, a pavilion at World Nature at the Epcot theme park at the Walt Disney World Resort in Bay Lake, Florida. The focus of the ride is on agriculture, especially new technology to make agriculture more efficient, sustainable, and environmentally friendly.

Ride experience
The dark-ride portion of the attraction opens with a scene of a deciduous forest in the middle of a thunderstorm, illustrating how the forces that shape the land can appear destructive to us. The boat then sails through artificial biomes representing a tropical rainforest, a desert and the American prairie. Some of the Audio-Animatronic figures in this section were originally created for the never-built Magic Kingdom attraction, Western River Expedition. The biomes feature sound and lighting effects, in addition to heat, wind and mist, to simulate real conditions. The boats float through a small theater that illustrates the relationship between humans and the environment, and the ways that we have been modifying the land to better serve our purposes.

The second part of the attraction takes place in The Land's "Living Laboratory", which showcases ideas about the future of agriculture. All of the plants in this section are grown through various methods of hydroponics. Plants are grown in sand, perlite, coconut coir and rockwool.

There are five distinct areas of the "living laboratory", which are:

 * Tropics Greenhouse - This greenhouse features crops from the tropical areas of the world, including both familiar and exotic foods. Plants on display include banana, cacao, jackfruit, date palm, dragonfruit, vanilla, cleome, pineapple, java apple and papaya.
 * Aquacell - This section focuses on aquaculture, or "fish farming." It includes several high-density tanks and a few low-density display tanks and tubes.  Animals on display include tilapia, sturgeon, paddlefish, catfish, bass, American alligator, and shrimp.  Some of the fish harvested from the Aquacell are served in the Coral Reef Restaurant in The Seas pavilion.
 * Temperate Greenhouse (formerly the Desert Greenhouse) - A greenhouse featuring crops from temperate climates. Currently, the Temperate house showcases large-sized crops, such as Prizewinner and Atlantic Giant pumpkins, winter melon, pomelo, and "Nine-pound Lemon."  Other crops include sunflower, beets, turnip, cotton, millet and cassabanana.

 * String Greenhouse (formerly the Production Greenhouse) - This greenhouse focuses on innovative high-density techniques, such as Nutrient film technique. It also shows off "vertical growing techniques", in which plants are grown on specialized trellises which cause the herbaceous plants to approximate the shape and structure of trees. One of the most famous examples of these trees is The Land's "tomato tree", which produced over 32,000 tomatoes in a 16-month period.  It was recognized by Guinness World Records as the most productive tomato plant in the world.  Other crops include eggplant, peppers, winged bean, lettuce and snake gourd.  Furthermore, cucumbers and pumpkins are grown in the shape of Mickey Mouse through the use of special molds.  Much of the produce grown in the String Greenhouse is used in The Garden Grill and Sunshine Seasons, both restaurants in The Land pavilion.  In total, over 30 tons of produce are harvested from The Land each year.
 * Creative Greenhouse - The final greenhouse in the attraction shows some unusual ideas about the future of agriculture. Most of the plants in Creative House are grown via Aeroponics, in which a fine mist of water and nutrients is sprayed directly onto the roots of the plants.  The roots dangle freely in the air, and are not hindered by any growing medium.  Some of the plants' roots in Creative House are enclosed within rotating columns and A-frame structures, while others are completely exposed to the open air, at least temporarily, so the entire plant may be viewed by the Guests on the boat ride.  Creative House also features a small exhibit of NASA hydroponic growing units, which were developed for use on extended-length space journeys.  Crops on display include tomato, squash, lettuce, basil, rosemary, cabbage, super-dwarf wheat, swiss chard, marigold and snapdragon.

Additionally, the Living Laboratory contains:
 * Biotechnology Lab - Attached to the Creative Greenhouse, the Biotechnology Lab is a sterile research environment. Several USDA scientists are on-site at The Land, performing research on crop improvement.  The Land also produces a product called "Mickey's Mini Gardens" in the Biotechnology Lab, which are available for purchase in several locations in Epcot.
 * Integrated Pest Management Lab - An Entomology laboratory that raises beneficial insects for use in The Land and all over Walt Disney World property. It is not visible on the Living with the Land boat ride, but is visited during the Behind the Seeds backstage tour.  Insects raised here include tiny, stingless parasitoid wasps and ladybugs.

The ride concludes with a lighted collage of people and produce from all over the world, along with a projection of Earth as seen from space.

Holiday overlays
During the EPCOT International Festival of the Holidays, the attraction is transformed into "Living with the Land - Glimmering Greenhouses". While the dark-ride portion of the attraction remains unchanged, the greenhouses are enhanced with holiday lighting and decorations, and the narration is updated to describe how the foods produced in the greenhouses are used in holiday celebrations around the world.

Listen to the Land
Living with the Land is an updated version of a previous attraction, Listen to the Land. Very little was changed between the two versions of the attraction. The opening scene, the "Symphony of the Seed", which provided a stylized look at the growth of a plant, was replaced by the opening storm scene. Also, the Biotechnology lab was relocated from the exit tunnel to the Creative Greenhouse. The Integrated Pest Management Lab is now housed in the space formerly occupied by the Biotechnology Lab. The ride has been updated to use an automated guide, not a cast-member.

Also, the theme song "Listen to the Land" is no longer used in the attraction, though an instrumental version can still be heard in The Land's exterior background music loop as well the music loop played inside the Garden Grill. They are currently using portions of various other pieces, including "Rain Forest Rhapsody" and "Dawn of a New Day".

title: Living with the Land


text:
Brigitte Mohnhaupt

Brigitte Margret Ida Mohnhaupt (born 24 June 1949) is a German convicted former terrorist associated with the second generation of the Red Army Faction (RAF) members. She was also part of the Socialist Patients' Collective (SPK). From 1971 until 1982 she was active within the RAF.

Early life
Mohnhaupt was born in Rheinberg, North Rhine-Westphalia, the daughter of an employee in a publishing house. After her parents' divorce in 1960 she stayed with her mother. She took her abitur in 1967 in Bruchsal, and later that year enrolled with the philosophy department at the University of Munich. She was married to Rolf Heissler from 1968–1970. While in Munich, she joined the local commune scene, where she met core figures of the 1960s student movement such as Rainer Langhans, Fritz Teufel and Uschi Obermaier. In 1969, she participated in a demonstration in the USA cultural centre in Munich (Amerikahaus) to protest against the Vietnam War. She was reportedly influenced by Carlos Marighella's Manual of the Urban Guerilla.

Activities as a member of the RAF
Mohnhaupt was first a member of the Socialist Patients' Collective, known by its German acronym, SPK. Together with fellow commune member Irmgard Möller, she joined the Red Army Faction (RAF) around 1971 after the SPK dissolved, and helped with organization, logistics, and weapon procurement. Below is a timeline of Mohnhaupt's major acts as a member of the RAF.
 * 9 June 1972: Mohnhaupt was arrested in Berlin in connection with the RAF and sentenced to prison for involvement with a criminal organization, identity document forgery, and illegal weapon possession.
 * Shortly after Ulrike Meinhof's death in prison in 1976, Mohnhaupt was, on her own request, transferred to Stammheim Prison where the majority of other RAF prisoners were held captive. In Stammheim Prison she met Gudrun Ensslin, Andreas Baader, and Jan-Carl Raspe, and was reportedly trained by them to become a leader of the RAF.
 * She was released on 8 February 1977, and immediately went underground and continued her work with the RAF.
 * Mohnhaupt was a major player in the German Autumn: she was involved in the 1977 assassinations of chief federal prosecutor Siegfried Buback in Karlsruhe and banker Jürgen Ponto, chairman of the Dresdner Bank board of directors, in Oberursel, Taunus. She was also involved in the kidnapping and murder of employer representative Hanns Martin Schleyer.
 * 11 May 1978 Mohnhaupt, Sieglinde Hofmann, Rolf Clemens Wagner, and Peter-Jürgen Boock were arrested in Zagreb, Yugoslavia.
 * 17 November 1978 – Mohnhaupt and three other RAF members were allowed to leave Yugoslavia for a country of their choice because West Germany turned down an offer from Yugoslavia to extradite them in exchange for eight Croatian political fugitives in West Germany.
 * 15 September 1981 Mohnhaupt took part in an assassination attempt on U.S. General Frederick Kroesen using an RPG-7 anti-tank rocket.

Arrest and imprisonment
On 11 November 1982 Mohnhaupt, along with Adelheid Schulz, was caught entering an RAF arms cache in the woods near Frankfurt which had been staked out by GSG 9 men. Mohnhaupt was detained and sentenced to life in prison with a minimum 24-year mandatory sentence by the appellate court of Stuttgart. She was given this sentence because of the significant role she played during the German Autumn and for her part in the attempted assassination of NATO General Kroesen. The court considered her a leading figure of the RAF, but could not determine whether she had personally been involved in any of the murders. After her conviction, Mohnhaupt declared that the RAF would continue to fight.

Her arrest was a massive blow to the RAF (as she had become almost as important to her RAF 'generation' as Gudrun Ensslin and Andreas Baader had been to theirs).

On 12 February 2007 amidst widespread media controversy, the appellate court of Stuttgart gave Mohnhaupt parole effective of 27 March 2007. She routinely qualified for early release after serving her mandatory sentence. Parole was granted since she was no longer a danger to society according to a psychological expert and the Federal Attorney General. Unlike other RAF members, Mohnhaupt had never applied for clemency.

She was released from Aichach prison on 25 March 2007.

Political debate surrounding her release
Many German politicians were in favour of clemency towards Mohnhaupt. Former Justice minister Klaus Kinkel of the Free Democratic Party (Germany) (FDP) had pleaded in favour of a "second chance"; former president of the Bundestag Wolfgang Thierse (Social Democratic Party of Germany) declared that "expiation" has taken place, and Green member Antje Vollmer stated that Mohnhaupt and fellow RAF member Christian Klar "have been in prison longer than any Nazi criminal." On the other hand, Konrad Freiberg, president of the police union, who had seen ten of his officers killed by the RAF, and Bavarian Interior Minister Günther Beckstein opposed her release. However, Gerhart Baum (FDP), Federal Interior Minister from 1978 to 1982, was in favor of her release, as it would show that she was treated in the same way as other prisoners, being released after having served all 24 years of her mandatory sentence. According to weekly Die Zeit, keeping her in prison would signify that the state was confirming the terrorists' view of themselves as political prisoners.

title: Brigitte Mohnhaupt


text:
Talk:Adrian Veidt

Abilities
The character catches a bullet with his hands and seems to be capable of several other feats that surpass the abilities of a normal human being. I wonder how he manages to do that. Shouldn't that be mentioned? 134.106.199.1 09:07, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's that he actually moves faster than a bullet, but he's able to anticipate where the bullet will hit and is able to move faster than the trigger is pulled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.32.174.24 (talk) 16:53, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

He still has to move faster than the bullet to catch it. Even if he knew when the trigger was pulled, no human being can move quickly enough to intercept a bullet. It's super speed and reaction time without a doubt.69.9.210.13 (talk) 22:10, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

 * The bullet hit his hands, injuring them (they bled). He didn't have to "catch" the bullet, just getting his hands in the way of it, before it killed him, would do. He could anticipate the bullet, and it's aim, from looking at the gun before it was fired. Laurie's never used a gun before, it's likely she's not very quick with it. Veidt is an athlete, but like everybody (except you-know-who) in Watchmen, he's an "ordinary" human person.

188.28.162.241 (talk) 14:14, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum

Analysis
I disagree with several points in this section. I don't think that Veidt likes to kill, but rather that his "sloppiness" surrounding the staged assassination attempt merely reflects his unbridled egotism. From his point of view, each of the deaths were logically necessary to achieve his goals, and I'm sure he felt that no one would be clever enough to trace his ownership of the businesses.

I'm not entirely sure analysis sections like these should even appear in articles, since they tend to be fannish and encourage speculation and "new research". -DynSkeet (talk) 11:42, August 18, 2005 (UTC)

It's also interesting to note that Veidt fits perfectly with the image of the ideal Aryan German. Ironically, he calls the Comedian "practically a Nazi," to which Rorschach points out that Veidt was more of a sell-out concerning the Keene Act. When Veidt finally teleports the monster, he is treating New York as the Nazis treated any group they persecuted. New York, with all of its weak citizens as pointed out through the book, becomes the sacrificial lamb for Veidt's plan. Veidt is also a profiteer of his own acts, using the attack to sell his already-planned "Millenium" line, featuring more Aryan imagery. Veidt is Truman, but also Hitler, Stalin and Henry Ford rolled in one. Is he right? Few people think that Hitler, Stalin and Ford were. Palexandridis 17:18, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Something else struck me while reading the series: it's the set of ads for perfume/cosmetics from Adrian's companies, which are initially set in a somber mood and, right after the explosion, replaced by a new product line illustrated by positive themes (see 'this is the time, these are the feelings'). This illustrates the depth of his thinking, also one step ahead of others in trade as weel as in his general "world saviour" plan. I think something should be added about it.

Please, someone from Japan
Tell the americans who glorify Ozymandias and Truman for dropping the nuclear bomb in Hiroshima and killing half the population of New York to FUCK OFF! 168.243.218.2

 * BRB Busy being a cowboy and saving the world from Al Qaedadada terrorism. FREEDOM.151.205.100.243 (talk) 04:02, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not going to comment on the above statement, but I do notice an error in the comparison to the dropping of the A-bomb. Truman wasn't elected at the time, and so Rorschach was merely holding two men up to very different standards. 69.117.143.23

Well, *I* am going to comment on the first statement: I'm not from Japan, but it's debatable whether Truman dropped the bomb in order to end the war, or to test new war tech, or to impress the Soviets. So the comparison in the article is suspect... It's not clear WHY Truman dropped the bomb at all. Some people outside the US consider him a war criminal. I know I do.201.235.51.167 23:48, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm an american, most of my friends have read Watchmen, and none of us support past or future atomic warfare, but we are less decisive about Veidt for one major reason: Watchmen's central idea is that human concepts of moral absolutism are basically worthless. So anybody glorifying Veidt AND Truman must have missed the point, not only because they are glorifying a character from Watchmen, but also because they have obviously read Watchmen and are still supporting a moral absolute. -Nietzscheanlie

 * Thats not quite right. The point of watchmen was not to debunk moral absolutism, but to make you question your own ethical values. If moore wanted to debunk moral absolutism, he would have shown the newspaper editers throwing out rorschach's journal at the end. 98.165.149.229 (talk) 06:16, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Category:Heroes who turned evil
I'm not convinced Ozymandias should be in this category, the comic has a more nuanced view of morality in both intent and action, and I don't think he is meant to be seen as an "evil" character per se. Thoughts? JoshuaZ 03:40, 28 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Someone else has already removed it, but I agree. Comic book villians typically do what they do to "be evil" or for personal gain or vengeance.  Ozy certainly did not see himself as evil, but felt that the times called for a vision beyond conventional definitions of morality.  Though what he did would be considered evil by most, his goals were for the betterment of all mankind. Canonblack 13:41, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily. Many comic book villians have noble intentions or at least reasonable explanations for what they want.  Take Marvel's Magneto, for instance.  As a former victim of the persecution of a racial minority (a Jew captured by the Nazis), he saw conflict between the human and mutant races to be inevitable and simply wanted his side to win.  By his own moral code, he's doing what's right to protect his people against a majority that he believes will never accept the more powerful and less numerous mutants as equals.
 * While mainstream American comics tend to have a black or white morality about them that lends to villians being evil for the sake of being evil, Watchmen is one of many works that deliberately tweaks the assumptions of the superhero comic genre. The moral ambiguity of the setting does not make Ozymandias any less of a fallen hero, though.  He clearly follows the principle that the ends justify the means, and few people would consider this to be a heroic trait. 192.133.193.80 21:19, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
 * It is absolutely a heroic trait. That is one of the things that I find so wrong about the superhero genre; we glorify these irresponsible kids for acting as vigilantes, and just because they are in the Justice League or the X-Men and they have a cool costume, that's all ok, regardless of whatever damage to private property they cause. That's also one of the things Watchmen does best; getting us to question these archetypical notions we have established about morality which are really very questionable. Juvenal said it best: Quis custodiet ipsos custodes. Sheavsey33 (talk) 12:57, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

 * "The ends justify the means" is NOT an heroic trait, not even an admirable one. Though I'm sure it's easy to come up with cases for both sides, and it's an argument at least as old as time. Veidt illustrates this point well. He's not evil out of petty reasons. He possibly saves the world "in the end"(!). There are many millions murdered to "make the world a better place". On the one hand, the self-made nature of his power is more admirable than getting it by radioactive good luck, on the other, should he use it at all? If anything, Watchmen brings up a lot of great questions, tells stories, but... nothing ever ends, Adrian. 188.28.162.241 (talk) 14:43, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum

Question
So I was reading anotehr finely written wikiarticle about the Red Hot Chili Peppers, and their music video for "Otherside". The inspiration for the visual style of it came from a groundbreaking German Expressionist film from the 1920's, called "The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari". I was in the middle of watching it over at archive.org (http://www.archive.org/stream/DasKabinettdesDoktorCaligariTheCabinetofDrCaligari/The_Cabinet_of_Dr._Caligari_256kb.mp4) and noticed in the opening credits, that the somnambulist, a key character in the film, is played by a man named Conrad Veidt. I didn't notice any mention of this in the article, but I think that there may be something to this.
 * Is their some deeper significance I am missing? Sharing the same surname isn't notable, unless the characters are markedly similar to the extent that Adrian is probably based on Conrad. Even then we would need to find a source stateing this in the outside world to furfil No Original Research. Jefffire 11:52, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's a bit of a stretch. Conrad may be the most famous real-life Veidt, but he's certainly not the only one and the surname is not terribly uncommon.  Other than that Conrad was German-born, emigrated to the US, and championed humanitarian causes, he has little in common with Adrian.  Adrian is a wealthy philanthropist who gains incredible intelligence and vision that enables him to change the world (or attempt to do so).  Conrad was a straight gentile actor who championed Jewish and Gay causes and took a vocal anti-Nazi stance during WWII. Adrian's parents emigrated to the US when Adrian was very young; Conrad emigrated when he was already a famous and highly-regarded actor in order to try his luck in Hollywood.  The Wikipedia article for Veidt states that one of his screen portrayals was the model for Batman's nemesis the Joker, so any supposition about Veidt also being the model for a misguided vigilante seems even more tenuous without perhaps a quote from Moore.  And knowing Moore's work, if he'd intended Adrain to be based on Conrad, wouldn't he have simply named him Conrad?  It's not like "Conrad Veidt" was a household name in the late 1980s. Canonblack 14:01, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Illuminatus!
While this is an interesting parallel drawn between Illuminatus and Watchmen, this is most likely due Alan Moore's influence from Wilson and Shea as strikingly themes from Illuminatus tend to pop up in his work repeatedly (numerology and philosophy on government in V for Vendetta; direct citation of RAW's work in the notes to From Hell, etc.) Since there's no mention of trancendental immortality in Watchmen, it would seem more likely that the eye in the pyramid is an homage to Illuminatus, if you could even say that since Wilson and Shea did not create the idea of the secret society, only popularized it (although, yeah the mass murder thing is still there). In any case, where's the Karen Berger comment?

Unfortunately, the comment is as yet unpublished outside of here. I hadn't read the part about DOCUMENTING sources for Wikipedia before I put this in. The exact conversation, as I recall it (it was @ 1987, Animal Man was out, and Chas. Truog was sitting beside me):

Karen (looking at 1st ILL! comic): Alan Moore would really like to see this.

Me: Yes, I noticed from reading Watchmen that he ws an Illuminatus! fan. Interesting how if you know about transcendental illumination how it totally changes the ending of Watchmen.

Karen (smiling, I believe): Yes, isn't it?

This took place at Chicago Comicon, since supplanted by Wizard World Chicago. Icarus 23

BTW, thanks for the wording change -- it reads much better. -- I23!

I am sort of surprised that he Illuminati/Freemasonry theme is not explored further in the Ozymandias entry. At the very least it seems plausible that Ozymandias symbolizes the Illuminati/Freemasons. Here are some links coincidental or otherwise between the two.
 * 1) Ozymandias being of German descent. The best known branch of Illuminati is purported to be the Bavarian Illuminati.
 * 2) His fascination with Ramses II and Egyptian history. Freemasons, of which the Illuminati are reported to be an offshoot of, were have said to have helped built the pyramids
 * 3) Ozymandias' costume contains the Illuminati symbol the "All Seeing Eye" within a pyramid.
 * 4) There is a curious use of a period within the word "illumination" on chapter 11, page 8, panel 9.  Ozymandias says "I wanted to match his accomplishment, bringing an age of illuminat.ion to a benighted world." Does this indicate that Ozymandias briefly paused while saying "illumination"?  Did he almost have a Freudian slip and say Illuminati instead?
 * 5) Ozymandias' plan to unite the world is consistent with conspiracy theories of a New World Order or one-world government.
 * 6) He use of a large number of televisions lets him monitor events from all around the world. In effect he has an "All Seeing Eye."
 * 7) His plan to unite the world took the form of a pyramid. Ozymandias says "No one will know.  Those involved are all dead. killed by killers who killed each other, a lethal pyramid."  He further says that his servants death "provided a silent capstone." Ch. 12, pg. 10, panel 6.
 * 8) Ozymandias' monster contains a single eye. In an abstract way, it looks like an eye on top of a pyramid.
 * 9) If you superimpose the letter "A" and "V" (Adrian Veidt's initials) on top of each other, you get something resembling the Masonic symbol of the Square and Compass. You can see an image of this on the back of the chair Ozymandias is sitting in Chapter 11, pg 16, panels 1 and 4, and then again on pg 17, panel 7. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Square_compasses.svg) Strongman1970 19:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * This is all massively original research. JoshuaZ 23:14, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * There are internet forums for that kind of thing. 121.1.51.190 13:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Now they will come for you... Sheavsey33 (talk) 13:04, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

 * "Illuminat.ion", that's a lot to read in to a tiny dot on the page! I'm impressed! I imagine one would have to ask Mister Moore, has anyone ever spotted that before? Also, I'm sure the blood-splash on the pyramid poster, in the room of the guy who went nuts and killed his kids has something to do with something. 188.28.162.241 (talk) 14:33, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum

 * The author of this analysis of Veidt seems to believe Veidt symbolizes the Illuminati, though he/she carefully avoided using the actual word. If you research Project Bluebird and its connections to the Illuminati, then read this page, you'll see that the argument that Veidt does symbolize the Illuminati is quite substantial. 11:17, April 19 2012 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.90.163.66 (talk) 16:23, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Homage in Watchmen#11 or 12 to an incident from Professor X's backstory
I think there was a scene in of these issues where he (Vedit) was wearing traveler's clothes walking up a hill and an artist was painting a landscape. This reminds me of a scene from X-MEN vol 1 #117, page 6 panel 7.

23:27, 26 February 2008 (UTC)Enda80 (talk)Enda80

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

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

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot (talk) 20:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Ozymandias in mask
This article needs a picture of Ozymandias wearing his mask, in full costume. I added one but the image was removed because it is 'messy'. Snapshots from comic books often are, messy does not mean it needs to be removed. If you'd like to crop out the partial images of his teammates, go ahead. Or else, replace it with a cleaner-looking picture. Currently, Ozymandias is only shown in partial costume, it doesn't properly reflect the character. Tyciol (talk) 21:12, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Page deleted and converted to redirect
This page seems to be in some sort of deletion war in which it is periodically converted to a redirect page and then periodically converted back.

As the talk page notes, there was a discussion on deletion of the article and the result was to keep this page. It has significantly more content than the Characters of Watchmen page. If you don't like the content of the page, edit it. But there does not appear to be any reason for deleting the article. Sligocki (talk) 20:33, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
 * All notable secondary source information about the character is covered in Characters of Watchmen, hence the merge that was implemented after that discussion. Everything else is in-universe detail based on primary sources, which is discouraged. WesleyDodds (talk) 07:31, 7 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That's strange, here the decision was to keep the articles on all the separate characters, and not to merge the information into List of Watchmen characters. What eventually happened is exactly the opposite. Is there any reason to revert the keep decision? -- Gabi S. (talk) 11:25, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

Destroying New York is a Right-Wing Action?
In the section on "Personality" Veidt is accurately described as a liberal, which he is labeled as (by himself and others) throughout Watchmen. However, it then goes on to say that his "actions in destroying New York to save the world are extremely right-wing and utilitarian."

Yes to the latter, no to the former. Aside from a lack of any sourcing, this statement reveals a fundamental ignorance of what it means to be right-wing. Right-wingers are characterized by a strong aversion to change (or progress, depending on who you ask), intense nationalism, insular thinking and opposition to egalitarian social reordering.

Whatever you think of his methods, Ozymandias enacted his plan in order to change the world order, force international cooperation, broaden mankinds perspectives and shake up the world hierarchy. Does that sound right-wing?

Though they've been more common & visible in recent years, right-wingers do not have a monopoly on brutal actions. Radical liberalism can lead to decisions as dangerous as any radical conservative's. I'm a liberal myself (and proud of it!), but it's irresponsible to think that the good aspects of Veidt can be listed as liberally motivated but the bad ones are right-wing. There's no evidence that his liberalism is a "facade" because he made the "right-wing" choice to kill millions. He's a radical liberal and that informs all his decisions, whether it's to be charitable, vegetarian or homicidal.

Long story short, I move to redact the comments on Ozymandias' violent decisions being right-wing and an inherent contradiction of his liberalism. He's a bad person, but that doesn't mean he's a bad liberal. The Cap'n (talk) 19:04, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Crimebusters
Actually, from how the meeting went, it seems unlikely anybody joined Nelson's "Crimebusters". While Adrian stayed behind, I doubt the two of them went off fighting crime together. It was at this point that Adrian really understood that beating up purse-snatchers was not going to save the world. This is when he started The Plan! God I love this book!

So the bit about Crimebusters is wrong.

188.28.162.241 (talk) 14:19, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum

Possibly homosexual
That line in the comic is meant more as a description of Rorschach's shattered, angry mind than anything to do with Adrian's personal life. Mentioning this, and the rather accusatory way he's referred to as politically liberal in this article seems to be from the writing of an 11-year-old who didn't really understand the comic properly. I may take my scissors to this article, there are lots of chunks that really seem to need it.

188.28.162.241 (talk) 14:52, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum

 * It's most likely an in-joke, but in the film adaptation there's a folder named "Boys" on Adrian's computer: snapshot
 * 89.69.136.52 (talk) 16:38, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Well, he is called a homo because of the graphics. He wears pink, his ship is pink, his company's logo is a pink triangle, he has a cat (albeit a very big cat), and he sells cosmetics. But even these signs can be only a joke, or a red herring, to make readers forget his wealth and influence, which would easily recover him as the antagonist.
 * He may be gay. But in this story, it is insignificant.
 * 213.222.181.220 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:15, 26 January 2014 (UTC)

"Known Liberals"!
From the tone of the text I've replaced, it seemed that either the author was the ghost of Joe McCarthy, or a kid who doesn't understand politics. People are generally quite open about their political opinions. That makes Adrian a "liberal", not a "known" one! Dan and Laurie too seem like liberal people, so Adrian's not the "only" one of the group.

I added the bit about the Indian famine aid to back up the point on this.

I mentioned The Plan, to back up the original author's point about Adrian's high self-regard, and because really The Plan is the culmination of Adrian's personality and what's relevant about it.

I removed the bit about homosexual. He's not seen or mentioned to be romantically involved with anybody in the book. The only "source" for this opinion is Rorschach, who as a reliable witness is hardly "without stain", as you might say. And SAY, there's that stain on his overcoat! Just noticed that. Man I love that book!

188.28.162.241 (talk) 15:38, 15 November 2011 (UTC) Greenaum

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ozymandias (comics). 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/20081229070626/http://scifiscripts.com/scripts/wtchmn.txt to http://www.scifiscripts.com/scripts/wtchmn.txt

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) 02:55, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Characters mentioned but never identified. Links?
The last full paragraph includes the following sentence:
 * Veidt's plan succeeds, but Veidt also intends to kill Dreiberg and Laurie afterwards.

Who are Dreiberg and Laurie? For people who don't already know, they should be identified. Ileanadu (talk) 17:50, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
 * , fixed. – Muboshgu (talk) 17:54, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 31 January 2020

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 10:24, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

Ozymandias (character) → Ozymandias (Watchmen) – (or perhaps Ozymandias (DC Comics)). The current title is an incomplete disambiguation. There are many characters called Ozymandias: see Ozymandias (disambiguation). After the move, Ozymandias (character) should redirect to the disambiguation page. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 13:54, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

 * Support - This move is the clearest disambiguation alternative. -- Netoholic @ 14:38, 31 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Support - as above In ictu oculi (talk) 08:11, 1 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Support per nom.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 10:57, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Moving sections
Is there anyway you can move the "Events of Watchmen (HBO Series)" paragraph to "in other media"? His biography should just be his comic book history, ending at doomsday clock. You already have the events of the HBO series under "in other media," so there is no reason to include it twice.

--138.88.227.232 (talk) 18:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 8 May 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. There were two main arguments at play in the discussion. The first is WP:COMMONNAME; this line of discussion led to disagreement over whether "Adrian Veidt" or "Ozymandias" is the subject's common name. As far as evidence for this claim, Google search results were provided, which showed around three times as many results for "Ozymandias" as for "Adrian Veidt" (663k vs. 203k when I checked the links); it was also alleged that the primary sources (the graphic novel and HBO series) predominantly use "Adrian Veidt". On the whole, neither side of the COMMONNAME argument appeared to make a strong case, and I would not have found a consensus from that alone. However, it was also pointed out that the title "Adrian Veidt" was preferable under WP:NATURAL, as it allowed for the removal of parenthetical disambiguation. This additional factor sways the balance of the arguments in favor of "Adrian Veidt". (non-admin closure) ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 20:33, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

Ozymandias (Watchmen) → Adrian Veidt – Per WP:COMMONNAME. Primarily known as Veidt in comics and other media, and even in this article as currently written. U-Mos (talk) 09:59, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Additionally, while I argue that the proposed title is the common name, it also provides WP:NATURAL disambiguation. U-Mos (talk) 13:34, 8 May 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME In ictu oculi (talk) 12:53, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per NATURAL.--Ortizesp (talk) 02:42, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose there is no way Adrian Veidt is the common name. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:15, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I thought this was pretty self-evident, but maybe it's worth outlining the common name matter further. For secondary material, Google searches for ozymandias watchmen and adrian veidt suggest a fairly even split: almost all discussion using both names, some leading with Ozymandias, some leading with Veidt. This evenness means WP:NATURAL should be considered, in Veidt's favour. However, the primary texts are much more weighted. The Watchmen graphic novel uses Veidt dominantly, with Ozymandias mentioned sporadically as the character's superhero alias in the narrative past, long since abandoned and with his true identity known throughout the story. In the recent HBO series, the character is unidentified for a time, referred to as Veidt while missing presumed dead, and also by that name when his identity is revealed. That, in my view, clearly tips the common name balance towards the proposed title. U-Mos (talk) 18:19, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Adrian Veidt


text:
Loralai District

Loralai District is a district in the northeast of Balochistan province of Pakistan. The town of Loralai serves as the district headquarters.

Demographics
At the time of the 2017 census the district had 32,681 households and a population of 244,446. Loralai district had a sex ratio of 873 females per 1000 males and a literacy rate of 42.42% - 56.99% for males and 25.46% for females. 54,849 (22.44%) lived in urban areas. 87,792 (35.91%) were under 10 years of age. 1,201 (0.49%) were from religious minorities.

At the time of the 2017 census, 93.29% of the population spoke Pashto, 1.68% Saraiki, 1.48% Balochi and 1.31% Punjabi as their first language.

Education
According to the Pakistan District Education Rankings, district Loralai is ranked at number 97 out of the 141 ranked districts in Pakistan on the education score index. This index considers learning, gender parity and retention in the district.
 * University of Loralai

Literacy rate in 2014–15 of population 10 years and older in the district stands at 44% whereas for females it is only 22%.

Post primary access is a major issue in the district with 89% schools being at primary level. Compare this with high schools which constitute only 3% of government schools in the district. This is also reflected in the enrolment figures for 2016–17 with 12,192 students enrolled in class 1 to 5 and only 586 students enrolled in class 9 and 10.

Gender disparity is another issue in the district. Only 28% schools in the district are girls’ schools. Access to education for girls is a major issue in the district and is also reflected in the low literacy rates for females.

Moreover, the schools in the district lack basic facilities. According to Alif Ailaan district education rankings 2017, the district is ranked at number 135 out of the 155 districts of Pakistan for primary school infrastructure. At the middle school level, it is ranked at number 137 out of the 155 districts. These rankings take into account the basic facilities available in schools including drinking water, working toilet, availability of electricity, existence of a boundary wall and general building condition. 7 out of 10 schools do not have electricity in them. 3 out of 4 schools lack a toilet and more than half of the schools do not have a boundary wall. 2 out of 5 schools do not have clean drinking water.

Localities

 * Loralai
 * Zangiwal

title: Loralai District


text:
Talk:Mariavite Church

Zaborowski's assertations
An additional difficulty with this page is the inclusion of Robert Ronald John Maria Zaborowski's assertions that he leads a signficant North American branch of this religious movement. In fact Bishop Zaborowski is simply an Episcopi vagantes (see relevant listing at Wikipedia) with no real following and therefore this part of the listing is essentially fraudulent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.63.8.158 (talk) 22:03, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
 * He'd be an episcopus vagans. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 19:42, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Having known Zaborowski for over 40 years I could easily prove His "assertations" as I hold all records in his archives. Yet I'll follow his example of ignoring such slander as there truly is nothing to prove to anyone. God knows how He lived His life and God will judge accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CFAD:5B00:AC6A:167C:5583:65F2 (talk) 15:42, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

North America
This article has come a long ways but still needs lots of work IMO. Firstly, someone truly both logical and grammatical needs to integrate much of the "Relations between Catholics and Mariavites" as it is largely redundant with the history above it. Secondly, I do not buy for a second the statements about there being 300,000+ Mariavites in North America. If so, where are their chuches, schools, seminaries, etc., that a group of such size would necessarily have? This needs verified sources, not the self-serving statements of its proponents without independent review. Certainly there may well be 300,000+ North American Catholics who are sympathetic with this groups devotion to the Tridentine Mass, a less-centralized, hierarchical organization, and so on, but this is not at all the same as the group having 300,000 actual members. Rlquall 19:19, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Official site of the Mariavite Church says there "25,000 believers in Poland and 5,000 believers in France" . And no information about believers in North America, there is even no evidence that there is "the autonomous Province in North America". I delete this information until the author would proove it. Slawojarek 20:57, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I noticed the headquarters of "Old Catholic Mariavite Church in North America" was in my father's hometown of Wyandotte, Michigan (also home to large number of Poles) then I recognized the address, to my surprise it is right next to my family's home parish and the Mariavite HQ is nothing more than a normal house with no sign or anything. Also I am a religious Polish-American and quite familiar with our religious movements and history in America and I have never nor has anyone in my family ever even heard of this American Mariavite Church so I suspect this is something someone made up or there is a huge underground secret society of American Mariavites - I suspect the former.Zaynaq (talk) 02:47, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I can also confirm that the alledged "HQ" is just a private residence. Numerous contacts wit "Bishop" Zaborowski have truned up no information.  He has declined to share clergy names, locations, parishes, addresses, etc.  I have been directly involved with the independent movement for 30+ years and have seen much in the area of exageration.  I suspect that that is what we are seeing here.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.73.56.39 (talk) 20:30, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * According to an article in Encyclopedia of American Religions, published in 1996, except for a chapel in Zaborowski's residence, "observers have been unable to locate any of the congregations" and Zaborowski "consistently refused" to provide details, e.g. an address, about any of the 157 parishes, with 356,034 members, that he claimed were part of his church in 1995 – his claims are unverified, there is no WP:RELIABLE source for any of Zaborowski's claims. The corresponding Polish article, which lacks references, claims that Mariavitism existed in 1930s North America and that Francis Mary Ignatius Boryszewski, a Carmel Henry Carfora priest, was consecrated as a bishop of this Mariavite group by Old Catholic Church of the Mariavites Bishop Maria Jakub Próchniewski – Episcopi vagantes and the Anglican Church only states that Lloyd consecrated Boryszewski in 1930 (p41) while Encyclopedia of American Religions adds, in a qualified way, that "it appears that [...] Prochniewski consecrated Boryszewski a second time in a separate ceremony in 1930" (p230). There is no connection between Zaborowski and an ostensibly historical Mariavite group, at best it is a recycling of a name. I tagged two sections with . A 1975 newspaper article shows that "Archbishop Joseph Skureth, OM, superior or general of the Polish Mariavite Church in America." This contradicts what historian John Bukowczyk wrote in 1987: "No record of direct Mariavite involvement in the United States has surfaced." Skureth was associated with various episcopi vagantes whose congregations also only existed in their imaginations. It is part of a subculture pathology that was pointed out in the 1940s in Episcopi vagantes and the Anglican Church (pp1–4). –BoBoMisiu (talk) 17:22, 24 October 2015 (UTC); modified 16:47, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Relations Between Mariavites and Roman Catholics
This section cites almost no sources and seems to be quite biased. I have removed some of the most unsupportable claims, but someone really needs to look at this.Mayor Beauregard 01:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

another source
I encourage people interested in the Mariavici to read The Third Adam by Jerzy Peterkiewicz. No doubt adherents will have problems with it, but it contains information such as the hypostatic union of Mother Kozłowska with Christ in the Eucharist, and her spiritual birthing of Archbishop Kowalski. The Third Adam --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 15:54, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

"They said nota bene took place"
This sentence doesn't make sense as it stands: "They said nota bene took place in Płock, which was for the Mariavites a clear sign that God has repeated this message to the people." "The said 'nota bene'" might make sense, except there is no 'nota bene' in what precedes it. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 15:34, 17 May 2013 (UTC)

Catholic Church naming conventions RfC
There is currently an RfC at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(Catholic_Church) that may be of interest. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk 23:42, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

"noblewoman" yes but nun more important
Yes she was szlachta but that she was a nun is more important, and if only one of these facts should be in the lead, it should be this. --142.163.194.74 (talk) 10:10, 13 July 2021 (UTC)

What is this article about?
What is this article about? The two churches, or only one of the Mariavite churches? The website in the infobox has the name Kościół Starokatolicki Mariawitów (Mariavite Catholic Church), which is the name of another article, Catholic Mariavite Church. The article is titled "Mariavite Church", yet the name of the Church in the infobox is "Old Catholic Mariavite Church". Veverve (talk) 15:16, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

"see also: Priestly Fraternity of St Peter"
Why is this "see also" link here? The Priestly Fraternity of St Peter has nothing at all to do with the Mariavites. --2607:FEA8:FF01:4B63:A4BC:6EF:C08B:19FD (talk) 11:04, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
 * You are right, I removed it. Veverve (talk) 14:36, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mariavite Church


text:
Masatoshi Nakayama

Masatoshi Nakayama (中山 正敏) was an internationally famous Japanese master of Shotokan karate. He helped establish the Japan Karate Association (JKA) in 1949, and wrote many textbooks on karate, which served to popularize his martial art. For almost 40 years, until his death in 1987, Nakayama worked to spread Shotokan karate around the world. He was the first master in Shotokan history to attain the rank of 9th dan while alive, and was posthumously awarded the rank of 10th dan.

Early life
Nakayama was born on April 13, 1913, in the Yamaguchi prefecture of Japan. He was descended from the Sanada clan, who were known as kenjutsu instructors, from the Nagano region. Nakayama's grandfather was Naomichi Nakayama, a surgeon in Tokyo, who had also been the last of the family to teach kenjutsu. Nakayama's father was Naomichi Nakayama, an army physician and a judoka (practitioner of judo). His father was assigned to Taipei, so Nakayama spent some of his formative years there. Apart from his academic studies, he participated in kendo, skiing, swimming, tennis, and track running.

Nakayama entered Takushoku University in 1932 to study Chinese language, and began learning karate under Gichin Funakoshi and his son Yoshitaka (also known as Gigō). He had originally planned to continue his training in kendo, but misread the schedule and arrived at karate training instead—and, interested by what he saw, ended up joining that martial art group. Nakayama graduated from Takushoku University in 1937. That same year, he travelled to China as a military interpreter during the Japanese occupation of China. By the time World War II began, Nakayama had attained the rank of 2nd dan. Nakayama returned to Japan in May 1946, after the war.

Japan Karate Association
In May 1949, Nakayama, Isao Obata, and other colleagues helped establish the Japan Karate Association (JKA). Funakoshi was the formal head of the organization, with Nakayama appointed as Chief Instructor as he was the only one without a job and they needed someone to open and close the dojo during the day. By 1951, Nakayama had been promoted to 3rd dan, and he held the rank of 5th dan by 1955. In 1956, working with Teruyuki Okazaki, he restructured the Shotokan karate training program to follow both traditional karate and methods developed in modern sports sciences. In 1961, Nakayama was promoted to 8th dan—a remarkable progression, in part made possible by the consensus-based system of higher dan promotion in Japan at the time, according to Pat Zalewski. Nakayama established kata (patterns) and kumite (sparring) as tournament disciplines. Students of the large JKA dojo (training halls) subsequently achieved an unmatched series of tournament successes in the 1950s and 1960s.

Nakayama is widely known for having worked to spread Shotokan karate throughout the world. Together with other senior instructors, he formed the JKA instructor trainee program. Many of this program's graduates were sent throughout the world to form new Shotokan subgroups and increase membership. Nakayama also held positions in the Physical Education department of Takushoku University, beginning in 1952, and eventually becoming head of that department. He also headed the ski team at the university.

Later life
In 1972, Nakayama, with some help from one of his students, Hirokazu Kanazawa, set up a personal dojo in the basement of his apartment building, naming it "Hoitsugan." This dojo is located in Ebisu, Tokyo, a short distance from where the JKA honbu (headquarters) dojo was located. Karate students from outside Japan lived in the dormitory rooms and trained in this dojo from the early 1970s.

After rapid promotion through the ranks in the 1950s, Nakayama still held the rank of 8th dan in 1974. He was promoted to 9th dan in the 1980s, becoming the first Shotokan master to be awarded this rank while still living. Nakayama continued teaching Shotokan karate until his death on April 15, 1987, in Tokyo, Japan.

Legacy
Nakayama wrote many books on karate, including the 11-volume Best Karate series. He also had many video productions credited to him. Nakayama's books include: Practical Karate: A guide to everyman's self-defense (1963, co-authored), Practical Karate: Defense against an unarmed assailant (1963, co-authored), Best Karate: Comprehensive (1977), and Dynamic Karate (1986). Martial arts scholar Donn Draeger was one of Nakayama's well-known co-authors.

After Nakayama's death in 1987, the JKA divided into two factions, which subsequently led to a further splintering within the organization. Many senior JKA instructors left to form their own associations, which include the International Shotokan Karate Federation (Teruyuki Okazaki), Japan Karate Shotokai (Tetsuhiko Asai), Japan Shotokan Karate Association (Keigo Abe), Shotokan Karate International Federation (Hirokazu Kanazawa), Japan Karate Association / World Federation America (Shojiro Koyama) and America and Karatenomichi World Federation (Mikio Yahara).

title: Masatoshi Nakayama