text:
Talk:Aquila (Roman)

The Ball
"Another figure used in the standards was a ball (pila), supposed to have been emblematic of the dominion of Rome over the world (Isid. Orig. xviii.3); "

 * That doesn't make sense if the ball is a symbol of the globe. Did the Romans believe the world was round?  If not, then how could they have used a ball as a representation of the world? Comatose51 04:30, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The Romans knew that the world was round, that the ancients generally belived the world to be flat is itself something of an myth. The more usual word for ball in this sense would be globus. See picture of coin in pilum article. I really don't know about the role of an orb for aquila, but the Sovereign's Orb has been a symbol of power for a very long time. Gaius Cornelius 07:22, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Note 1 is wrong, taken from Webster. it was not Caesar who concealed any eagle. Florus talks abnout the Teotoburg disaster (the clades variana) and about an aquilifer who concealed his eagle that way... only to die and loose it in the marshes.80.103.130.197 01:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Which species?
Was a particular aquila species "the" Roman eagle, or was it several or even any aquila species? Whogue 01:56, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

and fate
I removed the 'and fate' from the see also section because I'm not entirely sure what it's trying to say. What is the meaning of it, please? Mon Vier 10:30, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

 * I see now - clarified. Mon Vier 17:19, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Requested move: → Roman eagle

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

The result of the move request was: no consensus, defaults to previous title Aquila (Roman). Discussion appears to have petered out without any consensus unfortunately. A few notes: I have taken both RMs into account when making this close; if you think a relist and an extra week will get us to a consensus, drop a note on my talk page and we can discuss potentially reopening; although everyone clearly had the best intentions, this RM has become a bit of a mess – as such, and taking into account the many editors who supported some form of a title change, there should be considered no prejudice against starting a new RM, though I would strongly recommend waiting at least a few weeks to give everyone a bit of a break. Jenks24 (talk) 13:41, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Eagle (Roman military standard) → Roman military standard – WP:NCDAB provides that a parenthetical disambiguator be a "generic class...that includes the topic, as in Mercury (element), Seal (mammal)" or a "the subject or context to which the topic applies." The current title refers to the subject twice, i.e. it is an improperly constructed double title. The title should be in English rather than Latin, per WP:UE. Of the non-Latin titles mentioned in the previous discussion, this one seemed to have the most support. Kauffner (talk) 16:50, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Aquila (Roman) → Roman eagle – Let's follow WP:UE and use English. "Eagle" is used to mean "legionary standard" in the title of the extremely popular novel The Eagle of the Ninth. This was recently adapted for film as The Eagle. For scholarly usage, see Brewer's Birthday of the Eagle: The Second Augustan Legion and the Roman Military Machine (2002) or Webster's The Roman Imperial Army (1998). Aquila is just the Latin word for eagle, not a technically specific word for this subject. Roman eagle is already a redirect to this article. --Relisted. Salix (talk): 06:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC) Kauffner (talk) 03:46, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The result of the move request was: Moved to Eagle (Roman military standard) which meets the precision required by WP:TITLE. Salix (talk): 19:18, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Following discussion on my talk page it seems people are not happy with the close and want more time to discuss so I'm reverting my close and relisting.--Salix (talk): 06:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I wonder whether you would notify the two relevant projects? Especially at Greece & Rome, project members may be interested in commenting, but given the vast number of articles under the project's aegis, may not have this one on their watchlist. I myself don't have strong feelings either way at present, and would like to know if anyone else does. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:50, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
 * I've left a note there and will give it a few days before closing. Jenks24 (talk) 13:28, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Old survey

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

On 16 March 2013, this RM was closed and the page moved prior to consensus. The RM was subsequently reopened and retargeted. A new survey section was opened to following the retarget.
 * Support Good use of WP:NATURALDIS and WP:COMMONNAME. I'm not sure how familiar most people will be with the term aquila unless they've taken a Latin class. Some such concepts don't have a simple English equivalent, such as vexillum, but the proposed title should be recognizable to many readers. --BDD (talk) 17:54, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. As noted above, I have no strong feelings about this. I do wonder, though, whether Roman eagle, especially the lowercase "eagle", leaves the topic a bit ambiguous, or not restricted in usage as an article title to "military standard". A "Roman eagle" could appear in Imperial art, or even in the context of private art, and the broader symbolism of this visual device is something that can be given encyclopedic treatment: see for instance the sarcophagus at Cupid and Psyche. So an image recognizable as a "Roman eagle" is a general symbol of sovereignty (in association with the supreme deity Jupiter) and of "ascent" in various senses. I'm not arguing for aquila, but just noting that a technical term is sometimes chosen because it delimits scope. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment I might suggest "Eagle (Roman military standard)" as a better name than "Roman eagle". Paul August ☎ 15:44, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Support Paul's idea vel sim.  davidiad { t } 19:40, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The proposed new name is very generic/ambiguous. This would not be an issue if it were the English common name for the article's subject ("Wikipedia...prefers to use the name that is most frequently used to refer to the subject in English-language reliable sources."), but it is not. The term "Roman eagle" is no more closely associated with Roman legionary standards than "aquila". Cursory searches of academic sources (for "Roman eagle") produce more results relating to art and heraldry than military symbols. "Legionary standard" actually returns relevant documents more reliably than the other two terms. — Sowlos 07:01, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment. I would support a move to legionary standard or Roman legionary standard. — Sowlos 07:01, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * This subject is commonly referred to as an "eagle" in both popular and scholarly literature. I gave examples in the nomination. "Roman" is disambiguation. Perhaps we could call it Eagle (standard). Kauffner (talk) 05:06, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose to "Roman eagle", which I think is even worse than Aquila, but I support Paul August's suggestion for "Eagle (Roman military standard)", or something equivalent (e.g. legionary standard), like the previous comments. Michael! (talk) 12:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * "Eagle" and "Roman military standard" mean the same thing. The disambiguator is supposed be a generic class or category that the subject is an item within, per WP:NCDAB. Kauffner (talk) 14:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Really? Every time the word "eagle" is used in the English language it means "Roman military standard"? Or every time the word "eagle" in used in reference to ancient Rome it means "military standard"? NCDAB emphasizes precision as much as simplicity. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Any commonly used word can mean more than one thing depending on context. I meant that in the context of the title, "eagle" and "Roman military standard" would be two ways to refer to the same thing. It would be like having a double title. The guideline gives the examples Mercury (element) and Mercury (planet), mercury being either an item in the category "element" or in the category "planet". Kauffner (talk) 23:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Compare Eagle (a bird), Eagle (heraldry) and Eagle (Roman military standard), to name just a few eagles, ignoring all other possible meanings at Eagle (disambiguation). I don't see why a double title would be a problem, nor what is fundamentally different with Mercury (by the way, you could have add Mercury (mythology) as well).Michael! (talk) 12:06, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * What's wrong with Eagle (standard)? That would comply with the guideline. It is one word instead of three. Every example in the guideline is done this way. None of them are double titles. None of them are three words long. Show me an example of a double title somewhere on Wiki. What's wrong with double titling? If double titling was allowed, somebody would want triple titling. Before long, we would have titles that went all the way down the page. Kauffner (talk) 14:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Eagle (standard) looks too much like Eagle (heraldry) to me. I still like the original proposal, but I guess it's just you and me. --BDD (talk) 15:18, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with BDD that Eagle (standard) doesn't sufficiently distinguish the scope of this article from Eagle (heraldry). But let me try to make the point more clearly that "Roman eagle" is an iconographical type, not just the eagle as a military standard. In the gallery following, these are all "Roman eagles". The Roman eagle can appear independently as a symbol on coins, for instance. I wouldn't oppose calling the article Roman eagle if we're intending to broaden its scope to include the symbolic use of the "Roman eagle" in numismatics and other art. Examples: Roman eagle as a type distinguished from an eagle on Herod's coins (also here); Roman eagle as predecessor for the eagle of the U.S.; as part of imperial iconography; as Roman symbol in conjunction/contrast with a Celtic wheel. As an attribute of the supreme deity Jupiter, the eagle is a general symbol of Roman sovereignty, setting aside its use on sarcophagi and the like to represent spiritual ascent. Besides all that, in the Republic not all legionary standards were eagles; other totemic animals might be used. (Not sure about the pre-Constantinian Imperial army.) So Sowlos' suggestion for legionary standard should be considered. I see this as a question of scope: do you want the article to be about the "Roman eagle" or about the "legionary standard," which was an eagle in some periods? Cynwolfe (talk) 18:15, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Here are two sources on standards of the Republican legions prior to Marius:

'''Examples of the "Roman eagle"

 * The purpose of disambiguation is to allow readers to distinguish among articles that Wiki actually has. The phrase "Roman eagle" is associated with this subject, as you can see in this example. The fact that the Romans had other kinds of eagles is beside the point. In any case, I am fine with the options that avoid both Latin and double titling: Roman eagle, Eagle (Roman), Eagle (standard), or Roman military standard. Kauffner (talk) 07:21, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, but once again you miss my point: what is the scope of the article? Is it Roman eagle as an iconographical device, which would include the historical development of the eagle as the military standard, or is it the legionary standard (or Roman military standard or similar), which would need to include the Republican standards? An appropriate title can't be chosen for an article unless its scope is understood. Cynwolfe (talk) 15:50, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I personally wouldn't mind an expansion in scope. It's difficult to picture such an article getting so large that it would need to be split back into military and civil uses. --BDD (talk) 16:08, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * And it would be hard to draw a line between the imperial eagle in general, and the eagle perched on the standard. To me, if the article is supposed to be about the military standard only, I think we have to exclude Roman eagle as the actual title, but allow it to remain as a redirect because (as Kauffner notes) there is no other article currently for which that title is useful. An overview Roman eagle that encompassed the history of the military standard could incorporate the Republican background on how the eagle came to nudge out the other totem animals. If the scope is broadened, it would be easier to have a historical (actual Roman) image at the top instead of a modern fabrication. There's a fine image at Commons I think should be in the article regardless, which I give to the right, but there's no room for it now. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:26, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The purpose of disambiguation is to allow readers to distinguish among articles that Wiki actually has.
 * Aquila (Roman) already fulfils that requirement.
 * "The title indicates what the article is about and distinguishes it from other articles", WP:AT. Note the and. Worded another way, Wikipedia article titles are supposed to accurately indicate the scope of their articles in an unambiguous way. This is accomplished by selecting article titles "...based on what reliable English-language sources refer to the article's subject by" (WP:NAMINGCRITERIA),
 * As has already been stated above (repeatedly), the eagle is a persistent iconographical motif in Roman culture. To take an article focused on Roman military standards and name it "Roman eagle" is to improperly indicate scope.
 * An article titled "Roman eagle" should discuss all appearances of the eagle pervading Roman culture. An article titled "Roman military standard" should discuss all Roman military standards, not just ones depicting eagles. I think Wikipedia would do well to have both articles, actually. By the way, this article already describes standards other than eagle standards.
 * And it would be hard to draw a line between the imperial eagle in general, and the eagle perched on the standard.
 * Good point.
 * — Sowlos 08:56, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

These points have already been made and rebutted, but it looks like I'll have to do it again. Any word or phrase that is in common use can mean more than one thing depending on context. That doesn't mean we can't use it as a title. I have already given various examples where terms "eagle" or "Roman eagle" are used to refer to this subject. The non-military eagles are also aquila. This word is simply non-English; It is not a more technical or precise term. Kauffner (talk) 12:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Where in classical studies is aquila used for "non-military eagles"? When Dando-Collins at the bottom of p.73 says, "The eagle standard of the legion, the aquila, initially silver, later gold, was...", note "eagle standard" while "aquila" stands by itself, we see there that "aquila" is indeed a technical term, needing no qualification, when used. It is the same on p.39, "the legion's golden eagle standard, the aquila...." Peter Herz in A.I. Baumgarten, Sacrifice in Religious Experience, uses "aquila' here, but defines it immediately as "the eagle standard of the legion". Eagle is a generic term, while aquila is a technical term. --  spin |control 14:00, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Kauffner, simply because you countered said points does not mean you have invalidated them. You agree that terms can have multiple meanings, but you disagree that they need disambiguation in such cases. Several of us have pointed out that "Roman eagle" refers to a broader topic than Roman military standards and that the majority of academic sources do not refer to Roman military standards simply as "Roman eagles" (nullifying any WP:COMMONNAME argument). Citing Dando-Collins did not make your case. He used "eagle" as a descriptor for the "standard of the legion", then parenthetically rephrases the preceding simply as "the aquila". He is introducing a clause that is inessential to understanding the meaning of the sentence, but is providing another name which the reader is likely to better know the subject by. Regardless, we all agree that a Latin name ("Aquila") is not called for in this case. If you can provide sources for your opinion that "eagle" is used in Roman scholarship to reference military standards far more than other Roman eagles, then please do. Otherwise, let us discuss the validity of other titles, such as the one this page was prematurely moved to. — Sowlos 09:16, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Oppose the move to Roman Eagle. "Aquila" is used as a technical term in the most reliable sources, standard works such as G.R. Watson, The Roman Soldier, Cornell UP:1969, H.D.M. Parker, The Roman Legions, B&N:1993(1928), Lawrence Keppie, The Making of the Roman Army, B&N, 1984. Syme uses it. What about this book? Do a google scholar search for 'crassus legion aquila'. The newly released Legions of Rome, Stephen Dando-Collins, has no problem with it. Wikipedia's aim is not to reduce vocabulary or substitute less appropriate generic for technical terms. As it is a standard technical term, seen in the most reliable sources, we should leave it. --  spin |control 06:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think you are seriously misrepresenting the sources. Parker was published in 1928 when a lot more people studied Latin than do nowadays. Here is Watson: "It does not appear that the loss of an eagle led to inevitable disabandment." (p. 129). Here is Keppie: "The loss of an eagle was traditionally held as the supreme disgrace of a legion." (pp. 214-215). Here is Dando-Collins: "The 12th Fulminata Legion...disgraced itself by losing its eagle standard to the rebels." (p. 11). Kauffner (talk) 11:40, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If you think I have misrepresented Keppie, I suggest you look at this. Use the same search for "eagle" and compare the hits. You'll find fewer hits and less specific hits as well. (This book disagrees by two pages with my copy.) Watson p.21f, "The second of the Marian reforms was the presentation of the aquila to each legion. The eagle gave the legion a sense of// corporate identity..." and your p.129, "The aquila first became a legionary emblem as part of the reforms of Marius." Same page, "There is a small shrine, and in this there is an eagle of gold." It's plain that Watson uses aquila technically and "eagle" is used for a range of options. And on to Dando-Collins, noting the expression "eagle standard", "eagle" qualifies "standard", ie it doesn't stand alone. He also writes, p.75, "Roman standards were focal points for the attacking enemy, who particularly went after the golden aquila. To lose its eagle was the single greatest disgrace for a legion." Dando-Collins does the same thing as Watson, give the technical term here first, before talking of the eagle. So, "eagle standard" or "aquila... eagle" is no help to giving life to "eagle". I don't think I've misrepresented anything and it's not very nice to accuse people of doing so. --  spin |control 13:37, 16 March 2013 (UTC)
 * If the sources you cite use both “aquila” and “eagle”, I don’t see how they can be used to support one form over the other. Notice that they typically give "aquila" in italics to indicate that it is a non-English form. Readers are more likely to be to be familiar with the Sutcliff novel, or the movie based on it, than they are with the academic scholarship. Kauffner (talk) 16:24, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Eagle (standard) does not work, Napoleon used eagle standards, and then any flag with an eagle on it used as a standard is also an "eagle standard", or the standard promulgated by the Eagle coin. Roman eagle does not work, eagle iconography is used in many places in Roman works, so the scope is much different. legionary standard doesn't work since Rome isn't the only place with legions that had standards. Roman legionary standard doesn't work, since the Roman Legions had other standards before standardizing on the eagle. Eagle (Roman military standard) works quite well in explaining the scope of this article. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 13:44, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I see your reasoning, but why shouldn't an article on the Roman legionary standard include the full history of the standard? That's why to me it's a question of scope. If the article is about Roman eagle, its scope will encompass a section on the general symbology of the Roman eagle, including its use on coins and other imperial art; if the article is about the Roman legionary standard, it should be about that, which would include the history of the pre-Marian standard. Surely we're not saying we have to write the article to explicate the title of a Channing Tatum movie (though note that his character's cognomen is Aquila, so even Hollywood knows aquila means). "Aquila" and "eagle" are used interchangeably in English, as aquila and the more general signa are in Latin (aquilifer, signifer). At signifer, there's a redlink to signum (standard); there's no way that can be reasonably distinguished from the aquila. What are the arguments against Roman legionary standard? All the variations on aquila and eagle would remain as redirects. Cynwolfe (talk) 14:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer a separate article on Roman legionary standards, but this article could be expanded to cover them... I think that the pre-Aquila-standardization could support an article on its own. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 14:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Comment If this discussion closes as no consensus, the article needs to be moved back to its former title at Aquila (Roman).--Cúchullain t/ c 14:57, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes. Paul August ☎ 19:11, 18 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

RM interlude
Pity the article had to end up with a worse title than it had to begin with. Kauffner (talk) 14:27, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

 * I wasn't aware there was a consensus for this or any other title yet, and think the discussion was prematurely closed. Cynwolfe (talk) 17:36, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Agree. In fact I was beginning to be persuaded by  spin control's argument for retaining "Aquila (Roman)". Paul August ☎ 21:41, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

 * There was not. Either Salix alba was not paying attention or he moved the page, after seven days, based on what he saw as the strongest arguments. — Sowlos 09:25, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

 * I hadn't even had a chance to read the new posts arguing for the retention of aquila when the discussion was closed, and was completely undecided between broadening the scope to encompass "Roman eagle" as a general imperial symbol and clarifying that it was about the legionary standard. Either topic seems good to me, and I just want a clear consensus about article scope before we decide on a name. Cynwolfe (talk) 12:41, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Second survey
This RM was originally intended to move Aquila (Roman) to Roman eagle. However, it was closed and the page moved prior to establishing consensus. The RM has been reopened, this time proposing Eagle (Roman military standard) be moved to Roman military standard based upon WP:NCDAB and what "seemed to have the most support" in the prior discussion. A few comments have been made in the above survey section since the RM reopened, but they are mixed with comments on the old proposed move target. It is difficult to tell if the new posts distinguish between the current and previous state of the RM. Please restate your support or opposition to the RM in light of the new proposal (Eagle (Roman military standard) → Roman military standard) and comments thereof in this section. — Sowlos 08:38, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Support. For reasons previously stated ad nauseam. — Sowlos 09:07, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Comment. Here is what I see as the options, depending on the intended scope of the article:
 * Roman eagle, an overview of the Roman eagle as a iconographical type that can be distinguished from other eagles at the time, used most famously for the legionary standard, and appearing also on coins and as an imperial symbol. In the dominant section on the legionary standard (also known as signum, plural signa), a paragraph would be included on the pre-Marian standards, and how the eagle came to be the sole totem. The article already points to the Roman eagle's nachleben, which is properly not a part of the following options.
 * Roman legionary standard, an overview of the signa used by the Roman legions, presented historically by period. "Roman eagle" would redirect there, until and unless the overview article on the icon was created.
 * Roman military standard, an overview of all the signa used by the Roman military as a whole, since "military" includes standards of the auxilia such as the draco (military standard). Cynwolfe (talk) 11:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * You are right to re-raise this issue. As we have already established, the article does not broadly discuss Roman eagle iconography, so Roman eagle is inappropriate. (That would be the worthy name of an entirely new article.) The current article defines its scope and heavily focuses on legionary standards. That makes its title at least Roman legionary standard. However, the article already discusses more than just legionary standards (though it focuses on them). It is my opinion that Roman military standard is a suitable title and is compatible with the article's current content (although the tone in a few spots would need adjusting). But even if it is expanding the article's scope, at least a few people here have expresses support for that. — Sowlos 13:54, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, sorry to sound so dogged. It just seems to me that if the topic is "Roman military standard" the argument between "eagle" (which would need to encompass the icon) and aquila (which would require a narrower focus on the "Roman legionary eagle standard" than the current article) becomes superfluous. I can support the current proposal if some of the parties who engaged above can indicate which of these three scope parameters they endorse. Cynwolfe (talk) 16:05, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Just to be clear, the eagle may be a loose means of referring to the aquila, but it is also the means of referring to the icon, as Cynwolfe has pointed out, which is obviously not a standard at all, so while eagle is ambiguous for us in English, having two possible referents (icon or standard), the aquila is not. Dealing with the eagle under "Roman military standard", when it isn't just the standard, isn't accurate. --  spin |control 22:47, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Comment. As no consensus was arrived at to cause the initial move from Aquila (Roman) to Eagle (Roman military standard), it was against Wiki policy to make the move and must go back to Aquila (Roman). The proposed re-move will not achieve much other than sweep aquila under the aegis of "Roman military standard", which is a good place to have a generic discussion on Roman military standards, but not really a suitable place to deal with the full range of "(Roman) eagle" or to deal with just the aquila. If someone wants to totally rewrite Aquila (Roman) to include significant new material for Roman military standards other than the aquila, then I suppose one could justify the move. But as things stand, it must go back to Aquila (Roman). --  spin |control 22:47, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I konw a lot of people have probably been put off by the premature move, but lets not throw out the whole RM just because someone made a mistake. Let us continue the discussion and see if consensus actually settles on something other than "auila". It's already been established that the move should be reverted if there is no consensus, but if there is, the issue is moot. As for article scope: it would be trivial to modify the article's tone to better reflect the article's coverage of Roman military standards. Afterwords it would be simple enough to add some more relevant content. I don't understand your point of comparing the article's scope to the topic of Roman eagles. The article clearly does not include coverage of that broad topic.  — Sowlos 02:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * When a generic article is written for Roman military standards, then that is a good reason to post such an article. It can then link to Aquila (Roman) as well as Vexillum. I'm not a fan of renaming an article with the vague promise of adapting it to make the name fit. It's better to write an article for the name you want, then post it. My understanding of previous discussion was that the implications of the Roman eagle were to be included in Eagle (Roman military standard). If I have that wrong, just forget about my comment on the matter. --  spin |control 03:31, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, you were against any move from the start. ;) My intent was not to raise a vague promise of adapting the article, but to point out it already covers the said topic (albeit poorly). And, my understanding of previous discussion was that the implications of the Roman eagle were not to be included in Eagle (Roman military standard). That's why Cynwolfe wanted to make sure we all agree on what the article is (or should be) before continuing to debate on a name.  — Sowlos 03:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Comment I find this procedurally highly improper, since it makes a jumble of comments for the various moves. Why was the old section repurposed for the new move, and have a weird interlude hiding in the middle of the move discussion, instead of just opening a new move section with a clean new discussion area? -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 04:29, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes; it is highly irregular. mistakinly closed and moved the page based on his judgement because consensus wasn't reached in under 7 days. Several of the participants began talking on this page outside the closed RM (originally called "Post-RM", now called "RM interlued").  tried to open a second, separate RM.  reverted the second because it was too soon to start one. Salix reopened the same RM because of the discontent over the closure. Kauffner re-targeted the reopened RM based on what transpired. Then, participants returned to the old survey section, mixing new discussion with old and even replying to post from before the RM closure (which of course came before the new situation and new proposed move target). Due to the confusion, I tried to stop things from unravelling by closing the old survey, starting a new survey subsection for the new proposed target, summarizing the current/new situation for participants, and renaming "Post-RM" to "RM interlude" (to hopefully avoid confusion of a "post" discussion taking place in the middle). As you can tell, I reverted your refactoring. I advise you to next time look more closely and read the revisions more carefully before heavily refactoring a battered RM full of historical content. Unfortunately, I think too much prior damage has been done and this attempt to revive an RM after a disputed move may only cause more confusion than solutions.  — Sowlos  06:05, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think your solution has been a good one to sort out what quickly became a messy problem. Kudos.--Cúchullain t/ c 16:52, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Comment Per the last discussion, I would prefer a separate article on Roman military standard, while keeping this one focused on Eagle (Roman military standard), but an expansion is scope is suboptimal in my opinion. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 04:33, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

As the original move was done against Wiki policy and there is no consensus for this move proposal, we have to go back to the original name Aquila (Roman). This does not mean that there can't be a generic article for "Roman military standard". --  spin |control 17:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
 * We still have a few days, but it looks like that's were it's going.  — Sowlos 18:04, 23 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

title: Talk:Aquila (Roman)


text:
WBUF

WBUF (92.9 FM) is a commercial radio station licensed to Buffalo, New York. Its studios are located at the Rand Building in downtown Buffalo, with its transmitter on Elmwood Avenue in North Buffalo. WBUF is owned by Townsquare Media and broadcasts a mainstream rock radio format known as "92.9 WBUF, Buffalo's Real Rock".

WBUF began streaming its programming on the Internet in mid-November 2006. The station has a HD 2 subchannel that airs religious programming from Family Life Network. WBUF also uses three FM translator stations: W239BA on 95.7 MHz in Niagara Falls, New York, W262CQ on 100.3 MHz in Lockport, New York and W291CN on 106.1 MHz in Buffalo. These three translators carry the Family Life Network programming by way of the WBUF-HD2 signal.

Superpower status
WBUF is a grandfathered "Superpower" Class B FM radio station, operating at 76,000 watts. Buffalo has three other superpower FM stations: WNED-FM, WDCX-FM and WBKV. Under current U.S. Federal Communications Commission rules, Class B FM's are not allowed to exceed 50,000 watts ERP. Because WBUF signed on in 1947, it was not subject to those restrictions on power. In fact, it once was powered at 92,000 watts, but because it moved its antenna some years ago, it reduced its power.

History
WBUF began broadcasting in 1947, among the earliest FM stations in Buffalo.

 * 1947: WBNY-FM

 * 1959: WBUF The Home of the Blended Sound (Beautiful music)
 * WBUF was "The Home of the Blended Sound" as part of The Empire State FM Network which also included WVOR in Rochester, WDDS in Syracuse, and WFLY in Albany/Troy.

 * 1975: (Free-form/progressive)
 * WBUF flipped to this format in 1975 which would last for five years.

 * 1980: WFXZ Foxy 93
 * In 1980, veteran Buffalo media executive Donald Angelo rebranded the station as WFXZ, "Foxy 93." The short-lived format ended in 1982, after which the station returned to the call sign WBUF.

 * 1982: WBUF FM 93 (Adult contemporary/Oldies)
 * In the 1980s, the station featured a popular full service format of adult contemporary and oldies music presented by several well known Western New York on-air personalities including Stan Roberts and Fred Klestine, with its own local news bureau and branded as "FM 93".

 * 1991: Mix 92.9 (Adult contemporary)
 * WBUF began this format at noon on April 2, 1991.
 * From early 1991 to 2005, WBUF had a history of short-lived and rapidly changing formats (usually failed attempts to challenge other more dominant stations in the market or adopt fad formats popular in the radio industry for brief periods of time), with the station typically changing formats every two years.

 * 1992: B93 (Adult contemporary)
 * WBUF would rebrand to "B93" in early 1992.

 * 1995: WSJZ Smooth Jazz 92.9
 * This format began on March 30, 1995. The final song on "B93" was "End of the Road" by Boyz II Men, while the first song on "WSJZ" was "Smooth Operator" by Sade. The format lasted two years.

 * 1997: WLCE Alice@92.9 (Modern adult contemporary)
 * This format began on April 3, 1997, and was intended to challenge what was then WMJQ (now WBKV) with an edgier, slightly alternative-leaning sound. WTIC-FM morning show (Gary) Craig and Company was syndicated to WLCE, and later WBUF, for its morning show. The format lasted two years.

 * 1999: WBUF B92.9, Buffalo's Dancin' Oldies (Rhythmic oldies)
 * This format began at noon on June 23, 1999 and was the third time the WBUF call sign would be used by the station. Using the slogan "Buffalo's Dancin' Oldies", this disco-centric format was positioned to an older audience than urban sister station WBLK and to directly challenge traditionally oldies-formatted WHTT (commercials advertising B92.9 mocked WHTT's music, using "Little Darlin'" by The Diamonds as an example, as music that put a person to sleep). As with other rhythmic oldies stations of the era, the format was short-lived; it lasted two years. Its end was marked with a stunt, playing the song "We Will Rock You" by Queen repeatedly for one day.

 * 2001: 92.9 WBUF, Buffalo's Rock Station (Active rock)
 * WBUF began this format at noon on February 23, 2001. The first song was "Abacab" by Genesis. "92.9 WBUF", as it was called, was intended to challenge WGRF and WEDG. WBUF brought the syndicated The Howard Stern Show to Buffalo's morning drive. Later on, the station added Opie and Anthony. A combination of two events held by the duo led to their demise on WBUF. The first was "T'n'A with O&A", a raunchy party hosted by Opie and Anthony in Angola, New York and sponsored by WBUF. However, before any disciplinary action for that incident was taken, the hosts were embroiled in the infamous "Sex for Sam" scandal, where two lovers had sex in St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York City in exchange for Samuel Adams beer. It was the latter event that ultimately led to their first firing. Opie said, "We were well on our way to being fired for the 'T'n'A with O&A' party, when we were canceled for 'Sex for Sam'." Instead of reverting the drive time back to rock, Opie and Anthony was replaced with the all-talk Don and Mike Show.

 * 2004: FM Talk (Hot talk)
 * This format was a revival of WWKB's ill-fated "hot talk" format of the mid-1990s. The format was intended to challenge WGR and WBEN, as well as partially replace WNSA. With both drive blocks filled with hot talk hosts, the natural progression was to make WBUF a full-time talk outlet. With the region's best known hot talk host, J. R. Gach, working in Albany and unavailable, Brother Wease, from sister station WCMF in Rochester, was hired to fill the midday, while Tom Leykis and Loveline were given nighttime slots. The format ended after six months due to Wease developing nasal cancer preventing him from working both his Rochester and Buffalo shifts.

 * 2005: 92.9 Jack FM (Adult hits)
 * On May 16, 2005, WBUF flipped to an adult hits format, branded under the Jack FM name. Stern was the only host retained when CBS Radio, then the station's owner, dropped the talk format, as CBS burned off Stern's contract (their slogan even briefly being "Howard in the morning, playing what we want all day"). It was the first format in about 10 years not intended to directly compete with another station in the market. When Stern left terrestrial radio for Sirius Satellite Radio, he was not replaced on WBUF. Jack FM was, by far, the longest-running format in the station's recent history, lasting 15 years, longer than the previous six formats combined. Subsequent owners of WBUF, Regent Communications and Townsquare Media, continued to license the Jack FM format and did not share the same desire to flip the station's format every few years as previous owners CBS Radio and Infinity Broadcasting had done.
 * Similar to other Jack FM stations, WBUF had no live disc jockeys, carried no syndicated long-form or short-form programming, and carried no time-sensitive information (such as news, weather or sports), only interrupting its music for commercials, pre-recorded one-line jokes and station identification; this format was followed uniformly, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. At first, 92.9 was one of the only Jack FM stations which didn't use Howard Cogan as the voice of Jack, due to its proximity to Toronto's CJAQ-FM, which identified itself as 92.5 Jack-FM. Using Cogan would have most likely caused confusion with listeners due to the fact the two stations are so close on the FM dial. Until mid-April 2009, WBUF used voice talent Brad Davidorf, best known for his voice work on TBS. At that point, WBUF began using Howard Cogan as its imaging voice. Within two months of Cogan's employment on WBUF, CJAQ-FM dropped the Jack format and went back to the Top 40/CHR format known as "Kiss-FM" that Jack-FM replaced six years earlier.

 * 2020: 92.9 WBUF, Everything That Rocks (Mainstream rock/Classic rock)
 * On November 25, 2020 at noon, after briefly stunting with a loop of Christmas music (which ended with "I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus" by John Cougar Mellencamp), WBUF flipped back to a mainstream rock format, branding once more as "92.9 WBUF, Everything That Rocks" and returning to the broad-based rock format the station had featured from 2001 to 2004. The first song under the rock format was "For Those About to Rock (We Salute You)" by AC/DC. The station added the nationally syndicated The Free Beer and Hot Wings Show a few months after launch.

 * 2022: 92.9 WBUF, Buffalo's Real Rock (Active rock)
 * From 2020 to 2022, WBUF's playlist leaned toward a classic rock presentation billed as "Everything that Rocks", initially hoping to take advantage of on-air turmoil in the market's heritage classic rock station WGRF. When this was unsuccessful, on June 10, 2022, WBUF shifted its format from mainstream rock to active rock, branded as "92.9 WBUF, Buffalo's Real Rock". The station's airstaff (other than one day part) and presentation did not otherwise change. There had been no major active rock station in Buffalo since WEDG shifted to alternative (itself prompted when previous alternative station WLKK, another station in Buffalo notorious for its frequent format changes, changed format to country music).

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

title: WBUF


text:
User talk:Velasquez~enwiki

Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia , I hope you will like it here and decide to stay.

You may want to take a look at the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

Here are some links I've found useful:
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Merge
 * New user log
 * Be Bold
 * Don't let grumpy users scare you off
 * Wikiquette
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * User page
 * How to upload files
 * Image copyright tags

Also: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your username and the time after your comments. Signing with three tildes ~~~ will just sign your username. I hope to see you around Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page!

Johann Wolfgang [ T ... C ]

04:28, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

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

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 03:30, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:12, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Velasquez~enwiki


text:
Glen P. Wilson

Glen Parten Wilson Jr. (1923–2005) worked on the Senate space and astronautics committee, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and was executive director emeritus of the National Space Society, a space advocacy group.

Born in Waco, Texas and raised in Houston, he was an aviation electronics technician in the Navy during World War II and also worked for Lockheed Aircraft Co. in Burbank, Calif.

He was an aeronautical engineering graduate of the University of Texas at Austin, where he also received his master's degree and doctorate in psychology.

Wilson was working in his native Texas when he was summoned in 1955 with his wife to join the Washington office of then-Sen. Lyndon B. Johnson (D-TX), the majority leader. Wilson was a staff assistant, and his wife was a secretary, and they shared mutual friends with Johnson.

A Johnson protégé, Wilson soon joined the staff of the Senate's Special Committee on Space and Astronautics. His function initially was to interview specialists and analyze technical data so the committee had guidelines as it wrote the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 and created the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

He later was involved in research and development, technology assessment and policy planning. He remained with the committee until its termination in 1977 as part of a Senate reorganization.

The next year, NASA hired him to develop the Shuttle Student Involvement Program to spur student interest through suggestions on possible experiments to conduct aboard the shuttle. Before retiring in 1982, he received NASA's Exceptional Service Medal.

From 1984 to 1988, Wilson was executive director of what is now the National Space Society, a nonprofit organization that promotes space-related activities. He oversaw his group's merger with the like-minded L5 Society. He continued to serve on the board until his death January 8, 2005 at a hospice in Fort Worth, TX.

title: Glen P. Wilson


text:
1990 CFL season

The 1990 CFL season is considered to be the 37th season in modern-day Canadian football, although it is officially the 33rd Canadian Football League season.

CFL News in 1990
J. Donald Crump was appointed as the eighth CFL Commissioner on Friday, January 5.

The CFL Annual Meetings-Canadian College Draft was held in Hamilton for the third straight year.

The CFL increased roster limit to 37 players to include 20 non-imports, 14 imports and 3 quarterbacks with the reserve list remaining at two players.

The Toronto Argonauts and the BC Lions set a record for most points in a game when they scored 111 points on Saturday, September 1 at the SkyDome. The Argonauts won the game 68–43.

The BC Lions added silver to its team colour scheme. In addition, Vancouver played host to the Grey Cup game for the 11th time, and for the fourth time at BC Place.

Citing multi-million dollar losses, the league-run Canadian Football Network syndication service ceased operations after this season; it had replaced CTV's CFL coverage in 1987.

Final regular season standings
Note: GP = Games Played, W = Wins, L = Losses, T = Ties, PF = Points For, PA = Points Against, Pts = Points

 * Bold text means that they made the playoffs.
 * Calgary and Winnipeg had first round byes.

Grey Cup playoffs
The Winnipeg Blue Bombers are the 1990 Grey Cup champions, humiliating the Edmonton Eskimos 50–11, at Vancouver's BC Place Stadium. The Blue Bombers' Tom Burgess (QB) was named the Grey Cup's Most Valuable Player on Offence and Greg Battle (LB) was named Grey Cup's Most Valuable Player on Defence, while Warren Hudson (FB) was named the Grey Cup's Most Valuable Canadian.

CFL Leaders

 * CFL Passing Leaders
 * CFL Rushing Leaders
 * CFL Receiving Leaders

Offence

 * QB – Kent Austin, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * FB – Blake Marshall, Edmonton Eskimos
 * RB – Robert Mimbs, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * SB – Darrell Smith, Toronto Argonauts
 * SB – Craig Ellis, Edmonton Eskimos
 * WR – Stephen Jones, Ottawa Rough Riders
 * WR – Don Narcisse, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * C – Rod Connop, Edmonton Eskimos
 * OG – Dan Ferrone, Toronto Argonauts
 * OG – Roger Aldag, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * OT – Jim Mills, BC Lions
 * OT – Chris Walby, Winnipeg Blue Bombers

Defence

 * DT – Kent Warnock, Calgary Stampeders
 * DT – Harold Hallman, Toronto Argonauts
 * DE – Stewart Hill, Edmonton Eskimos
 * DE – Greg Stumon, Ottawa Rough Riders
 * LB – Danny Bass, Edmonton Eskimos
 * LB – Willie Pless, BC Lions
 * LB – Greg Battle, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * CB – Less Browne, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * CB – Rod Hill, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * DB – Troy Wilson, Ottawa Rough Riders
 * DB – Don Wilson, Toronto Argonauts
 * DS – Greg Peterson, Calgary Stampeders

Special teams

 * P – Bob Cameron, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * K – Dave Ridgway, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * ST – Mike "Pinball" Clemons, Toronto Argonauts

Offence

 * QB – Tom Burgess, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * FB – Warren Hudson, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * RB – Robert Mimbs, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * SB – Darrell Smith, Toronto Argonauts
 * SB – Rick House, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * WR – Stephen Jones, Ottawa Rough Riders
 * WR – Earl Winfield, Hamilton Tiger-Cats
 * C – Lyle Bauer, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * OG – Dan Ferrone, Toronto Argonauts
 * OG – Gerald Roper, Ottawa Rough Riders
 * OT – Rob Smith, Ottawa Rough Riders
 * OT – Chris Walby, Winnipeg Blue Bombers

Defence

 * DT – Lloyd Lewis, Ottawa Rough Riders
 * DT – Harold Hallman, Toronto Argonauts
 * DE – Grover Covington, Hamilton Tiger-Cats
 * DE – Greg Stumon, Ottawa Rough Riders
 * LB – Tyrone Jones, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * LB – Bruce Holmes, Ottawa Rough Riders
 * LB – Greg Battle, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * CB – Less Browne, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * CB – Rod Hill, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * DB – Troy Wilson, Ottawa Rough Riders
 * DB – Don Wilson, Toronto Argonauts
 * S – Scott Flagel, Ottawa Rough Riders

Special teams

 * P – Bob Cameron, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * K – Paul Osbaldiston, Hamilton Tiger-Cats
 * ST – Mike "Pinball" Clemons, Toronto Argonauts

Offence

 * QB – Kent Austin, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * FB – Blake Marshall, Edmonton Eskimos
 * RB – Reggie Taylor, Edmonton Eskimos
 * SB – Ray Elgaard, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * SB – Craig Ellis, Edmonton Eskimos
 * WR – Ray Alexander, BC Lions
 * WR – Don Narcisse, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * C – Rod Connop, Edmonton Eskimos
 * OG – Leo Blanchard, Calgary Stampeders
 * OG – Roger Aldag, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * OT – Jim Mills, BC Lions
 * OT – Lloyd Fairbanks, Calgary Stampeders

Defence

 * DT – Kent Warnock, Calgary Stampeders
 * DT – Brett Williams, Edmonton Eskimos
 * DE – Stewart Hill, Edmonton Eskimos
 * DE – Will Johnson, Calgary Stampeders
 * LB – Danny Bass, Edmonton Eskimos
 * LB – Willie Pless, BC Lions
 * LB – Dan Rashovich, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * CB – Andre Francis, Edmonton Eskimos
 * CB – Keith Gooch, Edmonton Eskimos
 * DB – Richie Hall, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * DB – David McCrary, Calgary Stampeders
 * DS – Greg Peterson, Calgary Stampeders

Special teams

 * P – Brent Matich, Calgary Stampeders
 * K – Dave Ridgway, Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * ST – Derrick Crawford, Calgary Stampeders

1990 CFL Awards

 * CFL's Most Outstanding Player Award – Mike "Pinball" Clemons (RB), Toronto Argonauts
 * CFL's Most Outstanding Canadian Award – Ray Elgaard (SB), Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * CFL's Most Outstanding Defensive Player Award – Greg Battle (LB), Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * CFL's Most Outstanding Offensive Lineman Award – Jim Mills (OT), BC Lions
 * CFL's Most Outstanding Rookie Award – Reggie Barnes (RB), Ottawa Rough Riders
 * CFLPA's Outstanding Community Service Award – Richie Hall (DB), Saskatchewan Roughriders
 * CFL's Coach of the Year – Mike Riley, Winnipeg Blue Bombers
 * Commissioner's Award - Gregory B. Fulton, Toronto

title: 1990 CFL season


text:
User talk:TychoZzyx

Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia , I hope you will like it here and decide to stay.

You may want to take a look at the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

Here are some links I've found useful:
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Merge
 * New user log
 * Be Bold
 * Don't let grumpy users scare you off
 * Wikiquette
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * User page
 * How to upload files
 * Image copyright tags

Also: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your username and the time after your comments. Signing with three tildes ~~~ will just sign your username. I hope to see you around Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page!

Johann Wolfgang [ T ... C ]

04:29, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Hello
How are you doing! Jedi6 -(need help?)  03:05, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. When I had my adminship nomination I had just gotten back from a trip. I was so busy with school I'll I could do was watch my adminship request and do homework :P Jedi6  -(need help?)  03:42, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes and the AP CALCULAS EXAM is tomorrow. TOO MANY AP EXAMS!!!!!!!  Jedi6  -(need help?)  03:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)
 * SIGN IN Jedi6  -(need help?)  03:56, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:TychoZzyx


text:
User talk:Raminta~enwiki

Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia , I hope you will like it here and decide to stay.

You may want to take a look at the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

Here are some links I've found useful:
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Merge
 * New user log
 * Be Bold
 * Don't let grumpy users scare you off
 * Wikiquette
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * User page
 * How to upload files
 * Image copyright tags

Also: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your username and the time after your comments. Signing with three tildes ~~~ will just sign your username. I hope to see you around Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page!

Johann Wolfgang [ T ... C ]

04:29, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

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

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 02:17, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:57, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Raminta~enwiki


text:
2005 Newfoundland and Labrador municipal elections

The Canadian province of Newfoundland and Labrador held municipal elections in its municipalities on September 27, 2005.

Listed are the results of selected municipal mayoral races in the province.

Stephenville
Election postponed for a week due to flooding


text:
User talk:Fsapphire

Welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia , I hope you will like it here and decide to stay.

You may want to take a look at the welcome page, tutorial, and stylebook, avoiding common mistakes and Wikipedia is not pages.

Here are some links I've found useful:
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Merge
 * New user log
 * Be Bold
 * Don't let grumpy users scare you off
 * Wikiquette
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * User page
 * How to upload files
 * Image copyright tags

Also: To sign comments on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your username and the time after your comments. Signing with three tildes ~~~ will just sign your username. I hope to see you around Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page!

Johann Wolfgang [ T ... C ]

04:30, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Fsapphire


text:
The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson

The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson is an American late-night talk show hosted by Johnny Carson on NBC, the third iteration of the Tonight Show franchise. The show debuted on October 1, 1962, and aired its final episode on May 22, 1992. Ed McMahon served as Carson's sidekick and the show's announcer.

For its first decade, Johnny Carson's The Tonight Show was based at the RCA Building at 30 Rockefeller Plaza, New York City, with some episodes recorded at NBC Studios in Burbank, California; on May 1, 1972, the show moved to Burbank as its main venue with extended returns to New York for several weeks over the next 12 months. After May 1973, however, the show remained in Burbank exclusively until Carson's retirement. The show's house band, the NBC Orchestra, was led by Skitch Henderson, until 1966 when Milton Delugg took over, who was succeeded by Doc Severinsen less than a year later.

The series has been ranked as one of the greatest TV shows of all time in polls from both 2002 and 2013.

Format
Johnny Carson's Tonight Show established the modern format of the late-night talk show: a monologue sprinkled with a rapid-fire series of 16 to 22 one-liners (Carson had a rule of no more than three on the same subject) was sometimes followed by sketch comedy, then moving on to guest interviews and performances by musicians and stand-up comedians, in no fixed order. Occasionally, Carson interviewed prominent politicians such as Richard Nixon, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, Robert F. Kennedy, and Hubert Humphrey, however Carson refused to discuss his personal political views on the show out of concern it might alienate his audience and resisted efforts from his writing staff, particularly head writer and admitted liberal Marshall Brickman, to include more political material in the show. Other regulars were selected for their entertainment or information value, in contrast to those who offered more cerebral conversation.

His preference for access to Hollywood stars caused the show's move to the West Coast on May 1, 1972; The Tonight Show would not return to New York until 2014 when Jimmy Fallon took the hosting reins. When asked about intellectual conversation on The Tonight Show, Carson and his staff invariably cited "Carl Sagan, Paul Ehrlich, Margaret Mead, Gore Vidal, Shana Alexander, Madalyn Murray O'Hair" as guests; one television critic stated, however, "he always presented them as if they were spinach for your diet when he did [feature such names]." Family therapist Carlfred Broderick appeared on the show ten times, and psychologist Joyce Brothers was one of Carson's most frequent guests. Carson, in general, did not feature prop comedy acts (Carson was not averse to using prop comedy himself); such acts, with Gallagher being a prominent example, more commonly appeared when guest hosts helmed the program.

Carson almost never socialized with guests before or after the show; frequent interviewee Orson Welles recalled that Tonight Show employees were astonished when Carson visited Welles's dressing room to say hello before a show. Unlike his avuncular counterparts Merv Griffin, Mike Douglas, and Dick Cavett, Carson was a comparatively "cool" host who only laughed when genuinely amused and abruptly cut short monotonous or embarrassingly inept interviewees. Mort Sahl recalled, "The producer crouches just off camera and holds up a card that says, 'Go to commercial.' So Carson goes to a commercial and the whole team rushes up to his desk to discuss what had gone wrong, like a pit stop at Le Mans." Actor Robert Blake once compared being interviewed by Carson to "facing the death squad" or "Broadway on opening night." The publicity value of appearing on The Tonight Show was so great, however, that most guests were willing to subject themselves to the risk.

Ed McMahon
The series' announcer and Carson's sidekick was Ed McMahon, who from the first show would introduce Carson with a drawn-out "Here's Johnny!" (something McMahon was inspired to do by the overemphasized way he had introduced reporter Robert Pierpoint on the NBC Radio Network program Monitor). The catchphrase was heard nightly for 30 years, and ranked top of the TV Land poll of U.S. TV catchphrases and quotes in 2006; it has been referenced in all media going from The Shining to Johnny Bravo to a "Weird Al" Yankovic album cut; it was even used for the character Johnny Cage in the video game series Mortal Kombat.

McMahon, who held the same role in Carson's ABC game show Who Do You Trust? for five years previously, would remain standing to the side as Carson did his monologue, laughing (sometimes obsequiously) at his jokes, then join him at the guest chair when Carson moved to his desk. The two would usually interact in a comic spot for a short while before the first guest was introduced.

McMahon stated in a 1978 profile of Carson in The New Yorker that "the 'Tonight Show' is my staple diet, my meat and potatoes—I'm realistic enough to know that everything else stems from that." After a 1965 incident in which he ruined Carson's joke on the air, McMahon was careful to, as he said, "never to go where [Carson]'s going." He wrote in his 1998 autobiography:

"My role on the show never was strictly defined. I did what had to be done when it had to be done. I was there when he needed me, and when he didn't I moved down the couch and kept quiet. ... I did the audience warm-up, I did commercials, for a brief period I co-hosted the first fifteen minutes of the show..., and I performed in many sketches. On our thirteenth-anniversary show Johnny and I were talking at his desk and he said, 'Thirteen years is a long time.' He paused long enough for me to recognize my cue, so I asked, 'How long is it?' 'That's why you're here,' he said, probably summing up my primary role on the show perfectly... I had to support him, I had to help him get to the punch line, but while doing it I had to make it look as if I wasn't doing anything at all. The better I did it, the less it appeared as if I was doing it....If I was going to play second fiddle, I wanted to be the Heifetz of second fiddlers....The most difficult thing for me to learn how to do was just sit there with my mouth closed. Many nights I'd be listening to Johnny and in my mind I'd reach the same ad lib just as he said it. I'd have to bite my tongue not to say it out loud. I had to make sure I wasn't too funny—although critics who saw some of my other performances will claim I needn't have worried. If I got too many laughs, I wasn't doing my job; my job was to be part of a team that generated the laughs."

Bandleaders and others
The Tonight Show had a live big band for nearly all of its existence. The NBC Orchestra during Carson's reign was originally led by Skitch Henderson (who had previously led the band during Tonight Starring Steve Allen), followed briefly by Milton DeLugg. Starting in 1967 and continuing until Jay Leno took over, the band was led by Doc Severinsen, with Tommy Newsom filling in for him when he was absent or filling in for McMahon as the announcer (this usually happened when a guest host substituted for Carson, which generally gave McMahon the night off as well). The series' instrumental theme music, "Johnny's Theme", was a re-arrangement of the Paul Anka composition "Toot Sweet", which Anka and Annette Funicello had separately recorded, with lyrics, as "It's Really Love". During shows when Newsom filled in for Severinsen, the band played a slightly truncated version of the theme that transitioned from the bridge to the closing phrase without reprising the first few notes of the main melody. The NBC Orchestra was the last in-house studio orchestra to perform on American television.

Behind the scenes, motion picture director/producer Fred de Cordova joined The Tonight Show in 1970 as producer, graduating to executive producer in 1984. Unlike many people of his position, de Cordova often appeared on the show, bantering with Carson from his chair off-camera (though occasionally a camera would be pointed in his direction).

Dick Cavett was Carson's original head writer. He was succeeded by Marshall Brickman when Cavett left to pursue a stand-up career in 1964. The Tonight Show writing staff was structured so that the head writer was responsible for all of the material except for the nightly monologues, which the remainder of the staff handled; Brickman remarked in a 2009 interview that this was the main reason why he, at 25, got his position without any major experience, since all of the other writers under Cavett declined the offer. Brickman was succeeded as head writer by Hank Bradford, a writer and stand-up comedian who had performed his routine on the show multiple times in the 1960s, and who lead the Tonight Show writing staff from 1970 to 1975.

Characters
If the laughter fell short when a line bombed (as it often did), "Carnac" would face the audience with mock seriousness and bestow a comic curse: "May a diseased yak befriend your sister!" or "May a rabid holy man bless your nether regions with a power tool!"
 * Carnac the Magnificent, in which Carson played a psychic who clairvoyantly divined the answer to a question contained in a sealed envelope. This was to some degree a variation on Steve Allen's recurring "The Question Man" sketch. The answer was always an outrageous pun. "Carnac" examples:
 * "Debate" ... "What do you use to catch de fish?"
 * "Baja" ... "What sound does a sheep make when it laughs?"
 * "Ben-Gay" ... "Why didn't Mrs. Franklin have any kids?"
 * "A loaf of bread, a jug of wine, and thou" ... "Name three things that have yeast."
 * "Three Dog Night" ... "What's a bad night for a tree?"
 * "Mount Baldy" ... "What did Yul Brynner's wife do on their wedding night?" also "How do you play 'horsey' with Don Rickles?"
 * "Sis boom bah" ... "Describe the sound made when a sheep explodes." (Ed McMahon's personal favorite)

 * "Floyd R. Turbo," a dimwitted yokel responding to a TV station editorial. Floyd always spoke haltingly, as though reading from cue cards, and railed against some newsworthy topic, like Secretaries' Day: "This raises the question: Kiss my Dictaphone!"
 * "Art Fern," the fast-talking host of a "Tea Time Movie" program, who advertised inane products, assisted by the attractive Matinee Lady, played by Paula Prentiss (late 1960s), Carol Wayne (the most familiar Matinee Lady, 1971–81, 1984), Danuta Wesley (1982), and Teresa Ganzel (1984–92). He imitated the vocal stylings of Jackie Gleason's character "Reginald Van Gleason". The fake movies Art would introduce usually had eclectic casts ("Ben Blue, Red Buttons, Jesse White, and Karen Black") and nonsensical titles ("Rin-Tin-Tin Gets Fixed Fixed Fixed"). This would be followed by a four-second stock film clip before coming back for another commercial, usually catching Art and the Matinee Lady in a very compromising position. On giving directions to a fake store he was touting, Fern would show a spaghetti-like road map, sometimes with a literal "fork in the road," other times making the joke, "Go to the Slauson Cutoff...," and the audience would recite with him, "...cut off your Slauson!" The character was previously named "Honest Bernie Schlock" and then "Ralph Willie" when the Tea Time sketches first aired in the mid-to-late 1960s. At least one surviving pre-1972 Art Fern sketch that originated from New York had its movie show title as "The Big Flick," an amalgam of two movie show titles in use at the time by New York station WOR-TV, The Big Preview and The Flick. On that sketch Lee Meredith was the Matinee Lady. Carson's Comedy Classics features an episode where Juliet Prowse is in the role of Matinee Lady, from 20 August 1971.
 * "Aunt Blabby," an old woman whose appearance and speech pattern bore more than a passing resemblance to comedian Jonathan Winters' character "Maude Frickert." A frequent theme would be McMahon happening to mention a word or phrase that could suggest death, as in "What tourist attractions did you check out?," to which Aunt Blabby would respond, "Never say check out to an old person!"
 * "El Mouldo," mysterious mentalist. He would announce some mind-over-matter feat and always fail, although triumphantly shouting "El Mouldo has done it again!" Ed McMahon would take exception, noting El Mouldo's failure. "Did I fail before?" asked El Mouldo. "Yes!," replied McMahon, to which El Mouldo said, "Well, I've done it again!" El Mouldo was in large part a continuation of Carson's mentalist character Dillinger, which he had performed on The Johnny Carson Show in 1955 on CBS-TV; Dillinger was an obvious spoof of Dunninger, leading to complaints and threats of lawsuits against Carson and CBS.
 * "David Howitzer, Consumer Supporter," a thinly veiled satire of consumer reporter David Horowitz. Howitzer's segments (in a rare example of prop comedy for the show) usually featured purported counterfeit consumer goods (usually gag props) that unscrupulous mail-order companies had sent his unsuspecting viewers (for example, a woman who spent thousands of dollars on an oriental rug instead received a cheap toupee made in Taiwan).
 * "Ronald Reagan." During President Reagan's term in office, Carson developed an impersonation of the president that was featured regularly in a Mighty Carson Art Players segment. Carson also did a less memorable impersonation of Jimmy Carter during his term as president.

Bits
Some Bits are desk pieces, others are stand-ups, however the multiperson sketches are collectively referred to as by The Mighty Carson Art Players, with sketch series that include Tea Time Movie with Art Fern, and Home Shopping Network(?) with Sheila McShallow.

 * "The Mighty Carson Art Players," began in 1966. The name was a tribute to radio legend Fred Allen's Mighty Allen Art Players. While Carson's show was primarily a talk show, with performances by guests, periodically Carson, "playing on top of a character", and a group of stock performers, including Betty White, blonde Teresa Ganzel, curvaceous Suzanne LaRusch (from a modeling agency), buxom Carol Wayne, Fred Holliday, Norm Alden, Peter Leeds, and Jimmy Devine, would perform skits that spoofed news, movies, television shows, commercials, and past events.   A Mighty Carson Art Players appearance would usually be announced along with that night's guests during McMahon's introduction.
 * Example: Johnny, dressed as a doctor, starting to talk about some intimate topic (just as in the real ad) and then being hit by cream pies from several directions at once.
 * "the secret to getting a sketch approved by Carson was "B.I.B."..."Babe In Bikini" or maybe "Bimbo in Bikini"...if the sketch was really weak, you might need more than one" — Nick Arnold (Nicholas Arnold Melito, 1 March 1947 — 28 September 1999)
 * "The Edge of Wetness," in which Johnny would read humorous plot summaries of a fictional soap opera (such as The Edge of Night) while the camera randomly chose an unsuspecting audience member whom Carson claimed was, for example, the butler from the soap.
 * "Book bit" (named retrospctively, with a "fun fact" list read, from a book or news article, followed by a similar comedic "supposed fact" list, a bit that Bill Maher currently does a version of)
 * "How ___ was it?" a recurring call-and-response during Carson's monologues. Carson would set up the joke with a passing comment about, for instance, the weather with the phrase "It was so hot..." prompting the audience to respond "HOW HOT WAS IT?" Carson would then follow with several punch lines (e.g. "I heard Burger King singing, 'If you want it made your way, cook it yourself!'"). Carson would occasionally throw the audience off with an anti-joke (such as "it was worth the trip in, wasn't it?").
 * "Stump the Band," where studio audience members ask the band to try to play obscure songs given only the title. Unlike when this routine was done during the Jack Paar years with the Jose Melis band, Severinsen's band almost never knew the song, but that did not stop them from inventing one on the spot. Example:
 * Guest's request: "My Dead Dog Rover"
 * Doc Severinsen, singing: "My dead dog Rover / lay under the sun / and stayed there all summer / until he was done!"
 * David Letterman revived this bit later, along with the CBS Orchestra on his Late Show.

 * "Headlines," was developed by Jay Leno, and seen only during nights when he guest-hosted beginning in 1986, featured humorous stories and typos from newspaper clippings. This carried over when Leno became permanent host in 1992.

Programming history
Jack Paar's last appearance was on March 29, 1962, and due to Carson's commitment to the ABC game show Who Do You Trust?, he could not take over until October 1 (the day his ABC contract expired). His first guests were Rudy Vallée, Tony Bennett, Mel Brooks, and Joan Crawford. Carson inherited from Paar a show that was 1 3/4 hours (105 minutes) long. The show broadcast two openings, one starting at 11:15 p.m. and including the monologue, the other that listed the guests and re-announced the host, starting at 11:30 p.m. The two openings gave affiliates the option of screening either a fifteen-minute or thirty-minute local newscast preceding Carson. Since 1959, the show had been videotaped earlier the same broadcast day.

As more affiliates introduced thirty minutes of local news, Carson's monologue was being seen by fewer people. To rectify this situation, Ed McMahon and Skitch Henderson co-hosted the first fifteen minutes of the show between February 1965 and December 1966 without Carson, who then took over at 11:30. Finally, because he wanted the show to start when he came on, at the beginning of January 1967 Carson insisted the 11:15 segment be eliminated (which, he claimed in a monologue at the time, "no one actually watched except the Armed Forces and four Navajos in Gallup, New Mexico").

 * January 2, 1967 – September 12, 1980: Monday–Friday 11:30 p.m.–1:00 a.m.
 * January 1965 – September 1966: Saturday or Sunday 11:15 p.m.–1:00 a.m. (reruns, initially billed as The Saturday Tonight Show)
 * September 1966 – September 1975: Saturday or Sunday 11:30 p.m.–1:00 a.m. (reruns, now identified as The Saturday/Sunday Tonight Show; The Weekend Tonight Show by 1973)

By the mid-1970s Tonight was the most profitable show on television, making NBC $50 to $60 million ($0 to $0 million in ) each year. Carson influenced the scheduling of reruns (which typically aired under the title The Best of Carson) in the mid-1970s and, in 1980, the length of each evening's broadcast, by threatening NBC with, in the first case, moving to another network, and in the latter, retiring altogether.

In order to work fewer days each week, Carson began to petition network executives in 1974 that reruns on the weekends be discontinued, in favor of showing them on one or more nights during the week. In response to his demands, NBC created a new comedy/variety series to feed to affiliates on Saturday nights that debuted in October 1975, Saturday Night Live.

In 1980, Carson renewed his contract with the stipulation that the show lose its last half-hour. On the last 90-minute show (September 12, 1980), Carson explained that by going to an hour, the show would feel more fast-paced, and have a greater selection of guests.

For a year, Tom Snyder's existing talk show, Tomorrow, was expanded to 90 minutes and forced to change its format, adding gossip reporter Rona Barrett as a co-host and taking on the name Tomorrow Coast to Coast. This was short-lived as a year and a half later, Snyder had quit and Tomorrow Coast to Coast had been canceled. Carson was given authority to fill the vacant time slot and used it to create Late Night with David Letterman (1982–1993). Today, The Tonight Show remains one hour in length and is still followed by Late Night, currently under the title Late Night with Seth Meyers (2014–).

 * September 15, 1980 – August 30, 1991: Monday–Friday 11:30 p.m.–12:30 a.m.
 * September 2, 1991 – May 22, 1992: Monday–Friday 11:35 p.m.–12:35 a.m.

In May 1991, following positive viewer reception during tests in St. Louis (KSDK) and Dallas–Fort Worth (KXAS), NBC reached an agreement with Carson Productions to delay the show's start time by five minutes beginning September 2, allowing its stations to include more commercials during their local newscasts. (The timeshift would also affect Late Night, Later with Bob Costas, and station-programmed overnight syndicated shows.) NBC executives had been proposing the five-minute delay idea to Carson since 1988, only to be repeatedly rebuffed, amid concerns that some of its affiliates—particularly those that had unsuccessfully sought permission to delay the Tonight Show by a half-hour—would begin preempting the program entirely and replace it with syndicated reruns to generate extra revenue from local advertising.

In an onscreen eulogy to Carson in 2005, David Letterman said that every talk show host owes his livelihood to Johnny Carson during his Tonight Show run.

1979–1980 contract battle
In 1979, when Fred Silverman was the head of NBC, Carson took the network to court, claiming that he had been a free agent since April of that year because his most recent contract had been signed in 1972. Carson cited a California law barring certain contracts from lasting more than seven years. NBC claimed that it had signed three agreements since then and Carson was bound to the network until April 1981. While the case was settled out of court, the friction between Carson and the network remained and Carson was actively courted by rival network ABC, which was willing to double Carson's salary and offer him a lighter work schedule and ownership of the show. NBC, in turn, was ready to offer The Tonight Show to Carson's most frequent guest host at the time, Richard Dawson.

Eventually, Carson reached an agreement that paid $25 million a year while reducing his workload from 90 to 60 minutes, with new shows airing only three nights a week 37 weeks a year (a guest host would appear Monday nights and for most of Carson's 15 weeks of vacation and "Best of Carson" reruns would air Tuesdays) and also give him ownership of the show, as well as its back catalog, and of the time slot following the Tonight Show which became Late Night with David Letterman produced by Carson Productions. In September 1980, Carson's eponymous production company gained ownership of the show after owning it from 1969 to the early 1970s.

Archives
Only 33 complete episodes of Johnny Carson's Tonight Show that had originally aired prior to May 1, 1972, are known to exist. All other shows during this period, including Carson's debut as host, are now considered lost. Carson himself initially encouraged the erasure of his archives thinking that the shows were of no real value and that NBC should "make guitar picks" out of them. Carson's shows were preserved by NBC into the early 1970s, but then thrown out to free storage space after the show moved to Burbank, California. When Carson later learned of their destruction, he was furious.

Other surviving material from the era has been found on kinescopes held in the archives of the Armed Forces Radio and Television Service, or in the personal collections of guests of the program, while a few moments such as Tiny Tim's wedding, were preserved. New York meteorologist Dr. Frank Field, an occasional guest during the years he was weather forecaster for WNBC-TV, showed several clips of his appearances with Carson in a 2002 career retrospective on WWOR-TV; Field had maintained the clips in his own personal archives. There are also two appearances by Judy Garland in 1968 that still survive. John Lennon and Paul McCartney's joint appearance on the May 14, 1968 episode guest-hosted by Joe Garagiola, with a guest appearance by Tallulah Bankhead (one of her last), was preserved on poor-quality home kinescope and audiotape in separate recordings by Beatles fans. Similarly, the Supremes' May 22, 1967 appearance survives on poor-quality kinescope and an audio recording of their April 5, 1968 appearance honoring the recently slain Martin Luther King Jr. was preserved.

The program archive is virtually complete from 1973 to 1992. Carson Productions has also made clips available on YouTube and Antenna TV.

Although no footage is known to remain of Carson's first broadcast as host of The Tonight Show on October 1, 1962, photographs taken that night survive, including Carson being introduced by Groucho Marx, as does an audio recording of Marx's introduction and Carson's first monologue. One of his first jokes upon starting the show (after receiving a few words of encouragement from Marx, one of which was, "Don't go to Hollywood!") was to pretend to panic and say, "I want my nana!" (This recording was played at the start of Carson's final broadcast on May 22, 1992.) The oldest surviving video recording of the show is dated November 1962, while the oldest surviving color recording is from April 1964, when Carson interviewed Jake Ehrlich Sr. as his guest.

The 30-minute audio recordings of many of the "missing" episodes are contained in the Library of Congress in the Armed Forces Radio collection. Many 1970s-era episodes have been licensed to distributors that advertise mail-order offers on late-night TV. The later shows that exist in full were stored by Carson in a bomb-proof underground salt mine outside Hutchinson, Kansas.

The non-tape archives pertaining to Carson's show are held by the Elkhorn Valley Museum in Carson's hometown of Norfolk, Nebraska. Beginning in 2020, the museum began working with the National Comedy Center to preserve the archive.

Rebroadcasts and streaming availability
A large amount of material from Carson's first two decades of The Tonight Show (1962–1982), much of it not seen since it had first aired, appeared in a half hour "clip/compilation" syndicated program known as Carson's Comedy Classics that aired in 1983. Audio clips from the show were featured nightly on WHO-AM in Des Moines, Iowa, in the mid-2000s. In 2014, Turner Classic Movies would begin rerunning select interviews from the program for a new series called "Carson on TCM" presented by Conan O'Brien, who himself hosted The Tonight Show briefly.

The digital multicast network Antenna TV acquired rerun rights to whole episodes of the series in August 2015. Unlike the previous clip shows, Antenna TV's airings feature full broadcasts as they were originally seen, with the only edits being removal of The Tonight Show name, with the show being renamed simply as Johnny Carson (as of January 2018, the broadcasts air opposite the current edition of The Tonight Show in much of the United States, and NBC still owns the trademark on that name), and with bumpers, walk-on music and the closing theme being replaced by generic music cues from the Warner/Chappell Production Music library. Most musical guest segments are also removed. Antenna TV began airing the show seven days a week beginning January 1, 2016. Currently, 60-minute episodes (from September 1980 – May 1992) air Monday through Friday nights, and 90-minute episodes (from 1972 – September 12, 1980) Saturday and Sunday nights.

Selected episodes of Carson's show are available on NBC's Peacock streaming service. Shout! Factory launched a 24/7 streaming channel devoted to the series in August 2020, which is distributed through various free over-the-top platforms, including Stirr, Xumo and Pluto TV. Recently, The Roku Channel began streaming JohnnyCarsonTV on its multi-channel platform LiveTV.

Guest hosts
Jack Paar had often asked Carson to guest-host Tonight in its earliest years and repeatedly claimed he had been responsible for NBC's selection of Carson in 1962 as his replacement. Steve Allen also utilized guest hosts, including Carson and Ernie Kovacs, particularly after he began hosting The Steve Allen Show in prime time in 1956 and needed to reduce his workload on Tonight.

The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson had guest hosts for entire weeks during Carson's vacations and other nights he had off. Many guest hosts were already large names in their own right, among them Frank Sinatra, Burt Reynolds and Don Rickles. Comedian Woody Allen guest hosted three times between 1966 and 1971. The following is a list of those who guest-hosted at least 50 times during the first 21 years of the show's run:
 * Joey Bishop (177 times, mostly in the 1960s)
 * Joan Rivers (93, during the 1970s and 1980s )
 * John Davidson (87)
 * Bob Newhart (87)
 * David Brenner (70)
 * McLean Stevenson (58)
 * Jerry Lewis (52, mostly in the 1960s)
 * David Letterman (51, mostly between 1980 and 1981)

Sammy Davis Jr. guest hosted on November 23, 1964, becoming the first African-American to host a talk show, and then guest hosted for a week in August 1966. Harry Belafonte guest hosted for a week in February 1968, and among Belafonte's guests were Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr., just months before both men were assassinated (King in April; Kennedy in June). On April 2, 1979, Kermit the Frog was guest host. In addition, many other Muppets appeared for skits and regular segments: Frank Oz voiced Fozzie Bear and Animal, while Jerry Nelson performed Uncle Deadly, a Vincent Price–inspired Muppet during a segment with the real Price. Richard Dawson guest hosted 14 times during 1979 and 1980, and was being considered as a full-time replacement should Carson have retired during his 1980 contract dispute with NBC.

Carson's contract, that took effect in 1981, reduced his work schedule to three nights a week, 37 weeks a year. "Best of Carson" reruns aired on Tuesdays in the weeks that Carson was hosting new shows. Monday night shows and shows for most of the 15 weeks that Carson had off were hosted by guest hosts. Due to the frequent need for substitutes, starting in 1983 permanent guest hosts were hired in order to give the program more stability. The permanent guest hosts were Joan Rivers (1983–1986), then, after about a year where a wide range of guest hosts were used, Garry Shandling alternating with Jay Leno (1987–1988) and finally Leno alone (1988–1992) after Shandling left to focus on his Showtime series It's Garry Shandling's Show. Leno, who first guest hosted in 1986, would do so 333 times before becoming the next Tonight Show host in 1992. Though the concept of using "permanent" guest hosts was fairly strictly adhered to, occasionally illness or some other situation necessitated a substitute guest host, as when David Brenner filled in for Joan Rivers on October 31 and November 1, 1985, when Rivers' husband was briefly hospitalized. Steve Martin has also filled the seat as host on a couple of occasions.

During the show's run, its cast and crew collaborated with a number of NBC sitcoms to produce spoof episodes of the Tonight Show. These spoofs typically ran in the sitcom's usual spot on the broadcast schedule and featured one of the sitcom's main characters as the guest host.

Joan Rivers
In September 1983, Joan Rivers was designated Carson's permanent guest host, a role she had been essentially filling for the previous year. In 1986, after years as a guest and 190 total appearances as guest host, she left the program for her own show on the then-new Fox Network. According to Carson, Rivers never personally informed him of the existence of her show. Rivers, on the other hand, disagreed. Nevertheless, Rivers' new show was quickly canceled, and she never again appeared on The Tonight Show with Carson. Nor did she appear on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno, a ban maintained by Leno out of respect for Carson. She also never appeared during Conan O'Brien's seven-month run. After Carson's death in 2005, Rivers told CNN that Carson never forgave her for leaving, and never spoke to her again, even after she wrote him a note following the accidental death of Carson's son Ricky in June 1991. On February 17, 2014, Rivers returned to the Tonight Show as part of a skit in which numerous celebrities paid new host, Jimmy Fallon, after having lost the bet that he would never become the host of the program. Rivers appeared for a full-length interview segment on March 27, 2014.

The program of July 26, 1984, with guest host Joan Rivers, was the first MTS stereo broadcast in U.S. television history, though not the first television broadcast with stereophonic sound. Only NBC's flagship local station in New York City, WNBC, had stereo broadcast capability at that time. NBC transmitted The Tonight Show in stereo sporadically through 1984 and on a regular basis beginning in 1985.

Consequential appearances
According to Skepticism activist James Randi, Carson invited Uri Geller, who claimed paranormal powers, onto the Tonight Show specifically to disprove the Israeli performer's claims. Randi later wrote, "that Johnny had been a magician himself", so prior to the date of taping, Randi was asked "to help prevent any trickery." Per Randi's advice, the show prepared their own props without informing Geller, and did not let Geller or his staff "anywhere near them." When Geller joined Carson on stage, he appeared surprised that he was not going to be interviewed, but instead was expected to display his abilities using the provided articles. Geller said "This scares me." and "I'm surprised because before this program your producer came and he read me at least 40 questions you were going to ask me." Geller was unable to display any paranormal abilities, saying "I don't feel strong" and he expressed his displeasure at feeling like he was being "pressed" to perform by Carson. According to Adam Higginbotham's Nov. 7, 2014 article in the New York Times: "The result was a legendary immolation, in which Geller offered up flustered excuses to his host as his abilities failed him again and again. 'I sat there for 22 minutes, humiliated,' Geller told me, when I spoke to him in September. 'I went back to my hotel, devastated. I was about to pack up the next day and go back to Tel Aviv. I thought, That's it — I'm destroyed.'"

However, this appearance on The Tonight Show, which Carson and Randi had orchestrated to debunk Geller's claimed abilities, backfired. According to Higginbotham, "To Geller's astonishment, he was immediately booked on The Merv Griffin Show. He was on his way to becoming a paranormal superstar. 'That Johnny Carson show made Uri Geller,' Geller said. To an enthusiastically trusting public, his failure only made his gifts seem more real: If he were performing magic tricks, they would surely work every time."

Carson's last shows
As his retirement approached, Carson tried to avoid sentimentality but would periodically show clips of some of his favorite moments and again invited some of his favorite guests. He told his crew, "Everything comes to an end; nothing lasts forever. Thirty years is enough. It's time to get out while you're still working on top of your game, while you're still working well."

Carson hosted his penultimate show, featuring guests Robin Williams and Bette Midler, on May 21, 1992. The last of Carson's monologues was delivered on this episode and was written by Jim Mulholland, Steven Kunes and Rift Fournier. Once underway, the atmosphere was electric and Carson was greeted with a sustained, two-minute intense standing ovation. Williams was especially uninhibited with his trademark manic energy and stream-of-consciousness lunacy. Midler was more emotional. When the conversation turned to Johnny's favorite songs, "I'll Be Seeing You" and "Here's That Rainy Day," Midler mentioned that she knew a chorus of the latter. She began singing the song, and after the first line, Carson joined in and turned it into an impromptu duet. Midler finished her appearance from center stage, where she slowly sang the pop standard "One for My Baby (and One More for the Road)." Carson became unexpectedly tearful, and a shot of the two of them was captured by a camera angle from across the set that had never before been used on the show. The audience became tearful as well and called the three performers out for a second bow after the taping was completed. This show was immediately recognized as a television classic that Midler considered one of the most emotional moments of her life and eventually won an Emmy for her role in it.

Carson had no guests on his final episode of The Tonight Show on May 22, 1992, which was instead a retrospective show taped before an invitation-only studio audience of family, friends, and crew. During the show, Carson regretted that the first 10 years of his tenure as host no longer exist saying that he would have loved to show the audience clips of Jayne Mansfield with Boris Karloff, Peter Lorre talking to Tallulah Bankhead and even the first appearance of Bette Midler (who had appeared on Carson's penultimate episode the night before) on the show. More than fifty million people tuned in for this finale, which ended with Carson sitting on a stool alone at center stage, similar to Jack Paar's last show. He said these final words in conclusion:

"And so it has come to this: I, uh... am one of the lucky people in the world; I found something I always wanted to do and I have enjoyed every single minute of it. I want to thank the gentlemen who've shared this stage with me for thirty years. Mr. Ed McMahon, Mr. Doc Severinsen, and you people watching. I can only tell you that it has been an honor and a privilege to come into your homes all these years and entertain you. And I hope when I find something that I want to do and I think you would like and come back, that you'll be as gracious in inviting me into your home as you have been. I bid you a very heartfelt good night."

A few weeks after the final show aired, it was announced that NBC and Carson had struck a deal to develop a new series. Ultimately, however, Carson chose not to return to television. He gave only two major interviews after his retirement: one to The Washington Post in 1993, and the other to Esquire magazine in 2002. Carson hinted in his 1993 interview that he did not think he could top what he had already accomplished. He rarely appeared elsewhere after retiring, providing only a guest voice on an episode of The Simpsons, which included him performing feats of strength and featured Bette Midler as well. Carson's final television appearance was a cameo on the May 13, 1994, Late Show with David Letterman where he handed over a copy of a Top 10 List and sat in Dave's chair for a minute. He was prepared to say a few words, but the crowd's cheering was so loud and so sustained, that he humorously decided to leave without saying anything—although as he exited, he could be heard saying "Thank you, good night!"

In 2005, after Carson's death, it was revealed that he had made a habit of sending jokes to Dave Letterman via fax machine which Letterman would then sometimes incorporate into his monologues. The January 31, 2005, episode of the Late Show with David Letterman, which featured a tribute to Carson, began with a monologue by Letterman composed entirely of jokes written by Carson himself after his retirement.

In 2011, the last Carson Tonight show was ranked No. 10 on the TV Guide Network special, TV's Most Unforgettable Finales.

title: The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson