text:
Gibbons–Hawking–York boundary term

In general relativity, the Gibbons–Hawking–York boundary term is a term that needs to be added to the Einstein–Hilbert action when the underlying spacetime manifold has a boundary.

The Einstein–Hilbert action is the basis for the most elementary variational principle from which the field equations of general relativity can be defined. However, the use of the Einstein–Hilbert action is appropriate only when the underlying spacetime manifold $$\mathcal{M}$$ is closed, i.e., a manifold which is both compact and without boundary. In the event that the manifold has a boundary $$\partial\mathcal{M}$$, the action should be supplemented by a boundary term so that the variational principle is well-defined.

The necessity of such a boundary term was first realised by James W. York and later refined in a minor way by Gary Gibbons and Stephen Hawking.

For a manifold that is not closed, the appropriate action is

 * $$\mathcal{S}_\mathrm{EH} + \mathcal{S}_\mathrm{GHY} = \frac{1}{16 \pi} \int_\mathcal{M} \mathrm{d}^4 x \, \sqrt{-g} R + \frac{1}{8 \pi} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \mathrm{d}^3 y \, \epsilon \sqrt{h}K,$$

where $$\mathcal{S}_\mathrm{EH}$$ is the Einstein–Hilbert action, $$\mathcal{S}_\mathrm{GHY}$$ is the Gibbons–Hawking–York boundary term, $$h_{ab}$$ is the induced metric (see section below on definitions) on the boundary, $$h$$ its determinant, $$K$$ is the trace of the second fundamental form, $$\epsilon$$ is equal to $$+1$$ where the normal to $$\partial \mathcal{M}$$ is spacelike and $$-1$$ where the normal to $$\partial \mathcal{M}$$ is timelike, and $$y^a$$ are the coordinates on the boundary. Varying the action with respect to the metric $$g_{\alpha\beta}$$, subject to the condition

 * $$\delta g_{\alpha \beta} \big|_{\partial \mathcal{M}} = 0,$$

gives the Einstein equations; the addition of the boundary term means that in performing the variation, the geometry of the boundary encoded in the transverse metric $$h_{ab}$$ is fixed (see section below). There remains ambiguity in the action up to an arbitrary functional of the induced metric $$h_{ab}$$.

That a boundary term is needed in the gravitational case is because $$R$$, the gravitational Lagrangian density, contains second derivatives of the metric tensor. This is a non-typical feature of field theories, which are usually formulated in terms of Lagrangians that involve first derivatives of fields to be varied over only.

The GHY term is desirable, as it possesses a number of other key features. When passing to the Hamiltonian formalism, it is necessary to include the GHY term in order to reproduce the correct Arnowitt–Deser–Misner energy (ADM energy). The term is required to ensure the path integral (a la Hawking) for quantum gravity has the correct composition properties. When calculating black hole entropy using the Euclidean semiclassical approach, the entire contribution comes from the GHY term. This term has had more recent applications in loop quantum gravity in calculating transition amplitudes and background-independent scattering amplitudes.

In order to determine a finite value for the action, one may have to subtract off a surface term for flat spacetime:

 * $$S_{EH} + S_{GHY,0} = \frac{1}{16 \pi} \int_\mathcal{M} \mathrm{d}^4 x \, \sqrt{-g} R + \frac{1}{8 \pi} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \mathrm{d}^3 y \, \epsilon \sqrt{h} K - {1 \over 8 \pi} \int_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \mathrm{d}^3 y \, \epsilon \sqrt{h} K_0,$$

where $$K_0$$ is the extrinsic curvature of the boundary imbedded flat spacetime. As $$\sqrt{h}$$ is invariant under variations of $$g_{\alpha \beta}$$, this addition term does not affect the field equations; as such, this is referred to as the non-dynamical term.

Defining hyper-surfaces
In a four-dimensional spacetime manifold, a hypersurface is a three-dimensional submanifold that can be either timelike, spacelike, or null.

A particular hyper-surface $$\Sigma$$ can be selected either by imposing a constraint on the coordinates

 * $$f (x^\alpha) = 0,$$

or by giving parametric equations,

 * $$x^\alpha = x^\alpha (y^a),$$

where $$y^a (a=1,2,3)$$ are coordinates intrinsic to the hyper-surface.

For example, a two-sphere in three-dimensional Euclidean space can be described either by

 * $$f (x^\alpha) = x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - r^2 = 0,$$

where $$r$$ is the radius of the sphere, or by

 * $$x = r \sin \theta \cos \phi, \quad y = r \sin \theta \sin \phi, \quad z = r \cos \theta,$$

where $$\theta$$ and $$\phi$$ are intrinsic coordinates.

Hyper-surface orthogonal vector fields
We take the metric convention (-,+,...,+). We start with the family of hyper-surfaces given by

 * $$f (x^\alpha) = C$$

where different members of the family correspond to different values of the constant $$C$$. Consider two neighbouring points $$P$$ and $$Q$$ with coordinates $$x^\alpha$$ and $$x^\alpha + d x^\alpha$$, respectively, lying in the same hyper-surface. We then have to first order

 * $$C = f (x^\alpha + d x^\alpha) = f (x^\alpha) + {\partial f \over \partial x^\alpha} d x^\alpha. $$

Subtracting off $$C = f (x^\alpha)$$ from this equation gives

 * $${\partial f \over \partial x^\alpha} d x^\alpha = 0$$

at $$P$$. This implies that $$f_{, \alpha}$$ is normal to the hyper-surface. A unit normal $$n_\alpha$$ can be introduced in the case where the hyper-surface is not null. This is defined by

 * $$n^\alpha n_\alpha \equiv \epsilon =\begin{cases} -1 & \text{if } \Sigma \text{ is spacelike} \\ +1 & \text{if } \Sigma \text{ is timelike} \end{cases}$$

and we require that $$n^\alpha$$ point in the direction of increasing $$f : n^\alpha f_{, \alpha} > 0$$. It can then easily be checked that $$n_\alpha$$ is given by

 * $$n_\alpha = {\epsilon{\,}f_{, \alpha} \over (\epsilon{\,} g^{\alpha \beta} f_{, \alpha} f_{, \beta})^{1 \over 2}}$$

if the hyper-surface either spacelike or timelike.

Induced and transverse metric
The three vectors

 * $$e^\alpha_a = \left( {\partial x^\alpha \over \partial y^a} \right)_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \quad a=1,2,3$$

are tangential to the hyper-surface.

The induced metric is the three-tensor $$h_{ab}$$ defined by

 * $$h_{ab} = g_{\alpha \beta} e^\alpha_a e^\beta_b .$$

This acts as a metric tensor on the hyper-surface in the $$y^a$$ coordinates. For displacements confined to the hyper-surface (so that $$x^\alpha = x^\alpha (y^a)$$)

 * $$\begin{align}

ds^2 &= g_{\alpha \beta} dx^\alpha dx^\beta \\ &= g_{\alpha \beta} \left(\frac{\partial x^\alpha}{\partial y^a} dy^a \right) \left(\frac{\partial x^\beta}{\partial y^b} dy^b \right) \\ &= \left( g_{\alpha \beta} e^\alpha_a e^\beta_b \right) dy^a dy^b \\ &= h_{ab} dy^a dy^b \end{align}$$

Because the three vectors $$e^\alpha_1, e^\alpha_2, e^\alpha_3$$ are tangential to the hyper-surface,

 * $$n_\alpha e^\alpha_a = 0$$

where $$n_\alpha$$ is the unit vector ($$n_\alpha n^\alpha = \pm 1$$) normal to the hyper-surface.

We introduce what is called the transverse metric

 * $$h_{\alpha \beta} = g_{\alpha \beta} - \epsilon n_\alpha n_\beta.$$

It isolates the part of the metric that is transverse to the normal $$n^\alpha$$.

It is easily seen that this four-tensor

 * $${h^\alpha}_{\beta} = {\delta^\alpha}_{\beta} - \epsilon n^\alpha n_\beta$$

projects out the part of a four-vector transverse to the normal $$n^\alpha$$ as

 * $${h^\alpha}_{\beta} n^\beta = ({\delta^\alpha}_{\beta} - \epsilon n^\alpha n_\beta) n^\beta = (n^\alpha - \epsilon^2 n^\alpha) = 0 \quad \text{and } \; \mathrm{if} \quad w^\alpha n_\alpha = 0 \quad \mathrm{then} \quad {h^\alpha}_{\beta} w^\beta = w^\alpha.$$

We have

 * $$ h_{ab} = h_{\alpha \beta} e^\alpha_a e^\beta_b.$$

If we define $$h^{ab}$$ to be the inverse of $$h_{ab}$$, it is easy to check

 * $$h^{\alpha \beta} = h^{ab} e^\alpha_a e^\beta_b$$

where

 * $$h^{\alpha \beta} = g^{\alpha \beta} - \epsilon n^\alpha n^\beta.$$

Note that variation subject to the condition

 * $$\delta g_{\alpha \beta} \big|_{\partial \mathcal{M}} = 0,$$

implies that $$h_{ab} = g_{\alpha \beta} e^\alpha_a e^\beta_b$$, the induced metric on $$\partial \mathcal{M}$$, is held fixed during the variation. See also for clarification on $$\delta h_{\alpha \beta}$$ and $$\delta n_{\alpha}$$ etc.

On proving the main result
In the following subsections we will first compute the variation of the Einstein–Hilbert term and then the variation of the boundary term, and show that their sum results in

 * $$\delta S_{TOTAL} = \delta S_{EH} + \delta S_{GHY} = \frac{1}{16 \pi} \int_\mathcal{M} G_{\alpha \beta} \delta g^{\alpha \beta} \sqrt{-g} d^4x$$

where $$G_{\alpha \beta} = R_{\alpha \beta} - {1 \over 2} g_{\alpha \beta} R$$ is the Einstein tensor, which produces the correct left-hand side to the Einstein field equations, without the cosmological term, which however is trivial to include by replacing $$S_{EH}$$ with

 * $${1 \over 16 \pi} \int_\mathcal{M} (R - 2 \Lambda) \sqrt{-g} d^4x$$

where $$\Lambda$$ is the cosmological constant.

In the third subsection we elaborate on the meaning of the non-dynamical term.

Variation of the Einstein–Hilbert term
We will use the identity

 * $$ \delta \sqrt{-g} \equiv - {1 \over 2}\sqrt{-g} g_{\alpha \beta} \delta g^{\alpha \beta},$$

and the Palatini identity:

 * $$ \delta R_{\alpha \beta} \equiv \nabla_\mu (\delta \Gamma^\mu_{\alpha \beta}) - \nabla_\beta (\delta \Gamma^\mu_{\alpha \mu}),

$$

which are both obtained in the article Einstein–Hilbert action.

We consider the variation of the Einstein–Hilbert term:

 * $$\begin{align}

(16 \pi) \delta S_{EH} & = \int_\mathcal{M} \delta \left ( g^{\alpha \beta} R_{\alpha \beta} \sqrt{-g} \right ) d^4x \\ & = \int_\mathcal{M} \left( R_{\alpha \beta} \sqrt{-g} \delta g^{\alpha \beta} + g^{\alpha \beta} R_{\alpha \beta} \delta \sqrt{-g} + \sqrt{-g} g^{\alpha \beta} \delta R_{\alpha \beta} \right) d^4x \\ & = \int_\mathcal{M} \left( R_{\alpha \beta} - {1 \over 2} g_{\alpha \beta} R \right ) \delta g^{\alpha \beta} \sqrt{-g} d^4x + \int_\mathcal{M} g^{\alpha \beta} \delta R_{\alpha \beta} \sqrt{-g} d^4x. \end{align}$$

The first term gives us what we need for the left-hand side of the Einstein field equations. We must account for the second term.

By the Palatini identity

 * $$ g^{\alpha \beta} \delta R_{\alpha \beta} = \delta {V^\mu}_{; \mu}, \qquad \delta V^\mu = g^{\alpha \beta} \delta \Gamma^\mu_{\alpha \beta} - g^{\alpha \mu} \delta \Gamma^\beta_{\alpha \beta}.

$$

We will need Stokes theorem in the form:

 * $$\begin{align}

\int_\mathcal{M} {A^\mu}_{; \mu} \sqrt{-g} d^4x & = \int_\mathcal{M} (\sqrt{-g} A^\mu)_{, \mu} d^4x \\ & = \oint_{\partial \mathcal{M}} A^\mu d \Sigma_\mu \\ & = \oint_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \epsilon A^\mu n_\mu \sqrt{|h|} d^3y \end{align}$$

where $$n_\mu$$ is the unit normal to $$\partial_\mathcal{M}$$ and $$\epsilon \equiv n^\mu n_\mu = \pm 1$$, and $$y^a$$ are coordinates on the boundary. And $$d \Sigma_\mu = \epsilon n_\mu d \Sigma$$ where $$d \Sigma = |h|^{1 \over 2} d^3 y$$ where $$h = \det [h_{ab}]$$, is an invariant three-dimensional volume element on the hyper-surface. In our particular case we take $$A^\mu = \delta V^\mu$$.

We now evaluate $$\delta V^\mu n_\mu$$ on the boundary $$\partial \mathcal{M}$$, keeping in mind that on $$\partial \mathcal{M}, \delta g_{\alpha \beta} = 0 = \delta g^{\alpha \beta}$$. Taking this into account we have

 * $$\delta \Gamma^\mu_{\alpha \beta} \big|_{\partial \mathcal{M}} = \frac{1}{2} g^{\mu \nu} (\delta g_{\nu \alpha, \beta} + \delta g_{\nu \beta, \alpha} - \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \nu}).$$

It is useful to note that

 * $$\begin{align}

g^{\alpha \mu} \delta \Gamma^\beta_{\alpha \beta} \big|_{\partial \mathcal{M}} & = {1 \over 2} g^{\alpha \mu} g^{\beta \nu} (\delta g_{\nu \alpha, \beta} + \delta g_{\nu \beta, \alpha} - \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \nu}) \\ & = {1 \over 2} g^{\mu \nu} g^{\alpha \beta} (\delta g_{\nu \alpha, \beta} + \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \nu} - \delta g_{\nu \beta, \alpha}) \end{align}$$

where in the second line we have swapped around $$\alpha$$ and $$\nu$$ and used that the metric is symmetric. It is then not difficult to work out $$\delta V^\mu = g^{\mu \nu} g^{\alpha \beta} (\delta g_{\nu \beta, \alpha} - \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \nu})$$.

So now

 * $$\begin{align}

\delta V^\mu n_\mu \big|_{\partial \mathcal{M}} & = n^\mu g^{\alpha \beta} (\delta g_{\mu \beta, \alpha} - \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \mu}) \\ & = n^\mu (\epsilon n^\alpha n^\beta + h^{\alpha \beta}) (\delta g_{\mu \beta, \alpha} - \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \mu}) \\ & = n^\mu h^{\alpha \beta} (\delta g_{\mu \beta, \alpha} - \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \mu}) \end{align}$$

where in the second line we used the identity $$g^{\alpha \beta} = \epsilon n^\alpha n^\beta + h^{\alpha \beta}$$, and in the third line we have used the anti-symmetry in $$\alpha$$ and $$\mu$$. As $$\delta g_{\alpha \beta}$$ vanishes everywhere on the boundary $$\partial \mathcal{M} ,$$ its tangential derivatives must also vanish: $$\delta g_{\alpha \beta, \gamma} e^\gamma_c = 0$$. It follows that $$h^{\alpha \beta} \delta g_{\mu \beta, \alpha} = h^{ab} e^\alpha_a e^\beta_b \delta g_{\mu \beta, \alpha} = 0$$. So finally we have

 * $$n^\mu \delta V_\mu \big|_{\partial \mathcal{M}} = - h^{\alpha \beta} \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \mu} n^\mu.$$

Gathering the results we obtain

 * $$(16 \pi) \delta S_{EH} = \int_\mathcal{M} G_{\alpha \beta} \delta g^{\alpha \beta} \sqrt{-g} d^4x - \oint_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \epsilon h^{\alpha \beta} \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \mu} n^\mu \sqrt{h} d^3 y \quad Eq 1.$$

We next show that the above boundary term will be cancelled by the variation of $$S_{GHY}$$.

Variation of the boundary term
We now turn to the variation of the $$S_{GHY}$$ term. Because the induced metric is fixed on $$\partial \mathcal{M},$$ the only quantity to be varied is $$K$$ is the trace of the extrinsic curvature.

We have

 * $$\begin{align}

K & = {n^\alpha}_{; \alpha} \\ & = g^{\alpha \beta} n_{\alpha ; \beta} \\ & = \left (\epsilon n^\alpha n^\beta + h^{\alpha \beta} \right ) n_{\alpha ; \beta} \\ & = h^{\alpha \beta} n_{\alpha ; \beta} \\ & = h^{\alpha \beta} (n_{\alpha, \beta} - \Gamma^\gamma_{\alpha \beta} n_\gamma) \end{align}$$

where we have used that $$0 = (n^\alpha n_\alpha)_{; \beta}$$ implies $$n^\alpha n_{\alpha; \beta} = 0.$$ So the variation of $$K$$ is

 * $$\begin{align}

\delta K &= -h^{\alpha \beta} \delta \Gamma^\gamma_{\alpha \beta} n_\gamma \\ &= -h^{\alpha \beta} n_\gamma \frac{1}{2} g^{\gamma \sigma} \left (\delta g_{\sigma \alpha, \beta} + \delta g_{\sigma \beta, \alpha} - \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \sigma} \right ) \\ &= -{1 \over 2} h^{\alpha \beta} \left( \delta g_{\mu \alpha, \beta} + \delta g_{\mu \beta, \alpha} - \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \mu} \right ) n^\mu \\ &= \frac{1}{2} h^{\alpha \beta} \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \mu} n^\mu \end{align}$$

where we have used the fact that the tangential derivatives of $$\delta g_{\alpha \beta}$$ vanish on $$\partial \mathcal{M}.$$ We have obtained

 * $$(16 \pi) \delta S_{GHY} = \oint_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \epsilon h^{\alpha \beta} \delta g_{\alpha \beta, \mu} n^\mu \sqrt{h} d^3 y$$

which cancels the second integral on the right-hand side of Eq. 1. The total variation of the gravitational action is:

 * $$\delta S_{TOTAL} = {1 \over 16 \pi} \int_\mathcal{M} G_{\alpha \beta} \delta g^{\alpha \beta} \sqrt{-g} d^4x .$$

This produces the correct left-hand side of the Einstein equations. This proves the main result.

This result was generalised to fourth-order theories of gravity on manifolds with boundaries in 1983 and published in 1985.

The non-dynamical term
We elaborate on the role of

 * $$S_0 = {1 \over 8 \pi} \oint_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \epsilon K_0 |h|^{1 \over 2} d^3y$$

in the gravitational action. As already mentioned above, because this term only depends on $$h_{ab}$$, its variation with respect to $$g_{\alpha \beta}$$ gives zero and so does not effect the field equations, its purpose is to change the numerical value of the action. As such we will refer to it as the non-dynamical term.

Let us assume that $$g_{\alpha \beta}$$ is a solution of the vacuum field equations, in which case the Ricci scalar $$R$$ vanishes. The numerical value of the gravitational action is then

 * $$S = {1 \over 8 \pi} \oint_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \epsilon K |h|^{1 \over 2} d^3y ,$$

where we are ignoring the non-dynamical term for the moment. Let us evaluate this for flat spacetime. Choose the boundary $$\partial \mathcal{M}$$ to consist of two hyper-surfaces of constant time value $$t= t_1, t_2$$ and a large three-cylinder at $$r=r_0$$ (that is, the product of a finite interval and a three-sphere of radius $$r_0$$). We have $$K=0$$ on the hyper-surfaces of constant time. On the three cylinder, in coordinates intrinsic to the hyper-surface, the line element is

 * $$\begin{align}

ds^2 & = - dt^2 + r_0^2 d \Omega^2 \\ & = - dt^2 + r_0^2 (d \theta^2 + \sin^2 \theta d \phi^2) \end{align}$$

meaning the induced metric is

 * $$h_{ab} = \begin{bmatrix} -1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & r_0^2 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & r_0^2 \sin^2 \theta \end{bmatrix}. $$

so that $$|h|^{1 \over 2} = r_0^2 \sin \theta$$. The unit normal is $$n_\alpha = \partial_\alpha r$$, so $$K = {n^\alpha}_{; \alpha} = 2/r_0$$. Then

 * $$\oint_{\partial \mathcal{M}} \epsilon K |h|^{1 \over 2} d^3y = \int_{t_1}^{t_2} dt \int_0^{2 \pi} d \varphi \int_0^\pi d \theta \left( {2 \over r_0} \right) (r_0^2 \sin \theta) = 8 \pi r_0 (t_2 - t_1)$$

and diverges as $$r_0 \to \infty$$, that is, when the spatial boundary is pushed to infinity, even when the $$\mathcal{M}$$ is bounded by two hyper-surfaces of constant time. One would expect the same problem for curved spacetimes that are asymptotically flat (there is no problem if the spacetime is compact). This problem is remedied by the non-dynamical term. The difference $$S_{GHY} - S_0$$ will be well defined in the limit $$r_0 \to \infty$$.

Variation of modified gravity terms
There are many theories which attempt to modify General Relativity in different ways, for example f(R) gravity replaces R, the Ricci scalar in the Einstein–Hilbert action with a function f(R). Guarnizo et al. found the boundary term for a general f(R) theory. They found that the "modified action in the metric formalism of f(R) gravity plus a Gibbons–York–Hawking like boundary term must be written as:"

 * $$S_{mod} = \frac{1}{2\kappa} \int_V d^4x\sqrt{-g} f(R) +2 \int_{\partial V} d^3y \epsilon |h| f'(R) K $$

where $$f'(R) \equiv \frac{d f(R)}{d R}$$.

By using the ADM decomposition and introducing extra auxiliary fields, in 2009 Deruelle et al. found a method to find the boundary term for "gravity theories whose Lagrangian is an arbitrary function of the Riemann tensor." This method can be used to find the GHY boundary terms for Infinite derivative gravity.

A path-integral approach to quantum gravity
As mentioned at the beginning, the GHY term is required to ensure the path integral (a la Hawking et al.) for quantum gravity has the correct composition properties.

This older approach to path-integral quantum gravity had a number of difficulties and unsolved problems. The starting point in this approach is Feynman's idea that one can represent the amplitude

 * $$\langle g_2, \phi_2, \Sigma_2 | g_1, \phi_1, \Sigma_1 \rangle$$

to go from the state with metric $$g_1$$ and matter fields $$\phi_1$$ on a surface $$\Sigma_1$$ to a state with metric $$g_2$$ and matter fields $$\phi_2$$ on a surface $$\Sigma_2$$, as a sum over all field configurations $$g$$ and $$\phi$$ which take the boundary values of the fields on the surfaces $$\Sigma_1$$ and $$\Sigma_2$$. We write

 * $$\langle g_2, \phi_2, \Sigma_2 | g_1, \phi_1, \Sigma_1 \rangle = \int \mathcal{D} [g,\phi] \exp (i S [g,\phi])$$

where $$\mathcal{D} [g,\phi]$$ is a measure on the space of all field configurations $$g$$ and $$\phi$$, $$S [g,\phi]$$ is the action of the fields, and the integral is taken over all fields which have the given values on $$\Sigma_1$$ and $$\Sigma_2$$.

It is argued that one need only specify the three-dimensional induced metric $$h$$ on the boundary.

Now consider the situation where one makes the transition from metric $$h_1$$, on a surface $$\Sigma_1$$, to a metric $$h_2$$, on a surface $$\Sigma_2$$ and then on to a metric $$h_3$$ on a later surface $$\Sigma_3$$

One would like to have the usual composition rule

 * $$\langle h_3, \Sigma_3 | h_1, \Sigma_1 \rangle = \sum_{h_2} \langle h_3, \Sigma_3 | h_2, \Sigma_2 \rangle \langle h_2, \Sigma_2 | h_1, \Sigma_1 \rangle$$

expressing that the amplitude to go from the initial to final state to be obtained by summing over all states on the intermediate surface $$\Sigma_2$$.

Let $$g_1$$ be the metric between $$\Sigma_1$$ and $$\Sigma_2$$ and $$g_2$$ be the metric between $$\Sigma_2$$ and $$\Sigma_3$$. Although the induced metric of $$g_1$$ and $$g_2$$ will agree on $$\Sigma_2$$, the normal derivative of $$g_1$$ at $$\Sigma_2$$ will not in general be equal to that of $$g_2$$ at $$\Sigma_2$$. Taking the implications of this into account, it can then be shown that the composition rule will hold if and only if we include the GHY boundary term.

In the next section it is demonstrated how this path integral approach to quantum gravity leads to the concept of black hole temperature and intrinsic quantum mechanical entropy.

Transition amplitudes and the Hamilton's principal function
In the quantum theory, the object that corresponds to the Hamilton's principal function is the transition amplitude. Consider gravity defined on a compact region of spacetime, with the topology of a four dimensional ball. The boundary of this region is a three-dimensional space with the topology of a three-sphere, which we call $$\Sigma$$. In pure gravity without cosmological constant, since the Ricci scalar vanishes on solutions of Einstein's equations, the bulk action vanishes and the Hamilton's principal function is given entirely in terms of the boundary term,

 * $$S [q] = \int_\Sigma K^{ab} [q] q_{ab} \sqrt{q} \; d^3 \sigma$$

where $$K^{ab}$$ is the extrinsic curvature of the boundary, $$q_{ab}$$ is the three-metric induced on the boundary, and $$\sigma$$ are coordinates on the boundary.

The functional $$S [q]$$ is a highly non-trivial functional to compute; this is because the extrinsic curvature $$K^{ab} [q]$$ is determined by the bulk solution singled out by the boundary intrinsic geometry. As such $$K^{ab} [q]$$ is non-local. Knowing the general dependence of $$K^{ab}$$ from $$q_{ab}$$ is equivalent to knowing the general solution of the Einstein equations.

Background-independent scattering amplitudes
Loop quantum gravity is formulated in a background-independent language. No spacetime is assumed a priori, but rather it is built up by the states of theory themselves – however scattering amplitudes are derived from $$n$$-point functions (Correlation function (quantum field theory)) and these, formulated in conventional quantum field theory, are functions of points of a background space-time. The relation between the background-independent formalism and the conventional formalism of quantum field theory on a given spacetime is far from obvious, and it is far from obvious how to recover low-energy quantities from the full background-independent theory. One would like to derive the $$n$$-point functions of the theory from the background-independent formalism, in order to compare them with the standard perturbative expansion of quantum general relativity and therefore check that loop quantum gravity yields the correct low-energy limit.

A strategy for addressing this problem has been suggested; the idea is to study the boundary amplitude, or transition amplitude of a compact region of spacetime, namely a path integral over a finite space-time region, seen as a function of the boundary value of the field. In conventional quantum field theory, this boundary amplitude is well-defined and codes the physical information of the theory; it does so in quantum gravity as well, but in a fully background-independent manner. A generally covariant definition of $$n$$-point functions can then be based on the idea that the distance between physical points – arguments of the $$n$$-point function is determined by the state of the gravitational field on the boundary of the spacetime region considered.

The key observation is that in gravity the boundary data include the gravitational field, hence the geometry of the boundary, hence all relevant relative distances and time separations. In other words, the boundary formulation realizes very elegantly in the quantum context the complete identification between spacetime geometry and dynamical fields.

title: Gibbons–Hawking–York boundary term


text:
Talk:Sic

'Sic erat scriptum' redux
The current lead suggests that the use of sic ("thus") derives from the use of the longer phrase sic erat scriptum ("thus is had been written"). However, despite some efforts by Wikipedia editors (cf. talk pages archives here and especially here), no reliable secondary source establishing that this is indeed the case has ever been cited in this article. The claim was added to the article on 10 February 2012 by a since-blocked editor, who cited Merriam-Webster's collegiate dictionary, which however does not back up the claim.

Searching Google Books for occurrences of the phrase before 10 February 2012 only yields actual Latin texts (e.g., , , , ) that are using it in their own literal narrative contexts (not in our intended editorial context of 'quoting it as it was written'), as well as a book somehow showing a screenshot of the post 10 Feb 2012 Wikipedia page (Google Books version probably revised/updated after the book's original publication in 2009?). Sure, doing a normal Google search for "sic erat scriptum" yields tons of websites repeating that "sic" is short for "sic erat scriptum", but of course none of these cite a source, and it seems very likely that they themselves rely on Wikipedia (and so using them would be WP:CIRCULAR and result in WP:CITOGENESIS).

Given this situation, it is clear that we need a good secondary, pre-February 2012 source to back up the claim. The current reference to the fact that a US federal judge apparently once (in U.S. v. Bryant, Case No. 11-CR-20034, November 15, 2012) used the phrase "sic erat scriptum" in a court document to note that they were using a variant spelling of Bryant's given name does not meet that bar, for several reasons. Of course it's a primary source (which against WP:PSTS we are clearly interpreting to establish something the source does not say), it's post-February 2012 (judges are human too, they read Wikipedia), but it also does not actually back up the claim that "sic" derives from "sic erat scriptum" (the reverse may be true), nor does it show that this judge's use of it is anything more than an idiosyncrasy on their part (i.e. it does not show that anyone else is using it).

I am therefore removing the claim from the article. Per WP:BURDEN, please do not reinstate this without citing a secondary, pre-February 2012, reliable source. ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 21:37, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

"Sic erat scriptum" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sic_erat_scriptum&redirect=no Sic erat scriptum] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 22:06, 26 April 2024 (UTC)

Music Journal ref.
Dear, Apaugasma,

I believe that the reference to the Music journal is irrelevant. The Journal of Seventeenth-Century Music Style Sheet is not an important or field leading journal, and its conventions are not necessarily representative. This seem like journal-promotion / spam with little contribution to the article. What's your take?

Cheersרמרום (talk) 09:20, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

 * It's difficult to speculate on the intentions of the user who added it, but as it stands this seems like a piece of useful information that is weakly sourced. The way to improve would be to cite other, better sources rather than to remove it. This would also allow us to remove the explicit mention of  Journal of Seventeenth-Century Music Style Sheet (which is mentioned by name in the main text precisely because it is only the point of view of one source, per WP:YESPOV/WP:INTEXT).
 * Do other journals suggest a different convention? From a Latin language point of view at least it would make idiomatic sense to omit punctuation after recte, but then I can easily imagine that others would prescribe a colon. That's why we can't just write it down as a fact ("There should be no punctuation, for example no colon, before the correct form when using recte."): for this we would need multiple sources all saying the same thing. ☿ Apaugasma  ( talk  ☉) 09:46, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Sic


text:
User:DavisIsWorking

My name is David. I love Wikipedia, and I am looking forward to making a positive contribution to the site.

title: User:DavisIsWorking


text:
Hugh Roberts (art historian)

Sir Hugh Ashley Roberts (born 20 April 1948) is a British art historian and curator.

He was the Director of the Royal Collection, the art collection of the British Royal Family, and Surveyor of the Queen's Works of Art, whose office is responsible for the care and maintenance of the royal collection of works of art owned by the Sovereign of the United Kingdom in an official capacity.

Roberts was closely involved in the restoration of Windsor Castle, a medieval castle and royal residence located in Windsor, Berkshire, England, notable for its long association with the British Royal Family and its architecture after its 1992 fire.

Career
He was previously a director of Christie's, an art-business and a fine-arts auction house, and was the head of its Decorative Arts Department. His particular area of expertise is French and English furniture and interior decoration of the 18th and 19th centuries; he has written extensively on these subjects in Royal Collection exhibition catalogues and major journals.

On 20 April 2010, on his retirement as Director of the Royal Collection, Roberts was appointed a Knight Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order. and Surveyor Emeritus of The Queen's Works of Art

Personal life
Roberts graduated from Corpus Christi College, Cambridge in 1970. On 13 December 1975, Roberts married The Hon. Jane Stephanie Low (later Dame Jane, Lady Roberts, DCVO), a daughter of the 1st Baron Aldington; they have two daughters.

title: Hugh Roberts (art historian)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countries by date of nationhood

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

The result of the debate was KEEP. All of the rename suggestions have been redirected back to the original title, so I'll not move it (and there's no gathering around any one name here anyway). -Splash 00:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

List of countries by date of nationhood
The lead of the article pretty well sums up the reasons for why the list should be deleted:

 * 1) Nation-building is a long evolutionary process. It is therefore practically impossible to come up with a single date for a nation's "birth".
 * 2) The following list is mainly based on data published by the CIA, and is therefore restricted to nations whose independence is recognised by the USA.
 * 3) The situation is futher complicated by the confusion between the terms nation (genereally considered an ethnic or cultural grouping) and state (an independent political entity).

There is no way to make this list useful, let alone NPOV. What makes it particularily biased is the chronological order which suggests that some nations are "older" than others. Still, many nations are listed more than once, with different dates.

I know many people have put considerable effort into the development of this list, but this cannot be an excuse for keeping a useless and biased article on WP. – Kpalion (talk) 00:16, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete – Kpalion (talk) 00:20, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Keep. Useful and informative. As for your objections:
 * Yes, it certainly is. That's why several nations are listed with more than one date. I consider it very appropriate.
 * Since creation of this list, it has been greatly expanded with data from other sources. Btw, "nations whose independence is recognised by the USA" is pretty much the same as "nations whose independence is recognized by some country", with Northern Cyprus, Palestine, Taiwan, and Western Sahara being the only contemporary exceptions I can think of.
 * This is a purely technical issue, that can be solved by rewording the introduction, or perhaps renaming the article.
 * Naive cynic 00:44, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Obvious keep Trollderella 01:26, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Valid encyclopedic article.Amren (talk) 01:34, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - very useful, cleanup issues are not vfd issues -- Francs2000 | Talk [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px| ]] 01:48, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. This just needs cleaning up. Jaxl | talk 01:56, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful list. Capitalistroadster 04:25, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Date of Nationhood cannot be "one" specific year in many cases especially in older countries in new ones yes like in Brasil everyone knows when Dom João declared independence from Portugal or in the U.S.A. also but like on what "date" did someplace like Egypt become a nation plus Egypt as it is now has nothing to do with the Egypt of the Pharos and same with Rome and Greece so this article is too politically biassed and misleading.Wiki brah 05:13, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Usefulness should override the technicalities Tintin 05:14, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep : As per Tintin above Manik Raina 05:15, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, as per Naive cynic. MCB 07:43, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * cautious keep, but subject to extensive cleanup. It is interesting, but it is intellectually lazy and it should incorporate discussion around the various types and stages of statehood. Peeper 09:44, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep --MicroFeet 11:53, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. List of largely arbitrary dates, inherently POV and very problematic, as the term "nation" is not clearly defined. Keeps out nations that do not have achieved a "national state" and includes some strange entries such as the German Democratic Republic, which I've never heard anyone consider a nation. Martg76 15:49, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * If this misleading article is actually to be kept, I strongly urge a move to List of countries by date of statehood as suggested by Roodog2k below. Martg76 23:38, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * KEEP and remove delete tag, ignore previous editor . D. J. Bracey (talk) [[Image:Flag of California.svg|25px]] 15:51, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Instead of suggesting to suppress discussion, why don't you give a reason for your vote? Martg76 16:03, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The issue's been settled. Martg76 17:53, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Typical candidate for cleanup. 129.215.194.205 16:17, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Definitly needs some work, nothing that can't be fixed HoratioVitero 17:25, 25 August 2005 (UTC) (sorry 'bout that)
 * Note that every one of this user's edits, save for one minor edit to Bible, is to VfD. Zoe 21:30, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Could need cleanup, but the concept of nation is fairly well understood. German Democratic Republic, aka. East Germany is not a strange entity; it sent people to the Olympics (e.g. 1968 Summer Olympics) and was recognized as a nation for decades. --Prosfilaes 17:27, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I think we shouldn't confuse statehood with nationhood. You'll have a hard time finding any German considering East Germany a nation, under whatever definition. The rename suggested below makes certainly more sense than keeping the page as it is. Martg76 22:41, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep as per Naive cynic. --Dysepsion 17:36, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Useful and interesting. But hopefully some of the conflict that occurs on other pages on what constitutes statehood can be avoided. Rx StrangeLove 18:16, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as per Naive cynic. This article just needs some editing work, but could be useful and definitely encyclopedic. --Blackcap | talk 19:22, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename. Changed vote after reading Roodog's points below. --Blackcap | talk 23:32, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * RENAME Good article, bad name. List of countries by date of statehood would be MUCH more accurate. For instance, believe it or not, several Nations exist within the United States, although this is an arguable point. Nine Nations of North America is one argument.  Navajo Nation is another argument.  JMHO, tho! Roodog2k 19:30, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Agreed. --Blackcap | talk 20:22, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep, for reasons other have given above. Evil Eye 22:30, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * KeepJournalist   C.[[Image:Smilie.gif|30px]] Holla @ me! |undefined
 * Rename to List of countries by date of statehood, per Roodog2k above. —Charles O'Rourke 23:20, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Possibly rename, if the editors of that article have a better name for it.  This is definitely useful information. --Idont Havaname 01:05, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep - useful and interesting trivia. Agreed it should be renamed. 23skidoo 05:04, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful list. Sjakkalle (Check!)  10:08, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename But do it to List of countries by date of independence please. While it is admittedly a U.S.-centric perspective, statehood does not make me think of independent sovereignity. Caerwine 14:52, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I'm game for that, its better than nationhood. Roodog2k 15:38, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * No, it's no good either. I'm afraid you can't escape a US-centric perspective. Nationhood or statehood not always equals independence. Many countries have existed since times immemorial but later lost and regained independence. For instance, Poland has existed since mid-10th century and the traditional date of Poland's statehood is 966. But because Poland was partitioned in the late 18th century and regained sovereignty after WW1, the date of independence is November 11, 1918. Poland's just an example, there are many more countries with similar histories. Perhaps, if the list is to stay (as it clearly is) it might be good to split it into (at least) to lists: one for countries by date of nationhood, and one for countries by (most recently regained) independence. The US, then, would be near the bottom of the former, and near the top of the latter. – Kpalion (talk) 17:33, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * How can you ppl consider a useful list that as no valid arguments. Do you think modern Egypt sees the birth of its nation in Ancient Egypt? come on! I've renamed the article I hope all the participants of this vote clean the article, it is really an ashaming article for wikipedia, that others can use to discredit this encyclopedia, that I think overall is much more thruthful than the Microsoft one for instance. --Pedro 18:18, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Please do not move the article while the vote is in progress. And BTW, Pedro, what is your vote? – Kpalion (talk) 23:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I didnt saw it was in Vfd, i just moved. o.o, I think the best is to redirect and clean the article. -Pedro 10:28, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Pedro, how could you possibly not know it was in VfD when A) there's a huge template at the top of the page, saying it's in VfD, and B) you actually voted on the VfD page, just three posts above this one? --Blackcap | talk 16:46, August 28, 2005 (UTC)
 * I saw it immidiatly, so what? It should be redirected again ending this vfd. --Pedro 23:38, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * O.K., I'm going to start with the problems one by one. The problem of why shouldn't I redirect/move a VfD page is dealt with in both WP:GVFD, an article you should have read before voting on a VfD, and in the message I left you on your talk page. Problem 2 is that moving this article is somewhat contentious and is not an opinion shared by the majority, some people want it moved to a different place, AND the title your moved it to is misspelled (capitalized "independence") and is disagreed with for various reasons. Your going ahead and moving it anyway shows a lack of respect for other's opinions. I also mentioned this on your talk page. Problem 3 is that you lied and said that you didn't know it was in VfD (three posts up), and when I called you on it, you said, "so what? It should be redirected again," which I take to mean that you don't paticularly care for the opinions of others, and that you didn't bother to read my message, which is what talk pages are for, or WP:DP and WP:GVFD. That's "so what." --Blackcap | talk 16:37, August 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Pedro did go ahead and move the article, unfortunately. I'll move it back and change the new List of countries by date of Independence, which is what he moved it to, to a redirect page. --Blackcap | talk 00:42, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Never mind. Just tried and it looks like I can't do that. Well, that's unfortunate. Instead, I'm going to put a notice on the talk page with a link to this VfD so that at least there's some way to get here. --Blackcap | talk 00:47, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * You have to be an admin to move it back. – Kpalion (talk) 13:45, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Yep. Is the egg showing? --Blackcap | talk 16:26, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep "Difficult to NPOV" is not a reason to delete an article. Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 22:35, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Definitely useful information. However, it could use a renaming. PBP 23:07, 28 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
User talk:Lithius

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Alf 00:17, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Re: Votes for deletion/H4xopolis
Hi Lithus,

On the VfD discussion Votes_for_deletion/H4xopolis, you asked "Note from Creator: Aww, man, why does it have to be deleted? Does it really matter if it's insignificant at this point?".

Wikipedia is not just a collection of information, it is an encyclopedia. As such, it has standards for the inclusion of articles. One of these standards is notability. The subject of an entry must be sufficiently notable for inclusion.

You may want to have a look at the following pages for more information:

What Wikipedia is not - Proposed guidelines for web sites - Vanity guidelines

Please contact me at my talk page if you want to discuss anything. --GraemeL (talk) 11:52, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Lithius


text:
User talk:Figgleeeeeo

--Figgleeeeeo 11:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)Your new article Philippa baryan sounds like nonsense. No such Google hits for her, neither Rick Baryan who is supposed to be someone famous. Adding nonsense to the Wikipedia is not on. Dysprosia 06:03, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I know they are real, because I am in their family, I am Amber Baryan. My husband Rick Baryan is a television presenter but has not yet got his first job, which might explain the lack of websites. As for my daughter, we prefer to keep personal information off the web. --Figgleeeeeo 06:06, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I think what Dysprosia means to say is that your family is not (in)famous enough to warrant a Wikipedia entry. No offense is intended.--inks 06:09, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * So if they don't even come up on Google, why should they be entered in something that intends to be an encyclopedia? When Rick Baryan becomes famous, then we might have an article for him - but only then and not before. Dysprosia 06:10, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I have to say, I do find that a little bit offensive. Who are you to say we do not belong on this encyclopaedia, if we are willing to make and update our own entries? My daughter will be very famous someday. Not everything can be found on Google. --Figgleeeeeo 06:10, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Please see WP:VAIN and WP:BIO and then let us know if you think your family qualifies for these criteria. Zoe 06:12, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

 * By the way, could you please let us know what publisher has published Philippa's book and will be publishing the upcoming one? Zoe 06:14, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

 * Ginninderra Press. I don't see why I am having to defend myself here. --Figgleeeeeo 06:15, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Can you cite any online sources at all? It's certainly plausible since I was reading newspapers at a very early age as well...but if this can't be verified, it's probably going to get voted off. - Lucky 6.9 06:11, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * "Child Progidy Publishes Book", ABC News Online, 23 April 2005. http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200508/s14454442.htm --Figgleeeeeo 06:15, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I hope it doesn't sound that I personally am saying that you do not belong on this encyclopedia; it is general consensus of the project that people who are not notable are not included in the encyclopedia (see for example Criteria for inclusion of biographies). For example, what if she does not become very famous? We do not have articles on every single person that enters Australian Idol, for instance, because not every single person that enters will win the competition. It is a similar principle we apply on Wikipedia. Dysprosia 06:15, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * But my children weren't on Australian Idol! You don't seem to understand, Philippa Baryan has published one book and has a second one on the way. --Figgleeeeeo 06:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Your ABC link doesn't work. Neither is Baryan mentioned on the http://www.ginninderrapress.com.au/ website. Dysprosia 06:17, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * You're kidding. That's all I need. The article expires just when I want to show it to somebody. They only keep them for 3 months. --Figgleeeeeo 06:20, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

They don't put everything on that site, we specifically asked for Philippa to be removed because she's too young to have personal information available. Also she published the book under a pseudonym, Tara Undercliff. --Figgleeeeeo 06:21, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Tara Undercliff is not listed as an author under the Ginninderra Press list of current publications. If you have an ISSN it could be looked up.--inks 06:23, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * So I don't count, but people like Cayden Boyd are allowed to have articles? Is there some sort of bribery going on, do I have to contribute to your 21-day fund drive? --Figgleeeeeo 06:24, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Allegations of improper behaviour are rude, and are not going to help your cause.--inks 06:27, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I was just wondering, after all, something about fundraising appears on every page I go to. I thought maybe there was some kind of special system here. Remember I am new. --Figgleeeeeo 06:32, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * You're saying Kara & Shelby Hoffman, who have written no books, are in some way superior to Philippa Baryan? Who learnt to read first? --Figgleeeeeo 06:26, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * You may want to look at Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. If you think that Cayden Boyd should not have an article, vote his article for deletion. We are asking you to provide some factual sources for your information. If there is none how can we verify your information? Dysprosia 06:29, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Would it help if I gave you my phone number? --Figgleeeeeo 06:30, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * You didn't read the links I supplied above, did you? And Tara Undercliff gets zero Google hits as well, and her supposed book is also a no-show.  Your phone number wouldn't help us to get information about this supposed book your supposed daughter wrote.  Zoe 06:31, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

 * For goodness' sake, we're all REAL. If you phoned me, I would be able to confirm that. And I did read the links you provided, and I feel Philippa qualifies on all counts. --Figgleeeeeo 06:33, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * No. Why would it? Whether you're real or not is not the issue. Wikipedia works by using outside sources, see Neutral point of view -- Wikipedia doesn't take a view on a subject, it describes others views of the subject. Wikipedia doesn't operate on the authority of its contributors.
 * I find all those links extremely confusing. Please remember that English is not my first language. My husband was born in Hong Kong. --Figgleeeeeo 06:36, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Funny, the now-deleted Amber Baryan article said "Amber Michelle Baryan (née Walters) was born in Melbourne, Australia". Zoe 06:45, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes. Myself, Amber, was born in Melbourne, Australia, but English wasn't my first language (shock horror, there are immigrants in Melbourne!). I picked it up when I went to school. My husband was born in Hong Kong. Problem? Not racism as well, I hope. --Figgleeeeeo 06:55, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * You'll have to explain how your husband (last name Baryan) born in Hong Kong means that you don't speak English as your native language, when you were born and raised in Australia and your maiden name is Walters.  Has your husband's lack of English proficiency somehow become contagious?  Zoe 07:17, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't actually have to explain anything to you. Are you trying to catch me out? But I will. Let's go through it again. I was born in Melbourne to an immigrant mother and immigrant father. My father came from England (hence the Walters), so he spoke English, but my mother's English was minimal at best. Her first language was Italian, and my father communicated to her in that language, which he had learnt at university and on his travels in Italy (where he met my mother). I had my father's name, Walters, but he died before I remember, so I was brought up for a few years solely by my mother, who constantly spoke Italian to me. There is a large Italian community in Melbourne, and we lived with Italian neighbours, and it wasn't until I went to school that I started to learn English. I had a very helpful teacher who made the experience easier; the children of my neighbours also spoke English. My husband's name is Baryan and he was born in Hong Kong. I never said he was not proficient in English, just that he was born in Hong Kong. Is that enough family history for you, or are you still going to try and prove I don't know my own name? --Figgleeeeeo 11:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Let me see if I can get this clear. You were born in an English-language country over 40 years ago, and, although you didn't speak English until you went to school, you were taught in English, presumably all of your school years, and yet you claim that you don't understand English well enough to consider it your native language?  What language do you speak with your Hong Kong-born husband and your Australia-born children?  And how does your husband's having been born in Hong Kong have any bearing on your ability to understand English?  Zoe 04:36, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * I am considering this some sort of harassment. Of course I am extremely proficient in English, as you can tell, but I am still allowed to truthfully make the point that it is not my first language. I never said that my husband's birth place had any bearing on my ability to speak, read, understand or otherwise communicate in any language, nor his. I just made the point that he was born in Hong Kong. At home, we speak English, the odd bit of Italian and our own family language. Have I satisfied you enough, or would you like to submit me to a short test in Indonesian to see if I really was born in Australia? --Figgleeeeeo 06:00, 27 August 2005 (UTC)
 * You said above, I find all those links extremely confusing. Please remember that English is not my first language. My husband was born in Hong Kong.. It was you who brought up your husband having been born in Hong Kong in relation to your inability to understand English.  You claim you don't understand English well enough to understand the links that people are supplying to you.  And yes, please, fill out the attached test in Indonesian in triplicate, please, with references.  Zoe 06:09, August 27, 2005 (UTC)
 * I never denied saying that. I am proficient in English; English is not my first language; I sometimes find links confusing; my husband was born in Hong Kong. --Figgleeeeeo 10:23, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The issue about the ABC site is incorrect as well, I was able to look up an article about another child prodigy on the ABC site from 2003. Dysprosia 06:34, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Are you saying that child prodigy is smarter than Philippa? --Figgleeeeeo 06:36, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Show me the link to the other article! Proof! --Figgleeeeeo 06:36, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

We are not questioning your existence or honesty. It is the article that is being evaluated. Please read the links suggested by Zoe and Dysprosia. Given that feelings are quite heated, perhaps it would be a good idea to take a break and resume this dicussion later, with cooler heads.--inks 06:38, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Just please show me the link to the other child prodigy article, inkhead. --Figgleeeeeo 06:39, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * So why can't I write articles on us on Wikipedia? How come there are articles on people I don't know about, like Zoe, Inkhead and Dr Adam Carr? --Figgleeeeeo 06:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Those are user pages, because they have a "User:" in front of them. They aren't part of the encyclopedia. Here is the other news article. http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200308/s930435.htm Dysprosia 06:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Firstly, that guy is British, and secondly, he's clearly up himself. --Figgleeeeeo 06:42, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * You are not helping your case. At least that guy has a news article to back up his story. Dysprosia 06:43, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * What's a user page and why don't I get one? Everybody else has one to make their own family articles. Again, is money an issue? --Figgleeeeeo 06:45, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * You have one. You edited it yourself: User:Figgleeeeeo. You can write whatever you want on that page and only that page and no one will argue. Dysprosia 06:48, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Really? Well why didn't anybody tell me? That was all I wanted. We can all have user pages. Here you all were, faffing around with votes for deletion, Cayden Boyd, child prodigies and other crap when you could have just said: "Amber, you are new to Wikipedia, instead of confusing you with links we will point you to your user page for your family articles and photos". --Figgleeeeeo 06:53, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia isn't a place for just your family articles and photos, we're not a free hosting site. Dysprosia 06:56, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I thought we'd solved the issue. Dr Adam Carr has information and photos of and about himself, anyway, why can't I do that? It's not a proper article, right? --Figgleeeeeo 06:58, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, but he uses his user page to take note of his work on the Wikipedia project. - Mgm|(talk) 11:42, August 26, 2005 (UTC)
 * Well I'll do that too then. --Figgleeeeeo 11:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Your user page is here Figgleeeeeo. Just click the "Edit this page" link at the top. --inks 06:47, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * If you want to argue a page be undeleted, see Votes for undeletion, and make your case there. Dysprosia 06:43, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

Figgs has now made a half-baked effort at deleting Cayden Boyd. Zoe 06:46, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

 * Who's Figgs? I was told to delete Cayden Boyd, anyway. --Figgleeeeeo 06:49, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

 * You're not User:Skyring by any chance? I just find the mention of Dr Adam Carr and a vanity publisher in Canberra a little coincidental--Porturology 04:22, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * How about...no? I am Amber Baryan. What is with this place? --Figgleeeeeo 22:33, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

First language
If English isn't your first language, you may find it easier to contribute in another language. The Main Page lists all of them if you scroll down a little. - Mgm|(talk) 11:44, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Figgleeeeeo


text:
Talk:Raymond Herrera

Untitled
WTF is a "stop-go" technique? Could someone explain it to this to a fledgling drummer and curious Wikipedian? // Gargaj 00:17, 2005 August 25 (UTC)

This page needs SERIOUS editing, people! I would do it if I had time, but there are just so many flaws I don't have time right now. I've just gone round and cleaned up the Christian Olde Wolbers, Andrew Shives and Byron Stroud stubs. I didn't check the edit history, but I'd wager all of these are done by the same person, and all are equally awful. A drummer needs to come and fix this article very, very quickly. For the record, Herrera does use triggers.

I fixed the comment on triggers. It may be a fact he uses them but he shouldn't be considered a bad drummer for using them. Triggers are not a dirty thing.

Also, a "stop-go" technique can go in many examples though one way to put it is like the intro of a song is fast but the verse suddenly becomes slow.

I maintain Raymond's website and other such business. I will discuss with him the contents of this page and update it.

Unlike continously playing single strokes on the bass drums for an extended period of time, a "stop go technique" is a way of playing where you play in bursts. (In this case, Herrera's double bass drum technique.) For example: 4 single strokes, pause, another 4 single stokes, pause, another 4 single strokes, etc.

The info on this page needs to be written by someone other than a 16 year old.

I did my best to add more detail to the unique facets of Raymond's playing style, and added a previously overlooked tidbit about the way he "doubles" his bass drum with palm muted guitar notes.

I am, by the way, 16 years old. Get over it. 24.211.19.239 07:07, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Trivia
Why is it important to point out he loves to sleep? In fact, this trivia section seems pointless. Can anyone get the specs of his drum kit? Julez Nossy (talk) 19:47, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Raymond Herrera


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Westboro Baptist Church (Topeka)

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

The result of the debate was speedy keep -- Francs2000 | Talk 01:43, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Westboro Baptist Church (Topeka)
Delete Article is far too long, has little to no references, mostly opinion, negative point of view, bad spelling, poor grammar. It should be deleted or at best reduced to a paragraph and merged with Fred Phelps which itself suffers from most of the same problems.

As it stands right now it is "6,216 words of toilsome reading—a cheap, tacky, wearisome, and confused jumble of crude nonsense." 66.32.97.69 00:19, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * All reasons given are matters for the talk page, not VfD. Keep CanadianCaesar 00:45, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * Speedy keep, trolling nomination. The same user has nominated the article on FAC, where s/he describes it as "well-written and packed full of factual, verified information." Har har. Bishonen | talk 01:07, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep sigh. Trollderella 01:27, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * SPEEDY KEEP. All of those are cleanup issues. Very deserving of an article. N (t/c) 01:42, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep - nomination in bad faith. -- Francs2000 | Talk [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px| ]] 01:43, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.


text:
Anahareo

Gertrude Bernard (June 18, 1906 – June 17, 1986), commonly known as Anahareo, was a Canadian writer, animal rights activist and conservationist of Algonquin and Mohawk ancestry. Throughout her life, she challenged cultural stereotypes of First Nations women and proved herself to be "an intrepid, resourceful, and self-reliant woman who could manage on her own in the wilderness and yet was no stranger to the customs and trappings of modern civilization". At a time when "conservation" stood for increasing the numbers of animals for the sake of hunting and trapping, she, along with Grey Owl, pioneered a new concept – that animals have intrinsic rights and deserve to be treated with respect and compassion. In the later years of her life, she became an outspoken champion of animal rights.

Early life (1906–1925)
Gertrude Bernard was born on June 18, 1906, in Mattawa, Ontario, where she spent her childhood. Her mother, Mary Nash Ockiping, was Algonquin, while her father, Matthew Bernard, was Algonquin and  Mohawk. Her father nicknamed her "Pony" because "she always ran, she never walked". Her mother died when she was four, and she was raised by her paternal grandmother. "Catherine Papineau Bernard, 'Big Grandma', was a respected member of the community who combined a strong Catholic faith with a fierce pride in her heritage and the knowledge and crafts of her people." Bernard adored her grandmother, who related many memories of her beloved husband and taught her Mohawk customs. Bernard and her descendants were always proud of their Mohawk ancestry. At the age of eleven, her grandmother became too frail to care for her, and one of her aunts, with her family, moved in. Bernard proved to be a rebellious child and grew into a strongly independent young woman.

In 1925 Bernard took a summer job as waitress at the island resort of Camp Wabikon, on Lake Temagami. Her biographer, Kristin Gleeson, writes: "At nineteen she was now a beautiful and energetic young woman with bobbed hair who dressed in riding breeches and shirt, though if the occasion demanded she would apply makeup – the very picture of a modern woman."

She caught the eye of a guest at the resort, a wealthy New Yorker, who offered to pay her school fees. She and her father decided that in the fall she would attend Loretto Abbey, a Roman Catholic boarding school in Toronto. This was not to be, since later in the summer she would meet a guide working at the resort:

"A handsome mysterious man, dressed in a buckskin vest, a Hudson Bay belt and moccasins, Archie appeared to Gertie like the dashing daredevil heroes she idolized – Jesse James and Robin Hood. Compared to the bland wealthy vacationers, Archie reeked of adventure and excitement. Gertie found him so fascinating she wasted no time in discovering his name and that he was a guide."

His name was Archibald Belaney and he would later come to be known as Grey Owl. He was 36, almost twice her age, and claimed to be the son of a Scottish man and an Apache woman and to have been born in Mexico.

Life with Grey Owl (1926–1936)
In February, 1926, forgoing her plans for school, Anahareo (as she would come to be commonly known) joined Belaney near Doucet in the Abitibi region of northwestern Quebec, where he was earning a living as a trapper. She accompanied Belaney on the trapline and was horrified by what she experienced:

"Nothing in her small-town up-bringing had prepared her for the heart-wrenching sight of the frozen corpses of animals who had died in agony while trying desperately to escape from the unyielding metal jaws of the leghold traps. Nor could she bear to watch as Archie used the wooden handle of his axe to club to death those who were still living."

She attempted to make him see the torture that animals suffered when they were caught in traps. According to the account given in Pilgrims of the Wild, Belaney located a beaver lodge, which he knew to be occupied by a mother beaver, and set a trap for her. When the mother beaver was caught, he began to canoe away to the cries of the kittens, which greatly resemble the sound of human infants. She begged him to set the mother free, but, needing the money from the beaver's pelt, he could not be swayed. But the next day he rescued the baby beavers, which the couple adopted and named McGinnis and McGinty.

Gertie’s identity as a resourceful, self-reliant woman, at home in the bush yet still at ease with modern ways, emerged. She made her own and Belaney's clothes out of buckskin, canvas, and cloth. She dressed in a distinctive way that was not typical of Indigenous women – in breeches, fringed buckskin jackets and vests, and laceup prospector boots.

Their courtship was at times eventful. In her memoir Devil in Deerskins: My Life with Grey Owl, she claimed that she stabbed Belaney with a knife at one point. In summer, 1927, Belaney proposed to her. Due to his undissolved marriage to his first wife, Angele Egwuna, the couple could not marry under Canadian law, but the chief of the Lac Simon Band of Indians gave them a "marriage blessing".

In 1928 Belaney and Anahareo, along with the adopted beavers, moved to the area of Cabano in southeastern Quebec, where they were to reside until 1931. It was here that Belaney transformed himself into the writer and lecturer, Grey Owl. The transformation began with the appearance of his first article, "The Passing of the Last Frontier", which was published in 1929 in the English outdoors magazine Country Life. There followed a request from the publisher for the book that would be published in 1931 as The Men of the Last Frontier. He had fully entered into the persona of Grey Owl by January, 1931, when he gave a talk at the annual convention of the Canadian Forestry Association in Montreal. "The event was a huge success. It set the pattern for numerous speeches Grey Owl was to give, dressed in his Indian regalia, with films of his tame beaver to illustrate his stories."

Meanwhile, Anahareo was asserting her independence and bucking stereotypes by embarking on prospecting expeditions in remote areas of northwestern Quebec. She was greatly interested in prospecting, always hoping to stake a claim. This did not pan out, but she did succeed in honing her backcountry skills on these trips: "She portaged canoes, carried packs using tumplines, and built fires and pitched tents like any other skilled bushman. She was an expert with the canoe, able to negotiate rapids and shallows with ease." She accepted one job that involved hauling 1,320 kilos weight of equipment to a distant lake in winter by dog sled.

In the spring of 1931, Grey Owl accepted an offer of employment from the Parks Branch as the "caretaker of park animals", first at Riding Mountain National Park in Manitoba and then at Prince Albert National Park in Saskatchewan. He and Anahareo, with two new beavers, Jelly Roll and Rawhide, left Quebec, bound for a new life in the west.

The winter of 1931-1932 found Grey Owl preoccupied with writing. Although Anahareo had strongly encouraged him to write, she found it made him "like a zombie". Pregnant with their daughter, Shirley Dawn, who would be born in 1932, she was fed up, later writing "All I heard from Archie that winter was the scratch, scratch of his pen, and arguments against taking a bath. Like a kid, he loathed baths."

Due to her continuing interest in prospecting, she began to study mineralogy. In 1933 she heard of a discovery of gold in Chapleau, Ontario. Leaving Dawn in the care of the Winters family in Prince Albert, she set out on a prospecting trip to try her luck, an event that was reported in the Christian Science Monitor under the headline, "Indian Squaw Turns From Kitchen Duties to Gold Prospecting". She changed her mind and returned home after experiencing five days and nights in a drenching rain that prevented her from going into the woods.

Anahareo went alone on prospecting trips to the remote Churchill River area. The first trip was in the summer of 1933. The second trip lasted an entire year, from the summer of 1934 to the summer of 1935. She travelled by canoe to Wollaston Lake, 550 kilometers north of Prince Albert, and continued farther north to the edge of the Barren Lands. Grey Owl's letters to her betrayed a mixed bag of emotions: admiration for her fiercely independent spirit and courage in making such an arduous trip alone, concern for her safety, envy that she could make a trip into the bush that poor health and the pressure of writing prevented him from making – also irritation that the endeavour cost more than they could afford. At his request, she returned in the summer of 1935 to help him prepare for the upcoming lecture tour in Great Britain and to look after the beavers in his absence.

After Grey Owl's return from the lecture tour in Great Britain, the couple's tumultuous ten-year relationship suffered a serious rupture in April 1936, and they agreed to separate for some time. Anahareo received a monthly allowance of $50, almost half of Grey Owl's salary. They parted for good later that year, probably in September. That was the last time Anahareo ever saw Grey Owl alive.

Years of hardship (1937–1959)
With her daughter Dawn still in the care of a family in Prince Albert, Anahareo made some effort to pursue a film career in Hollywood. (She had previously appeared in two of Grey Owl's "beaver" films: The Beaver People and Pilgrims of the Wild. ) But her attempt came to an end in June, 1937, when she gave birth to her second daughter, Ann. The father's name did not appear on the birth certificate and she never publicly stated who the father was. Anahareo found herself in a precarious position financially and socially: Attempts to make use of the backcountry skills she had developed to make money as an experienced guide were fruitless, and she lacked the means to support herself and a new baby. Due to entrenched cultural stereotypes, she also faced particular challenges as an unwed Indigenous mother: The possibility that Ann would be forcibly taken away from her, and she herself institutionalised, were not negligible. After taking shelter for some time in a Salvation Army residence for unwed mothers in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, she gave Ann up for adoption by the Eagles, an Anglo-Canadian couple, who took her to live with them in Calgary. She would grow up with them and only later discover the identity of her biological mother.

After having been away for many months on his second lecture tour, taking in Great Britain, the United States and Canada, Grey Owl returned home, a very ill man. Anahareo was alerted that he was dying in hospital in Prince Albert. She rushed there, but he died before she could see him, on April 13, 1938.

Shortly afterwards, the sensational news broke that he was not half-Indian, as he had claimed to be, but an Englishman born in Hastings, without a trace of Indigenous blood. Anahareo later wrote:

"When, finally, I was convinced that Archie was English, I had the awful feeling for all those years I had been married to a ghost, that the man who now lay buried at Ajawaan was someone I had never known, and that Archie had never really existed."

At the invitation of Grey Owl's London publisher, Lovat Dickson, Anahareo travelled to England in 1939 and there met Belaney's mother, Kittie Scott-Brown. Dickson's hope was that "she would, or could, detect in her a drop of Indian blood. Of course, there wasn't a trace".

At Dickson's behest, Anahareo wrote a book of memoirs called My Life With Grey Owl, which was published in 1940. She was dissatisfied with the book, in part because of her lack of control over the content. She complained "The usual portrayal of myself has been that of a sweet, gentle Indian maiden—whispering to the leaves—swaying with the breeze, tra la—. No, no, I’m a rebel really."

In 1939, Anahareo met Eric Moltke, a member of the noble Moltke-Huitfeldt family and formally a count. He had immigrated to Canada from Sweden to start a new life.

"Anahareo found Eric handsome, charming and interesting, and he shared her delight in dancing and music. She also valued his regard for her as an equal and the easy manner in which he dismissed race and class. He knew of her past experiences and it made no difference to him. And it could not have escaped her thoughts that with Eric as her husband she would have the extra security that assured that her experience in Saskatoon would not be repeated."

They were married in Winnipeg, Manitoba, where they hoped to find good job opportunities, but ended up doing menial labour. According to Kristin Gleeson, the use of alcohol was a problem for the couple:

"Eric, like Grey Owl, was no stranger to drink and by this time it was a familiar part of Anahareo’s life. For Anahareo alcohol was an integral part of any celebration, good time, relaxation or party that enabled her to overcome her shyness and become outgoing, but for Eric it was a daily necessity."

She continues:

"In some ways Anahareo had chosen a partner that possessed characteristics that had drawn her to Grey Owl. His charm, wit and an alcohol-fuelled love of a good time were all qualities she had enjoyed with Grey Owl. And with both Grey Owl and Eric she was happy to drink along with them and have fun. With her days in the bush behind her and still raw from the memories from her experiences in Calgary, Saskatoon and Banff, Anahareo’s confidence had diminished. She no longer had trips to the bush to reinforce her sense of capability and strength that marked her for an exceptional woman. She could only get menial jobs that did little to challenge her inquiring mind. With Eric beside Anahareo, alcohol became a way to escape or find confidence."

Moltke enlisted in the army in 1941 and served as a tank driver in WWII. Pregnant with her third daughter, Katherine, Anahareo moved back to Saskatoon, where she rented a small house and lived on a small army wife's pension. Benefiting from a guaranteed income, she brought Dawn from the Winters family in Prince Albert to live with her and Katherine and concentrated on providing a stable family life.

Katherine was four years old and Dawn nearly fourteen when Moltke returned to the family after the war. Having trouble adjusting to civilian life, he drank heavily and was unable to find a job. In 1947 Dawn returned to Prince Albert. Anahareo left Moltke and took a job as cook and housekeeper at a farm in the area. In 1948 Moltke found a job in Canmore, Alberta, and, hoping for a new start, Anahareo and Katherine joined him there.

A friend of Anahareo, Wilna Moore, was fascinated by Grey Owl, and enlisted Anahareo's help in preparing an "exciting narrative of his life". In 1950, she sent the manuscript to Macmillan of Canada, Grey Owl's old publisher. The reviewer reported that "the manuscript itself was 'bulky, untidily put together and poorly typed', and that 'the spelling and punctuation leave much to be desired and the authors frequently use words in their wrong context'." He also questioned "whether certain episodes recorded were really fact or fiction". Macmillan turned down the manuscript.

Anahareo's life with Moltke continued to be troubled, and they periodically separated and then came back together again. To her great joy, she received a visit from her second daughter in 1953. Now spelling her name with an "e", Anne was sixteen and had discovered the identity of her biological mother. Finding life with Moltke untenable, Anahareo, with Katherine, moved back to her childhood home in Mattawa for some time, where she met her family for the first time in nearly thirty years. She eventually decided to return to Moltke in Canmore. Although his family in Sweden had agreed to pay for Katherine to attend boarding school, he refused to give his assent. Moltke suffered a severe workplace accident, and the family moved to Calgary, where he was receiving treatment in hospital. Permanently disabled, unable to work and depressed, he drank heavily. Anahareo was also depressed and tired. When Katherine left for beauty school, she decided to go live with Dawn. Moltke arranged to return to the care of his first wife and the couple permanantly separated on good terms in 1959. He died in 1963.

Success and recognition (1960–1986)
After moving in with Dawn, Anahareo was diagnosed with a malfunctioning thyroid, the cause of the depression and ill-health from which she had suffered for years. With the improvement brought about by its successful treatment, she began to pursue two projects: a film and a book about Grey Owl. These, she insisted, must portray herself and Grey Owl authentically. She travelled to Toronto, Vancouver and Los Angeles promoting the film project, but with no success. There was little appetite in the film industry for an authentic portrayal of Indigenous Canadians in the 1960s.

Undaunted, Anahareo began writing a book about Grey Owl. Starting in the late 1960s, interest in his life, long on the wane, began to increase, as Kristin Gleeson observed:

"As the public became more aware of the negative impact of pollution and the importance of the wilderness to the health of the planet, more Canadians began to view Grey Owl through his role in pioneering wilderness preservation and felt he should be recognized for these achievements."

The Parks Department restored Beaver Lodge, which had fallen into disuse. Anahareo wrote to a fan "I am sure you would feel much better to see it now. Dawn says there is a loneliness there, but the spirits still abid[e]."

Popular and scholarly publications about Grey Owl began to appear. Professor Donald B. Smith published an article on Grey Owl in Ontario History in 1971, a small taste of what was to become his monumental 1990 study From the Land of Shadows: the Making of Grey Owl. The CBC produced a portrait of Grey Owl in 1972. Lovat Dickson brought out a second book of memoirs, Wilderness Man: The Strange Story of Grey Owl, in 1973.

In 1972 Anahareo's book Devil in Deerskins: My Life with Grey Owl was published. It was a popular success, reaching number four on the Toronto Star best seller list. The title was inspired by a conversation she had had with Grey Owl years before, in which he told her he would write a book called "Devil in Deerskins", which would be his last book:

"When I asked him why it was going to be his last book he said that after they read that book they wouldn’t read another line from him. And I asked him why and he said Oh, there are things about me that even you don’t know. So, I asked him what he was going to call the book and he was going to call it 'Devil in Deerskins' ... and I figured that was what he was going to come out with, to tell all, so, but he didn’t get around to it."

The idea of a film about Grey Owl returned in 1975, when a Toronto film company bought the rights to Dickson's Wilderness Man: The Strange Story of Grey Owl. The film was supposed to feature Marlon Brando as Grey Owl, but the idea never got off the ground. (The company later approached Anahareo for the rights to her book for parts to be included in a scaled-down production of Dickson's story, but she refused. This idea too never got off the ground.) Meanwhile, a Toronto theatre company put on a play entitled Life and Times of Grey Owl. Anahareo's reaction to the opening night performance was scathing: It was "totally unrealistic and the actress bore no resemblance in appearance or mannerisms and definitely not in spirit to her.” She stated: "It turned out to be a parody. Archie must have flipped in his crib.”

Two profiles of Anahareo appeared in the Vancouver Weekend Sun and BC Outdoors in 1980 and 1981, which "succeeded in portraying Anahareo as a living, breathing First Nations woman who could not be easily slotted into any old Aboriginal stereotype... She was a determined woman, with miles of experience, who was committed to her views."

In the remaining years of her life, Anahareo continued to be active in the conservation and animal rights movement. She joined the Society for the Protection of Fur Bearing Animals and campaigned for various issues regarding animal protection such as banning leg hold traps and promoting the use of humane traps. In 1979 she became a member of the Order of Nature of the International League for Animal Rights. The medal she received was engraved with Grey Owl’s words, "kindness is the hallmark of civilization". In 1983 she was presented with the Order of Canada.

During a visit to Grey Owl's birthplace of Hastings to meet the Grey Owl Society, Dawn suddenly died after a long-term battle with diabetes. On June 17, 1986, just a day before her eightieth birthday, Anahareo died in Kamloops, British Columbia. She was buried next to Dawn and Grey Owl above Beaver Lodge.

Anahareo's writings

 * ''My Life With Grey Owl (1940)
 * Devil in Deerskins: My Life with Grey Owl (1972)

title: Anahareo


text:
Eugene Reybold

Eugene Reybold (February 13, 1884 – November 21, 1961) was distinguished as the World War II Chief of Engineers who directed the largest United States Army Corps of Engineers in the nation's history.

Reybold was born in Delaware City, Delaware. He graduated from Delaware College in 1903. Commissioned in the Coast Artillery Corps in 1908, Reybold was assigned to military housing and coast defense construction work. Stationed at Fort Monroe throughout World War I, he became commandant of the Coast Artillery School in 1919. He then transferred to the Corps of Engineers in 1926 and served as District Engineer in Buffalo, New York; Wilmington, North Carolina; and Memphis, Tennessee. In the last assignment he successfully battled record Mississippi River flood crests. He was appointed Southwestern Division Engineer (1937–40) and War Department Assistant Chief of Staff, G-4 (1940–41). Appointed Chief of Engineers shortly before Pearl Harbor, General Reybold directed the Corps' tremendous range of activities throughout the war and became the first Army officer ever to attain the rank of Lieutenant General while serving in the position of Chief of Engineers.

General Reybold retired on January 31, 1946, and died November 21, 1961, in Washington, D.C. He was awarded a Distinguished Service Medal with Oak Leaf Cluster.

title: Eugene Reybold


text:
Dizzy: Prince of the Yolkfolk

Dizzy: Prince of the Yolkfolk is an adventure video game published in December 1991 by Codemasters for the Amstrad CPC, Atari ST, Commodore 64, ZX Spectrum, MS-DOS, NES and Amiga. It was the sixth game in the Dizzy adventure series. Initially it was only released as part of the Dizzy's Excellent Adventures compilation. The creators of the series, the Oliver Twins, outsourced the video game company Big Red Software to design and develop the game. The game interface and mechanics resemble those of Magicland Dizzy, discarding changes introduced in the fifth game.

The game was enhanced and re-released in November 1992 with the Aladdin Deck Enhancer under the title Dizzy the Adventurer. The title was then released in 1993 as part of The Excellent Dizzy Collection. An HD remake of this game was released on the Android and iOS platforms in December 2011.

title: Dizzy: Prince of the Yolkfolk


text:
User:Parker for President

Parker for President
I mean we could do worse right? I say we vote for LHP in 2008! Hillary? Not a chance. McCain? Please! Nader? Don't make me laugh!

Only Larry H. Parker has what it takes to fight for us! (And get us money!)

Vote for Larry H. Parker!!

title: User:Parker for President


text:
User talk:Bigbadboston

Chowdah!
Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:Bigbadboston


text:
List of elected officials in Los Angeles

This is a list of elected officials serving the city of Los Angeles, California. It includes member of the Los Angeles City Council, Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, California State Assembly, California State Senate, United States House of Representatives, and Los Angeles citywide officials.


text:
Anton Karas

Anton Karl Karas (7 July 1906 – 10 January 1985) was an Austrian zither player and composer, best known for his internationally famous 1948 soundtrack to Carol Reed's The Third Man. His association with the film came about as a result of a chance meeting with its director. The success of the film and the enduring popularity of its theme song changed Karas' life.

Early life
Anton was born illegitimate at Marchfeldstraße 17, Brigittenau, Vienna to Theresia Streckel. He was later legitimized by her marriage to a factory worker, Karl Josef Karas. One of five children, Anton Karas was already keen on music as a child. He wanted to become a bandleader, which was impossible because of his family's financial situation. He was allowed to learn to play an instrument, as were his two brothers and two sisters. He later reported that his first zither was one he found in his grandmother's attic at the age of 12.

As ordered by his father, he became an apprentice tool and die maker at the age of 14, while taking evening courses in music at a private institution. He finished his apprenticeship in 1924, and worked in a car factory until becoming unemployed in January 1925. Having already begun to study at the University of Music and Performing Arts, Vienna in 1924, he subsequently earned a living as an entertainer in a Heuriger. He soon earned more than his father, and continued his studies until 1928.

Career
In 1930, he married, with the birth of his daughter following three months later. From 1939 to 1945 he was with the German Wehrmacht anti-aircraft warfare, temporarily in Russia, where he took a zither along. He lost more than one instrument from war action, but always managed to find another one.

The Third Man

In the summer of 1948, director Carol Reed was preparing to shoot The Third Man in Vienna and was staying in the Hotel Sacher, along with many of the British elements of the Allied Control Commission for Austria. Robert Baty, the young son of the Director of Education, C.W. Baty, was tasked with showing the director around the city. On the second day, they stopped at a Heuriger and heard Karas playing the zither in the background. This is described in Karas' L.A. Times/Reuters obituary which states that:

"Reed, desperately searching for a theme tune ... chanced on the tavern in Vienna's Grinzing wine-growing district. Struck by the simple zither melodies, Reed asked a stunned Karas if he would compose the music for the film. Karas protested, saying he had never actually written music. As Karas later told the story, the director insisted and invited Karas to England. The Austrian became homesick and asked to return. Reed told him he could; when he had written the music. Under this pressure, Karas wrote his Harry Lime theme."

The film—with the music a contributing factor—was a success, and Karas' life was changed drastically. As a result, he toured globally and performed for many celebrities, including members of the British Royal family. Princess Margaret invited him to London's Empress Club, where he played twice a week while in London. He also appeared before Queen Juliana of the Netherlands, members of the Swedish royal family, and Pope Pius XII.

By the end of 1949, half a million copies of "The Harry Lime Theme" had been sold, an unprecedented number. The success of the score caused a surge in zither sales.

In Austria, the film opened on 10 March 1950, in Vienna's Apollo Kino, and it initially offended some Viennese inhabitants, as it focused on the disgrace of the destroyed city. Vienna's newspaper critics hated the film, except for its music. When Karas returned to Austria after his first world tour in July 1950, he was welcomed by Chancellor Leopold Figl and other members of the government. Most importantly, the public liked the film. In Brigittenau, where Karas was born, people queued for tickets, which were sold out eight days in advance.

Karas disliked the glamour, and his soundtrack proved to be an enduring one-hit wonder. He later stated, "I never was a star, and never felt like one. It is because of that film that I was pushed from one place to the other ... My only desire was to be back home again." He toured again in 1951, travelling to Montreal and Las Vegas, followed by other tours, including Japan in 1962, 1969 and 1972, where he performed for Emperor Hirohito.

In 1953 Karas opened a heuriger or wine bar in Vienna he named Zum Dritten Mann. It became fashionable among cinema celebrities including Orson Welles, Gina Lollobrigida, Curd Jürgens, Hans Moser, Paul Hörbiger, Marika Rökk and Johannes Heesters, thereby becoming a tourist attraction. He was not satisfied, as he preferred to perform for locals who would understand him, his language and music. Because of this, he retired and retreated from the limelight in 1966, explaining, "I'm not a tourist guy, and what I did there had hardly anything to do with 'Vienna Heuriger'."

The first few bars of "The Third Man Theme" are engraved on his grave marker in Vienna.

title: Anton Karas


text: User talk:63.19.204.168

title: User talk:63.19.204.168


text:
Hylton v. United States

Hylton v. United States, 3 U.S. (3 Dall.) 171 (1796), is an early United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that a yearly tax on carriages did not violate the Article I, Section 2, Clause 3 and Article I, Section 9, Clause 4 requirements for the apportioning of direct taxes. The Court concluded that the carriage tax was not a direct tax, which would require apportionment among the states. The Court noted that a tax on land was an example of a direct tax that was contemplated by the Constitution.

The case is also significant for being the first case by the Supreme Court to rely on judicial review, later formally established by Marbury v. Madison (1803), to decide whether a statute of Congress was unconstitutional.

Oral argument
Alexander Hamilton argued before the Court on behalf of the government and claimed that the tax was a valid use of the power of Congress. Justice James Iredell wrote two days after the event: "Mr. Hamilton spoke in our Court, attended by the most crowded audience I ever saw there, both Houses of Congress being almost deserted on the occasion. Though he was in very ill health, he spoke with astonishing ability, and in a most pleasing manner, and was listened to with the profoundest attention. His speech lasted about three hours."

Seriatim opinions
The Justices at the time, rather than issuing a single opinion of the Court, instead issued seriatim opinions, with each writing separately and in turn reading a separate analysis. Justice Chase wrote, "As I do not think the tax on carriages is a direct tax…. I am for affirming the judgment of the Circuit Court." Justice Paterson wrote, "All taxes on expenses or consumption are indirect taxes. A tax on carriages is of this kind, and of course is not a direct tax.... I am, therefore, of opinion, that the judgment rendered in the Circuit Court of Virginia ought to be affirmed." Justice Iredell wrote, "I am clearly of opinion this is not a direct tax in the sense of the Constitution, and therefore that the judgment ought to be affirmed." Justice Wilson wrote, "I shall now, however, only add, that my sentiments, in favor of the constitutionality of the tax in question, have not been changed."

Other comments
Regarding the definition of duties, Justice Samuel Chase wrote, "The term duty, is the most comprehensive next to the generic term tax; and practically in Great Britain, (whence we take our general ideas of taxes, duties, imposts, excises, customs, etc.) embraces taxes on stamps, tolls for passage, etc. etc. and is not confined to taxes on importation only."

On the issue of judicial review, he wrote, "As I do not think the tax on carriages is a direct tax, it is unnecessary, at this time, for me to determine, whether this court, constitutionally possesses the power to declare an act of Congress void, on the ground of its being made contrary to, and in violation of, the Constitution; but if the court have such power, I am free to declare, that I will never exercise it, but in a very clear case."

Subsequent history
The Court's interpretation of federal taxes on personal property as "indirect taxes" lasted until the 1895 case of Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co. Writing for the majority in Pollock, Chief Justice Fuller explained, "We are of opinion that taxes on personal property, or on the income of personal property, are likewise direct taxes." The Congressional Research Service lists the Hylton decision as having been overruled by the Pollock decision.

In 1913, the Sixteenth Amendment was adopted, overruling Pollock relating to taxes on income from real estate and personal property. The Amendment did not address taxes on personal property itself. Writing for the majority in the 1916 case of Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., Chief Justice White explained that the "Amendment contains nothing repudiating or challenging the ruling in the Pollock Case that the word 'direct' had a broader significance, since it embraced also taxes levied directly on personal property because of its ownership, and therefore the Amendment at least impliedly makes such wider significance a part of the Constitution...."

In 1916, while presiding over Stanton v. Baltic Mining Co., the Supreme Court said: “… the meaning of the 16th Amendment as interpreted in the Brushaber Case,... by the previous ruling it was settled that the provisions of the 16th Amendment conferred no new power of taxation.”

Use as precedent
In 2012, Chief Justice John Roberts cited Hylton v. United States as a precedent for deeming the mandate for individuals to buy health insurance contained in the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010) to be constitutional as a tax.

title: Hylton v. United States


text:
Talk:Matthew Harding

Notability
This is non-notable musical vanity, and lacks a neutral point of view to boot. Google had no results on DJ 'Matti Matt'. It is vanity him himself. (Apologies, by the way; I could not find a template for speedily deleting a section alone.) IINAG 00:23, 25th August 2005 (UTC)

 * Any suggestions on becoming making this addition "more neutral" will be more than welcome. However, I would be interested in finding out how does one become "notable", and at what point in time does "vanity" become "professional" ?  The reason google may or may not be able to find DJ Matti Matt, is that the website http://www.mattsmusic.com.au is new, as is the artist persona.  Submitting to search engines, arranging url and domain name links, business names, etc all takes time.  Doubtless in a months time search results may yeild different answers that what may be available today. My real name is "Matthew Harding", which I apparently share with an ex-owner of the Chelsea Football club in England.  I have played music with famous people, and on famous recordings available throughout the world.  Surely I have points of interest that are viable and valuable, just like my namesake who's wikipedia page I have added myself to ?  Let the debate begin !! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matthew Harding (talk • contribs) 02:19, 25 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Matthew: these are the guidelines for what classifies as notable and what does not. It is a fairly established Wikipedia convention. No offence, mate, but when you qualify under WP:Music, I am positive that someone in the wikisphere will add you themselves. Until then, good luck with your recordings From interest, what are these famous recordings of which you speak? The perennial question: are you credited on any of them. Over here on Wikipedia, not many people who have played sessions with people more famous have their own articles. If you are permanently part of a notable band, that is great; as is if you are famous independently and record a session with someone else (like with Jack White recording Go It Alone with Beck.) But, if we gave an article to every person who ever played with Beck, for example, there would be hundreds of articles about people who have not accomplished themselves. Sure, they may be fine musicians, but that does not make them article-worthy in their own right. IINAG 15:52, 25 August 2005

title: Talk:Matthew Harding


text:
Talk:Ethnic groups of China

Gaoshan, the Taiwanese aborigines
Is there a better way of presenting/handling the 'political issue' than having an inline note? It looks really awkward the way it is. Or, is it really necessary in this context? The note seems to just want to remind the readers that Taiwan is not necessarily considered part of China (or the PRC to be precise), but supposedly there are a few Gaoshan people on the mainland too (in the Fujian province). -Broccoli 00:24, August 25, 2005 (UTC)
 * I moved these to footnotes for improved readability and elaboration. Shawnc 21:13, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ethnic groups of China


text:
HDMS Triton

At least five ships of the Royal Danish Navy have borne the name HDMS Triton:

 * HDMS Triton (1790) a 30 gun frigate designed by E.W.Stibolt
 * HDMS Triton (1913)
 * HDMS Triton (1915) an Æger-class submarine launched in 1915 and sold for scrapping in 1946.
 * HDMS Triton (F347) a Triton-class corvette launched in 1954 and decommissioned in 1981.
 * HDMS Triton (F358) a Thetis-class frigate launched in 1990.

title: HDMS Triton