text:
Talk:Eine kleine Nachtmusik

Audio story?
Does anyone remember an audio tape from the early-to-mid-80's that was about Mozart and his music? It was narrated from the point of view of Eine and Kleine Nachtmusik, a brother and sister who were pulled literally into the music itself and relied on riding the notes of the various pieces. - MargyL

Mario?
"The musical introduction at the beginning of the game Super Mario Bros. is this first movement."... If you don't mind me asking... what!? As far as I can tell the Mario theme tune and this are fairly dissimilair... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.153.145.117 (talk • contribs) I, username222, feel the same way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.30.145.254 (talk • contribs)
 * Obviously this comment was written a long time ago, and there's no trivia/popular culture/whatever section any more...but the answer is, it's in fact Mario Bros. that uses the introduction of the piece. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 15:14, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Second theme
In the paragraph titled "first movement", where does the second theme start?? Identify so in the following note list:

G-D-G-D-G-D-G-B-D

C-A-C-A-C-A-F#-A-D

G-G-B-A-G-G-F#-F#-A-C-F#

A-G-G-B-A-G-G-F#-F#-A-C-F#

G-G-G-F#-E-F#-G-G-B-A-G-A-B-B-D-C-B-C-D

D-E-D-C-C-C-B-B

B-A-A-G-F#-E-F#-G-A-B

D-E-D-C-C-C-C-B-B-B

B-A-A-A-G-F#-E-F#-G

(I believe it starts just after the note list ends; am I correct??) Georgia guy 22:50, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

 * This is a really old follow-up, but here goes anyways. The "second theme" is in the dominant (D major) and piano.  It starts on measure 28 and goes: A--G-F#-E-D, B, G, E, A.  F#--E-D-C#-B, G, F#, E.  DavidRF 16:51, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

This tune is a mess!
I've stumbled across a page that has a midi file to the full tune and I got something that can be divided into 4 parts:

 * 1) The first part has the notes further up this talk page in the key of G, and then stays in G only a little while longer and then modulates into D for a long time with a hard-to-remember set.
 * 2) The second part is identical to the first throughout.
 * 3) The first 9 notes of the third part are the same as the first 9 notes of the first part only transposed into the key of D. The next 9 notes of the third part are the same as the next 9 notes of the first part only transposed into the key of E. The rest of the third part is hard to memorize.
 * 4) The fourth part is the same as the first part until a few measures after the modulation starts. After that, it is the same as the first part only going back into the key of G and finally gets a nice ending for a song in the key of G.

Any false info in the above?? Georgia guy 21:32, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Are you still wondering about that, or did you figure it out? Willi Gers07 (talk) 19:41, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Family Guy
Aah, this was the one tune that four Peter Griffins laugh to in a 'capella. Which episode was that, though... --Geopgeop 07:37, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * This article could use an "Eine Kleine popkultur" section... Chubbles 22:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Fifth/Second Movement
Why was it necessary to take this information out of the article? 24.58.18.13

Regarding the fact tag
Rex, summarized your re-insertion of the cite tag with "thats not where the cite tagg is about. Its about the claim that its better known by in German, which google tests do not prove". I'll try to offer you the proof you desire: First of all "Serenade for strings in G major" is hardly known in Germany, being the English translation of the German name "Serenade für Streicher in G-Dur". Thus the question is, is "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" is better known than "Serenade für Streicher in G-Dur" in Germany. Personally, I can only say, yes, before I'd have read this article I'd definitly known about "Eine kleine Nachtmusik", but not about "Serenade für Streicher in G-Dur". Still, this is no proof. Looking at the German Wikipedia, we can see that the Corresponding entry is also titled "Eine kleine Nachtmusik", and not "Serenade für Streicher in G-Dur". Looking at the naming conventions we can deduct that this is in fact, the better known term in Germany. But let's Google-test this theory. "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" counting only German pages: 86k hits. "Serenade für Streicher" 572 hits. Also, I offer this information site about Mozart's works, which also exclusively lists "Eine kleine Nachtmusik". I hope this convinces you and would appreciate a reply. Also I would be interested what caused you to challenge this piece of information with a fact tag. 84.145.199.254 01:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not about Germany, Germans or the German language, so that basically renders your piece of text above useless. This English article, on the English wikipedia article states that EKN is a better know term, which in the case of English is doubtfull, and likely unprovable. Hence I suggest you cut the weasel words.Rex 15:43, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I have misunderstood, I thought you meant "better known in German (speaking areas)", but actually you meant "better known as 'eine kleine nachtmusik' than 'Serenade for strings in G major' in english." I'll dig around for some information, see if I can find some international mozart databases. Update: I did some preliminary searching, almost all sources base off the Köchel catalogue (good call there, BTW) and list them alternatively as "Serenade for strings" with "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" as subtitle as in Mozart's original script or simply "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" ommiting "Serenade for strings" entirely. This didn't help anything either way. I also checked out amazon, what was the prevalent name for the this particular work was, and there "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" was the main title of the CDs I found. Not really conclusive proof, but I feel it hints that "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" is better know (as why would the producers of the CDs not print "Serenade for strings" on them if that were the better known term) 84.145.221.62 16:44, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * FWIW, Arkivmusic lists it as Eine kleine Nachtmusik in their most listing of popular Mozart works, while calling it Serenade no 13 in G major, K 525 "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" in their page for the work itself. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 17:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmmm... since it lists the "technical term" Serenade no 13 in G major only on the page for the work itself I'd say that "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" is the better known one (in the sense that more people will say "Ah, I know that one" to "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" than to "Serenade no 13 in G major") 84.145.221.62 18:03, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sadly that's not really important. Meanwhile I'm going to change 'better known as' to 'also known as', if the anonymous still wants to change it, (s)he can do so when she has sources (a poll or something like that) to back his/her statement up.Rex 20:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * While I still disagree I think it would be a pretty lame thing to fight over, so go ahead. As long as this won't lead to a move to "Serenade no 13 in G major" I see this as an acceptable compromise. 84.145.221.62 22:28, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

"The sonata's minuet has been recorded in an arrangement for string quartet"
This may be referring to l'Oiseau-lyre OLS 101 from about 1971, which was not exactly, I think, for string quartet, but was a recording for small chamber ensemble of KV498a/Anh. 136 as part of Eine kleine Nachtmusik (as its second movement). The performers were Granville Jones, Raymond Keenlyside, violin; Cecil Aronowitz, viola; Nigel Amherst, double-bass; Thurston Dart, organ; Philomusica of London; Thurston Dart, conductor. This from a record in http://www.ohiolink.edu. (Or, of course, there may well be a recording of KV498a/Anh136 for string quartet, but the reference hasn't yet been provided. Note that the Philomusica of London's role, and the need for an organ, in the recording may have been limited to the other works in the recording, not Eine kleine Nachtmusik- namely,

Serenata notturna, K. 239 -- Epistle sonata in F major, K. 244 -- Epistle sonata in G major, K. 274. The epistle sonatas, for example, certainly used an organ :) ) Schissel | Sound the Note! 09:42, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Mistranslation of Eine Kleine Nachtmusik into English
In German, "Eine Kleine Nachtmusik" can only be translated into English as "A little serenade", and NOT as "a little night music." I say this for two reasons. First of all, "night music" and "serenade" are not at all equivalent, "serenade" having a very definite meaning, while "night music" does not mean much of anything specific in English other than something musical when it is dark out. Eine Nachtmusik in German is A Serenade in English! Secondly, there is a problem here with the English word "little." In English, "a little" often means "some", as in this case: "a little night music" can only mean "some night music." By contrast, in German, "kleine" cannot mean "some", it can only mean "little," as in small. So the better hyper-literal translation into English would be "a small night music", which makes no sense. The only alternative is to use the only possible correct translation: "a small serenade." Ajrocke (talk) 13:34, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

 * The German language's propensity to use compound words always makes these literal translations interesting. In this case, though, a literal translation might actually be just as appropriate.  Is Nachtmusik actually a German word?  It was my understanding that Mozart made it up to Germanize the word "serenade" (sera means evening in Italian).  (As an aside, that makes 'serenata notturna' oddly translate to 'nighttime evening music').  Anyhow, if Nachtmusik is indeed a German word, then your translation should stay the "correct" one, but if Mozart indeed made up the German word, then I think the literal translation stands on equal footing and a few sentences spelling out its etymology would be appropriate.DavidRF (talk) 17:16, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not going to change it (for now), but I'm thinking that for such a well known title, such a difference should seriously be backed up be a source. You may be right, but it's not what most people call it -- in the English speaking world any way. In fact...tagging. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 19:08, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

 * These comments by DavidRF and Melodia are interesting; I had not considered the possibility that Mozart was coining a German word here. In response, I would say three things.  First, even if "Nachtmusik" was a novel neologism at the time of composition, it is a neologism no longer.  I repeat, "Nachtmusik" means "serenade" in modern German, and no citation for that is necessary -- it can be found in any German-English dictionary and is therefore "common knowledge."  Second, even if one were to insist on translating Nachtmusik as "night music", then "a little night music" would STILL be wrong as a translation, since "a little" in this context must be interpreted as "some" -- that is a different (hence incorrectly translated) meaning.  One would have to translate it as "a small night music."  I don't think anyone would want to advocate that. Finally, one must ask, if Mozart was coining a word here, what did he MEAN by that word?  The answer, I think is clear.  Eine Nachtmusik = a serenade.  It should be translated "a little serenade."  Can we therefore agree to remove the tag? Ajrocke (talk) 17:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Places that discuss the title are here:  .  I wish I had more concrete references, but I'm not at a library right now.  Mozart had used the Night Music title before in his "Lodron Night Music" of K247 and 287 which are classified as divertimenti and not serenades.  Plus, there are "notturni" which also means "night music" which were common in this period as well.  Its a famous enough title and an interesting enough topic that it deserves a small paragraph of discussion in the article.  I don't think we should feel the need to be terse here and settle for one and only one correct translation.  A short discussion would make the article better. DavidRF (talk) 18:45, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

 * DavidRF, thanks much for your helpful comments on my discussion page. Grove Music Online states that German "Nachtmusik" is equivalent to Italian "Nottorno"; the "Nottorno" entry suggests that both words are equivalent to English "serenade".  I propose changing the disputed text in parentheses to "'a little serenade" or 'a little nocturne', often mistranslated as 'a little night music'", and citing Grove.  To make my other point about partitive grammar (to which you haven't yet offered any counter) a different way:  If one regarded the phrase "a night music" as any kind of appropriate English, then "a little night music" might make sense as a proper translation.  But since the former is NOT English, then the latter cannot be a proper translation.  If I am right that the translation is simply wrong, then the prevalence of these mistranslations suggests that something should be done to change the situation.  Ajrocke (talk) 14:06, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Did you resolve the problem ? Eine Kleine in German means one little, Mozart did not have small piece in mind, except that he wanted this piece to be performed by a small group, not for big symphony orchestra! But it could be performed by any ensemble!
 * Well, I'm German and I understand the word Nachtmusik as a compound, and thus as a music played at night, or composed to be played at night. But Nachtmusik is not a genre; the genre is called Serenade. If the word Nachtmusik means serenade then it is, as such, about as common as the word Tonkunst supposed to mean music; that is, not at all. --129.187.210.4 (talk) 15:39, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

The second sentence of the article is really confusing, the title is either "a little night music" or "a little night music", so I'm not sure what got lost there, but I don't think that what it should say. Aaron Bruce ( talk ) 16:06, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Original German Translation
Eine Kleine Nachmusik (K is c, ck) gilt als Mozart' s-bester Aufbau, das oben genannte ist das ursprüngliche deutsche Aussprache, es hat ein spezielles Gefühl, tiefen Symbolismus, Substanz, Ton! As simple as that! Das ist richting, sehr gut! {{{ BoxingWear - BWear - Miranda }}} (talk) 00:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Requested move

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

The result of the proposal was Moved to Eine Kleine Nachtmusik. Editors please update lede accordingly. DMacks (talk) 06:35, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Serenade No. 13 (Mozart) → Eine kleine Nachtmusik — I put this as an RM rather than actually make the change my self as a matter of courtesy since I suspect some people will prefer that all the Serenades are consistant in their names. However, I believe that the most typical name over-rides the consistant name in this case. Very few people know this work is a Serenade let alone No. 13. 99.99% of people will search for Eine Kleine Nachtmusik so the page may as well be at that title. —Jubilee♫ clipman 23:04, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Eine Kleine Nachtmusik was the original name for the article. I can understand why it was changed (consistency) but I don't have a problem moving it back.  The ordinal numbers are not well-known for Mozart's Serenades.  I would wait until next week though to allow for more feedback as I imagine many of the usual editors are away from WP this week.--DavidRF (talk) 23:11, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * (Bah! Stop conflicting me!)Hard to say really. There was no discussion about the move from it over a year and a half ago...certainly a plus for having it at the more popular title is that it doesn't conflict with anything. I'm wonder if THIS is moved (and I'm kinda neutral either way right now), if the Gran Partita should be as well. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 23:12, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Gran Partita(10), Haffner(7), Posthorn(9), Serenada Notturna(6)... The only ones of those I ever see the number for is the Gran Partita (because its often collected with 11 & 12).  I don't see a problem renaming any of them.  The nav-template helps people redirect these.  Some might see this as a slippery slope towards renaming the moonlight sonata or jupiter symphony, but the ordinal numbers for those works are much better known.--DavidRF (talk) 23:25, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
 * All of Bach's cantatas are given their chorale's name—despite this being illogical—rather than the series number. Eg Wachet auf, ruft uns die Stimme should locically lead directly to the chorale rather than the cantata written almost two centuries later.  However, the redirects all include the BWV number eg BWV 140.  Regarding other renames, they will have to be judged on a case by case basis.  However, I suspect Moonlight sonata will be ferociously resisted.  Try it out if you wish though...!  :P  --Jubilee♫ clipman  00:54, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, I don't actually condone renaming it "Moonlight Sonata" I like "Piano Sonata No. 14 (Beethoven)" just fine, I'm just thinking this out.  I don't agree the Bach cantatas are a good precedent.  BWV numbers are essentially opus numbers so those would be added in addition to the proper name and not in place of it.  (Its just an accidental coincidence that the cantatas are listed first in the BWV catalogue.)
 * I think we should kick this question over to the WP:CM discussion page. We do normally prefer ordinal numbers if the ordinal numbers are at all known and clarify things with a navigation template.  But we've made some exceptions (e.g. Schubert Piano Sonatas -- confusion over ordinal numbering due to early pieces that are either lost of fragments).  I think an exception has also been made for the Archduke Trio as well and I wouldn't mind exceptions for Mozart's Violin Sonatas (e.g. childhood sets really muck up the numbering so usually only K-numbers are used) and maybe these serenades (though with the nav-template clarifying things I could go either way).  Anyhow, the gang at WP:CM has hashed over this issue a few times in the past.  I say we post a note there and then wait until at least the middle of next week to do anything.  I think a lot of people might be on vacation right now.--DavidRF (talk) 01:21, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh... you've already kicked the discussion over there. Thanks.--DavidRF (talk) 01:22, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If to be moved, should it not be to Eine kleine Nachtmusik (lower case "k")? But I fail to see what such a move would gain in practice. Google finds the Wikipedia article "Serenade No. 13 (Mozart)" in second position (Eine kleine Nachtmusik ), and REDIRECTs and search completion in Wikipedia cater for that and many other variants; see these redirects. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:17, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Probably not kleine; this is (strictly speaking) English title case, not German - even in German, the adjective might well be capitalized in a title. As for the rest of the post; the existence of redirects does mean that moves are usually marginal questions - but that's true of all page moves. We should still decide the best title on the merits. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 18:48, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia treating foreign language titles according to rules for English titles seems a major departure from existing practices to me. The statement "even in German, the adjective might well be capitalized in a title" cries out for Citation needed. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 05:16, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Not at all. See WP:UE, which discusses the matter; we do what English does, as with Meissen. As for the capitalization, this poage of search results shows both; actually looking at a wider variety of sheet music would show a more even split. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:29, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Unsurprisingly, English-language editions are often rather sloppy with their treatment of German spelling. Unlike "Meissen", there is no reason not to follow the original spelling in this case (K. 525). It's also worth noting that all interwiki links which use the German words also use the lower-case "k", including the simple English Wikipedia. Other examples of foreign language titles following their native title case rules are Pavane pour une infante défunte, Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune, any number of works in Category:Solo piano pieces, and all of Category:Cantatas by Johann Sebastian Bach. But, to be sure, I see no reason for a move at all. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 01:39, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Just to reinforce what Michael Bednarek has pointed out. It's important that we follow German capitalization (small 'k' for kleine in this case), as indeed Opera and doubtless other projects already do. -- Klein zach  11:23, 31 December 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a side issue, when the naming proposal is whether to use the name by which speakers of both languages know the piece. Can we have that settled, and then argue over spelling? Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:28, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Support. This a common name issue. While many classical pieces are at titles with an ordinal number of a set, that is because they don't have a common English language title. The vast majority of people looking for this work will be using its common and very famous title. If consistency is to be considered, we should be consistent about having subjects titled at the name under which they most likely will be searched and expected to reside at.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:19, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. It's a very famous piece and I think we look a bit pedantic to call it "Serenade No. 13".  "Eine kleine Nachtmusik" is more public-friendly.  Opus33 (talk) 23:48, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - I have changed Kleine to kleine in the proposal as per the discussion above. That is indeed the correct usage in German and we have no pressing need to go against this usage.  Further, this is indeed a common name issue.  --Jubilee♫ clipman  01:41, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

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

Wrong move
The move as executed by DMacks was precisely not what was requested. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * "Eine Kleine Nachtmusik was the original name for the article." and there was no strong consensus to use "k". "This is a side issue, when the naming proposal is whether to use the name by which speakers of both languages know the piece. Can we have that settled, and then argue over spelling?" I've moved it to lower-case "k" and will now leave it to the rest of you to spend your time on this. DMacks (talk) 07:15, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Just a side note: the correct German title has a lower-case "k". It doesn't make sense to capitalize it. Offliner (talk) 12:00, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The move was exactly what was requested before I changed the proposal. The further move (K → k) was per the majority opinion, however. --Jubilee♫ clipman  23:59, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

It's now been fixed — Eine kleine Nachtmusik. -- Klein zach  00:38, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Fourth movement
The form of the last movement is usually analyzed as sonata rondo. For example, the Wikipedia article Sonata rondo form lists this movement as an example. I have therefore changed it from rondo form to sonata rondo form. RGB2 (talk) 06:18, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Hello RGB2, here is the trouble I have with saying the 4th movement of EKNM is in sonata rondo form: the development section does indeed begin with the opening theme, which is one criterion for sonata rondo form.  However, the them is stated in a different key, B flat rather than the tonic of G.  The New Grove tells us that "a sonata rondo is differentiated from sonata form by the additional appearance of the first subject in the tonic key after the second subject and before the development" (my italics).  So my inclination is to take out the sonata rondo characterization, and also to remove the reference from the Sonata rondo form article.  Opus33 (talk) 15:18, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Copyright
What's the copyright in relation to 'Eine kleine Nachtmusik'

"''Your video, Eine kleine Nachtmusik, may include content that is owned or administered by these entities:"

"''Entity: Music Publishing Rights Collecting Society Content Type: Musical Composition" Viralmeme (talk) 13:40, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

 * It is obviously public domain in United States (published before 1923) and in European Union (author died more than 70 years ago). vvvt 13:56, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

4th movement in sonata form, not in sonata rondo form
I switched the form designation of the fourth movement from sonata rondo form to sonata form. It's true that the opening notes appear again after the first double bar, but these notes are in E flat, not in the home key of G. To qualify as a sonata rondo, a movement has to include a reappearance of the opening theme at the start of the development in the home key -- on this point see the New Grove, also our own article sonata rondo form. Opus33 (talk) 00:28, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Ranma ½
This song was used in the intro of the Ranma ½ 4th opening, "Zettai! Part 2" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 49.151.49.43 (talk) 06:46, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Eine kleine Nachtmusik. 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/20090426025029/http://www.wyastone.co.uk:80/nrl/main/7023b.html to http://www.wyastone.co.uk/nrl/main/7023b.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:52, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

On Disney's Little Einsteins
I found the episode of Little Einsteins, The Birthday Balloon. It has the Eine Kleine Nachtmusik on it. Apollo C. Quiboloy fans (talk) 01:37, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

First Minuet and Trio
Someone so kind to check and correct the awful english I used to expand the information? SO thankful :)Nolispy (talk) 19:11, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Eine kleine Nachtmusik


text:
Torys

Torys LLP is a Canadian international corporate law firm with offices in Toronto, Calgary, New York, Montreal and Halifax. The firm acts for a wide range of commercial clients and financial institutions in Canada, the United States, and globally.

History
The firm was founded in 1941 by Toronto business lawyer John Stewart Donald Tory.

In the 1960s the firm was renamed Tory Tory DesLauriers & Binnington.

In 2000, it merged with New York law firm Haythe & Curley and was briefly known as Tory Haythe before being rebranded to Torys LLP.

Torys became a national firm with the opening of a Calgary office in 2011 and a Montreal office in 2013.

The firm is one of the Seven Sisters, a group of seven prominent Canadian business law firms.

Notable lawyers

 * John Tory, 65th and former Mayor of Toronto, former leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario, grandson of founder John S. D. Tory
 * Robert Prichard, current Chairman of the Bank of Montreal
 * Anita Anand, Member of Parliament in the House of Commons of Canada
 * Frank Iacobucci, former puisne justice of the Supreme Court of Canada
 * John B. Laskin, justice of the Federal Court of Appeal
 * Robert P. Armstrong, former Justice of the Court of Appeal for Ontario
 * Bill Davis, former Premier of Ontario

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

title: Torys


text:
Louis Kahan

Louis Kahan AO (25 May 1905 – 16 July 2002) was an Austrian-born Australian artist whose long career included fashion design, illustration for magazines and journals, painting, printmaking and drawing. He is represented in most major collections in Australia as well as in Europe and USA. He won the Archibald Prize in 1962 with a portrait of Patrick White.

Biography
Louis Kahan was born in Vienna on 25 May 1905 and initially trained as a tailor with his father. However, he was particularly drawn to art and as a young man sketched his father's clients, who included famous actors and musicians of the day. In 1925 he travelled from Vienna to Paris where he worked with renowned couturier Paul Poiret, first as a tailor and then designer. Through Poiret he met many artists, including Matisse, Dufy and Vlaminck. He designed costumes for Josephine Baker, Collette and the Follies Bergeres. He immersed himself in the bohemian life of the city and began life drawing in Montparnasse. At this time he also produced freelance illustrations for newspapers and magazines.

He enlisted in the French Foreign Legion in 1939 and was sent to Algeria, North Africa as a war artist, although he had never received any formal art training. He had an exhibition at Oran in 1942. He was a voluntary artist for the Red Cross between 1943 and 1945. During this time, photography of soldiers was not permitted. Louis made over 2,000 drawings of wounded soldiers being cared for in the hospital at Oran and these were v-mailed (an early form of microfilm) to the families of soldiers. When he found that the originals were being destroyed after transmission Kahan began to save them and over 300 were later given by him to the Red Cross Museum in Washington, USA.

He returned to Paris after the war, and was employed by Le Figaro to sketch the court scenes of the war trials.

After travelling across the United States he moved to Perth, Western Australia to join his family, who had emigrated to Australia before the war. In Perth he had his first solo exhibition and began to be recognised by the art world, with work purchased by the Art Gallery of Western Australia.

He moved to Melbourne in 1950 where his talent for portraiture was recognised by Melbourne Herald art critic, Alan McCulloch, who introduced him to Clem Christesen, editor of Meanjin. He made many portraits of Australian and other celebrities, including Geoffrey Blainey, Judy Cassab, Manning Clark, Arthur Boyd, Dame Joan Sutherland, Yehudi Menuhin and Luciano Pavarotti. Many of the original drawings for Meanjin are now in the Baillieu Collection of Melbourne University.

On a return trip to Perth in 1953 he met and married Lily Isaac. After living in London for some time they returned to Australia in 1959 and then to Melbourne in 1960. Here he collaborated with producer Stephen Haag, designing sets and costumes for opera and theatre. The Victorian Art Centre, Melbourne, has a large collection of his portraits of musicians, and set and costume designs.

In his paintings, prints and drawings Louis Kahan explored many interests and themes, including dreams, death, and his own life. Childhood games, portraits and nudes were ongoing subjects. Symbolism particularly characterises his later works. Later, dreamlike prints and paintings often show Kahan's tools of the trade: palette, brushes, tailor's scissors and tape. These represent a kind of metaphorical self-portrait and life history.

In 1993 Louis Kahan was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia for service to the arts.

He died in 2002, aged 97.

title: Louis Kahan


text:
Ordinance room

In temples of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church), an ordinance room is a room where the ceremony known as the Endowment is administered, as well as other ordinances such as Sealings. Some temples perform a progressive-style ordinance where patrons move from room to room, each room representing a progression of mankind: the Creation room, representing the Genesis creation story; the Garden room represents the Garden of Eden where Adam and Eve lived prior to the fall of man; the World room, where Adam and Eve lived after the fall; the Terrestrial room; and the Celestial room representing the Celestial Kingdom of God, or more commonly, heaven. There is also an additional ordinance room, the Sealing room, and at least one temple has a Holy of Holies. These two rooms are reserved for the administration of ordinances beyond the Endowment. The Holy of Holies is representative of that talked about when the temple is discussed in the bible.

Development of ordinance rooms
The first building to have ordinance rooms, designed to conduct the Endowment, was Joseph Smith's store in Nauvoo, Illinois, in 1842. Using canvas, Smith divided the store's large, second-floor room into "departments," which represented "the interior of a temple as much as circumstances would permit" (Anderson & Bergera, Quorum of Anointed, 2). The departments included a garden with potted plants and a veil. (Anderson & Bergera, Quorum of Anointed, 3–4). After conducting the endowment services, Smith told Brigham Young, "This is not arranged right but we have done the best we could under the circumstances in which we are placed." Smith concluded that he wanted Young to "organize and systemize all these ceremonies." (Anderson & Bergera, Quorum of Anointed, 6–7). After Smith's death in 1844, Young also used canvas to divide the large attic room in the Nauvoo Temple in the departments. Participants in the Nauvoo Temple ceremonies used the same names for these departments as the ordinance rooms in later temples: Garden Room, World Room, Terrestrial Room, Celestial Room, and Sealing Room, which was also called the Holy of Holies. (Anderson & Bergera, Endowment Companies, 2–4, 377; Smith, 204–206). With the resumption of temple ordinances in Salt Lake City in the 1850s, Young followed the same method of using canvas to divide an upper floor of the Council House into the ordinance departments (Hyde, 90–99).

The above arrangement for administering the Endowment consisted of only temporary modifications to a building's interior rooms; obviously canvas partitions were not meant to be permanent. The first building to be designed specifically with actual progressive-style ordinance rooms for presentation of the Endowment was the Endowment House built in 1855 on Temple Square. This structure had the same rooms as the Nauvoo Temple and Council House, including a Garden Room with murals and potted evergreen plants, but the sealing room was not called the Holy of Holies (Tingen, 10). However, when the St. George Temple was completed in 1877, Young followed the Nauvoo Temple pattern of using "frame petitions [sic., partitions] with the curtains and doors" for Endowment rooms (McKinney, 7:305). Apparently, the rooms were later made more permanent in 1881, when a group of Utah artists painted murals on the walls (O'Brien, 14–15).

Four-room progressive style
Perhaps, using the precedent of the rooms in Endowment House and St. George, architect Truman O. Angell, Jr., specifically designed the Logan Temple interior with progressive ordinance rooms; the first temple so designed, which was dedicated in 1884. Manti Temple architect William Folsom, followed the same arrangement for that temple, which was dedicated in 1888. Based on his experience with the Logan Temple, Angell petitioned church president John Taylor to override Young's original design for the Salt Lake Temple's interior with progressive ordinance rooms, which Taylor enthusiastically approved (Salt Lake Temple, 54–55). This became the pattern for all temples until the construction of the Swiss Temple, when non-progressive ordinance rooms were developed to incorporate the new filmed Endowment ceremony (Buerger, 166).

The following description of the various rooms is based on James E. Talmage's The House of the Lord, which is typical of similar rooms in other LDS Church temples. These ordinance rooms reflect the overall temple ceremonies, which is an overview of God's plan for humanity. Beginning with the creation, the endowment reviews man's mortal existence, and what one must do in order to return to God's presence as husband and wife with their children.

Creation room

This room generally has "murals on the walls [which] are subdued in tones, and depict scenes representative of the creation of the earth" as recorded in Genesis. It has no altar, only comfortable theater seating (Talmage, 204). In this room temple patrons "learn about the creation of the world" (Temples, 11).

Garden room

This room has murals "showing landscape of rare beauty." The murals depict scenes such as "sylvan grottos and mossy dells, lakelets and brooks, waterfalls and rivulets, trees, vines and flowers, insects, birds and beasts, in short, the earth beautiful, as it was before the Fall of Adam and Eve. It may be called the Garden of Eden Room." It has an altar and theater seating (Talmage, 204–205). In this room temple patrons learn "about our first parents being placed in the Garden of Eden....how Satan tempted Adam and Eve, and how they were cast out of the garden and out of the presence of God into our world" (Temples, 11).

Telestial (or World) room

This room's murals stand "in strong contrast to with those of the Garden Room." The "rocks are rent and riven" with "gnarled trees, misshapen, and blasted; shrubs maintain a precarious roothold in rocky clefts; thorns, thistles, cacti, and noxious weeds abound," and the animals depicted "are living under the ever-present menace of death" The scenes depicts the "lone and dreary world," where Adam and Eve "[have] been driven out to meet contention, to struggle with difficulties, [and] to live by strife and sweat" in a "fallen world." It has an altar and theater seating (Talmage, 205–206). In this room temple patrons "learn about the joys as well as the discomforts of life,...[where they are taught the gospel and enter into covenants of obedience with God" (Temples, 11).

Terrestrial room

This room has no murals, but is "restful in its soft coloring and air of comfort." Its appointments "combine richness and simplicity," often including elaborately framed mirrors and paintings, and crystal chandeliers. "For convenience [this room is] designated the Terrestrial Room." In this room "lectures are given pertaining to the endowments" (Talmage, 206–207).

Celestial room

The veil separates this room from the Terrestrial Room. Again, this room has no murals, but "in finish and furnishings it is the grandest of all the large [ordinance] rooms within the walls" of the temple. Like the Terrestrial Room it has large mirrors, paintings, and chandeliers, but it is more "suggestive of conditions yet more exalted." Instead of theater-style seating for instruction it has tables with floral arrangements as well as comfortable sofas and chairs (Talmadge, 207–209). The Celestial Room "symbolizes life as eternal families with our Heavenly Father and His Son, Jesus Christ", and represents the glory of the highest degree of heaven. (Temple brochure, LDS Church). The Celestial Room is so called because it is symbolic of the Celestial Kingdom in LDS theology. Thus, the Celestial Room is a quiet and reverent place, where individuals may pause to pray, read the scriptures, and discuss amongst themselves. In most LDS temples, celestial rooms are elegant, beautiful, and brighter in decor than other parts of the temple.

Single ordinance room style
From the 1950s until 2002, LDS Church temples were built with between one and six ordinance rooms, any one of which could accommodate the entire endowment ceremony, combining the functions of the four progressive-style rooms. When the Nauvoo Illinois Temple was built in 2002, it was designed with progressive ordinance rooms, apparently as a tribute to the original Nauvoo temple (2005 Church Almanac, 495–555).

Two-room progressive style
Temples built since 2002 have generally paired two ordinance rooms together. In this arrangement, the first room combines the functions of the Creation, Garden, and World rooms, while the second serves as the Terrestrial room, thus restoring part of the progressive style of earlier temples. However, no matter the number or arrangement of ordinances rooms, the Celestial room is always a separate room, which culminates the Endowment experience. After the Endowment is a culmination of the temple rites administered in the Sealing Room and the Holy of Holies.

Sealing room

All temples have at least one Sealing Room, and most temples have two or more. Sealing rooms come in a variety of sizes from small to large to accommodate varying numbers of people. Each room is dominated by a large "richly upholstered altar." Around the room are comfortable chairs and sofas. The "walls are of light tint," and generally on two of the walls are large mirrors, opposite each other. In this room "is solemnized the sacred ordinance of marriage between the parties who come to plight their vows of marital fidelity for time and eternity" (Talmage, 208–209).

Holy of Holies

The only temple to have a room designated as the Holy of Holies is the Salt Lake Temple. Boyd K. Packer said that “hidden away in the central part of the temple is the Holy of Holies, where the President of the Church may retire when burdened down with heavy decisions to seek an interview with Him whose Church it is. The prophet holds the keys, the spiritual keys and the very literal key to this one door in that sacred edifice.”

Of all the rooms in the Salt Lake Temple, this circular room is "by far the most beautiful" with "splendid simplicity rather than of sumptuous splendor". Its ceiling is domed and fitted with circular and semi-circular windows. Its doorway "corresponds to the inner curtain or veil that shielded from public view the most sacred precincts" of earlier temples. Opposite the doorway is a large stained glass window depicting Joseph Smith's First Vision. The room has an altar, chairs and sofas. The Holy of Holies "is reserved for the higher ordinances in the priesthood relating to the exaltation of both the living and the dead." In temples without a Holy of Holies these ordinances are administered in one of the Sealing Rooms, which is dedicated as a temporary Holy of Holies.

title: Ordinance room


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Econnected

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. — J I P | Talk 07:37, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Econnected
I attempted a cleanup, but came to the conclusion that this was just an advertisment for a non-notable company.-- GraemeL (talk) 22:53, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete, ad. --fvw *  23:00, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Ad. *drew 23:06, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, Looks like an ad to me. --Gary2863 23:09, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as nom Fsdfs 23:28, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete advert --Rogerd 02:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete advert --Rogerd 02:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

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


text:
Julia Lee (actress)

Julia Lee Stander  (born July 14, 1975) is an American actress. Her roles include Chantarelle/Lily/Anne Steele in Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Angel (1997–2004). She has also appeared in Charmed.

In 2006, Disneyland refurbished its Haunted Mansion attraction. For this project, Julia became the face and body of the character, Constance Hatchaway (voice by Kat Cressida). In 2007, Lee and Cressida's version of Constance was also installed in Walt Disney World's Mansion.

Julia and her husband, Spencer, run a company called 'Stander Productions'.

title: Julia Lee (actress)


text:
Talk:Fragil

stubby
Sorry for the tiny stub. I found this on new page patrol, marked as a speedy. Allmusic guide has a bio on them, so they're real and not a garage band. If notability is a question, Afd is certainly the place for it, rather than speedy deletion. Friday (talk) 22:55, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fragil


text:
Research Unix

The term "Research Unix" refers to early versions of the Unix operating system for DEC PDP-7, PDP-11, VAX and Interdata 7/32 and 8/32 computers, developed in the Bell Labs Computing Sciences Research Center (CSRC).

History

The term Research Unix first appeared in the Bell System Technical Journal (Vol. 57, No. 6, Part 2 July/August 1978) to distinguish it from other versions internal to Bell Labs (such as PWB/UNIX and MERT) whose code-base had diverged from the primary CSRC version. However, that term was little-used until Version 8 Unix, but has been retroactively applied to earlier versions as well. Prior to V8, the operating system was most commonly called simply UNIX (in caps) or the UNIX Time-Sharing System.

AT&T licensed Version 5 to educational institutions, and Version 6 also to commercial sites. Schools paid $200 and others $20,000, discouraging most commercial use, but Version 6 was the most widely used version into the 1980s. Research Unix versions are often referred to by the edition of the manual that describes them, because early versions and the last few were never officially released outside of Bell Labs, and grew organically. So, the first Research Unix would be the First Edition, and the last the Tenth Edition. Another common way of referring to them is as "Version x Unix" or "Vx Unix", where x is the manual edition. All modern editions of Unix—excepting Unix-like implementations such as Coherent, Minix, and Linux—derive from the 7th Edition.

Starting with the 8th Edition, versions of Research Unix had a close relationship to BSD. This began by using 4.1cBSD as the basis for the 8th Edition. In a Usenet post from 2000, Dennis Ritchie described these later versions of Research Unix as being closer to BSD than they were to UNIX System V, which also included some BSD code:

"Research Unix 8th Edition started from (I think) BSD 4.1c, but with enormous amounts scooped out and replaced by our own stuff. This continued with 9th and 10th. The ordinary user command-set was, I guess, a bit more BSD-flavored than SysVish, but it was pretty eclectic."

Legacy
In 2002, Caldera International released Unix V1, V2, V3, V4, V5, V6, V7 on PDP-11 and Unix 32V on VAX as FOSS under a permissive BSD-like software license.

In 2017, Unix Heritage Society and Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc., on behalf of itself and Nokia Bell Laboratories, released V8, V9, and V10 under the condition that only non-commercial use was allowed, and that they would not assert copyright claims against such use.

title: Research Unix


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Angela Beesley (2nd nomination)

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP as notable. >: Roby Wayne Talk • Hist • E@ 05:33, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Angela Beesley
If Sonja Elen Kisa and Tim Shell aren't notable (and I'm starting to believe they aren't, either, not trying to make a point), neither is Angela. Angela is a great user, but I don't believe she is notable, either. --WikiFanaticTalk Contribs 17:56, 13 October 2005 (CDT)
 * Such a minor branch of a subject that it doesn't deserve an article: Merge the useful content into a more comprehensive article [Wikimedia] and redirect --SPUI (talk) 23:02, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your suggestion! When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the  link at the top. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to).  The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills.  New contributors are always welcome. -- Phroziac ( talk )[[Image:Flag_of_Phyzech_Republic.svg|25px]] 01:56, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - Doesn't seem to have notability outside of Wikipedia. See Articles for deletion/Tim Shell for the long version! -- Phroziac ( talk )[[Image:Flag_of_Phyzech_Republic.svg|25px]] 01:56, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep for the reasons I stated in the previous VfD. If anyone wants to merge that's okay with me too.  JYolkowski // talk 02:02, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Angela is like a Wiki celebrity. She's worked with Jimbo, and started alot of Wiki things. Let the woman have a page.Rhetoricalwater 05:51, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Same vote as ~6.3 months ago. ~⌈Markaci⌋ 2005-10-14 T 07:27:47 Z
 * Keep Angela's been around since God wore short pants, and I think it's reasonable to bend the rules for one of Wikipedia's elder stateswomen. Denni ☯ 08:27, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete 'Reasonable to bend the rules for one of Wikipedia's elder stateswomen'. Why? Proto t c 08:47, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * WP:IAR Denni ☯ 18:50, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable user and board member. Angela has been in articles about Wikipedia. Rhobite 13:54, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep notable. see my argument at Tim Shell AfD. Xoloz 17:38, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep as this figure appears to be a significant figure within her field.  We should not "bend the rules" for anyone, regardless of their affiliation with Wikipedia, when it comes to determining if a subject is encyclopedic or not.  Hall Monitor 20:22, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Be careful. There's another Angela Beesley that that search turns up, and you are excluding articles that mention her in connection with Wikipedia.  Fine-tuning a Google Web search is actually somewhat tricky in this case.  Uncle G 17:14, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per "Angela has been in articles about Wikipedia". Kappa 23:46, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * keep please she is a celebrity we do not need to be biased against people on wikipedia really Yuckfoo 23:48, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment - is it just me, or is there not much point in relisting this? I mean, fundamentally nothing has changed in the last six months, either about Angela's notability (or lack thereof) or the content of the article... Shimgray | talk | 00:09, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Denni. -- DS1953 04:15, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm sure she's great, but this looks much like Wikipedia self-adulation. Martg76 07:31, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep want to know who is who in Wikipedia --133.44.1.220 14:23, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The best guide to notability, be it of people, companies, software, products, or web sites, is whether other people, independent of the subject itself, have considered the subject to be notable. The litmus test for that, outlined to greater or lesser extent in all of our various notability criteria (WP:BIO, WP:CORP, WP:WEB, and so forth) is whether the subject has been written about in multiple separate published works that whose sources are independent of the subject xyrself.  (WP:BIO talks about press coverage and independent biographies.  WP:WEB talks about media attention.  WP:CORP uses the broad term of published works, and is explicit about excluding self-promotion.) Furthermore, as Geogre says, it is a disservice to AFD and to the encyclopaedia as a whole to apply criteria erratically and inconsistently.  It is wrong to hold the Wikimedia Foundation, its board members, and its web sites to standards that are different to the standards to which one holds other companies, people, and web sites. It is also wrong to argue that "If Tim Shell isn't notable then neither is Angela Beesley.".  The two are very different cases, as research shows.  Researching this person, I find that unlike Tim Shell Angela is the subject of multiple works published by people independent of Angela, Wikia, Wikipedia, or the Wikimedia Foundation.  Angela is quoted in reports, and conference sessions given by her are published and commented upon. As such, unlike Tim Shell Angela does satisfy the criteria for notability.  Keep. Uncle G 17:14, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Putting Tim Shell on the Google test, he gets 14,600 hits. This satisifies notability for me. --WikiFanaticTalk Contribs 15:27, 17 October 2005 (CDT)

 * Weak Keep I don't think she has general notability on her own, but she does have notability in Wikicircles which would at least give her a subsection of some sort somewhere ("Board Members of Wikimedia" or something like that), and quite frankly, i'm unsure of the perception of whether or not board members of corporations truly are notable or not after the Tim Shell Afd, and none of the criterion pages help the decision on that factor, so i'm erring on the side of caution. Karmafist 17:25, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete or Userfy not recognized outside of wikipedia. Ryan Norton T 23:20, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep per Uncle G, but strongly oppose any arguments that she deserves inclusion because this is Wikipedia and she works on Wikipedia. N (t/c) 23:29, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

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


text: User talk:70.174.60.250

title: User talk:70.174.60.250


text:
User talk:Waltwe

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! *drew 22:56, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Emergency department
I wonder if you would consider supporting Emergency department atArticle Improvement Drive. This department is where we all go if we are very ill, and I feel it needs a boost if it is ever to get featured article status. I would greatly appreciate if you were able to offer support on this.--File Éireann 16:05, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Article Improvement Drive
01:30, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

BioCOTW Project
You voted for Jerry B. Jenkins, this weeks' Biography Collaboration of the weeks. Please come and help them become a featured-standard article. Falphin 00:21, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Emergency department
Many thanks for your support!--File Éireann 23:37, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Waltwe


text:
User talk:64.12.116.71

April 2014
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Bob Shaheen, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. ''Consensus is determined through discussion. If you have a problem with the current phrasing of the article, feel free to open a discusson on the article's talk page. If you continue to remove the sourced content without discussion, your edits will be considered disruptive and may result in your IP being blocked, and/or article protection.'' Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:38, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Bob Shaheen, you may be blocked from editing. ''The Wikipedia community relies on the bold, revert, discuss cycle (BRD) for article evolution. You seem to be keen on asserting your POV in the above named article, but seem either unaware or disinterested in participating in the discussion aspect of BRD. Please use the article's talk page to explain your rationale for re-inserting the content you are attempting to re-insert. Otherwise, your edits will be considered disruptive, and will be reverted.'' Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:54, 20 April 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Bob Shaheen. ''Edit-warring, unexplained removal of sourced content, and addition of unsourced content. Talk page discussion has been open for a few days. Please participate.'' Cyphoidbomb (talk) 22:48, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Notice of Edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 03:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours for edit warring, as you did at Bob Shaheen. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Tiptoety talk 06:22, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Nomination of Charleston City Paper for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Charleston City Paper is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Charleston City Paper until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Ad Orientem (talk) 06:26, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Gagliardi Trophy

The article Gagliardi Trophy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Not sure if this is notable, most sources I find only reports on finalists and little on the trophy itself. If someone can find good sources that satisfy the notability policy it's great, but if not this article should not be here."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Bjelleklang -  talk 18:45, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

title: User talk:64.12.116.71


text:
Beatriz Paredes Rangel

Beatriz Elena Paredes Rangel (born 18 August 1953) is a Mexican politician who served as president of the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI) from 2007 to 2011. She was the first woman to serve as Governor of Tlaxcala and the second woman to serve as a state governor in Mexican history. She unsuccessfully mounted candidacies for Head of the Federal District (Mexico City) in 2006 and 2012.

Early life and education
Beatriz Elena Paredes Rangel was born on 18 August 1953 in San Esteban Tizatlán, Tlaxcala, Mexico. She is the daughter of politician. She studied sociology at the National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM), ultimately graduating in 2016 after 30 years of academic studies. Paredes Rangel later received a postgraduate degree in Latin American Literature from the University of Barcelona.

Tlaxcala politics
She began her political career at the age of 21 as a Tlaxcala state deputy, serving from 1974 to 1977. She served as advisor for the Governor of Tlaxcala from 1978 to 1980. In 1982, she was appointed Undersecretary for Agrarian Reform by President Miguel de la Madrid.

In 1987, she was elected Governor of Tlaxcala at the age of 33. Her election made her the second female governor in Mexico's history, after Griselda Alvarez, who served as Governor of Colima. She served in the position until 1992.

National politics
In 1992, she was nominated for the position of PRI secretary-general, replacing Luis Donaldo Colosio Murrieta. Her nomination made her the first woman nominated for national leadership in the PRI.

President Carlos Salinas appointed her Ambassador to Cuba in 1993. Paredes served in the Chamber of Deputies and in the Senate, and was President of the Chamber of Deputies from 2001 to 2002.

Paredes has occupied different positions in the PRI, mostly representing the rural and indigenous wings of the party. She ran for the presidency of her party in 2002, but lost to Roberto Madrazo in a contested race. In 2007, she ran again for the party's presidency and won by a large margin. She resigned from the position in 2011 and was succeeded by Humberto Moreira.

Paredes was previously ambassador of Mexico to Brazil. As of 2024, she is a member of the Senate. She ran for President in the 2024 election, but lost the Fuerza y Corazón por México primary to Xóchitl Gálvez.

Mexico City politics
In the 2006 Federal District election, she ran for Head of Government (mayor) of Mexico City, representing an alliance of the PRI and the PVEM; she lost the election against Marcelo Ebrard. In 2012, she unsuccessfully ran for Head of Government, losing to PRD candidate Miguel Ángel Mancera.

Political views
In 2010, Paredes expressed her support for the recognition of same-sex unions in Mexico after Mexico City legalized same-sex marriage. On 5 October 2009, she publicly acknowledged her interest in running for President of Mexico in 2012, and stated she is pro-choice on abortion issues.

Other activities
She is a member of the Inter-American Dialogue, a Washington D.C.-based think tank.

title: Beatriz Paredes Rangel


text:
1st Grenadier Division (Poland)

The 1st Grenadier Division (1ère Division des Grenadiers; 1. Dywizja Grenadierów) was a Polish infantry formation raised in France during the Phoney War. The division was created as a part of the Polish Army in France following the Invasion of Poland. The division fought in the Battle of France in 1940.

Formation
Due to the Franco-Polish alliance, the formation of a Polish division in France began in early September 1939, shortly after the Invasion of Poland. The French government gave over a military camp at Coëtquidan to the Polish military mission and permitted voluntary recruitment from the Poles in France, which were particularly numerous in the coal-producing regions of Flanders. After the fall of Poland and the formation of the Polish government-in-exile, the newly appointed Polish commander-in-chief Władysław Sikorski ordered the formation of the 1st Grenadier Division on 13 November 1939.

Initially commanded by Colonel Stanisław Maczek, the division was taken over by Colonel Bolesław Bronisław Duch in January 1940. It was organized according to the French model and was equipped with French weapons and uniforms. Altogether, the formation numbered eventually about 13,000 enlisted soldiers, 2,600 NCOs and 580 officers of all grades, when it was sworn in by Gen. Sikorski on 25 May 1940, shortly before arriving at the front in Lorraine.

Battle of France
At the end of April 1940, the division was moved to Colombey-les-Belles in Lorraine where it received its long-awaited heavy equipment and final training. On 18 May the formation was moved to the Sarre area and was part of the French 4th Army,. 1st Regiment under Colonel Lowczowski was assigned to defend the Maginot Line near Wittlesburg. Initially divided between the two units of the Corps, the French and the Fortified Sector of the Sarre, the division operated in a supporting role.

June 1940
The division first saw combat on 14 June 1940, when attacked by German forces. The following day the division was centred and successfully defended its positions. However, during the night the 52nd Division broke down and withdrew soon after it was attacked to Dieuze. Fearing his corps being cut in two, the formation commander ordered the Poles to withdraw to the second line of defences. It withdrew to the area of Dieuze, where it covered the retreat of the French division throughout 16 June. The following night it successfully disengaged itself and withdrew to the Marne–Rhine Canal defensive line, where it covered the area around Lagarde. As a result of the two-day-long Battle of Lagarde, the division was heavily damaged but managed to hold its positions. However, the 52nd Division had been destroyed by the Wehrmacht and the corps' remainder was disbanded by its commanding officer.

The 20th Army Corps' remnants, then composed mostly of the Polish division and a small detachment of the Fortified Sector of the Sarre, withdrew to the forests around Baccarat. There it formed a perimeter defence in and around the town of Meriller. Not attacked directly, the 20th Army Corps was surrounded by the enemy on 19 June. The Poles broke through to Neureville but were unable to continue their assault. On 21 June, after receiving information of Franco-German capitulation talks, Gen. Bronisław Duch disbanded the unit and ordered his men to either flee to neutral Switzerland or to join the Polish forces in the United Kingdom. Many chose the latter option, including the general himself.

Altogether, the division lost approximately 5,200 men during the Battle of France.

Composition

 * 1st Warsaw Grenadier Regiment
 * 2nd Wielkopolska Grenadier Regiment
 * 3rd Silesian Grenadier Regiment
 * 8th Uhlan Regiment
 * 1st Wilno Light Artillery Regiment
 * 1st Pomeranian Heavy Artillery Regiment
 * 1st Modlin Engineer battalion
 * 1st Gdańsk Signals battalion

Equipment

 * 12,000 rifles
 * 336 light machine guns
 * 176 heavy machine guns
 * 27 × 60 mm mortars
 * 24 × 81 mm mortars
 * 54 × 25 mm anti-tank guns
 * 8 × 47 mm anti-tank guns
 * 36 × 75 mm field guns
 * 24 × 155 mm howitzers
 * 560 automobiles and trucks
 * 1,600 horse-drawn vehicles

title: 1st Grenadier Division (Poland)


text:
Jensen Botanical Gardens

The Charles C. Jensen Botanical Gardens are botanical gardens located at 8520 Fair Oaks Boulevard, Carmichael, California. They are open during the daylight hours without charge.

The gardens exhibit a variety of flora including camellias, dogwoods, azaleas, and rhododendrons.

title: Jensen Botanical Gardens


text:
Interdata 7/32 and 8/32

The Model 7/32 and Model 8/32 were 32-bit minicomputers introduced by Perkin-Elmer after they acquired Interdata, Inc., in 1973. The 7/32 and 8/32 are primarily remembered for being the first 32-bit minicomputers under $10,000. The 8/32 was a more powerful machine than the 7/32, with the notable feature of allowing user-programmable microcode to be employed.

The Model 7/32 provided fullword data processing power and direct memory addressing up to 1 million bytes through the use of 32-bit general registers and a comprehensive instruction set.

Background
After the commercial success of the microcoded IBM System/360 series of mainframe computers, various startup companies arrived on the scene to bring microcode technology to the smaller minicomputers. Among these companies were Prime Computer, Microdata, and Interdata. Interdata used microcode to define an architecture that was heavily influenced by the IBM System/360 instruction set. The DOS-type real-time serial/multitasking operating system was called OS/32.

Differences between the 7/32 and 8/32

 * General register sets – The 7/32 has 2 sets while the 8/32 can have either 2 or 8.
 * I/O priority levels – The 7/32 has none but the 8/32 can have up to 3.
 * Writeable control store – The 7/32 does not have one and the 8/32 does.
 * On average the 8/32 is 2.5x faster than the 7/32.

Usage
The 7/32 and 8/32 became the computers of choice in large scale embedded systems, such as FFT machines used in real-time seismic analysis, CAT scanners, and flight simulator systems. They were also often used as non-IBM peripherals in IBM networks, serving the role of HASP workstations and spooling systems, so called RJE (Remote Job Entry) stations. For example, the computers behind the first Space Shuttle simulator consisted of thirty-six 32-bit minis inputting and/or outputting data to networked mainframe computers (both IBM and UNIVAC), all in real-time.

The 8/32 was used in the Lunar and Planetary Laboratory, Department of Planetary Sciences at the University of Arizona for research purposes.

The 8/32 was also employed by Mathematical Applications Group, Inc. (MAGI) to produce the vast majority of the 3D computer-generated imagery (CGI) in the 1982 film Tron. While CGI had been used during the 1970s for minor segments of film work (such as titles), Tron was the first film by a major producer that made extensive use of CGI.

Operating systems
The standard operating system for the 7/32 and 8/32 was Interdata's OS/32. At MIT, by 1976, Interdata computers were being used by the Architecture Machine Group and Joint Computer Facility at MIT, using the FORTRAN and PL/I programming languages.

Unix was ported to the platform in 1977 by two groups, working independently; to the 7/32 at Wollongong University, and to the 8/32 at Bell Labs, making the 32-bit Interdata machines the first non-PDP computers to run Unix (See V6 Unix § portability). Bell chose the 8/32 for their port because it was as different from the DEC PDP-11 as possible.

By 1979, researchers at the Architecture Machine Group created an operating system modelled on Multics called Magic 6, which featured the Multics concepts of pages, segments and dynamic linking, but had no security checks.

Emulation
SIMH, the historical computer emulator project, includes emulators for the 7/32 and 8/32, as well as their 16-bit minicomputers.

The Living Computers Museum + Labs had a 7/32 on display with attached teletype.

title: Interdata 7/32 and 8/32


text:
File:Treasure cover.jpg

Fair use in Treasure (album)
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 CD/album cover.
 * 2) It doesn't limit the copyright owner's rights to sell the CD/album 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 album artwork on another CD.
 * 4) The image is itself a subject of discussion in the article or used in the infobox thereof.
 * 5) The image on the cover is significant because it was made by a famous artist.

title: File:Treasure cover.jpg


text:
Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 October 14

Category:TV channels with British versions

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep. «» Who ? ¿ ? meta 06:56, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete, even if renamed to something less US-centric like "US Channels with British Derivatives", I still fail to see the value. Global channels tend to either be globally focused, or with many local variants that all influence each other. Also, the existance of this category implies that a similar category should exist for each country of the world - which would be incredibly unwieldly. matturn 17:16, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Why? It wouldn't be unwieldy at all imo. There aren't that many local versions of channels, and those that exist are significant. CalJW 10:14, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Is this category intended for the UK versions of these channels tailor-made for audience in the UK? — Instantnood 19:22, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is why is is called what it is called.
 * Comment although it was renamed to change "Channels to channels", here is the previous CFD on this cat. For reference. ∞ Who ? ¿ ?  21:27, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * keep, although I would go along with a less US-centric name. Youngamerican 05:32, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep It baffling that this has been called U.S. centric. We say channels in the UK, the Americans say "stations". This issue is simply absent from and wholly irrelevant to this case - and I am a regular opponent of U.S centrism. It was created by a user from Southend-on-Sea. This has been nominated before and I am baffled by the passion for deleting it. It is clearly useful to distinguish between local and non-local channels. CalJW 10:05, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This category is not necessarily US-centric. If there are Canadian, Australian, French, German TV channels with UK versions, group them under this category too. — Instantnood 09:08, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

Category:People from Chicago

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. «» Who ? ¿ ? meta 06:53, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

All articles now moved to Category:Chicagoans (there were only a dozen or so remaining). It's had a merge notice since 5 August which no-one has commented on. Ian ≡ talk 11:12, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Ian ≡ talk 05:45, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose this has been here before. The reasoning is "People from foo" speak of notable people FROM Chicago, Chicagoans, are notable people who LIVE IN Chicago. The CFD Merge tag means it is suggest to be merged, not to merge it. No changes should be made to the article before the end of discussion here. ∞ Who ? ¿ ?  21:23, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename, I was thinking people from state. Chicago - Illinois, what's the difference. :) ∞ Who ? ¿ ?  07:25, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Michigan - East Chicago, what's the difference? ;p siafu 23:59, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. No argument. siafu 23:59, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete -Mayumashu 03:48, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

Category:Notability and inclusion guidelines for WikiProjects and Category:Subject-specific notability criteria

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was No consensus (no change). «» Who ? ¿ ? meta 06:50, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Upmerge into parent cat Category:Wikipedia notability criteria, which has by far the best title and is small enough to contain all the info. Radiant_ >|< 09:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge into Subject-specific, but keep as sub-category under Category:Wikipedia notability criteria. I created Category:Subject-specific notability criteria because 1) comments in the Notability discussions have noted that subject-specific criteria are relied upon more than general Notability criteria because subject-specific criteria are less subjective, and 2) the links in the child will grow over time in a reasonable manner to cover more subjects, whereas the links in the parent are largely duplicates of each other, and while hopefully the duplicates will be resolved at some point, until then it would be nice to keep the historical repetitive discussions out of the much less controversial and up-to-date subject-specific criteria.  --Interiot 15:02, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment a central category just for subject-specific notability criteria would be great. I think the music and website guidelines that exist are already really useful when trying to decide whether I can propose something for AFD (though I still find it terribly murky).  It would be great if there was a list of clear criteria guides for all the common article types.  But I find this issue too confusing to vote on right now.  --W.marsh 21:51, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

Category:Things

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. «» Who ? ¿ ? meta 06:46, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

It is a poorly defined category. Brianjd | Why restrict HTML? | 09:13, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, but worth a chuckle. Radiant_ >|< 09:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Somewhat amusing, but not even relatively encyclopaedic. Firestorm 14:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Extreme speedy delete. N (t/c) 16:26, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless someone includes Thing (Addams Family), then I dont' want it :)  ∞ Who ? ¿ ?  21:31, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This makes much more sense if you look at Category:Fundamental, of which this is a subcategory. It's "poorly defined" because it's meant to be one of the broad, sweeping initial branches of the entire category structure; "Fundamental" is a subcategory of Category:Categories. Given that structure, a "Things" category is entirely valid and even necessary. (That said, I have some reservations about the whole structure beginning with a category called "Fundamental", but I can't say I have any better suggestions.) When its actual purpose is taken into account, it is more keepable than it appears; but I'd also favour restructuring the absolute roots of the category tree if anyone has a good alternative. Bearcat 17:07, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Were not talking historical category structure of Wikipedia. This cat was created in August, if it were necessary, it would have been part of the original structure. ∞ Who ? ¿ ?  18:08, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It is not necessarily the case that all desired categories are created immediately. We are allowed to change our minds about this. Brian Jason Drake 03:26, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't think we need this miscellaneous category, but if we really need it, can we call it "miscellaneous"? Brian Jason Drake 03:26, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, desired categories I think more of specific cats. This one, as Bearcat says, is fundamental, but it has never been a need for it in the past, and now there still isn't one now. so although it could be used for a plethora of things, it's definately to broad. IMHO there are several categories that now exist that could facilitate the needs of the articles placed there. ∞ Who ? ¿ ?  03:36, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - but be warned: after that there'll nothing left -- Ian ≡ talk 16:32, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. No argument. siafu 19:10, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Ill-thought-through effort to clear out . belongs in  and the others in subcats of . Septentrionalis 18:53, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

Category:Presidential office in the United States to Category:Presidency of the United States

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Rename. «» Who ? ¿ ? meta 06:45, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

This is a more correct name, first because it refers to the specific office we are interested in rather than the general principle, thus excluding articles like, for instance, President of Harvard University, and also because this is the term used in academic and professional literature on the subject. See for instance, the seminal book on the Presidency, Richard Neustadt's Presidential Power, or any political science journal. Christopher Parham (talk) 08:02, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * rename per nom. Youngamerican 05:33, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename as proposed. CalJW 10:07, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename Should have been named this from its inception a whole two days ago. -The Tom 00:37, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename. No argument. siafu 17:40, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

Category:Burkinan athletes

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Speedy deleted as long empty. ∞ Who ? ¿ ? 21:37, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Empty covered by Category:Burkinabé athletes. Dunno should this be in the speedy rename section probably should be speedy rename/delete section. MeltBanana 01:37, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.

Category:Armenian Poets

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the category above. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Speedy deleted. ∞ Who ? ¿ ? 21:33, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Only contains itself. Correctly capitalised Category:Armenian poets exists. MeltBanana 00:15, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete (speedy #2 applies). -- Rick Block (talk) 01:14, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete and speedy it. Firestorm 14:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the category's talk page (if any). No further edits should be made to this page.


text: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2005 October 14