text:
Talk:Paraprosdokian

Older discussion
Perhaps a comment stating that the punctuation of the second example is part of the humor is needed--I didn't consider the possiblity until it was mentioned, so others could miss it. Though it could just be me. Shilasu 16:24, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

We can self-reference if, like - Paraprosdokian is a figure of speech. You have to figure out how to speak it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.123.175.15 (talk) 19:07, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism
The definition has been substituted with phrases containing "hamburgers." The article should be corrected, but I don't know what the word means well enough to do it.

Reference for this word?
Even the Oxford English Dictionary doesn't contain this word, so can anyone give a reference for it? Otherwise, why should I believe it's not a made-up word?

 * It's a classical term - see, for example:
 * p. 218, Classical Philology > Vol. 35, No. 2 (Apr., 1940)
 * p. 315, The American Journal of Philology > Vol. 86, No. 3 (Jul., 1965)
 * p. 322, The American Journal of Philology > Vol. 77, No. 3 (1956)

 * I got these off JSTOR, though unless you're connected to a university somehow, you're unlikely to be able to get access. An example of more recent use can be seen as the penultimate entry on the second page of a google search for the term. Note the URL: muse.jhu.edu/journals/american_ journal_of_philology/v123/123.2biles.pdf - v. 123 of the journal is from 2002.

 * As the word is often written in italics in the above sources, I suspect that it is merely a transliteration of the Greek (hence not in the OED), which would be something like: παραπρωσδοχιαν :) Sorry, I might as well use my Greek GCSE for something.... Soobrickay 02:39, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm told that it's a phrase - "παρά προσδοκίαν" - "against expectation." 24.159.255.29 02:38, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

This word I found used in Edmund Murphy's book The Logic of Medicine. Thus, it is not a made-up word and is indeed from the Greek. The explanation provided here is not totally correct though, as it applies to a logic employed showing that the latter portion of the phrase seems at odds with the introduction/former part however is not contradictory to the same.--Mike 01:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion?

 * 1) "I type at one hundred and one words a minute. But it's in my own language." — Mitch Hedberg
 * 2) "I know a lot about cars. I can look at a car's headlights and tell you exactly which way it's coming." — Mitch Hedberg
 * 3) "It has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried." — Winston Churchill [8]
 * 4) "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing - after they've tried everything else." — Winston Churchill
 * 5) "[I weigh] 145 pounds, naked. That is, if that scale outside the drugstore is anything to go by." — Emo Philips[9]
 * 6) "My parents threw quite the going-away party for me... according to the letter." — Emo Philips

Should those be deleted from the article? I don't think they quite fit the definition - especially the first one. The punchline didn't cause me to reframe the first part of the sentence at all. --Dbutler1986 (talk) 01:11, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

 * Glad to see I wasn't the only one feeling that some cleanup is needed. I think both of the Churchill quotes should stay, but I'm going to remove those others, and a couple more as well. Cgingold (talk) 02:39, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

 * I suppose you're right about the Churchill quotes. --Dbutler1986 (talk) 19:15, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Agreeing with Dbutler1986, that the examples they cited should be deleted. I deleted the Churchill quote -- there's no change in meaning caused during the last part of the sentence. I also deleted two more, which didn't cause me...as far as I know...lol...to "rethink" the earlier part of the sentence. Piano non troppo (talk) 06:06, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Also, sadly, is this one: "Time flies like an arrow; fruit flies like a banana." It is incongruity between the two "flies" which creates the humour, not the reframing of the first part of the sentence; the first time you hear this, you probably reframe the second part of the sentence.  I disagree about removing "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing...", as the second part of the sentence turns this into a complete contradiction. cojoco (talk) 11:24, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

 * I also happen to agree that "You can always count on Americans to do the right thing..." quote should stay, it does force you to rethink the first part of the sentence, because it changes in meaning. The first part indicates that Americans will do what is right when expected, though the second says that they won't, and turns the indication into a part of humour (or whatever Churchill meant by that quote, I found it funny), the turning, in itself, is rethinking. --86.29.49.173 (talk) 21:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)

Near misses?
I wonder if it might be informative to include a selection of "near misses", in a kind of "exception proves the rule" kind of a way? cojoco (talk) 02:30, 18 March 2009 (UTC)

how about this from "Arrested Development" "You were the last to see her alive, or dead, or whatever" - cop in arrested development. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.17.152.16 (talk) 19:53, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Quote
I was pretty sure the line "I can picture in my mind a world without war, a world without hate. And I can picture us attacking that world, because they'd never expect it" was attributed to Steven Wright, not Jack Handey. Can anyone prove which of the two this quote is currectly attributed to?--Maceo (talk) 10:15, 3 September 2010 (UTC)
 * No it was Handey. Doesn't strike me as very like Wright's style. Ceoil (talk) 17:49, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

I am new to editing Wikipedia, but I have noticed that this example [of what I believe to be a [paraprosdokian] isn't in the list of examples overleaf, nor in my opinion, should it be included: "If I had anything interesting to add here, I would have said it. Anonymous." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 31.51.14.176 (talk) 17:35, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

 * I agree that it should not be included. I disagree that it is a paraprosdokian. And it couldn't be included, regardless of what you, I, or anyone else believe, unless a reliable source said it was a paraprosdokian. ― Mandruss  ☎  19:16, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

examples
there are a lot of examples listed but people always fight about them. i think they all count as original research any way so shouldnt they all be removed?? Aisha9152 (talk) 16:08, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Your taking the definition of OR a bit too far there. Outright mass deletion is just, well I dont know. Ceoil (talk) 18:05, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * i still think the tag should be there. i dont think youre supposed to remove tags without a good justification. Aisha9152 (talk) 22:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

 * Tagging pages for problems says If an argument on the talk page has been made as to the reason for the tag, but someone still feels that the tag is inappropriate, he or she should explain the reasoning on the talk page. If there is no reply within a reasonable amount of time (a few days), the tag can be removed. If there is disagreement, then normal talk page discussion should proceed, per consensus-building. Adding and removing tags without discussion is not helpful, and can be seen as disruptive. Where there is disagreement, both sides should attempt to discuss the situation.. so can we discuss it instead of removing the tag without discussion please. thank you. Aisha9152 (talk) 16:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I do agree with Ceoil that this is stretching the definition of OR a bit far. However I do agree that all quotations (eventually) need references, hence I've replaced the OR tag, with that tag. Let's all try to cite a little more reference, and a little less rulebook. Thanks :) -- Quiddity (talk) 05:49, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * problem is that even references that are there just tell you the person said it not that its a paraprosdokian. deciding whether they are or not counts as original research and if you look at article history has been cause of a lot of back and forth problems. Aisha9152 (talk) 06:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I think Aisha9152 has a good point, although it is a strict interpretation of OR. But it strikes me that using a strict interpretation in this case would make sense, as it would limit the examples to ones endorsed by a source. Otherwise, I see no criteria for which to include and which to reject, other than personal preference. --Nuujinn (talk) 16:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Judgment and linguistic expertise are required to assess if the quoted examples are, in fact, valid examples of the figure of speech. Strictly speaking, that makes it original research, in my mind. The problem is that other people's examples would have to be quoted verbatim, which would possibly be a copyright violation. Even allowing fair use, I imagine that the amount of text quotable would be very little (possibly even less than generally permitted for poetry) and there would have to be a fair use rationale (such as criticism or discussion of the quoted author's work, rather than the example itself). So, strictly speaking, we would probably be limited to examples that had been written or said by one person (preferably a long time ago) and quoted as an example by another. For this reason, I would suggest, the OR barrier might be set a little higher for examples of figures of speech (if necesary invoking WP:IAR.--Boson (talk) 16:35, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Would these work? one, two, three, four,five. I think that these would all qualify as reliable sources, and provide sufficient examples to get the point across. --Nuujinn (talk) 17:56, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * that is great if no one complains you should make the change! Aisha9152 (talk) 19:14, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ditto :) -- Quiddity (talk) 19:51, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Does anyone have any objections to stripping out the list of examples currently in place and replacing same with examples drawn from the list I've of sources I've provided? --Nuujinn (talk) 00:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, just done! --Nuujinn (talk) 00:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * yay thanks! Aisha9152 (talk) 00:41, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Wendy Liebman
Hi. I do understand the desire to prevent the long list of examples from growing further. However, I do believe Wendy Liebman is a notable comic, who has made an entire career out of this type of construction. I can only find a single blog reference that calls her material paraprosdokian (first at ), but there is a wealth of video footage (eg) that citable quotes could be drawn from. Her site has reviews that describe her M.O. eg "She's a master of a throwaway line, of making a perfectly rational observation, then adding, almost subliminally, the punch line, which skews everything she has said before."LA Times

I'm not requesting immediate replacement in the article, but just wanted to place these notes here, until they become usable. :) -- Quiddity (talk) 18:32, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Misattribution of an example
"Have you ever tried just sitting down with your children, turning the TV off, and hitting them." I believe this was actually said by Bender B. Rodriguez in Futurama, Bender Should Not Be Allowed on TV — not Homer Simpson as is currently stated. Also, the quote should probably end with a question mark. I'd change it myself, but the attribution seems to cite something and I don't have time to check that out. 99.177.172.109 (talk) 21:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I double checked the source, and the article reflects it. Do you have an alternate source? I wouldn't doubt that Bender also said it. --Nuujinn (talk) 23:37, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * As Nuujinn is saying, we go by what the reliable sources say. There's a citation for the attribution to Homer Simpson. If that's wrong, then it shouldn't be hard to find a different citation. I imagine the article we cite (from The Journal of Medical Speech) is using as its source Heinrichs, J. (2007). Thank You for Arguing: What Aristotle, Lincoln and Homer Simpson Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion. New York: Three Rivers Press. Anyone have access to a copy? -Phoenixrod (talk) 15:17, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * have you tried googling the quote? there are not a lot of results which is surprising. Aisha9152 (talk) 16:04, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure who's aware of this but both cartoon's are Groening's work, so my bet is the joke got recycled. --Nuujinn (talk) 16:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
 * There are quite a lot of hits if you replace "just" with "simply": "Have you ever tried simply turning off the TV, sitting down with your children, and hitting them?" --Boson (talk) 20:24, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Misquoted by source
"Have you ever tried just sitting down with your children, turning the TV off, and hitting them."

That isn't from Homer Simpson. It's from Bender, in the Futurama episode Bender Should Not Be Allowed on Television. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.121.184.211 (talk)
 * Got a source? We follow sources, and don't worry about the truth. --Nuujinn (talk) 12:39, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * if you google the episode transcript its there though not the best source. maybe we should just remove that one entry it wont hurt anything. Aisha9152 (talk) 16:30, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to that notion, fwiw. --Nuujinn (talk) 22:37, 24 October 2010 (UTC)
 * ok i did it it was more trouble than its worth Aisha9152 (talk) 02:14, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Invalid examples
To qualify, in my understanding, the sentence has to have two parts, the second part giving surprising new meaning to the first.

These examples don't qualify, in my view: "A modest man, who has much to be modest about." —Winston Churchill[4] "She looks as though she's been poured into her clothes, and forgot to say when." —P. G. Wodehouse[4]

The later Alistair Cooke and Churchill quotes are borderline at best.

SelectSplat (talk) 23:22, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Fortunately, we do not need to decide that, since we depend on reliable sources. FWIW, I "get" the surprise in the two quotes. --Nuujinn (talk) 00:00, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Those quotes citing the Journal of Medical Speech are all dubious- the journal article (looks like it came from a column rather than a paper) is itself only citing from the Figaro blog, which cites no primary sources to back up the quotes. The Wodehouse one is from here. 81.144.182.244 (talk) 12:20, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

 * SelectSplat is correct, many of the examples are not true examples, and the reliable sources are wrong. It's more than simply a one-liner, with two parts that are witty in combination. By that definition, virtually all one-liners would be paraprosdokians. You need a setup, followed by a knockdown, and the setup causes the listener to anticipate something different from what the knockdown delivers. Hence the surprise factor which makes it a paraprosdokian. Take the following two examples. In the second example, the first part leaves no anticipation and therefore no surprise.

 * "On the other hand, you have different fingers."

 * "I don't belong to an organized political party. I'm a Democrat."

 * And Nuujinn is correct, none of this matters here, since Wikipedia is about citing reliable sources, not about truth. Strictly speaking, on a Talk page we're not even supposed to talk about whether a reliable source is correct or false. Mandruss (talk) 03:30, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Mind rhymes?
Does this have a relation to mind rhymes? —141.153.215.89 (talk) 15:18, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

My recent revert
I don't think that Bill Casselman, an author of numerous books about words (mostly Canadian words, though :-) is an entirely non-reliable source. Loggerjack (talk) 02:28, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Country music
Country music is full of these witty twists. I wanted to add two examples, but was stymied by the article's requirement that some reliable source has to say they are paraprosdokia - even though it is obvious they are. Can they be added? Here are my examples. --MelanieN (talk) 20:22, 22 July 2012 (UTC)

 * "I've got friends in low places." --country song sung by Garth Brooks
 * "Is it cold in here, or is it just you?" --country song sung by Joe Diffie

"Low places" isn't much of an example; it probably falls more under another figure of speech than under this one... AnonMoos (talk) 06:09, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Move
Paraprosdokian is the accusative of paraprosdokia in Greek. Should the article be moved in light of this? Even if it doesn't come up very often in English, article names should be in the nominative case. Would anyone object to a move? -Anagogist (talk) 19:45, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Another example
"Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded" - Yogi Berra — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.230.96.228 (talk) 21:39, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Dangerfield quote
This is not original with Dangerfield. It's a version of the ancient joke, "Who was that lady I saw you with last night?" "That was no lady, that was my wife." Kostaki mou (talk) 15:43, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree. The reference link was invalid. I've deleted the example. -- Jmc (talk) 18:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
 * To be clear, the link worked but the source was a forum. I agree that we need a better source than some anonymous person posting an opinion on a forum. (And for those who aren't already aware, we need the source to state that the quotation is a paraprosdokian.) ― Mandruss  ☎  18:16, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, in saying that the reference link was invalid, I was referring both to the fact that it was "some anonymous person posting an opinion on a forum" (i.e. not a RS) and that there was no attribution to Dangerfield. -- Jmc (talk) 21:12, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
 * IMO, the best example of them all is the one by Steven Wright (that is to say, the most paraprosdokian, not necessarily the funniest). The source given mentions Wright but does not directly attribute that quotation to him. Since a simple Google search will associate the quote with him, and that will always be so, there is no need for the source to make that association. If one wanted to go to the trouble of adding a second source, I doubt anyone would complain, but it's not necessary. ― Mandruss  ☎  21:39, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Not even a simple Google search, let alone a RS, attributing the "lady/wife" example to Dangerfield, though. -- Jmc (talk) 07:44, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, just clarifying what I think are reasonable parameters for inclusion. Totally agree with the Dangerfield removal. ― Mandruss  ☎  09:20, 12 March 2015 (UTC)

Paraprosdokian vs. Garden path sentence
What is the difference (if any)? --Rusty Lugnuts (talk) 21:01, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

 * That's off topic for this page, which is for discussions about improvements to this article, but it would make an excellent question for Reference desk/Language. ― Mandruss  ☎  21:17, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Nope. This question is exactly about the subject. And comparisons of things do belong to encyclopedia. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:02, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Well now that you put it that way. I'm not responsible for anything I said prior to 2017. ― Mandruss  ☎  20:08, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * (In my defense, I was thrown by the fact that it was presented as a question about the topic, not as a suggestion for article improvement. In hindsight I guess I could have read the latter into it.) ― Mandruss  ☎  20:10, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * We all quite often take some things too literally. Too bad this page suffers from the lack of eyeballs. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:15, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * We have to find sources which say this, but the difference is that GPS is a grammatical artifact, while p--kian is a rhetorical figure. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:15, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Henny Youngman
What about the most famous one-liner from Henny Youngman: "Take my wife... please"? This causes the listener to re-interpret the word take, does it not? — Loadmaster (talk) 19:39, 11 July 2017 (UTC) I don't know. The source is as good as some of the rest. Given the multiple halfway-decent Google hits, combined with what I consider its clear paraprosdokianity, I think it should stay in. If somebody wants to improve the cite, there's no harm in that, but I think WP:V is satisfied regardless. ― Mandruss  ☎  20:27, 11 July 2017 (UTC) Rodney Dangerfield did the same thing with "My wife complains that I never take her anywhere. That's not true, I take her lots of places - but she keeps finding her way home!" ― Mandruss  ☎  23:59, 11 July 2017 (UTC) I suppose I wouldn't object to your approach, but you're sure to get pushback from those who strongly feel that all we need is one reliable source (with a generous interpretation of the term, probably since this is a low-visibility article about a light and uncontroversial topic). I see that reasoning everywhere. ― Mandruss  ☎  00:54, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Which source describes is as an example of p..kian?Staszek Lem (talk) 19:57, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Take your pick. I think it merits an entry, and I thought it was in the article at one time. Or maybe that was about his tired arms after flying in from New York. ― Mandruss  ☎  20:03, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I added it using the same source as for the Steven Wright example, which calls it "probably the most famous paraprosdokian", so I put it first. I added it some time ago, but someone said they didn't understand it, & I didn't want to edit war. But I still think it's the quintessential paraprosdokian. Davemck (talk) 20:14, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Good work. You have no doubt made Henny very happy. ― Mandruss  ☎  20:16, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Is "wordoriginsblog" a reliable source? Its author is an unnamed " English major who has always been rather fascinated with word trivia,". Staszek Lem (talk) 20:19, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Taken out of context it is not that funny. Logically I can deduce several contexts when it is funny and when it is not and when it is not a p..kian. Therefore IMO this example "as is" is not helpful for encyclopedic purposes. Staszek Lem (talk) 20:23, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Being funny is not a requirement for inclusion (obviously, from some of the other entries). Besides, funny is highly subjective. Lots of sane people think Don Rickles was hilarious.
 * My objection is not about being funny or not. My objection is that in this example 'as is' it is not evident where the heck there a  p--kian. For an example to be instructive, i.e., useful, either it must be explained or it must be self-evident. None of the options is here. You say "clear paraprosdokianity" in "Take my wife... please", I disagree. As I wrote already, there are plenty of contexts where the phrase has plain, unsurprizing meaning. Staszek Lem (talk) 21:45, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Point taken, but the same could be said for the quotes by Simpson, Colbert, and Marx. And to my eye the quotes by Churchill (1), Churchill (2), and Cooke are seriously wanting for paraprosdokianity, I don't care what those sources say. That's equally misleading to readers, if not more so. If we are going to start applying this much editorial judgment to raise the bar, we can't be selective about it, and I don't know that I like the idea of gutting 53% of the examples. ― Mandruss  ☎  22:15, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * This is the same problem with multitudes of example farms. Of course, we cannot be selective, but we are not almighty either; one chop at a time works fine in wikipedia:-). As for "to raise the bar", we already have guidelines in WP:EXAMPLEFARM and WP:TRIVIA. And BTW, I totally agree with your judgement of Churchills and Cooke. the problem with the sources cited is that the examples given come from the same highbrow attitude "because I say so", i.e., without actual explanation why it is so. Many cultural hints and allusions are utterly incomperehensive for people from foreign cultures. Quite a few p..kians can be concocted by taking a famous saying and smartly tweaking its ending. But to be recognized as a p..kian one has to recognize the cliche saying in the first place. Therefore in wikipedia the latter demands an explanation.
 * That said, can someone explain what's the deal with "Take my wife, please"? Namely how is that "in which the latter part of a sentence, phrase, or larger discourse is surprising or unexpected in a way that causes the reader or listener to reframe or reinterpret the first part. Reading Henny Youngman didn't make me wiser. Staszek Lem (talk) 23:37, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Pondering first paragraph. Sounds like you're suggesting explanatory prose with each example, but we can't do that without taking it from sources. Since that almost never exists, you're calling into question the very existence of the list.
 * I think Youngman preceded the one-liner with something that predisposed the listener to the cliche. "Many women seem to think shopping is essential to their survival. Take my wife..." is immediately heard as "Consider my wife, for example...". Then he added the word that forced the reinterpretation as "Please take my wife off my hands." Granted, the joke is lost on anybody lacking fluency in English idiom, and my suggestion would be for them to look for the equivalent article in their native language, or to request its creation.
 * I think Youngman preceded the -- my point exactly; without a wider context it is impossible to comprehend what's going on. You cannot expect everyone in the world immediately recognizes a stupid American comedian. I also understand your point about the dangers of WP:NOR if we start writing explanations by ourselves. But can we at least agree that if the utility or validity of an example is reasonably disputable, then it is off and out? Staszek Lem (talk) 00:29, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I think most of those fluent in English idiom intuitively understand the one-liner without the setup (you being one of the rare exceptions, if I read you correctly). I always have, and I don't think I ever heard the context, I just deduced that it must have been there.
 * you being one of the rare exceptions No. Again you misted my point. Without the setup one-liner may be understood in several different ways according to the different meanings of the word "take" (and even "please"). The big question is which of these interpretations is a p..kian. That's why I say this example is of questionable explanatory power. all we need is one reliable source The problem with this reliable source is that it heavily relies to the fact that an average TV-addicted american readily remembers this silly comedian and hence the context where the phrase was used. Staszek Lem (talk) 16:18, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I do seem to be "misting" some of your points. In the last instance I interpreted can someone explain what's the deal with "Take my wife, please"? to mean that you didn't get the joke. So I explained it, as requested. Let's try this: Which examples would you remove? And, given the magnitude and the controversial nature of such a change, wouldn't it warrant an RfC? Without it, this issue would not end here in this thread. ― Mandruss  ☎  17:09, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * to mean that you didn't get the joke There is no joke in our article in the first place. Your explanation is that someone somewhere cracked a joke with this line. But the line itself is not a joke, neither it is a paraprosdokian. Just as  "To get to the other side" is not a joke. I find it hard to understand why this is so hard to understand.  Staszek Lem (talk) 18:09, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Let's try this: Which examples would you remove? No, let's try this: "Many women seem to think shopping is essential to their survival. Take my wife... please" -- this is an example of a p..kian. On the other hand "Take my wife...please" is not regardless how many a reliable source you will cite. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:16, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I disagree with that view and consider it a case of overthink. As I've said, I see and get a joke in the one-liner sans setup, as do others in thread. You seem to be saying that our perception is faulty, and that's a dead-end conversation. Thankfully, our agreement is not essential if there is an RfC. Even if you and I reached an agreement, even if a couple of more editors joined in and agreed with us, that still wouldn't be a strong enough consensus to hold for long. I suggest you start a well-framed RfC if you want to pursue this any further. If the majority reaches the wrong conclusion in your view, so be it. That's how consensus works when there is weak or no connection to policy. ― Mandruss  ☎  18:29, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Your disagreement without a valid counterargument is irrelevant. That you get a joke is irrelevant, because you know (or may readily guess) a context where this may be a punchline. You did not answer my question: how the phrase "Take my wife...please" satisfies the definition of p..kian. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:40, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * (offtopic) consider it a case of overthink -- and I consider it a case of over-reliance on American culture, whereby a reader of wikipedia is supposed to know every American comedian wisecrack. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:51, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I am not going to continue this line of conversation because it's now moot for the reason I stated above. I am simply not interested in working to establish a two-editor consensus on something that is guaranteed to be controversial in the long term. I'll revert you per BRD if you make a unilateral change in this area, and then we'll be back in this impasse. The only way forward is RfC, and that will likely bring in about as many non-American views as American ones. That RfC is yours to start since you are proposing the change. ― Mandruss  ☎  18:54, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

How about "My wife baked two kinds of cake for my birthday and I was going to take my pick, but then I decided that the hammer and chisel were sufficient." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.124.116.101 (talk) 19:13, 4 February 2019 (UTC) I note that the list is currently all male, and I'd happily accept one or two good ones from women. With cited sourcing calling them paraprosdokians of course. ― Mandruss  ☎  01:58, 5 February 2019 (UTC)
 * That meets the definition in my opinion. However, the list is not intended to include everything that meets the definition, but rather to provide a sampling sufficient to illustrate the concept. I think it already does that. It already includes one from Henny, and, after this edit, it does not include two from the same person.

MST3K / Rifftrax
Does anyone else think that these are great examples of frequent paraprosdokians? Since the entire premise is to add commentary after an event happens in the film, the viewer is constantly re-interpreting what they just saw in the context of the joke made.

Currently, only quotes are being used as examples - so I don't think mentioning 'a good source' of paraprosdokians fits with the flow of the article. Could be used for any future expansions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:1FC0:2840:301C:BED0:3AEB:5782 (talk) 00:58, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

Sam Cassimally example
This example ("The funniest film of the year. My girl friend laughed so much she pissed on my finger") is of dubious validity. The article cited mentions it as coming from "a review of the film", without any reference to that review itself. Unless that review can be directly identified as the actual source, I propose to remove the example. -- Jmc (talk) 22:29, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Furthermore, I can't see how this example meets this article's definition of a paraprosdokian: "...the latter part of a sentence, phrase, or larger discourse is surprising or unexpected in a way that causes the reader or listener to reframe or reinterpret the first part". There's surely no reframing or reinterpretation of the first part, such as there is in the other examples. -- Jmc (talk) 08:14, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Nemine dissentiente, I've removed the example. -- Jmc (talk) 19:51, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Meta discussion
Offering food for thought.

 * 1) What's the page's primary goal? Surely we want the reader to leave knowing what a paraprosdokian is. Concretely, that means that they can recognize paraprosdokians correctly in the wild, and with equal importance, that they can recognize what is not a paraprosdokian in the wild. In logician-speak they need to understand both what is necessary and what is sufficient: only do we actually understand a definition. That means the presence of any false example on this page does real harm.
 * 2) Once this page has given the reader "N" excellent and varied examples of paraprosdokians, then can adding any more examples beyond that really help anything, or could it only hurt? I'd probably set N at 3, but it's perfectly debatable.
 * 3) Not everything that is an "X" also makes a great example of an "X".
 * 4) Though including an example here requires a reliable reference, excluding an example doesn't require that there be no reference. That is, no matter how many people have written that some phrase is a paraprosdokian, there's no obligation to include it here.

These observations all suggest being conservative: when in doubt, throw it out! If any example is even substantially controversial, it's very likely better to just drop it. IOW, why bother including borderline cases?

Many of the current included quotes are just jokes that a "sudden left turn" to surprising comedic or macabre effect. You're surprised, but you don't have to totally reevaluate what came before. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kevinb9n (talk • contribs) 00:37, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Agree in principle; less is often more. Practically speaking, about all one can do is (1) remove what you see as excess, (2) revert any future additions you see as excess, and (3) be prepared for the potential conflicts in both cases. For many of those edits, you will have to spend a bit of time seeking a consensus on this page (and possibly deal with editors who don't respect consensus). You will also encounter editors who don't even look at this page, so aren't even aware of an existing consensus and just re-add content that was previously removed under consensus. In my experience, few editors have the time and energy to fight such perpetual battles, particularly at such a low-profile article; I certainly don't. ― Mandruss  ☎  04:35, 22 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know if you noticed that I moved this thread to the bottom. ― Mandruss  ☎  18:53, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Paraprosdokian


text:
Wikipedia:Peer review/Cool (Gwen Stefani song)/archive1

Cool (song)
I've been attempting to transform this article into something it was once not. I would like to nominate it for featured article one day, so point out anything that you find. --Winnermario 16:26, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, for one it starts out with a one-sentence paragraph :(. Other than that its not too bad :) - "Chart performance" should be turned into something like three long paragraphs instead of the many shorts there. "Music video" the last two paragraphs here are a little short. "Lyrics and meaning" - the quotation here is odd - is it one or two? Right now it looks like two because there are two sets of quotes... last paragraph is a little short too. Other than that the structure isn't too bad. I'd take a look over it for POV issues though - even the smallest POV problem in an article like this will draw many objections at FAC time. Ryan Norton T 22:14, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

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


text:
Talk:Chinese hamster ovary cell

Definition is self-referential
The definition given in the first line is self-referential: "Chinese Hamster Ovary cells (CHO cells) are a cell line derived from Chinese Hamster ovary cells." — Paul G 07:11, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
 * How about "Chinese Hamster Ovary cells (CHO cells) are a cell line derived from the cells of Chinese Hamster ovaries." :-) Axl 21:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Someone has fixed it.Rod57 (talk) 12:51, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

copyright?
looks like part of this is a direct copy from : which is a apge with copyright Xtothel (talk) 08:32, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Chinese Hamster History
Hello all! It seems that much of the history on this page is actually the history of the Chinese Hamster in research, rather than the history of the CHO cell. Perhaps we could move the hamster stuff to Chinese hamster and start the history section of the CHO article with a short sentence like "the Chinese hamster had been used as a research animal since blah blah blah..." and then jump into the CHO cell stuff? Thoughts?Ajpolino (talk) 06:45, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Chinese hamster ovary cell. 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/20131213154144/http://pef.aibn.uq.edu.au/wordpress/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/Support/Mammalian/Literature/Recombinant_Protein_Therapeutics_from_CHO_Cells-20_years_and_counting_Jayapal.pdf to http://pef.aibn.uq.edu.au/wordpress/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/Support/Mammalian/Literature/Recombinant_Protein_Therapeutics_from_CHO_Cells-20_years_and_counting_Jayapal.pdf

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) 07:50, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chinese hamster ovary cell


text:
Talk:Texas horned lizard

Mascot (old remark)
I myself,do not see the point in including mascot information on this entry. If we do that here we should consider the plethora of "Apples" and "Penguins" teams out there, then we'd have to edit all of those pages. Also, biology/conservation minded research would not lead anyone to this type of info, so why should wiki. Wiki is a great opportunity to progress, not comercialize. -cheers- DanielJL

 * Disagree. Biology is hugely important, but we should cover all aspects of animals, not just bio.  Need to cover conservation, economics, symbology, etc.  TCU is a big school and the usage is not trivial.  Also, the animal is an official symbol of the state of Texas.TCO (talk) 14:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Special
"The Texas horned lizard is now a protected species and it is illegal to take, possess, transport or sell them without a special permit." The use of the word special doesn't sound very encyclopedic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.109.205 (talk) 20:26, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Conservation, state versus overall
Some of the discussion of conservation applies only within the state of Texas. We should also explain the animal is IUCN Least Concern, populous in New Mexico, etc. And clarify differences of legal limitations in Texas versus throughout range. Note, the content is good. Keep it. Just clarify.TCO (talk) 14:33, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Few Natural Predators?!
this article says the animals are docile because they have few natural predators. In truth almost any carnivore big enough will try to eat a horned lizard including but not limited to: feral dogs and cats, bobcats, raccoons (eat juveniles especially), roadrunners, hawks, birds, and snakes. I agree that they seem to be fairly relaxed when held but to state that they have few natural predators is false. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.26.174.203 (talk) 04:24, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

 * Re: Predators. I was wondering how the blood squirted from the lizard's eyes in defense can "destroy habitats." 70.114.146.227 (talk) 02:04, 16 April 2014 (UTC) Eric

title: Talk:Texas horned lizard


text:
Andrew Lang (basketball)

Andrew Charles Lang Jr. (born June 28, 1966) is an American former professional basketball player who played twelve seasons in the National Basketball Association (NBA). He played college basketball for the Arkansas Razorbacks.

Career
After a four-year career at the University of Arkansas, Lang was selected by the Phoenix Suns in the second round (28th pick overall) of the 1988 NBA draft. He quickly developed a reputation as a proficient shotblocker. For years, he maintained the fourth all-time NBA record of one blocked shot every 9.12 minutes.

After starting a career-high 71 games while recording career-highs of 6.7 rebounds and 2.5 blocks per game in 1992, Lang was traded (along with Jeff Hornacek and Tim Perry) to the Philadelphia 76ers for All-Star forward Charles Barkley.

Somewhat of a journeyman center, he also played for the Atlanta Hawks, Minnesota Timberwolves, Milwaukee Bucks, Chicago Bulls and New York Knicks before retiring in 2000. He finished his career averaging 6.0 points, 4.8 rebounds and 1.5 blocked shots per game.

Lang is the 55th all-time leading shot blocker in NBA history.

While on the Bucks, Lang received attention for a 1997 incident at the Bradley Center in Milwaukee, involving him fouling Knicks star center Patrick Ewing. After a midair collision with Lang, Ewing fell on his wrist and the Bucks went on to win the game, while Ewing did not return until the second round of the playoffs. Ewing never again regained his All-Star form after that injury. Lang later signed with the Knicks to be Ewing's backup at the center position.

Personal life
Lang is a Christian evangelist and is currently employed by the Atlanta Hawks as the team chaplain. Lang lives in Marietta, Georgia with his wife, Bronwyn. His son Trey played college basketball for the UMass Minutemen. His other son, Chad, played college basketball for the Belmont Bruins and the Lipscomb Bisons.

Regular season

 * align="left" | 1988–89
 * align="left" | Phoenix
 * 62 || 25 || 8.5 || .513 || .000 || .650 || 2.4 || 0.1 || 0.3 || 0.8 || 2.6
 * align="left" | 1989–90
 * align="left" | Phoenix
 * 74 || 0 || 13.7 || .557 || .000 || .653 || 3.7 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 1.8 || 3.5
 * align="left" | 1990–91
 * align="left" | Phoenix
 * 63 || 18 || 18.3 || .577 || .000 || .715 || 4.8 || 0.4 || 0.3 || 2.0 || 4.9
 * align="left" | 1991–92
 * align="left" | Phoenix
 * 81 || 71 || 24.3 || .522 || .000 || .768 || 6.7 || 0.5 || 0.6 || 2.5 || 7.7
 * align="left" | 1992–93
 * align="left" | Philadelphia
 * 73 || 59 || 25.5 || .425 || .200 || .763 || 6.0 || 1.1 || 0.6 || 1.9 || 5.3
 * align="left" | 1993–94
 * align="left" | Atlanta
 * style="background:#cfecec;"| 82* || 0 || 19.6 || .469 || .250 || .689 || 3.8 || 0.6 || 0.5 || 1.1 || 6.1
 * align="left" | 1994–95
 * align="left" | Atlanta
 * style="background:#cfecec;"| 82* || 63 || 28.5 || .473 || .667 || .809 || 5.6 || 0.9 || 0.5 || 1.8 || 9.7
 * align="left" | 1995–96
 * align="left" | Atlanta
 * 51 || 51 || 35.6 || .454 || .000 || .805 || 6.5 || 1.2 || 0.7 || 1.7 || 12.9
 * align="left" | 1995–96
 * align="left" | Minnesota
 * 20 || 18 || 27.5 || .421 || .500 || .789 || 6.1 || 0.2 || 0.4 || 2.1 || 8.8
 * align="left" | 1996–97
 * align="left" | Milwaukee
 * 52 || 52 || 23.0 || .464 || .000 || .721 || 5.3 || 0.5 || 0.5 || 0.9 || 5.3
 * align="left" | 1997–98
 * align="left" | Milwaukee
 * 57 || 0 || 12.1 || .378 || .000 || .772 || 2.7 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.5 || 2.7
 * align="left" | 1997–98
 * align="left" | Milwaukee
 * 57 || 0 || 12.1 || .378 || .000 || .772 || 2.7 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.5 || 2.7
 * align="left" | 1998–99
 * align="left" | Chicago
 * 21 || 13 || 18.4 || .323 || .000 || .696 || 4.4 || 0.6 || 0.2 || 0.6 || 3.8
 * align="left" | 1999–00
 * align="left" | New York
 * 19 || 10 || 12.8 || .438 || .000 || .429 || 3.2 || 0.2 || 0.4 || 0.3 || 3.1
 * - class="sortbottom"
 * style="text-align:center;" colspan="2"| Career
 * 737 || 380 || 20.8 || .470 || .250 || .744 || 4.8 || 0.6 || 0.5 || 1.5 || 6.0
 * }
 * align="left" | Milwaukee
 * 57 || 0 || 12.1 || .378 || .000 || .772 || 2.7 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.5 || 2.7
 * align="left" | 1998–99
 * align="left" | Chicago
 * 21 || 13 || 18.4 || .323 || .000 || .696 || 4.4 || 0.6 || 0.2 || 0.6 || 3.8
 * align="left" | 1999–00
 * align="left" | New York
 * 19 || 10 || 12.8 || .438 || .000 || .429 || 3.2 || 0.2 || 0.4 || 0.3 || 3.1
 * - class="sortbottom"
 * style="text-align:center;" colspan="2"| Career
 * 737 || 380 || 20.8 || .470 || .250 || .744 || 4.8 || 0.6 || 0.5 || 1.5 || 6.0
 * }
 * 737 || 380 || 20.8 || .470 || .250 || .744 || 4.8 || 0.6 || 0.5 || 1.5 || 6.0
 * }

Playoffs

 * align="left" | 1988–89
 * align="left" | Phoenix
 * 4 || 0 || 2.0 || .000 || .000 || .000 || 1.5 || 0.3 || 0.0 || 0.0 || 0.0
 * align="left" | 1989–90
 * align="left" | Phoenix
 * 12 || 0 || 7.8 || .667 || .000 || .571 || 1.7 || 0.2 || 0.3 || 0.8 || 1.3
 * align="left" | 1990–91
 * align="left" | Phoenix
 * 4 || 0 || 13.8 || .545 || .000 || .824 || 4.5 || 0.3 || 0.3 || 0.8 || 6.5
 * align="left" | 1991–92
 * align="left" | Phoenix
 * 8 || 8 || 24.0 || .375 || .000 || .789 || 4.0 || 0.3 || 0.4 || 1.9 || 5.6
 * align="left" | 1993–94
 * align="left" | Atlanta
 * 11 || 0 || 21.3 || .460 || .000 || .773 || 4.3 || 0.5 || 0.5 || 1.8 || 6.8
 * align="left" | 1994–95
 * align="left" | Atlanta
 * 3 || 3 || 33.7 || .429 || .000 || .778 || 4.0 || 0.3 || 0.7 || 0.7 || 10.3
 * - class="sortbottom"
 * style="text-align:center;" colspan="2"| Career
 * 42 || 11 || 16.3 || .444 || .000 || .770 || 3.2 || 0.3 || 0.4 || 1.2 || 4.6
 * }
 * align="left" | Atlanta
 * 3 || 3 || 33.7 || .429 || .000 || .778 || 4.0 || 0.3 || 0.7 || 0.7 || 10.3
 * - class="sortbottom"
 * style="text-align:center;" colspan="2"| Career
 * 42 || 11 || 16.3 || .444 || .000 || .770 || 3.2 || 0.3 || 0.4 || 1.2 || 4.6
 * }

title: Andrew Lang (basketball)


text:
File:Marathon Poster.jpg

Summary
from http://img.movist.com/data/imgroot/x00/00/90/38_p2.jpg

Fair use in Marathon (2005 film)
Though this image is subject to copyright, its use is covered by the U.S. fair use laws because:
 * 1) It's a low resolution copy of a Film Poster / VHS or DVD Cover.
 * 2) It doesn't limit the copyright owner's rights to sell the film in any way, in fact, it may encourage sales.
 * 3) Because of the low resolution, copies could not be used to make illegal copies of the artwork/image.
 * 4) The image is itself a subject of discussion in the article or used in the infobox thereof.
 * 5) The image  is significant because it was used to promoted a notable film.

Source

 * 1) Derived from a digital capture (photo/scan) of the Film Poster/ VHS or DVD Cover (creator of this digital version is irrelevant as the copyright in all equivalent images is still held by the same party). Copyright held by the film company or the artist.  Claimed as fair use regardless.

title: File:Marathon Poster.jpg


text:
Lorenzo de Tonti

Lorenzo de Tonti (c. 1602 – c. 1684) was a governor of Gaeta, Italy and a Neapolitan banker. He is sometimes credited with the invention of the tontine, a form of pension, although it has also been suggested that he simply modified existing procedures.

Around 1650, his wife, Isabelle di Lietto, gave birth to their first son, the future explorer Henri de Tonti. Shortly afterwards, Tonti was involved in a revolt against a Spanish viceroy in Naples and had to seek political asylum in France. Their second son, Alphonse de Tonty, was born in Paris and later helped establish Detroit, Michigan.

For reasons unknown, Louis XIV had him imprisoned in the Bastille from 1668 to 1675. Around 1684, he died in obscurity of unknown causes.

title: Lorenzo de Tonti


text:
Himalchuli

Himalchuli (also sometimes written as two words, Himal Chuli) is the second-highest mountain in the Mansiri Himal, part of the Nepalese Himalayas, and the 18th-highest mountain in the world (using a cutoff of 500 meters prominence, or re-ascent). It lies south of Manaslu, one of the eight-thousanders. Himalchuli has three main peaks: East (7893 m), West (7540 m) and North (7371 m).

Himalchuli is also notable for its large vertical relief over local terrain. For example, it rises 7,000 meters over the Marsyangdi River to the southwest in about 27 km horizontal distance.

Climbing history
Exploratory visits to the peak were made in 1950 and 1954, and a first attempt in 1955 failed early on. Further reconnaissance and attempts followed in 1958 and 1959.

The first ascent was made on May 24, 1960, by Hisashi Tanabe and Masahiro Harada, of Japan. The route followed the "Sickle Ridge" from the southwest. They first climbed to the saddle between the West and Main peaks, where they placed the last of six camps. This ascent was somewhat unusual for a sub-8000m peak in using bottled oxygen.

The Himalayan Index lists five other ascents of this peak, and 10 additional unsuccessful attempts. The ascents were by various routes on the south, southwest, and southeast sides of the mountain. The West Peak was first climbed in 1978 by two members of a Japanese expedition to the main peak of Himalchuli. They climbed from the south (the Dordi Khola) and approached the summit of the West Peak from the east.

The North Peak was first climbed in 1985 by a Korean expedition, via the North Face.

Other references

 * American Alpine Journal

title: Himalchuli


text:
Talk:Historians in England during the Middle Ages

Before the nationalists see this
Not all these were Englishmen nor did they all write in Englsih. I suggest a more diplomatic title for a valuable page. (RJP 16:29, 15 October 2005 (UTC))

 * Titles of pages are not to be taken literarly, they are simply placeholders for the content, a matter of convience that help the reader find and understand generally what the article is about. Nationalistic POV concerns have no place on Wikipedia. The text of the article explains in detail what the article is about. Stbalbach 17:31, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

I'm not convinced that the additions I made are a "modern pov." Rather, I would argue that the implied de-valuing of histories that extensively borrowed and translated from predecessors is a modern imposition of ideas about originality, rather than a medieval conception. Consider, for example, how common the practice was, and how little comment in warranted. Second, Florence of Worcester's text doesn't survive - the Chronicon ex Chronicii was re-written in precisely the copy/translate/edit model under discussion by the twelfth century John of Worcester. The text is edited in the Oxford Medieval Text series in three volumes by McGurk, Darlington, and Bray. Lutefish 14:39, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

 * "the implied de-valuing of histories" - does it really do that? If it did, that would be a modern value judgement, which would not be appropriate for the article. We can discuss the facts without implying a modern value judgement. If theres some unintended hidden meaning that devalues histories, then we need to change it. In the case of John, it's probably more appropriate to list who the work is attributed to originally, than who we have extant manuscripts from. --Stbalbach 16:34, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

 * "Another characteristic of the histories of the period is that they borrowed heavily from other writers, often directly copying entire works as their own." My argument here is that "borrowed heavily" and "directly copying" are not just neutral modern descriptions of processes of composition.  Rather, the types of composition being described are fundamental medieval methods of composition, and don't bear the modern stigma and implied lack of originality suggested by "borrowing" and "copying."  The majority of medieval history texts "borrow" heavily from other sources: the borrowing doesn't affect the originality of these works in the same way that it would, say, a modern history text book that "directly copied" from a source.  As far as John/Florence, Florence's text doesn't survive. What we have is a complete re-write by John of Worcester of a non-surviving original by Florence.  Thus to attribute the work to Florence is to pretend to have something we don't, to privilege a non-extant and purely hypothetical "original" over a distinct and different text that does survive. Lutefish 17:30, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Nennius
In other wikipedias Nennius is not English and did not write in English. Guess who is wrong.

 * See footnote #1 -- Stbalbach 17:44, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Title should be changed
Many of these "historians" (Geoffrey of Monmouth isn't even a historian but a writer of fiction) are English some are Welsh and many did not even write in or know the English language...thus the title should be changed. You can't call this "English historians in the Middle Ages" and then include those that aren't English as Wikipedia claims to be an encyclopædia and that is far from (like a lot of things that get written on this site) encyclopædic. Sigurd Dragon Slayer (talk) 17:17, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

This is very true, and this dragon ain't dead.Harrypotter (talk) 10:05, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

History is written by the victors?
Full disclosure: non-historian, neither Welsh nor English. I note the remarks regarding Geoffrey of Monmouth being called a liar by William of Newburgh, but the wikipedia entry on William notes that he is of "Anglo-Saxon descent", that is, the opposing side in the wars the two authors are describing. Shouldn't that be noted here?. When even this talk page seems to be so very much influenced by the national ancestry of the commenters (1000+ years later!), I can't help wondering whether the evaluation of the medieval writers depends on the team jersey....alacarte (talk) 13:46, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

Late Middle Ages
Nobody doing a Late Middle Ages section? 92.25.254.137 (talk) 18:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Himalchuli

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Himalchuli. 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/20060422024333/http://www.americanalpineclub.org/knowledge/aaj.asp to http://www.americanalpineclub.org/knowledge/aaj.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:29, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Himalchuli


text:
Crystal Springs Rhododendron Garden

Crystal Springs Rhododendron Garden is a botanical garden located between Reed College and the Eastmoreland Golf Course in southeastern Portland in the U.S. state of Oregon.

Description and history
The garden, located between Southeast 28th Avenue and Woodstock Boulevard, covers 9.49 acre and is named for the numerous springs within the garden. Crystal Springs Garden features more than 2,500 rhododendrons, azaleas, and other plants in a setting of small lakes, paved and unpaved paths, fountain, and small waterfalls.

The garden is open 10:00am to 5:00pm Thursday through Tuesday, and 1:00pm to 5:00pm on Wednesdays (gates close at 5:30). Pets are allowed on a leash.

The project began in 1950 as a rhododendron test garden on a site previously covered with brush, blackberries, native trees, and the remnants of a Shakespeare theater developed by students of Reed College. In 1964, the park's name was officially changed to Crystal Springs Rhododendron Garden.

In addition to the manicured areas that make up most of the garden, patches of less orderly shrubs, upland forest, marsh vegetation, and submerged logs attract wildlife, especially waterfowl, most prevalent in winter. The Rhododendron Society has counted 94 species in the garden, including grebes, herons, ducks, Canada geese, wigeons, gulls, thrushes, nuthatches, hummingbirds, and others.

title: Crystal Springs Rhododendron Garden


text:
Talk:SuperWaba

About the revision of Alvin-cs
Unfortunately, the developers of SuperWaba define it as a Java-like virtual machine. That means they're not after Java compatibility. For at least two reasons: it's a hard to achieve goal, too difficult for a small bunch of developers; and everyone that uses the sacred name of Java risks being sued by Sun.

So, let's keep the developers will and name it a Java-like virtual machine. --Hgfernan 16:29, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

There should be some mention of (classic) Waba on the Apple Newton MessagePad and eMate 300 platforms. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.248.237.87 (talk) 01:58, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:SuperWaba


text: User talk:70.119.70.179

title: User talk:70.119.70.179


text:
Gustaf Lindström

Gustaf Lindström (27 August 1829 – 16 May 1901) was a Swedish paleontologist.

He was born in Visby on Gotland. In 1848 he entered Uppsala University, and in 1854 he took his doctor's degree. Having attended a course of lectures in Stockholm by Sven Lovén, he became interested in the zoology of the Baltic, and published several papers on the invertebrate fauna, and subsequently on the fishes. In 1856 he became a school teacher, and in 1858 a master in the grammar school at Visby.

His leisure was devoted to researches on the fossils of the Silurian rocks of Gotland, including the corals, brachiopods, gastropods including pteropods, cephalopods and Crustacea. He described also remains of the fish Cyathaspis from Wenlock Beds in Gotland, with Tamerlan Thorell, a scorpion Palaeaphonus from Ludlow Beds at Wisby. He determined the true nature of the operculated coral.

He was awarded the Murchison Medal by the Geological Society of London in 1895. In 1876 he was appointed professor and keeper of the Paleozoological department of the Swedish Museum of Natural History in Stockholm, where he died in 1901.

title: Gustaf Lindström


text:
Gustav Lindstrom

Gustav Lindstrom may refer to:

 * Gustaf Lindström (1829–1901), Swedish paleontologist
 * Gustav Lindström (born 1998), Swedish ice hockey player

title: Gustav Lindstrom


text:
Iryna Yatchenko

Iryna Vasiliyevna Yatchenko (Ірына Ятчанка, Ирина Васильевна Ятченко; born 31 October 1965) is a Belarusian former discus thrower best known for winning two Olympic bronze medals at the 2000 Summer Olympics and 2004 Summer Olympics, although she was eventually stripped of the latter medal due to a doping offence. She also became world champion at the 2003 World Championships in Athletics. Her personal best is 69.14 metres, achieved in July 2004 in Minsk.

Career
Yatchenko was born in Gomel. Her career at the highest level of competition lasted almost twenty years, starting with the 1990 European Athletics Championships. She threw the discus at five editions of the Olympic Games, competing at all Games from the 1992 Barcelona Games to the 2008 Beijing Olympics. Yatchenko's World Championship career was similarly extensive, as she competed on eight separate occasions.

Yatchenko's final major competition was the 2009 World Championships in Athletics, but she failed to register a valid throw in the qualifying rounds. She retired from international competition in June 2010 and the Belarus National Olympic Committee held a ceremony to honour her career. At the age of 44, she was one of the last athletes to retire who had previously represented the Soviet Union in international athletics.

Yatchenko is married to Igor Astapkovich, also a Belarusian Olympic medalist in hammer throw.

Doping case
When the IOC in 2012 re-analysed stored samples from the 2004 Summer Olympics, Yatchenko's sample was found positive for the anabolic steroid Methandienone. IOC subsequently disqualified her results from the Athens Olympics and she was made to return the bronze medal and diploma. The IAAF also banned her for two years from sports and disqualified all her results from 21 August 2004 – 20 August 2006.

title: Iryna Yatchenko


text:
Mesopotamia, Oxford

Mesopotamia is a narrow ait (about 800 yards by 30 yards) that forms part of the University Parks in Oxford, England. It lies between the upper and lower levels of the River Cherwell which are partly interspersed with the Thames. The name Mesopotamia in Greek means "between the rivers", and is shared with an area between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers in present-day Iraq.

The land was purchased by the University of Oxford during the expansion of the Oxford University Parks between 1860 and 1865. A footpath, Mesopotamia Walk, laid out in 1865 runs along the centre of the spur to Kings Mill.

The Domesday Book records a watermill on this site and milling continued until 1825; one level of the river was once the mill stream. From 1914, attempts were made to introduce wild ducks and geese to the area, which proved fruitless due to a predatory otter population. Until 1926, a ferry operated from a point halfway along the Walk, when it was replaced by a footbridge.

Position:

title: Mesopotamia, Oxford


text:
User:Davidshilling~enwiki

see my Userpage in the german Wikipedia.

title: User:Davidshilling~enwiki


text:
Darin

Darin may refer to

Places

 * Darin, Anbarabad, a village in Kerman Province, Iran
 * Darin, Jebalbarez-e Jonubi, a village in Kerman Province, Iran
 * Darin, Sistan and Baluchestan, a village in Sistan and Baluchestan Province, Iran
 * Darin, Yazd, a village in Yazd Province, Iran
 * Darin, the main harbour on Tarout Island, Saudi Arabia, and an alternate name for the island itself

Music

 * Darin (singer), a Swedish singer of Kurdish descent, full name Darin Zanyar
 * Darin (album), 2015, the second studio album by Swedish singer/songwriter Darin

Other uses

 * Darin (name), a given name and surname
 * Treaty of Darin, a 1915 treaty between Ibn Saud and the United Kingdom

title: Darin


text:
Wikipedia:Notice board for India-related topics/Peer review

Please review
Please review and improve:

Thanks.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 ($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|)  16:34, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * National Physical Laboratory, India
 * Fundamental Rights, Directive Principles and Fundamental Duties of India
 * Constitution of India
 * Kerala

Hindu law
Just did a massive update on the above page. Some of it was a hack job, any polishing up or suggestions would be appreciated

Hymn of creation
Although a very important hymn, the page looks very bad. Could somebody reference this particular version of translation, and perhaps put up the Sanskrit version too? Or has this already been done, in which case this page may be deleted. Hymn of creation Prashanthns 06:52, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

The source texts of already published books, and translations thereof, do not encyclopaedia articles make. Wikisource has had the Rig Veda since September 2005. Please do your translation and copying of source text work in the correct project. If you are going to write about the Rig Veda here in the encyclopaedia, please write encyclopaedia articles. Don't include copies of primary sources. Uncle G 21:49, 8 January 2006 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Dieselboy~enwiki

A welcome from Sango123
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Simplified Ruleset
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Glossary
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy Wiki-ing!

-- Sango  123  16:35, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

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 Dieselboy. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Dieselboy~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 23:26, 19 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) 12:09, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Dieselboy~enwiki


text: User talk:71.68.50.195

title: User talk:71.68.50.195


text: Template:Delaware-stub

title: Template:Delaware-stub


text:
User talk:Gccengineering

A welcome from Sango123
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Simplified Ruleset
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Glossary
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy Wiki-ing!

-- Sango  123  16:35, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

title: User talk:Gccengineering


text:
User talk:Bobarley

A welcome from Sango123
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Simplified Ruleset
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Glossary
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy Wiki-ing!

-- Sango  123  16:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

File source problem with File:Index 1.gif
Thank you for uploading File:Index 1.gif. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 15:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:17, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:Bobarley


text:
User talk:Flux.books

A welcome from Sango123
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Simplified Ruleset
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Glossary
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy Wiki-ing!

-- Sango  123   (talk)  16:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

Re: How to stop?
The affliction would be a little something called Wikipediholism. :) Sango  123   (talk)  20:23, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

A welcome from Apwoolrich
I am glad to see the progress you have made on Encyclopaedias. It now has the making a a fine article indeed. Have you yet looked at Wikisource? We have a project of putting the whole of EB1911 online in an accurate form as a service to WP editors and posterity generally. We are in need of new keen editors for this. The trouble with the modern EB is how much has been cut of historical value, especially on British and Europoean history. I would also like to see added in due time the 3 volumes covering WW1 which make the 12th edition. I have recently put on the WS EB1911 project page the introduction and I am part way through putting up the list of contributors from the Index Volume. I also wrote trhe WP biogrpahy of Hugh Chisholm and Janet E. Courtney who were on the EB1911 editorial team. Encyclopaedias fascinate me and I collect them dealing with C19 technology. Kind regards. You can respond on my WP talk page. Apwoolrich 07:48, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

 * re your response, you might care to have a look at [] on Wikisource and follow the links. The guy who has started this runs Project Runeberg, digitising Scandinavian texts, and is working on a scheme to enable Mediawiki to handle digitised texts and edits. Its early days yet. The thread of SHARP-L I mention has a great deal of valuable info, with references to downloadable reports. Compared with working on WP, learning the edit codings for WS is taking some doing, since much more needs to be known, that is needed for the usual WP work and I certainly have had some hassle in finding the various reference pages of how to do it. I am practicing editing the Ballistics article from EB1911 which somebody posted, which includes, Roman and Greek letters, fractions, mathematical formulae, tables and uploaded drawings!! Its not that hard but needs application and patience. I scan and OCR for my work, but its mostly regular stuff which does not cause a problem. The most difficult job I have ever done was several reports from Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, Rees's Cyclopeadia and EB6ed. The typefaces were iffy and the hand-made paper had blemishes in it which caused problems. Apwoolrich 21:06, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Serials, periodicals and journals
Category:Serials, periodicals and journals, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. – Cgingold (talk) 11:17, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

 * This is an excellent example of why wikipedia is fatally flawed. The "discussion" is in effect a poll from random collection of passersby who chose to comment, none of whom made an effort to understand the key issues.  It isn't a matter of what people feel the terms mean.  There's an established science on the matter.  If the terms are out of date, fine - cite a better reference and change the terms.  But don't spew about what you think they mean.  flux.books (talk) 01:56, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

File:Boston 1772.gif listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Boston 1772.gif, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:40, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

FAR
nominated Encyclopædia Britannica for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Snowman (talk) 13:49, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Bushwacker

A tag has been placed on Bushwacker, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Winner 42 Talk to me!  22:46, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

"The Parker House" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect The Parker House and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 October 18 until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. —  Red-tailed hawk (nest) 00:28, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:Flux.books


text:
Annapurna III

Annapurna III (अन्नपूर्ण ३) is a mountain in the Annapurna mountain range located in Nepal, and at 7,555 m tall, it is the 42nd highest mountain in the world and the third highest peak of the Annapurna mountain range (Annapurna Fang is technically taller at 7,647 m, but lacks the prominence to be considered a fully independent peak).

Features
Located directly south of Manang village, Annapurna III is the easternmost peak within the Annapurna Sanctuary, though not the range itself. To the west, it is connected to the slightly shorter Gangapurna by a col at 6860 m, with a glacial cirque beneath the North and East Faces of these respective mountains emptying out via an icefall to Gangapurna Lake in the Marsyangdi river valley. The southern aspects of Annapurna III are accessible only through steep valleys and are renowned by climbers for their technical difficulty, most famously the spur known as the "Southeast Ridge", which rises steeply from the gorge of the Seti River to connect to the South Ridge proper.

History
It was first ascended 6 May 1961 by an Indian expedition led by Capt. Mohan Singh Kohli via the Northeast Face. The summit party comprised Mohan Kohli, Sonam Gyatso, and Sonam Girmi. A Japanese Women's expedition led by Junko Tabei succeeded in putting the first women on top on 19 May 1970.

Several teams had attempted to summit Annapurna III via the southeast ridge, with all efforts prior to 2021 ending in failure. The first attempt up this ridge was in 1981 by Nick Colton and Tim Leach who reached about 1000 feet below the peak before turning around. Twice in 2010, Pete Benson, Nick Bullock, and Matt Helliker unsuccessfully attempted the southeast ridge. Their first attempt started at the southeast pillar, and the second attempt started at the east ridge where the team began by flying a helicopter into basecamp to save time. In 2016, David Lama filmed a documentary of his unsuccessful attempt up the southeast ridge along with Hansjörg Auer and Alex Blümel winning the UIAA awarded the Best Climbing Film.

The first ascent of the southeast ridge ascent was made on 6th November 2021 by Mykyta Balabanov, Vyacheslav Polezhayko and Mykhailo Fomin. The route was considered one of the unfinished challenges in the Himalayas and is about 2,800-3,000 meters on a vertical face whose crux emerges in the form of a technically demanding chimney shown in the video of the 2016 attempt. It was the second attempt by this Ukrainian expedition, the first one being in 2019. They won a "Special Jury Award" at the 2022 Piolet d'Or for their ascent.

title: Annapurna III


text:
User talk:Alexamcnae

A welcome from Sango123
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Simplified Ruleset
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Glossary
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy Wiki-ing!

-- Sango  123  16:36, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

title: User talk:Alexamcnae


text:
Geometric realization

Generally speaking, geometric realization is a one-to-one mapping between abstract mathematical objects and concrete geometric objects. It has slightly different meanings in different contexts. See:

 * Geometric realization of an abstract simplicial complex;
 * Geometric realization of a simplicial set;

title: Geometric realization


text:
User talk:Aha4and1is5

A welcome from Sango123
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Simplified Ruleset
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Glossary
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy Wiki-ing!

-- Sango  123  16:37, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

title: User talk:Aha4and1is5


text:
User talk:Ibabs

Hello?

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Aaron Warm.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Aaron Warm.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. βcommand 22:33, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Aaron Warm.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Aaron Warm.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:14, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of RecoveryMagic

The article RecoveryMagic has been proposed for deletion  because of the following concern:
 * Original research essay, unsourced except for external link to defunct domain, fails WP:NSOFT

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Vrac (talk) 18:45, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ibabs


text:
Samuel D. Felker

Samuel Demeritt Felker (April 16, 1859 –November 14, 1932) was an American lawyer and Democratic politician from Rochester, New Hampshire.

Family life
Felker was born to William H. and Deborah A. (Demeritt) Felker in Rochester, New Hampshire. Felker married Mary J. Dudley on June 26, 1900 in Buffalo, New York. Felker was a member of the Congregationalist Church.

Education
Felker graduated from Dartmouth College in 1882. In 1888 Felker earned a A.M. and a L.L.B from the Boston University School of Law.

Early political career
Felker was a member of the New Hampshire state constitutional convention of 1889, he served in the New Hampshire Senate from 1890 to 1892, as the mayor of Rochester, New Hampshire in 1896 and 1897, and from 1909 to 1911 in the New Hampshire House of Representatives.

Governor of New Hampshire
In 1912 Felker ran as a Democrat for governor of New Hampshire, because no candidate received a majority of the vote, Felker was selected governor by the New Hampshire legislature. Felker did not seek reelection in 1914, and after deliberating, decided against a bid for the state's U.S. Senate seat.

Judge of the Rochester Municipal Court
Felker's gubernatorial successor, Rolland H. Spaulding, appointed Felker as Judge of the Rochester Municipal Court, a position Felker held from July 20, 1915 until 1930.

Death
Felker died at his home in Rochester on November 14, 1932.

title: Samuel D. Felker


text:
User talk:St33lbird

A welcome from Sango123
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions; I hope you like the place and decide to stay. We're glad to have you in our community! Here are a few good links for newcomers:

 * If you haven't already, drop by the New user log and tell others a bit about yourself.
 * Always sign your posts on talk pages! That way, others will know who left which comments.
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * Simplified Ruleset
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * Wikipedia Glossary
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also the Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Though we all make goofy mistakes, here is what Wikipedia is not. If you have any questions or concerns, don't hesitate to see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. The Community Portal can also be very useful.

Happy Wiki-ing!

-- Sango  123  16:38, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you need help with anything or simply wish to say hello. :)

Image copyright problem with Image:Douglas_Lenat.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Douglas_Lenat.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags.

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Edgar F Codd.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Edgar F Codd.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 04:55, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Edgar F Codd.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Edgar F Codd.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:07, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

title: User talk:St33lbird


text:
Annapurna IV

Annapurna IV (अन्नपूर्ण ४) is a mountain of the Annapurna mountain range in the Himalayas which is located in Nepal. Along with the taller Annapurna II, it is isolated from the other peaks in the range via a major col. It is the 4th highest peak of the range. It was first climbed in 1955 by a German expedition led by Heinz Steinmetz via the North Face and Northwest Ridge. The summit party comprised Steinmetz, Harald Biller, and Jürgen Wellenkamp.

Features
Despite its low prominence, Annapurna IV is an important peak relative to its immediate neighbors. The standard route of ascent for Annapurna II uses the North face of this peak to ascend to the ridge that connects the two summits, thus circumventing many of the hazards faced on that mountain. To the West, Annapurna IV drops away steeply into a major col shared with the East ridge of Annapurna III (and thus the rest of the Annapurna massif).

The Seti River valley, immediately due south of this col, provides access to the famous Southeast ridge of Annapurna III. Although subject to decades of attempts, the ridge was only successfully climbed for the first time in 2021. As of 2024, Annapurna IV's own Southwest pillar, also reachable from the valley, has repelled all climbing attempts.

Rockfalls
Rockfalls from Annapurna IV are thought to have blocked the Seti River, creating a temporary dam.

title: Annapurna IV


text:
Leonard Weinglass

Leonard Irving Weinglass (August 27, 1933 – March 23, 2011) was a U.S. criminal defense lawyer and constitutional law advocate, best known for his defense of participants in the 1960s counterculture. He was admitted to the bar in New Jersey, New York, Connecticut and California. He taught criminal trial advocacy at the University of Southern California Law School from 1974 to 1976, and at the Peoples College of Law, in Los Angeles, California from 1974 to 1975.

Early life
Leonard Weinglass was born on August 27, 1933, to a Jewish family in Belleville, New Jersey. He graduated from Yale Law School in 1958, then served as a captain judge advocate in the United States Air Force from 1959 to 1961.

Career
Weinglass championed a number of liberal and radical causes during the counterculture era. An expert in constitutional law, he served as co-chairman of the international committee of the National Lawyers Guild. Along with attorney William Kunstler, Weinglass represented the Chicago 7 in their 1969 trial. He also participated in the defense of Daniel Ellsberg and Anthony Russo, who were charged with leaking the Pentagon Papers and whose trial ended in a dismissal of all charges. In 1970, he represented and won the acquittal of Angela Davis who was charged with participation in the abduction and murder of a California judge.

Other prominent clients included Kathy Boudin, a member of the Weather Underground charged with felony murder for her participation in an armed robbery; anti-war activist Ron Kaufman; Bill and Emily Harris (of the SLA), wrongfully convicted Korean-American Chol Soo Lee, and Jimi Simmons, among others. He was the lead defense attorney for Mumia Abu-Jamal for several years. In 1995, he authored a book about Abu-Jamal's case entitled Race for Justice: Mumia Abu Jamal's Fight Against the Death Penalty.

In 1972, Weinglass took on the defense of John Sinclair, Chairman of the White Panther Party in Detroit, Michigan. The case became United States v. U.S. District Court, 407 U.S. 297 (1972) on appeal to the United States Supreme Court, a landmark decision prohibiting the government's use of electronic surveillance without a warrant.

Weinglass defended Kathy Boudin in the 1981 Brink's robbery.

In 1985, Weinglass successfully defended Stephen Bingham, an attorney accused of smuggling a handgun to George Jackson in San Quentin Prison setting off an escape attempt that resulted in the death of Jackson, two other inmates, and three prison guards.

Weinglass was the lead appellate attorney for the Cuban Five from 2002 until his death in 2011.

Last years
Up until the last year of his life, Weinglass continued to take on cases. He saw no reason to stop: "the typical call I get is the one that starts by saying 'You are the fifth attorney we've called'. Then I get interested."

Death
Leonard Weinglass died on March 23, 2011, aged 77, from pancreatic cancer, in New York City.

Popular culture

 * Elliott Gould played Weinglass in the 1987 film Conspiracy: The Trial of the Chicago 8.
 * Weinglass voiced himself in the 2007 animated documentary Chicago 10.
 * Weinglass was portrayed by Ben Shenkman in the 2020 drama film The Trial of the Chicago 7.

Awards

 * 1974: First recipient of the Clarence Darrow Award.
 * 1980: Humanitarian Award for 1980 of the First Unitarian Church of Los Angeles
 * 1994: Outstanding Achievement Award (California Attorneys for Criminal Justice)
 * 1996 Firecracker Alternative Book Award for Politics for Race for Justice: Mumia Abu-Jamal's Fight Against the Death Penalty

title: Leonard Weinglass


text:
Annapurna South

Annapurna South (अन्नपूर्ण दक्षिण) is a mountain in the Annapurna Himal range of the Himalayas located in Nepal, and the 101st-highest mountain in the world. It is the 5th highest peak of the Annapurna mountain range. It was first ascended in 1964, and is 7,219 m tall. The nearby mountain Hiunchuli is in fact an extension of Annapurna South.

First Ascent
The first ascent was achieved in 1964 by a six-person team from the Kyoto University Alpine Club. The team had originally planned an ascent of Dhaulagiri IV but upon permit application to the Government of Nepal they were informed that permission had already been given to a British team. The expedition left the Pokhara airfield with a support team of four Sherpas, 54 porters and a liaison officer on September 9. They reached the valley containing the ablation zone of the South Annapurna Glacier on September 15 where they established base camp. On September 21 Camp I was set up at 4100 m upon the moraine of the Ganesh Glacier after a four-day reconnaissance. Camp II was established at 5200 m on the 27th. It took several days to find a suitable route through avalanche terrain to set up Camp III at 5600 m. Steep ice and snow required the fixing of ropes before Camp IV was set up at 6200 m on October 6 under an overhanging ice-wall. On October 12, Camp V was established at 6600 m at a small snow terrace just below the main summit ridge. The next day the first assault team of three members reached the summit of the central peak in mid afternoon. However, the team now could see that the peaks to the north and south were slightly higher than the central peak which was thought to be the highest when viewed from base camp. With an estimated five hours to reach either peak though, it was too late to make the attempt so the team made the six-hour descent to Camp V. On October 15, two teams of two people made for the north and south peaks. The south peak team continued over the central peak and reached the south summit at noon time which they concluded to be the highest point. The second team headed to the north summit managed to reached a minor peak on the way but poor route conditions and lack of time prevented them from reaching the northernmost peak. Both parties returned to Camp V by 4 pm.

title: Annapurna South