text:
Debian-Installer

Debian-Installer is a system installer for Debian and its derivatives. It originally appeared in Skolelinux (Debian-Edu) 1.0, released in June 2004, but was later included in Debian 3.1 (Sarge) which was released on June 6, 2005.

Features
Debian-Installer consists of two modes: a text mode and a graphical mode. Multiple components of the installer exists to configure various aspects of the installed system, and configuration of some components may require user input.

Regardless of which mode is selected, the installer first prompts the user for a language selection. Some of the tasks the installer performs after a language selection is as follows :

 * Detects hardware
 * Detect installation media
 * Configure the network
 * Configure APT/select mirrors
 * Set up user accounts
 * Detect other operating systems

Win32-loader
win32-loader (officially Debian-Installer Loader) is a component of the Debian Linux distribution that runs on Windows and has the ability to load the actual Debian installer either from the network (as in the version in an official website) or from CD-ROM media (as in the version included in Jessie CD images).

title: Debian-Installer


text:
Talk:Greenstick fracture

Suggested template for Orthopaedic Conditions (see Talk:Orthopedic surgery) is Name Definition Synonyms Incidence Pathogenesis Pathology Stages Classification Natural History/Untreated Prognosis Clinical Features Investigation Non-Operative Treatment Risks of Non-Operative Treatment Prognosis following Non-Operative Treatment Operative Treatment (Note that each operations should have its own wiki entry) Risks of Operative Treatment Prognosis Post Operation Complications Management Prevention History --Mylesclough 05:42, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Torus vs greenstick
These two fracture types are not the same thing.--Doc James (talk) 17:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes! Torus fracture redirects to Greenstick Fracture, but then "Greenstick fractures should not be confused with buckle fractures (or torus fractures)" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.164.86.219 (talk) 18:43, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

I've nominated the redirect for deletion. —/M endaliv /2¢/Δ's/ 22:07, 24 August 2013 (UTC)

Clinical features
"Which is problematic." What does that mean? Shrdlu junction (talk) 02:11, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Wording
Is "discovered" the right word in this context "It was discovered by British-American orthopedist, John Insall, and Polish-American orthopedist, Michael Slupecki." We're talking about a concept, so I would say no. I propose that we change it. Perhaps we could change it to "first described" Tjringsmose (talk) 13:43, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

First two sentences seem contradictory and confusing at the least
"A greenstick fracture is a fracture in a young, soft bone in which the bone bends and breaks. Greenstick fractures usually occur most often during infancy and childhood when bones are soft." This makes it sound like they can only occur in childhood, but then backs off on the assertion. There needs to be some sort of clarification here. 24cell (talk) 23:39, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Greenstick fracture


text:
Talk:Further (bus)

Merge tag
i just removed the merger tag. if i shouldn't have done so i apologize. the article should be an article, as it is about the bus and not ken kesey. the bus is still here and ken kesey isn't, furthur festival was named after the bus, etc. --Heah (talk) 05:43, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Added a link to a Seattle Times article on Furthur's restoration to clear up the unverified statement problem. Also elaborated slightly on the status of the restoration --improbcat 9:08EST 11/26/06

Category:Hallucinogen stubs
The idea of a bus being a hallucinogen is rather bemusing, not sure that this is the right stub category though. Do we have a Category:Drug culture? Smerdis of Tlön 13:44, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Incorrect amount of money paid? I'm reading The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test right now, and Wolfe states "Kesey bought it for $1,500---in the name of Intrepid Trips, Inc." Is there a citation for the $1,250 figure? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.225.224.216 (talk • contribs)
 * If you have a referenced source, then feel free to add it to the article. Let me know if you need help. -- Mikeblas 22:47, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Two of the photos are not of the original bus
Are there any photos of the original bus available? I guess the p[ictures of the second bus will do, but the first one is really the most historical and significant Further. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.8.104.87 (talk) 00:06, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Further (bus) with Furthur (bus)
It looks to me as if Further (bus) and Furthur (bus) are about the same vehicle. Is this correct? If so, these two pages should be merged.

On the other hand, if these are two separate vehicles, I still think they should be on the same page. Perhaps this page could have separate sections for each of the buses, and a much shorter introductory section that mentions that there were multiple buses and explains that only the first of them was spelled with two U's?

One interesting fact: the disambiguation page Furthur includes a link to Further (bus), but not to Furthur (bus). — Lawrence King ( talk ) 03:22, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Definite merge needed. The other article was only created in Jan 2013. This article already discusses the two buses that shared the name, and the inconsistent spelling used in the placard of the 1st bus. –Quiddity (talk) 03:30, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

 * This is Zane Kesey, Ken's son. BOTH buses were named BOTH ways (Furthur AND Further)The original would change names occasionally, the second bus is labeled Further on the front and Furthur on the back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zanekesey (talk • contribs) 08:33, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Furthur (bus) is completely uncited so would be hard to integrate. It was apparently create b/c it wasn't a redirect here? I propose that it should be deleted and this article be moved to that location, as of the inconsistent naming, we should go with the unique name rather than the close English word. Yworo (talk) 02:06, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

"bloody brilliant"?
I'm removing the words "bloody brilliant" from the section on the Smithsonian prank. Obviously it goes against Wikipedia's NPOV policy. Elsquared (talk) 04:59, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

move to Furthur?
The two spellings are used inconsistently in the article, and the alternate spelling is, in my understanding, the better known term, plus it is easier to find as it is not a regular English word requiring a disambiguator. I saw a discussion on a merge of two similar articles with these two spellings, but no other discussion of moving it. I welcome feedback here, if no objection I will do it in a week. Cheers, JesseRafe (talk) 14:50, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

 * I'd be in favor of renaming the article to "Furthur (bus)". I'm under the impression that the Merry Pranksters' bus is (and was) known by both names -- Furthur and Further -- but is more commonly known as Furthur.  As far as the name of the article, "Furthur" is already a disambiguation page, and rightfully so, therefore "Furthur (bus)" would be the way to go, in my view.  Note that this article was called "Furthur", years ago, and renamed here.  Another thing: If "Furthur (bus)" is agreeable, then this will have to be submitted to Requested moves.  You won't be able to move the article yourself, because "Furthur (bus)" is a redirect with a change history. — Mudwater (Talk) 22:48, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

 * Thanks, didn't look that far back. That move was probably done to make the space for the Grateful Dead spinoff band of the same name which came into existence just a few weeks prior in September 2009. Will request the move by week's end. JesseRafe (talk) 19:52, 4 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Requested just now, FYI. JesseRafe (talk) 18:44, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Further (bus)


text:
Marianne (disambiguation)

Marianne is the national personification of France.

Marianne may also refer to:

Film and television

 * Marianne (1929 silent film), an American film directed by Robert Z. Leonard
 * Marianne (1929 musical film), a remake of the above, also directed by Leonard
 * Marianne (1953 film), Swedish drama film directed by Egil Holmsen
 * Marianne (1955 film), or Marianne of My Youth, a French-West German drama film
 * Marianne (2011 film), a Swedish horror film
 * Marianne (TV series), a 2019 French horror streaming series

Songs

 * "Marianne" (Sergio Endrigo song), representing Italy at Eurovision 1968; covered by Cliff Richard, 1968
 * "Marianne" (Terry Gilkyson song), written by Roaring Lion; covered by Terry Gilkyson and the Easy Riders, and by the Hilltoppers, 1957
 * "Marianne", by Gene Pitney, 1965
 * "Marianne", by the Human League from Holiday '80, 1980
 * "Marianne", by Stephen Stills from Stephen Stills 2, 1971
 * "Marianne", by Tori Amos from Boys for Pele, 1996

Other uses

 * Marianne (candy), a Finnish mint chocolate candy
 * Marianne (given name), including a list of people and fictional characters with the name
 * Marianne (1932–1940) a French illustrative magazine
 * Marianne (magazine), a French news magazine
 * Marianne, Pennsylvania, US
 * Marianne Island, a small granitic island of the Seychelles
 * Marianne, an 1876 novel by George Sand

title: Marianne (disambiguation)


text:
Talk:Hypophosphatasia

Suggested template for Orthopaedic Conditions (see Talk:Orthopedic surgery) is Name Definition Synonyms Incidence Pathogenesis Pathology Stages Classification Natural History/Untreated Prognosis Clinical Features Investigation Non-Operative Treatment Risks of Non-Operative Treatment Prognosis following Non-Operative Treatment Operative Treatment (Note that each operations should have its own wiki entry) Risks of Operative Treatment Prognosis Post Operation Complications Management Prevention History --Mylesclough 05:43, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Citations Needed
Attempt to add some requested citations added. DrGvago (talk) 15:32, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hypophosphatasia


text:
Mann Theatres

Mann Theatres was a movie theater chain that predominantly operated in the western United States, with a heavy concentration of theaters in Southern California.

Its motto was "Where Hollywood goes to the movies".

History
The Mann Theatres chain was named after Ted Mann, the founder of the original Minnesota chain. Ted Mann married Rhonda Fleming in 1977. In 1973 Mann purchased the theatre division of National General Pictures, which consisted primarily of the original Fox Theatres chain. Among the theatres acquired in the transaction was Grauman's Chinese Theatre, renamed Mann's Chinese Theatre, in addition to several of the prestigious single-screen theaters in the Los Angeles area, including the Fox Village Theater, the Bruin Theater, the National and the Ogden Theatre, Esquire Theatre, Mayan Theatre, Center Theatre and Aladdin Theatre located in Denver, Colorado.

Subsidiary era
In 1986, Mann Theatres was acquired by the conglomerate Gulf and Western Industries. In 1987, Warner Communications was brought in as a partner.

In 1997, Mann Theatres was sold to WestStar, a company backed by the private equity firm Warburg Pincus.

Demise
All the cinemas of Mann Theatres were gradually sold off to other chains.

Mann Theatres was a dominant cinema chain across Colorado, including the Denver area. In 2000, Colorado Cinemas Theatres acquired the Mann Theatres locations in Denver. Carmike Cinemas took over most of the Mann Theatres locations outside of the Denver area.

The company ceased operation on December 27, 2011, with the closing of its last property, the Westlake Village Theaters, which was reopened as a Cinépolis.

Technologies
In October 2008 the Mann Chinese 6 Theatre complex in Hollywood was the first 3-D-ready commercial cinema to unveil the installation of Iosono technology, featuring 380 speakers. In April 2009 the Mann Chinese 6 was among the first to present motion-enhanced theatrical films featuring 30 D-BOX motion controlled seats.

title: Mann Theatres


text:
Talk:Jones fracture

Suggested
Suggested template for Orthopaedic Conditions (see Talk:Orthopedic surgery) is Name Definition Synonyms Incidence Pathogenesis Pathology Stages Classification Natural History/Untreated Prognosis Clinical Features Investigation Non-Operative Treatment Risks of Non-Operative Treatment Prognosis following Non-Operative Treatment Operative Treatment (Note that each operations should have its own wiki entry) Risks of Operative Treatment Prognosis Post Operation Complications Management Prevention History --Mylesclough 05:44, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Surgery
The article mentions nothing about treatment with surgery, which I believe is also possible. This isn't my field so I can't add it myself. --Muhandes (talk) 07:43, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

id fracture
Could someone with knowledge mark the xray diagrams with an arrow indicating where the fracture is supposed to be? ~ Alcmaeonid (talk) 10:46, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Jones fracture


text:
Michel Cluizel

Michel Cluizel is a bean-to-bar chocolate making company that was founded in the French town of Damville in Normandy in 1948 by Marc Cluizel.

History
The company was founded when Michel Cluizel's parents Marc and Marcelle Cluizel expanded their pastry business into making chocolate from their own family kitchen. Later in 1948, Michel became an apprentice in his parents' business.

Their first export order came in 1981, as they dispatched products to the United States and they opened their first shop in Paris in 1987.

In 1999 Cluizel launched the Noble Ingredients program; a commitment to use high quality ingredients and eliminate use of artificial flavors and colors, soy lecithin and GMO ingredients.

The company has 200 employees, including the four children of the owner and name sake of the company. Michel Cluizel owns a store on Rue Saint-Honoré in Paris. In August 2004, the company opened a subsidiary in the United States –including a manufacturing facility and a museum– in West Berlin, New Jersey.

In 2002 the Cluizel family opened a chocolate museum in Damville. A decade later another museum opened near the U.S. factory.

Production
Michel Cluizel is one of the few chocolatiers in the world to work directly from the beans of cocoa and not from chocolate or cocoa paste supplied by a third party. They also patented the term cacaofèvier to describe a bean-to-bar chocolate maker, and to distinguish themselves from competitors (four or five in France, including Valrhona, Weiss, the Cémoi group, Bonnat and around forty chocolatiers around the world). Thanks to its cocoa selection work, the company was able to develop “first plantation growths” bars made exclusively with beans from an identified plantation, like coffee or wine vintages, thereby enhancing the terroir.

Michel Cluizel's children now run the company, which produces its high-end chocolates in two factories, one in Damville, in Normandy, where 200 people work, as well as in West Berlin, New Jersey in the United States. Michel Cluizel products are aimed both at retail sale to individuals (chocolate bars, candies, etc.) and to professionals (couverture chocolate for baking, decorations for chocolate making, semi-wholesale white-label candies intended to be sold under another brand, etc.).

Range of single-origin chocolates by cocoa content:

Distribution
Michel Cluizel chocolates are distributed through a network of retailers, as well as at the factory in Damville and in five company-owned stores under the name Petite Manufacture Cluizel (formerly Les Chocolats Michel Cluizel). There are four in Paris: 201, rue Saint-Honoré (opened in 1987); 43 Rue des Belles Feuilles; Pl. Louis-Armand Galerie des Fresques; and 3, rue Tronchet; one in Neuilly-sur-Seine at 10, rue Madeleine-Michelis; and one in New York City, opened in 2009 on Madison Avenue and 35th Street.

Distinctions
In 2012 Michel Cluizel products obtained the Entreprise du Patrimoine Vivant (‘Living Heritage Company’) label, a French government certification granted to traditional industries that successfully reconcile artisanship with modern manufacturing methods while maintaining production in France.

title: Michel Cluizel


text:
Talk:Kienböck's disease

Suggested
Suggested template for Orthopaedic Conditions (see Talk:Orthopedic surgery) is Name Definition Synonyms Incidence Pathogenesis Pathology Stages Classification Natural History/Untreated Prognosis Clinical Features Investigation Non-Operative Treatment Risks of Non-Operative Treatment Prognosis following Non-Operative Treatment Operative Treatment (Note that each operations should have its own wiki entry) Risks of Operative Treatment Prognosis Post Operation Complications Management Prevention History --Mylesclough 05:45, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Recent info
ICD-9 CODE 732.3; ICD-10 CODE M92.30 Kienböck - PubMed - NCBI http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=Kienb%C3%B6ck

Avascular necrosis of lunate bone: Kienbock disease. - PubMed - NCBI http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26682674

Kienböck disease. - PubMed - NCBI http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24267215

Imaging of Kienböck disease. - PubMed - NCBI http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24951206

Kienböck Disease: Recent Advances in the Basic Science, Assessment and Treatment. - PubMed - NCBI http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26387994

What Is the Radiographic Prevalence of Incidental Kienböck Disease? - PubMed - NCBI http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26324836

The Management of Kienböck Disease: A Survey of the ASSH Membership. - PubMed - NCBI http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25709878

Kienböck's disease. - PubMed - NCBI http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25600763

Atlas of Uncommon Pain Syndromes Third Edition Steven D. Waldman MD, JD 2014 Saunders, an imprint of Elsevier Inc. ISBN: 978-1-4557-0999-1 Chapter 55 page 162-164 FeatherPluma (talk) 18:03, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kienböck's disease. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090217225011/http://rarediseases.org/info/about.html to http://www.rarediseases.org/info/about.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:18, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kienböck's disease


text:
The Parsifal Mosaic

The Parsifal Mosaic is a spy fiction novel by Robert Ludlum published in 1982.

Plot summary
Michael Havelock (an anglicized version of Mikhail Havlíček) is a naturalized Czech-American intelligence officer working for the "Consular Ops", the US State Department's black operations division. At the beginning of the novel he believes he has just witnessed the execution of his partner and the love of his life, Jenna Karas (anglicized version of Jana Karasova), along an isolated stretch of the Costa Brava. Jenna had been marked for execution because she was proved to be a KGB double agent.

He immediately leaves the intelligence world, something he had been considering doing for some time and goes sightseeing in areas he had previously visited. In Athens, Pyotr Rostov, a senior KGB officer, forces a meeting with Havelock. Rostov denies that Karas is an agent of theirs. Later, in Rome, Havelock sees Jenna alive at a train station. She flees him, frightened, and he pursues her.

He makes contact with a former source at the US consulate called Colonel Baylor, and begins his search for Jenna throughout several countries. Meanwhile, strategists for Consular Operations in the US government decide that he is a paranoid schizophrenic and must be terminated, lest he compromise entire networks across Europe. All the evidence available to them indicates that Karas was a double agent, and was successfully terminated on the Costa Brava. So one of them, "Red" Ogivile sets up an ambush on the Palatine Hill in Rome with the intention of taking Michael in. However, the two mercenaries he hired are taken out by Michael, the gas grenade he uses only affects him when Michael lashes out, and after being convinced of Havelock's innocence, he ends up taking an accidental bullet from Colonel Baylor who was sent to kill Havelock.

Back in the United States, however, the US government has a problem of its own: Anton Matthias, the Secretary of State, acknowledged by the entire world as a genius and trusted with powers far beyond those his office allow him, has gone completely insane. Before anybody realized that he was insane, he negotiated treaties with parties he believed to be representing the Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China, each agreeing to a preemptive nuclear strike against the third party, but in fact with a man who identified himself as Parsifal. Parsifal demands a huge ransom to keep the documents from being released, thereby triggering a nuclear war. Once the ransom is paid, however, he does not touch it, having confirmed how desperate Washington is. Havelock, who as a child had been one of the few survivors of the massacre at Lidice, has a special bond with Matthias, a fellow Czech who had advised him in graduate school. Somehow Matthias's insanity is linked to the order to terminate Jenna Karas.

For her part, Karas has been told that Michael is a Russian spy and that he is trying to kill her. Consequently, she is not especially eager to meet him. When Michael finally traces Jenna to an isolated farm in Pennsylvania, they realize that they were both deceived and that each had been told that the other was an enemy. They then work together with the President of the United States, Charles Berquist, and several trusted advisors to find Parsifal and stop him.

They are opposed by Arthur Pierce, a brilliant and murderous Soviet mole highly placed in the State Department. Pierce has ordered the murders of the strategists of Consular Operations ( two of them are crushed by a bulldozer in their car and driven off a cliff and another is shot), and then a string of successive killings - all in his own quest to gain evidence of Matthias's insanity. Pierce is working not for the regular KGB, but the VKR (Voennaya Kontra Razvedka), a fanatical branch of Soviet intelligence identified as an offshoot of the OGPU. He is also, for that matter, a paminyatchik - an agent under deep cover, who has lived in the United States since infancy. For much of the novel, Pierce's true loyalties lie undiscovered. One of Havelock's allies, Undersecretary of State Emory Bradford, realizes that Pierce works for the VKR, but he is murdered by the ever-alert Pierce before he can warn anyone else. Pierce also solicits the murder of Rostov, who loathes the VKR and has tried to help Havelock.

When Michael finally finds Parsifal, a friend of Anton and a Soviet defector who is less fanatical than Arthur Pierce, he finds out that the documents were not produced to provoke nuclear war, but rather to demonstrate that no one man could be trusted with vast amounts of power. Pierce, however, has had his operatives murder Michael's bodyguards and breaks into Parsifal's house just as he agrees to burn the documents. However hearing that Rostov has been murdered, Parsifal decides to sacrifice himself by using his body to block Pierce's gun allowing Michael and Jenna time to get out. Michael and Jenna then kill Pierce's operatives by stabbing them and Michael then flanks Pierce and guns him down. They conclude that the documentary evidence of Matthias's insanity is best destroyed. Havelock tells Berquist of this; he is informed, in turn, that Matthias has just died. Finally safe, he and Jenna move to New England, where Havelock accepts an academic position.

Characters in The Parsifal Mosaic

 * Michael Havelock (b. Michal Havlíček), an exhausted and embittered veteran operative of Consular Operations. Born in interwar Czechoslovakia, Havlicek witnessed the murder of his entire village of Lidice by the Nazis.  His father survived the war, only to disappear at the hands of the Soviets in 1948.  Brought over to the United States, he proved an invaluable operative for US intelligence.
 * Jenna Karas (b. Jana Karasová), Havelock's faithful partner and lover, and a capable agent in her own right. Her apparent death on the Costa Brava sets Havelock off; the revelation that she is still alive causes him to go rogue.
 * Anthony Matthias (b. Anton Matthias), the brilliant, beloved American Secretary of State. Matthias has a close bond to Havelock, who was once his graduate student.  The strain of his exalted status, as well as his own ego, drive Matthias over the edge.
 * Pyotr Rostov, the KGB's Director of External Strategies. Rostov is a dedicated director of the KGB, but despises the fanatical VKR.  He first seeks to investigate Havelock's departure from Consular Operations and then offers him the opportunity to defect.
 * Emory Bradford, a controversial but brilliant Undersecretary of State. Bradford, once a renowned hawk in the Kennedy and Johnson years, became a convinced dove once he realized the damage caused by Vietnam.  When the President was faced with Parsifal's demands, he turned to Bradford as an invaluable counsellor.
 * President Charles Berquist. Berquist, who hails from rural Minnesota is a deeply intelligent man, but nonetheless is caught off guard by Matthias's actions and the presence of a mole in the State Department.
 * Arthur Pierce (b. Nikolai Petrovich Malyekov), the highest ranking paminyatchik in the State Department. Utterly fanatical and utterly ruthless, Pierce has an outwardly impeccable record, including valiant service in Vietnam.  He is dead set on obtaining Parsifal's evidence and using it to bring America to its knees.  His strategic cunning and the assistance of fellow paminyatchiki make him one of Ludlum's most fearsome villains.
 * Parsifal, a mysterious figure who has somehow collaborated with Anton Matthias to bring the world to the edge of catastrophe.

Major themes
The Parsifal Mosaic is the one Ludlum novel focused entirely upon the Cold War, and upon the possibility of nuclear war. Other novels such as The Matarese Circle and The Aquitaine Progression use the Cold War as a backdrop, but do not focus on it to the same degree.

Anton Matthias, the much revered Secretary of State, bears some resemblance to Henry Kissinger. Both men are immigrants to the United States, and both have an advanced academic background. While Kissinger was not nearly this revered, he did accumulate great amounts of unchecked power. Like Parsifal, Ludlum was deeply fearful of the concentration of power.

The Parsifal Mosaic conveys Ludlum's general loathing of fanaticism. Havelock's life journey is haunted by the actions of fanatics, from the village of Lidice, to the Costa Brava. The novel frequently reminds readers of this early part of his life: while searching for Jenna he encounters first an escaped Nazi war criminal, and then a man who has constructed a concentration camp in rural Pennsylvania. As he dispatches Arthur Pierce, Havelock remarks that it was people like him who forced him to live in the forest.

Film adaptation
Ron Howard has been attached by Universal Pictures to direct the film adaption of The Parsifal Mosaic, according to Variety. David Self was in charge of adapting the book to screenplay. In 2014, director Zhang Yimou (director of Hero, House of Flying Daggers, The Flowers of War) was in talks to direct the adaptation of the book. On May 16, 2016, Universal and Captivate Entertainment announced the film adaptation would be a part of a cinematic universe of Robert Ludlum adaptations with the following: The Janson Directive, The Sigma Protocol, Covert One and crossover films.

Publication history

 * 1982, US, Random House ISBN 0-394-52111-0, Pub date February 12, 1982, Hardback
 * 1983, US, Bantam Books ISBN 0-553-19951-X, Pub date February 1, 1983, Paperback
 * 1982, UK, Grafton ISBN 0-246-11417-7 Pub date March 25, 1982, Hardback
 * 2002, UK, HarperCollins ISBN 0-586-05276-3, Pub date April 15, 2002, Paperback

title: The Parsifal Mosaic


text:
Talk:Kyphosis

Suggested
Suggested template for Orthopaedic Conditions (see Talk:Orthopedic surgery) is Name Definition Synonyms Incidence Pathogenesis Pathology Stages Classification Natural History/Untreated Prognosis Clinical Features Investigation Non-Operative Treatment Risks of Non-Operative Treatment Prognosis following Non-Operative Treatment Operative Treatment (Note that each operations should have its own wiki entry) Risks of Operative Treatment Prognosis Post Operation Complications Management Prevention History --Mylesclough 05:45, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks
I am very appreciative of the language used in the article. None of the nasty 'hunchback' connotations often seen in relation to this condition.

A note: I fully understand the concerns of people who suffer from Kyphosis and their dislike of the term "hunchback", but I would like to see this article expanded to include some cultural history. I came to this page looking for that and not the medical angle at all. If someone could add to this in terms of religion, magic and superstition, it would be very useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.180.173.218 (talk) 12:16, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Re: Thanks for avoiding term "hunchback"
While I recognize that use of the "nasty" term "hunchback" is favorable in the avoidance of offending affected individuals, I would offer that including the word could be informative and educate people as to the words offensive nature." Perhaps, a sentence such as "Hunchback, an antiquated term, is now seen as offensive and seldom used." As sentence such as this could help people understand that when they see someone with a curvature they should call it kyphosis and not stare quite so much. Britonkolber 00:22, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree. I'm still not positive after reading the article if people who suffer from kyphosis are hunchbacks or not. There is mention of children having hump backs. I think by entirely ignoring the entire use of the word hunchback a great disservice is being perpitrated on the wiki15:02, 23 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.210.248.112 (talk)

 * Indeed without that background there is no information on *why* the term is offensive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.180.173.218 (talk) 12:20, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Category:Hunchbacks
Can someone re-name this category Category:People with Kyphosis, please ? --195.137.93.171 (talk) 19:20, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

 * well, it's not known that they did have kyphosis, they might have been hunched for other reasons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.107.249.207 (talk) 01:27, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Postural kyphosis is attributable to slouching?
Does this mean it's caused by slouching? I'm skeptical. I'm pretty sure this is the variety I have, and it wasn't caused by anything I did. It's congenital. I think it's the other way round--slouching can be attributed to postural kyphosis. And does cause a bit of pain and discomfort, altho it's easily manageable and doesn't stop me from doing anything.65.102.39.98 16:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * You're right about slouching not necessarily connected to congenital kyphosis, but postural kyphosis and slouching are pretty much the same thing, although the word slouch tends to connotate a voluntary posture, while postural kyphosis is the shape of the spine under normal conditions for an individual (although not necessarily normal for the spine in general). As far as pain is concerned, kyphosis, and any spinal distortion, can cause imbalances across the body, and makes it difficult for the body to efficiently use its muscles and bones, leading to a propensity to injury.  I've made some changes with the citations, even though the original citation was from the american academy of orthopaedic surgeons, but I've cited many articles which tend to dispute that cited article.  Rhetth 22:19, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

cervical kyphosis
you

what are the treatments for cervical kyphosis and is it likely to be corrected in an adult?

Are there any examples of kyphosis being initiated/exacerbated by constant downward/forward bending of the cervical and upper thoracic spine during perpetual use of handheld computers and fancyfones? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Homebuilding (talk • contribs) 03:21, 26 May 2012 (UTC)

Problems
What exactly are the problems associated with this, and what about the kyphosis causes them?

Effects of surgery
The article states that surgery for kyphosis can arrest (worsening of?) the deformity and relieve pain, and also suggests that breathing and other problems might be ameliorated. But it also cites an article claiming that the benefits are purely "cosmetic." Could someone knowledgeable clarify this? Inhumandecency (talk) 18:39, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Unclear: Is it normal or pathological?
It's unclear from this article whether kyphosis is a normal back curvature and hyperkyphosis is the problem, or whether kyphosis itself is the problem. I literally don't know when reading this. The first sentence says "Kyphosis (from Greek κυφός kyphos, a hump) refers to the normal convex curvature of the spine as it occurs in the thoracic and sacral regions" (emphasis added). But the rest of the article seems to treat kyphosis as a problem. Elcalebo (talk) 15:35, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kyphosis


text:
Talk:Lipoma

Template suggestion
Suggested template for Orthopaedic Conditions (see Talk:Orthopedic surgery) is Name Definition Synonyms Incidence Pathogenesis Pathology Stages Classification Natural History/Untreated Prognosis Clinical Features Investigation Non-Operative Treatment Risks of Non-Operative Treatment Prognosis following Non-Operative Treatment Operative Treatment (Note that each operations should have its own wiki entry) Risks of Operative Treatment Prognosis Post Operation Complications Management Prevention History --Mylesclough 05:46, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Lipoma of the corpus callosum?
There is no reference in this article about lipoma's in for example the brain. I suggest one be made. Lighthead þ 19, November 2007 23:59 (UTC)

Cancerous or not?
The page states that it can be cancerous; however, various trusted sources state that it cannot become cancerous. It can, though, be confused with cancerous growths similar in appearance if not properly diagnosed. Are many people in the medical field (i.e. doctors and registered nurses) and I incorrect in this belief, or is the page incorrect? -1,000,000 Stars (talk) 06:17, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes, those "trusted" sources are incorrect. --David Broadfoot (talk) 21:08, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I just added a cite re malignant transformation being possible. --David from Downunder (talk) 14:33, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Lipomatosis vs. Lipoma
Lipomatosis is not synonymous with Lipoma. Can someone who's more knowledgeable than I remove the redirect. 85.178.51.102 (talk) 21:00, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

 * It's not synonymous, but the redirect is still valid. I moved the definition of lipomatosis up to the into and bolded the term - that is the accepted Wikipedia convention in the circumstances: there are two definitions in the one article (lipoma & lipomatosis.) --David from Downunder (talk) 05:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Still seems confusing. There are now two articles, Lipoma and Lipomatosis (which is good). However, the definition of the latter may be too restrictive in stating it is AD (see comments in this github ticket). It seems to be confusing the more generic lipomatosis with "Familial multiple lipomatosis", which is usually AD? Also the redirects are confusing, with many of the specific forms of lipomatosis pointing to lipoma rather than lipomatosis Cmungall (talk) 02:21, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Lipomas that have transformed to liposarcomas
Cases of lipomas that have transformed to liposarcomas are extremely rare, with only scattered case reports appearing the in the literature. Even these case reports are thought to be an underdiagnosis of an atypical lipomatous tumor as a lipoma. Lipomas and liposarcomas do not arise in the same locations, which one would expect if liposarcomas transformed into lipomas. Lipomas and liposarcomas show enterely different cytogenetic profiles, which one would also not expect if one arose from the other. Although it may be easy to think of liposarcoma as arising from a lipoma, this has not been shown to occur with confidence. For this reason, I removed that sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.35.79.70 (talk) 20:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

 * I know that it is rare for it to happen, and that is what the article stated in the sentence that you deleted: that it is rare. The article never suggested that liposarcomas arise from lipomas (in general), merely that it can happen in rare cases. I will have a go at re-wording it again. P.S. please start new sections at the bottom of the talk page, and please sign your posts with four tildes. --David from Downunder (talk) 04:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Right, but it's not just rare. Most likely, it never happens.  User 1,000,000 Stars came here and was dead on correct, but then was mislead by the page.  Though, perhaps the page was different when that user came here. 66.61.25.164 (talk) 11:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)Unregistered User

Reference
I put this article with the revision back in it. If we want to list the one link as a source, we can simply move it to the references section without a revert. We should also try to cite the article inline if it's actually used as a reference, rather than just putting it as a blanket link at the bottom. Schu1321 (talk) 12:03, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Using the general articles as "Further reading" might solve this problem. Tim Vickers (talk) 23:17, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

 * No it wont: all sources used in the article must be included in the Notes/Footnotes/References sections. Schu1321 already moved that source to "External links" and I objected for the same reason. By you doing the same thing but renaming "External links" to "Further reading" does nothing to address my objection... "External links" are "Further reading".  --David from Downunder (talk) 11:29, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Medical articles require in-line cites linking a particular statement with a particular source. It is not sufficient to have a "general reference" that is not linked to any parts of the text, see MEDMOS. Such a general link is fine to provide further information on a topic, but it is not a reference. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:38, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

 * If the paper is used as a source, it must be classified as such and not put into "Further reading". There's no ban on putting the paper in the general references section, and it seems reasonable to me for a short article if that paper supplies much of the material. However, Tim is right to insist that aspects of the article be clearly sourced using inline references. If that paper is the source, then it must have an inline and be referred to in the Notes section. You could repeat the whole citation or just say "Salam 2002". A lot of literary articles, sourced to books, get done that way. I suspect that as the article grows, this one paper will no longer seem such a general reference. Colin°Talk 19:55, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Agree with Colin: It's best to use this paper as an inline reference.  The system makes it very easy to use a reference repeatedly.  You can use this article to support as many statements in the article as you choose (consistent with accuracy).
 * What we really don't want is this statement is this ref, that statement is that ref -- oh, and anything thing else is probably in this other thing, including whatever the vandal shoved in the article last week.
 * We also want to avoid having different "classes" of references. All refs belong in the same section.  WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:34, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Yes, Colin and WhatAmIdoing are right. Inline cites are always preferable, but until editors have the time to cite all relevant facts are cited inline, the proper place for any general source is in the "References" section", not "Further Reading", as per Citing_sources. --David from Downunder (talk) 00:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * If you feel any statements seem are disputable, please add tags and I'll see if I can find references for them. Tim Vickers (talk) 01:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks Tim, and thanks for all the edits. The bit about Lipomas that have transformed to liposarcomas needs some work. As per section above, some dispute it, but a friend of mine who is a leading oncologist told me some time ago that the chance of it happening is 0.3%, but now he cannot remember where he got that figure from. Rough translation of what he told me: once you have some genetic screw-ups as evidenced by having a lipoma, a fat cell in that lipoma has a greater chance of becoming a lipocarcoma than the average fat cell in a person who does not have a lipoma. Other medicos state outright that a lipoma cannot become a liposarcoma (and I'm sure that plenty of cites can be found to that effect), but it seems illogical to me to make such an assertion. --David from Downunder (talk)

 * I think part of the dispute is due to the location of the lipoma (some studies show transformation for intraosseous lipomas, but not much for malignant transformation elsewhere). I can expand that section a bit in a few days if no one gets to it before then. Schu1321 (talk) 06:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I've made a start on a "Prognosis" section. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Overweight
Interestingly, the article now states that being overweight is not a cause of lipoma, then it goes on to say that it is correlated in dogs! Probably one of those claims is wrong (the second one?) --David from Downunder (talk) 06:32, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * The three references all seem to check out fine and appear reliable. Perhaps there is a different mechanism in other animals? Schu1321 (talk) 06:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Might be worth pointing out the difference in the article so people know it isn't a mistake? Schu1321 (talk) 06:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I disagree with doing that because I believe that pointing out the difference so that readers "know" that it isn't a mistake smacks of Original Research - based on supposition what's worse! (In fact, it probably is a mistake.)
 * There are a number of beliefs held by medical professionals regarding lipomas that do not match the experience of patients. A major one is that "lipomas never cause pain". When patients report pain, they are usually not believed and often ridiculed. It would not surprise me if there was a reality mismatch regarding overweight being a factor too. --David from Downunder (talk) 14:08, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * But unless that mismatch is published and in a verifiable source, we have to use what we can find in published literature. According to the two sources we have, it says humans have no risk from being overweight while dogs do (pointing that out isn't OR, but removing or changing it because of word of mouth would be). Schu1321 (talk) 17:46, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Also, the current information as written in the article isn't supported by its sources. Neither source states a link between obesity and lipomas; the e-medicine article states a link between obesity/postmenopause and dercum disease (which has lipomas, so in a round-about way, this is somewhat true). However, this isn't for obesity in the entire population and should at least be differentiated. As for the second article, it is currently written correctly in the wiki article, but may be a bit misleading as the gene has been linked separately to obesity and lipoma, but not mutation->obesity->lipoma from what I could tell. I didn't look up the actual publication (just the news article), so it could be better or differently explained there. Schu1321 (talk) 17:59, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Good points. I've fixed it as per your criticisms. I also moved your note about Dercum's away from that discussion as it's really a different condition. --David from Downunder (talk) 01:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * The change again says there is a possible link between obesity and lipomas due to the mutation, however this is a misinterpretation of the data as I read it. The gene was linked to obesity, it has also now been linked to lipomas. However, just because they have a common start doesn't link obesity and lipoma; a common cause does not prove correlation. Schu1321 (talk) 01:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Re "a common cause does not prove correlation"... In fact, a common cause *does* imply a correlation. (On the other hand, a correlation does not imply any type of causality.) --David from Downunder (talk) 01:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * A common cause can lead to correlation, but doesn't mean that one must exist (some correlation may exist, but it could be +/0/-). However, the study (at least from the info in the news article) doesn't indicate a correlation between obesity and lipomas. It said that the mice with mutations were obese earlier in life but developed lipomas later in life. However, if we look at obese mice without the mutation there may be no increase in lipomas (and therefore no correlation). Also, there isn't any data presented that increased weight leads to a similar increase in lipomas (such as 1lb = 10% risk, 2lb = 20% risk, etc). I might be misinterpreting, but it seems a stretch to say that obesity is correlated to lipomas based on this study. Schu1321 (talk) 01:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I've done some searching on PubMed for "obesity" and "lipoma" and can't find anything particularly relevant. Tim Vickers (talk) 18:23, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I deemphasised the obesity link in the article. Though a very reliable source, I was not impressed by that article:
 * Note how they described lipomas as a "major clinical problem"?!! It’s an especially minor problem when you consider that they are apparently talking about sporadic lipomas, not even Familial Multiple Familial Lipomatosis.
 * The heading is flawed too: "'Obesity Gene' Causes Cancer of Fat Tissue"... given that the gene apprently causes lipoma, which only rarely could become a liposarcoma, the gene cannot said to "cause cancer".

Other conditions
Re other conditions related only by virtue of also presenting lipomas... we now have both lipomatosis and Dercum's mentioned in the lede. They could arguably be put in "See also" but I think they belong at least in the body of the article (perhaps in a new section called "Related conditions"?) so that their relationship to "Lipoma" can be made made clear.

Does anyone know about "Familial Multiple Lipomatosis" (FML)? Is that the same as what is meant by "Lipomatosis"? The Lipomatosis article needs work - it is just a stub.

FML is interesting because doctors invariably state that the cause is unknown, and there are numerous reliable sources that state that the cause is unknown. However, several specific mutations have been identified that cause FML (that's why I earlier added that fact to this article though I didn't cite it.)

Could I be correct in supposing that the same genetic mutation that causes FML also causes single lipomas if arising as a random mutation in a single cell? --David from Downunder (talk) 01:49, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I'd suspect that lipomas are much like other cancers and the transformation process involves a sequence of mutations in several different genes. Some of these targets could be common to all lipomas, and having them "pre-existing" in a hereditary form could speed up the process, but it is almost certainly a set of mutations, rather then a single hit on a single gene. Tim Vickers (talk) 01:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * A new "Related conditions" section would probably be worth starting to separate them out but keep them at their current importance. Schu1321 (talk) 01:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * As for the classification of lipomatosis, I would guess that lipomatosis is probably more accurately a general term for multiple lipomas, but should be differentiated for different causes (Familial, Benign symmetric). The current "lipomatosis" should probably be changed to FML. Schu1321 (talk) 02:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that an FML article is needed in addition to the lipomatosis article: note that there is a pelvic lipomatosis article already linked under lipomatosis. --David from Downunder (talk) 02:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Depending on how much info is available, would it be better to merge pelvic lipomatosis into the general lipomatosis article, and give them individual headings rather than their own articles? Schu1321 (talk) 02:24, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * That makes sense to me. So FML and lelvic lipomatosis, etc should all appear in the lipomatosis article (unless any of them get too large and need to be spun out into their own article.) Does anyone disagree? --David from Downunder (talk) 05:13, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Causes
I'll stick this here so we don't just go back and forth on the main page. How does this look for a rewrite of the causes section:
 * The tendency to develop a lipoma is not necessarily hereditary, although it is in a syndrome like familial multiple lipomatosis (where more than one lipoma develops over time.)[11] Hereditary lipomatosis is an autosomal dominant disorder and is a rare condition.[12] Genetic studies in mice have also shown a correlation between the HMG I-C gene (previously identified as a gene related to obesity) and lipoma development. These studies support prior epidemiologic data in humans showing a correlation between HMG I-C and mesenchymal tumors.[2]

 * Cases have been reported where minor injuries are alleged to have triggered the growth of a lipoma, called "posttraumatic lipomas".[13] However, the link between trauma and the development of lipomas is controversial.[14] Obesity has not been shown to cause lipoma in humans.[ref from page] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Schu1321 (talk • contribs) 02:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * The whole paragraph about lipomatosis should be moved to the lipomatosis article. However, I'd like to see retained here a simple note that lipomatosis has hereditary and genetic factors. You may as well edit in place so it's easier to see what changes you made, and be able to click on the cites to check. Sometimes it's better to have the discussion in the edit comments. Please just change what you don't like of mine, and I'll do the same to you - we only need to discuss it here if we have a deadlock. If you want to change that text and move it to lipomatosis, please do it in two steps: move & edit, so it can be tracked. Thanks. --David from Downunder (talk) 05:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Dercum's
Just wondering what the style change for Dercum's -> Dercums is based on. The wikipedia redirect is for Dercum's disease and is referenced as such in the redirected article (Adiposis dolorosa). Schu1321 (talk) 02:35, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I read somewhere that not using the possessive is becoming the accepted style - more accepted in some branches of medicine than others. Also, general style principles eschew apostrophes in names: e.g. "XYX Boys High School", not "XYZ Boy's High School" or "XYX Boys' High School". You can go crazy thinking about it! --David from Downunder (talk) 05:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * As far as style in most texts, it depends on what the reason of the name is. In the case of Dercum's, Dercum is an individual's name and is either Dercum disease (non-possessive but with no "s") or Dercum's disease (possessive with an "s"). As for the school example, the school isn't owned by the boys, but rather a school of boys, so no apostrophe. =) Schu1321 (talk) 05:39, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Well, it's not quite as simple as that. For example, it is standard practice to omit all apostrophes from place names in Australia (official style guide), so French's Forest is written "Frenchs Forest" even though it was a forest owned by a Mr French.
 * As far as students owning the school, Dercum didn't own the disease either. Nor did he even contract it. As Groucho Marx once said: "I've got Bright's disease, but not to worry -- he's got mine." (Add the apostrophes back in if you like - there doesn't seem to be a lot of consensus on that issue.)  -- David from Downunder (talk) 13:57, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

 * As for medical discovery, it's meant to signify some ownership since they discovered it, which I think is the reason they are moving to remove the "'s". It could be different here (US), but most of the sites I found with Google had either Dercum disease/Dercum's disease, so I went with the former for now. We should probably get the other Wikipedia pages to match at some point, just so they have standard style. I'll be mostly absent from here until Thursday, but can do some of it then. Schu1321 (talk) 15:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

In the article, it is said that Dercum's Disease occurs most often in obese, post-menopausal women. However, the main article about Dercum's Disease says that Dercum supposed this, but that there was a survey that showed that 85.7% of the patients developed the disease before menopause. I am not an official editor, but I would propose to change this bit of information in this article. (92.105.44.155 (talk) 15:52, 25 October 2012 (UTC))

General Comments
Comment/question: I've noticed this in a few other entries too. Does the picture have to be so dark?
 * It doesn't seem dark to me. Perhaps it's a setting on your computer?  WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:55, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Removed ultrasound claim
I have removed the following text from the Treatment section:

Another method being developed is the use of ultrasound waves to destroy the lipoma. This can be compared with the removal of kidney stones where ultrasound is used to pulverize the stones.

My reasons for removal:

 * There is no citation for this claim.

 * It really does need substantiation. The parallel with lithotripsy is erroneous, since kidney stones are hard and brittle, and hence will break when exposed to very high amplitude sound waves, while lipomas are very soft and hence will not break even when exposed to the highest practicable sound waves.

I have Lipoma on my right side of my back and the doctor said that I must of had it for awhile now but I just notice it. I want to know if I could die from this because the doctor said it's to big to remove. Lorrie —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.254.161.24 (talk) 18:51, 9 August 2010 (UTC)
 * It might be thought that ultrasonic cavitation resulting from lithotripsy might be effective, but such mechanical disturbance is unlikely to penetrate inside a lipoma due to its higher density than surrounding tissues, its elasticity, and its ductility. Cavitation created by ultrasound may be expected to damage surrounding tissues before it would substantially effect a lipoma. David spector (talk) 16:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes you will die! Seek alternative treatments in third world countries immediately!

I have multiple Lipomas, maybe around 5 total. With most in my quadriceps area.

I'm not 100% positive but it seems my mother and I both got the Lipomas within the same month. And most did appear within a month or so. Anyone else had that experience, other family getting Lipomas at the same time?

Time to perform self surgery and post it on youtube! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.131.210.151 (talk) 19:22, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Ambiguous use of "are supposed to"
"New methods under development are supposed to remove the lipomas without scarring." How are we to interpret "are supposed to" here - as "are said/claimed to", or as "are intended/meant to"? "Supposed to" can mean either of these, and should surely be replaced by something less ambiguous.213.127.210.95 (talk) 15:18, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lipoma. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050426184455/http://www.hms.harvard.edu/news/pressreleases/Schepens/0400ObesityGene.html to http://www.hms.harvard.edu/news/pressreleases/Schepens/0400ObesityGene.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:14, 16 May 2017 (UTC)

Conflicting figures on prevalence
The "Epidemiology" section includes the sentence "Approximately one percent of the general population has a lipoma", but the introductory section says that 2% of people are affected. These figures appear to conflict.188.230.240.75 (talk) 09:54, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure and fixed. Doc James  (talk · contribs · email) 21:44, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Lipoma


text:
Talk:The Parsifal Mosaic

I have created an article on The Parsifal Mosaic to replace the bad one. I wrote it myself, so this one should be okay.

title: Talk:The Parsifal Mosaic


text: MOTSS

title: MOTSS


text:
Giralda

The Giralda (La Giralda ) is the bell tower of Seville Cathedral in Seville, Spain. It was built as the minaret for the Great Mosque of Seville in al-Andalus, during the reign of the Almohad dynasty, with a Renaissance-style belfry added by the Catholics after the expulsion of the Muslims from the area. The Cathedral, including the Giralda, was registered in 1987 as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO, along with the Alcázar and the General Archive of the Indies. It remains one of the most important symbols of the city, as it has been since the Middle Ages. The tower is one of the most famous monuments of Moorish architecture in Spain and one of the most refined examples of Almohad architecture.

Initial construction
The mosque was built to replace the older Mosque of Ibn 'Addabas, built in the 9th century under Umayyad rule, since the congregation had grown larger than that modest mosque could accommodate. It was commissioned in 1171 by caliph Abu Ya'qub Yusuf. Sevillian architect Ahmad Ibn Baso, who had led other construction projects for the caliph, was in charge of designing the mosque. Construction was slowed down by the redirection of an existing city sewer that needed to be moved to accommodate the broad foundation for the building, an engineering obstacle that slowed progress by four years.

From the beginning, craftsmen from all over Al-Andalus and the Maghreb were enlisted in the mosque's planning, construction, and decoration, and the caliph himself was highly invested in the process and was said to have visited the site daily. By 1176, the mosque was complete, save for the minaret; however, Friday prayer was not held there until 1182.

Building of the Minaret
Upon returning to al-Andalus in 1184 for a new military campaign, Aby Ya'qub Yusuf ordered the construction of the minaret. However, construction halted that same year with the death of the architect and, a month and a half later, the caliph, who died while commanding the Siege of Santarém. His son, Abu Yusuf Yaqub al-Mansur, ordered construction on the minaret to continue upon his accession in 1184, but the work stalled again soon after and did not restart until 1188. Ahmad Ibn Baso had begun the base of the tower in cut stone and his work was continued by a Maghrebi Berber architect named 'Ali al-Ghumari, who was responsible for building the main body of the minaret in brick, and completed by Sicilian architect Abu Layth Al-Siqilli, who built the small secondary shaft at the top of the tower. The minaret was built using both local bricks and recycled marble from old Umayyad monuments. On 10 March 1198, the tower was completed with the addition of the finial (jāmūr) of four precious metal spheres (either gold or bronze) at the tower's peak to commemorate al-Mansur's victory over Alfonso VIII of Castile, which had taken place four years prior.

The mosque
Before its partial destruction in a 1356 earthquake, the mosque was comparable in size to the great mosque of Cordoba and its walls faced the cardinal directions with mathematical preciseness. It had a rectangular floor plan measuring approximately 113 by 135 meters. The prayer hall was symmetrical and airy, with a still-extant courtyard, the Patio de los Naranjos, or "Courtyard of Orange Trees." Its interior had a stucco-carved dome over the mihrab, as well as several matching carvings over the arched doorways. The minbar was decorated in a Cordoban style, constructed from expensive wood and embellished with sandalwood, ivory, ebony, gold, and silver. The main northern entrance to the courtyard, the present-day Puerta del Perdón, contains a bronze-plated door with geometric decoration and floral knockers. The current knockers in place are replicas of the originals which are on display inside the Giralda tower.

The minaret
The minaret of the mosque still stands as the Giralda. The base at street level is a square of 13.6 m on the side and which sits on a solid foundation which is a bit wider, 15 - 16 m and about 5 m deep. The foundation is built with solid, rectangular stones, some taken and reused from the nearby walls of the former Abbadid palace and from the Roman city walls. The tower consists of two sections: the main shaft and a much smaller second shaft, superimposed on top of it, which is enveloped today by the Renaissance-era belfry. The main shaft is 50.51 m tall and the second shaft is 14.39 m tall and has a square base measuring 6.83 m. The tower contains a series of 35 ramps winding around the perimeter of seven vaulted chambers at the tower's core. These ramps were designed with enough width and height to accommodate "beasts of burden, people, and the custodians," according to one chronicler from the era.

The decorated facades and windows on the tower are stepped to match the ramps in order to maximize light to the chambers inside. This exterior brick decoration was mainly done by 'Ali al-Ghumari, who also did repair work on the mosque. The decoration of the façades is divided into three equal vertical zones. The middle zone is occupied by the windows that provide light to the interior ramp passage. These windows vary in form from single horseshoe-arch openings to double-arched openings with polylobed (multifoil) profiles and a central marble column. They are generally framed by an ornate blind arch with marble columns on the sides and arabesque carvings in the spandrels. The two other vertical zones of the facades feature large panels of sebka motifs, each of which springs from a blind arcade of polylobed arches supported on marble columns. The top of the main shaft is decorated by another blind arcade forming a horizontal band of intersecting polylobed arches. The marble columns used throughout these areas feature spoliated Umayyad-era capitals from the 9th-10th centuries in the style of Madinat al-Zahra. Leopoldo Torres Balbás counted 92 such capitals reused in the tower. The facades of the tower did contain some plaster embellishment, but they were removed during a modern restoration. The top edge of the tower's main shaft was originally crowned by stepped or sawtooth-shaped merlons, as was common with other contemporary minarets in the region. The small secondary shaft at the top of the minaret also features sebka and blind arch decoration, though this is only visible from inside the belfry today.

Conversion to cathedral
After Seville was taken by the Christians in 1248 during the Reconquista, the city's mosque was symbolically converted into a cathedral. This involved changing the liturgical orientation, closing and screening off exits and archways, and creating several small family chapels. The former mosque was not well-maintained by any of the groups inhabiting their own sections of the building during this period, and most of the records from the 13th and early 14th centuries describe its neglect, damage, and consequent destruction to make way for a new cathedral. This structure was badly damaged in a 1356 earthquake, and by 1433 the city began building the current cathedral. Local stone to build with was scarce, and there were few skilled stonemasons in the area, so timber and stone had to be shipped from overseas, and like its earlier incarnation, the construction of the cathedral brought together artisans from all over its respective empire, this time as far away as Germany and the Netherlands. Construction took 73 years and was completed in 1506. Today, the cathedral stands as one of the largest churches in the world and an example of the Gothic and Baroque architectural styles.

Additions to the tower
When the mosque was converted into a cathedral, the minaret was reused as a bell tower. Its structure remained largely the same during this period. The metal spheres that originally topped the tower fell during the 1356 earthquake, and the spheres were replaced in 1400 with a cross and bell. The first public striking clock in Spain was added here around the same time.

In the 16th century Hernán Ruiz the Younger, who was commissioned to work on cathedral, constructed a new Renaissance-style belfry extension at the top of the tower, which houses the bells today. The new belfry was constructed between 1558 and 1568. It brings the height of the tower to approximately 95 or 96 meters. It consists of several sections or tiers. The lower section has a square layout with the same width as the main shaft of the tower. It consists of a lantern-like structure with 5 openings on either side in which the bells are hung. The space above these openings features for oculi in addition to a central arch. The top edge of this section is crowned with decorative stone "urns" popularly known as "carambolas". The upper section is narrower and consists of two square sections topped by two round sections of diminishing size. Black tiles are used alongside sculptural details for decoration throughout the belfry. The top of the square sections also features the inscription "TURRIS FORTISSIMA NOMEN DNI PROBERBI8", a reference to a passage of the 18th Proverb: "The name of the Lord is a fortified tower."

The Giraldillo
The finishing touch added to the summit of the belfry in 1568 is the rotating sculpture known as the Giraldillo (weather vane), from which the name "Giralda" is derived. It was designed by Luis de Vargas, a model was made by Juan Bautista Vásquez "el Viejo" and then it was cast in bronze by Bartolomé Morel. The sculpture, in the form of a woman carrying a flag pole, was probably inspired by the image of Pallas Athena, adapting it to a symbol of Christian faith. It is 4 meters tall and approximately 4 meters wide, weighing 1,500 kilograms. As it is made of cast bronze sheets, the interior is mostly empty and it is held together with the help of several vertical and horizontal bars. These internal supports rest on a vertical metal axis which is inserted into the sculpture itself up to around breast height and which is anchored below to the summit of the tower. The sculpture thus rotates around this axis like a weather vane.

The Giraldillo has been damaged and worn over time. Repairs were historically difficult due to its weight and its hard-to-reach location. During the 1755 Lisbon earthquake it suffered damage but repairs were not performed until 1770, when it was completely disassembled and its internal support system replaced. In 1980 and 1981 it was partially repaired again, which allowed modern scholars and scientists to study it directly for the first time. It was determined then that the sculpture was in poor condition and needed further restoration. This process began in 1999, when the Giraldillo was removed and brought to the Andalusian Historical Heritage Institute (Instituto Andaluz de Patrimonio Histórico) for restoration, while a replica was put in its place. The restored sculpture was reinstalled in 2005 along with instrumentation designed to monitor its condition in the future.

Buildings inspired by the Giralda
Many towers have borrowed from the Giralda's design throughout history. Several church towers in the province of Seville also bear a resemblance to the tower, and may have been inspired by the Giralda. These towers, most notably those in Lebrija and Carmona, are popularly known as Giraldillas.

Numerous replicas of the Giralda have been built in the United States, mostly between 1890 and 1937:
 * The second Madison Square Garden in New York City, designed by Stanford White, built in 1890
 * The San Francisco Ferry Building clock tower, completed in 1895
 * The clock tower of the Railroad Depot in Minneapolis, destroyed by wind in 1941
 * The Freedom Tower in Miami, Florida, built in 1925
 * The Biltmore Hotel in Coral Gables, Florida, built in 1926
 * The Wrigley Building in Chicago, built in 1920
 * The Terminal Tower in Cleveland, built in 1930
 * The clock tower at the University of Puerto Rico's Río Piedras campus, built in 1937
 * A replica in the Country Club Plaza in Kansas City, Missouri, built in 1967

The building has also inspired buildings outside the US and Spain, such as:
 * Seven Sisters (Moscow), seven Soviet-era skyscrapers in Moscow, Russia
 * Palace of Culture and Science in Warsaw, Poland
 * Tower of the university's library on the Ladeuzeplein in Leuven, Belgium

title: Giralda


text:
Mendicino, Italy

Mendicino (Calabrian: Mennicìnu) is a city and comune in the province of Cosenza, Calabria, in Southern Italy.

title: Mendicino, Italy