text:
Talk:Believer's baptism

Archived debate

 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the . 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.

move. — Nightst a  llion  (?) Seen this already? 06:41, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Survey and discussion
Please add * Support  or  * Oppose  followed by a brief explanation, then sign your vote using "~~~~".
 * Support per nom. David Kernow 11:05, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - why the singular possessive? Would believers' baptism be more logical? Stringops 21:01, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - believer's baptism is used more often than believers and believers' combined according to a quick google search. The term, however presented, is somewhat informal; maybe credobaptism as a title might be better. With the singular posessive, I take it to mean that it is the baptism of a believer; hence it is their baptism. I think either could work - but with no apostrophe it means nothing at all. BigBlueFish 13:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.

Technical change to the above archive
The archived debate did not give a true record, as the proposal did not show the original page name because of the way it was constructed, and hence made no sense. I have examined the history and modified the archive for the sole purpose of giving a true record. John Campbell (talk) 16:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

New section
"i feel that belivers baptism is someones choice " people should not be pushed into anything they dont wanna do! anyone agree?!?!?!?

In response to Wesley's concern of "resurrected by God". Was it not the Nicene Creed that determined the nature of God (The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are ONE BEING), mans own interpretation? If we were to use logic, our own interpretation, God and Jesus, the Father and the Son, are two separate beings. To read it any other way is simply relying on the interpretation of Man. James 1:37 says: "If any of you lack wisdom let him ask of God". Certainly if we really wanted to know the nature of God, we could ask him through prayer, and find out for ourselves. --Eric

 * Are you suggesting that the bishops at the First Nicene Council didn't pray and ask God? Or that if I were to pray and ask God, and receive a different answer, that that would somehow NOT be my interpretation? The doctrine of the Trinity is not only consistent with what Jesus Christ and the first apostles taught, it is what countless Christians have also confirmed by their experience in prayer, both corporately and separately. To depart from this tradition would be to elevate myself higher than the apostles and saints and presume that God had spoken more clearly to me, and that all the church for the last 2000 years has been in error. That somehow seems a bit arrogant. Also, individuals running around, praying individually and arriving at their own interpretations has led to tremendous fragmentation in the church, to the tune of tens of thousands of protestant denominations all claiming to be guided by the Holy Spirit. But now I've strayed rather far from the topic of improving the Believers Baptism article. Sorry Larry! --Wesley

 * Didn't the First Nicene Council decide the wording of a creedal statement about the nature of God, not the nature of God Himself? MaynardClark (talk) 07:04, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

--- I think there is some confusion this page between Age of Accountability and age of consent. Many children have reached the age where they realize the serious nature of christian belief, and thus are accountable for their actions, but are still a part of their family. Age of consent usually is associated with matters other than baptism, but when consent is a part of baptism, it is very common that the consent of the parents is required for baptism as well as the desire and understanding of the child.

I agree with Ben, this point is definitely confused in this article. The article for Baptist seems to have it right. Could we just copy the relevant paragraph over here?

i agree with the both of you. jesus and god are two separte things. however the christian faith believe that the holy tinity are all one thing user nay

This is tangential to the point of the article, but when you say that Jesus was "resurrected by God", you're implying that Jesus was not himself God, but was as much in need of being resurrected as was Lazarus, for example. Is that what you really mean to say? --Wesley

That may be your interpretation of the phrase, but the implication is only there in your understanding. The phrase 'resurrected by God' is a rephrasing of a direct quote from the Bible:

 * Acts 4:10 Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by him doth this man stand here before you whole.
 * 1Cor 6:14 And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by his own power.
 * Gal 1:1 Paul, an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead;)
 * 1Pet 1:21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God

 * Hmm, that does look like a direct rephrasing. It just struck me funny in the other context somehow. --Wesley

many Protestant churches => a number of Protestant churches, see talk page
I have changed "and many Protestant churches baptize infant children of believers" to "and a number of Protestant churches baptize infant children of believers" When we look at the Protestants, we find that quite a big number of them practice Believers Baptism. The rise of Pentecostal churches within the last decades has changed the statistics. By now the majority of Protestants were baptized as believers. This might not be the case in Europe, but especially in the developing countries. Stating that "many" Protestant churces practise infant baptism suggests that those who practise Believers baptism are a minority. That would be a very Europe-centered view, and suggests something that is no longer the case. Heiko Evermann 21:16, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Age of accountability
Believer's Baptism can only be administered to someone over the age of accountability or reason, which is usually 8-12, depending on the individual church, and sometimes on the individual themselves.

Is it true that there are actually churches which set a specific age for this? In my experience almost everyone would say that depends on the individual. Jdavidb 20:04, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

 * As far as I am aware setting an age is not so common as to be held by any entire denomination. If someone can name a specific group that holds this...  otherwise, it is probably too specific in its application to really belong in this article.  An article on the concept of age of accountability might be another matter.  Jonadab, 2006 Sep 02

Some also hold that individuals are not held eternally accountable by God for their sins until they reach a state of moral and rational accountability.

I altered the wording to some. Formerly it seemed to imply all, which is plainly wrong. At least three fellowships of the Schwarzenau Brethren, if not all of them, do not hold this doctrine (although a few individual Pastors within the fellowships might teach it), and I have my doubts about its universality among other Anabaptist groups.

I also marked the statement as needing a citation, not because I think a citation is needed to the effect that such a doctrine exists at all, but because I think the association between the doctrine of Age of Accountability and that of Believer's Baptism needs to be more firmly established if the statement is to remain in this article. A statement as to which particular groups hold both doctrines would be a good start toward that. I have always thought of Age of Accountability as largely a Protestant doctrine and Believer's Baptism as primarily an Anabaptist one (although a handful of Protestant groups have adopted it, notably the Baptists), so if there is a connection between the two doctrines it ought to be better documented. Otherwise the sentence about age of accountability does not belong in this article. -- Jonadab, 2006 Sep 02

Support for other "modes"
The article contains the sentence "Yet all three modes have Scriptural support." I fail to see how that is not POV. Some churches believe the Scripture teaches only immersion; other churches believe the Scripture teaches the possibility of using any of these methods. In this sentence the article takes a side in the debate, which is not appropriate. Moreover, it directly contradicts or minimizes the previous sentence which talks about those churches that "prefer" immersion. In fact, the very word "prefer" in that sentence is a misrepresentation, since to those who believe only in immersion, it is not at all a matter of "preference."

Finally, the sentence says "all three modes," but there has clearly been some editing, because there are only two modes mentioned up to that point. Jdavidb 04:27, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree with your critique, though I also agree with the fact that all 3 modes are Scriptural. Go ahead and make an edit!  KHM03 10:44, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

 * What are some Bible verses that support baptism other than by immersion? El Cubano 00:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Indeed, that would be an interesting argument to see. I was under the impression that most groups practicing non-immersion simply considered the distinction unimportant, arguing that it is the act that matters and not the details of the method; I was not aware that anyone (especially anyone who disagrees with infant christening and holds to baptism only of believers) actually argued that βαπτιζω refers to a method other than dipping.  I would have considered that a straw man. --Jonadab

 * This article in Wikipedia is mainly concerned with the subject of baptism, rather than the mode of baptism. Mode would be best treated in a separate article.  In theory at least, it might be possible to practice believer's baptism, yet stick to the mode of sprinkling rather than immersion.  There are some groups like this.  DFH 15:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Theological Objections
I would like to see some more in depth discussion in this area of theological objections. It seems to me to be very slanted to the objectors and no scriptural support is given to the objections.

The first objection seems to be contradictory to the necessity of baptism at all and is somewhat fatalistic. Knowing that this must be someone's objection, I think it should be stated perhaps more intellectually. It also presupposes that baptism is essential for salvation which is not a prevalent view in the baptist and anabaptist community. The same things hold true for the second objection. This also shows a presupposition that baptism is essential for salvation.

The third objection needs clarification. In the New Testament there are many evidences of family members who were not saved while others were. Timothy is a good example in that his mother was "saved" yet there is no mention of his father having the same relationship with God through Christ. James, the "half-brother" of Jesus is another example. I would like some clarification on how this third position treats those "baptised" family members who turn away from their faith and then potentially turn back.

The fourth Objection is very problematic since the act of baptism is looked at through the prism of a work and not a response to God's grace. I would contend that the majority of those who practice believer's baptism do not view it as a work, but rather as an act of obedience. I guess my problem is in the term "usually". Markepp 07:12, 22 November 2005 (UTC) Mark

 * I think all these points could be easily balanced by addressing the adherents' reasoning in the main body, which were pretty thinly represented here. I've tried to do that by adding some theological reasoning that goes beyond the mere mechanics. Others please help. 128.158.14.42, 04 Aug 2006

article title and photo caption
Shouldn't the title of this artice be Believer's Baptism? --Amazon10x 19:14, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I have made some changes to make the whole of "believer's baptism" stand out a little better as well as to acknowledge the fundamental differences maintained by the churches of Christ who are not denominational, Roman Catholic or Protestant. I changed the word "pastor" to "minister" under the picture as "pastor" has a biblical meaning (generally elder) for which there are biblical qualifications. Many if not most of todays "pastors" are not able to qualify to so call themselves "pastors." Sky 15:37, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * 'Minister' and 'Pastor' are in practice both courtesy titles. I don't think it is our place here to discuss the biblical qualifications to be so called, and we should rely on the styling adopted in the photo details. Unfortunately there is no information provided. John Campbell (talk) 09:22, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Original Sin
The article states: "'Believer's baptism is more prevalent in Christian traditions which maintain that there is a state of innocency from birth to the age of accountability (if the believer, due to mental or emotional disability, is not likely to gain the ability to judge the morality of his or her actions, this state of innocency persists for life). Credobaptism is less prevalent in traditions which maintain that the corruption of original sin is present at birth and is sufficient guilt in the eyes of God to cause the child to be damned, should it die before baptism.'" This statement assumes that a belief in "original sin" means a belief that an unbaptised person is damned, and that baptism is considered necessary for salvation - but while some on each side believe this, some certainly don't. Many people (myself included) who believe in believers' baptism (not as a necessity for salvation) also believe in original sin. In fact, as far as I was aware, most do. Of course, this creates problems. If everyone is born a sinner, but can only be saved by believing in Jesus, what about those who are too young to do so? Many would say, "we don't know, but God will do what is right," with the assumption that sending babies to hell would not come under the heading of "right"! Anyway, don't catholics, who certainly believe in baptism for salvation, believe that unbaptised babies go to limbo, instead of being "damned"?

Not sure how to edit this, but I have added in limbo. KMcA 20:32, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

'Good Conscience Toward God'
I would suggest adding the following verse:

 * "... Baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." --I Peter 3:21.

Also, I fixed a few punctuation errors, incuding a missing parentheses ")" at the end on " (See Independent Christian Churches."

--Creton4 207.43.79.22 19:11, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Yes, and the older translations phrase this as the "interrogation of a good conscience". DFH 15:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Include LDS here?
As I understand it, LDS also believe in baptism only after age of accountability. (WP:OR - I am not myself an LDS but I have family who converted.) Should they be included here, or alternatively, if they don't fall under the category, should some explanation be given? I have no stake in the matter, just raising the question. --Davecampbell 19:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Theological Objections (2)
Did anyone else not have a clue what this guy is talking about?

"One standard theological argument leveled against believer's baptism is that it makes the efficacy of the sacrament dependent upon the understanding of the baptisand; that is, it depends upon what the baptisand knows. This runs counter to the Calvinistic belief that God saves whomever he wills, regardless of any worthiness or knowledge on the part of the saved. It also runs contrary to the concept of free will and the notion of choice."

Sounds messed up to me. Totally wrong.

In my experience, the one to be baptized in a believer's baptism because he then knows Christ. Doing so does not actually save him; it merely goes in accordance with the scripture somewhere in the bible that says go and be baptized, once you are saved. It symbolizes your relation with Christ. During the time period that the Romans ruled Judea, being baptized was merely showing your strong commitment to anything, Jesus used it to symbolize a strong commitment to him.

And for the last sentence I quoted: God DOES save whoever he wants, which is everyone, but only if they accept him.

Just my little kick at it.

The Editor 2 22:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

 * The sentence I have added that begins "Reformed Baptist theologians ...." is based on my reading of the book by Fred Malone. DFH 15:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

 * The first part of the sentence is indeed a standard argument by sacramentalists (although not one I personally agree with): "One standard theological argument leveled against believer's baptism is that it makes the efficacy of the sacrament dependent upon the understanding of the baptisand; that is, it depends upon what the baptisand knows." The rest of the sentence appears to be the editor's own argument and so I would call it WP:OR -- what's more it seems to miss the sacramental/sacerdotal point. Obviously what we need to do here is set out the objections and the responses, not agree or disagree with them; however the whole section seems confused and confusing. John Campbell (talk) 15:49, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Arguments for Credobaptism: Premise #5
Premise #5 states:

"Whole household" baptism interpretations do not consider the context that many households were multi-family in the 1st century.[1]

What point is being made here? This premise neither advances an argument for credobaptism nor refutes arguments for paedobaptism. Why should "multi-family" baptism be thought to exclude paedobaptism or to suggest credobaptism?

In Holiness
"In Holiness, many Baptist, and some other churches..." Is Holiness a denomination? If so, fine, I've just never heard of it, if not, what does this phrase mean?--Thelonghop 23:18, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
 * "Holiness" is not a single denomination but a family of churches and groups, with some similarities to but predating Pentecostalism. See WCC web page

Number of Adherents
I question the 80% paedobaptist/20% credobaptist figure. Pentecostals are nearly always credobaptists, and some figures I've read have estimated the number of Pentecostals at over 400 million. Most credobaptists belong to independent congregations, so getting an accurate number is difficult. There is also the problem that churches only count baptized members as adherents - this means that paedobaptist churches count their children, but credobaptists do not. This puts the number of Baptists, for example, around 40 million worldwide. But when you count Baptist children, you get a number above 100 million. If the same ratio holds true for Pentecostals and various evangelical denominations and non-denominational churches, there are nearly a billion people associated with credobaptist churches, making the ratio of credobaptists to paedobaptists something like 45% to 55%.--ManicBrit 00:43, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Prevalence
I moved the paragraph about the prevalence of the practice to a lower spot in the article, and gave it its own heading. I did this to improve the article's readability. The original sentence was added by an Eastern Catholic who has openly stated his hostility to non-Catholic traditions, and was placed high in the article as an apparent attempt to disparage those who practice believer's baptism. Later revisions made the paragraph choppy, and started the article with a discussion of the practice's prevalence and the way church membership statistics are calculated rather than a discussion of the practice and its theology. Therefore, I tightened up the word and moved it to its new location. --ManicBrit (talk) 12:57, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Which Apostolics?
...other groups such as Apostolics do hold baptism to have salvation value.

The name Apostolic is used by several groups. One European group practises infant baptism. The Pentecostal church of this name that came out of the Welsh Revival practises believer's baptism, but does not consider it necessary to salvation. The term "Apostolics" here was linked (via a redirect) to an article on the Apostolic Brethren, a 12th or 13th century sect—unlikely to be the one that the editor was thinking of. Copey 2 (talk) 14:56, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

NNPOV debates
The believers baptism advocates have the same problem that i do. Its hard to be neutrial. I do not think i would delite the articles written by believers baptism advocates, when they came against infant baptism though. And if they were not gramaticaly correct and i knew how to correct them i would. And then I would simply do my best to disprove them.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.127.141.196 (talk) 03:37, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

 * The problem is that you are a new user with just a URL. Those with more "cred" behind there names and a real username sometimes get away with stuff you can't because you haven't regestered. My own personal suggestion is to register, get a username, and then stick to editing some strictly Lutheran articles for a while until you have a sufficient history, which will give you more credibility. It might even make them respect your points of view (which are mine, too) in a credible manner. Instead of editing stuff that is prone to edit wars (during which they'll often deleate your stuff even if it is well cited), carve a niche for yourself where they won't bother you. For example, you could pick names of early orthodox Lutherans from List_of_Protestant_Reformers and add stuff you've copied from this book to their articles.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 21:32, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

This article is about...
This article is about believer's baptism. The term is the one used generally. It is grammatically correct in that it the baptism that belongs to a believer. A quick Google search shows 12,700 for "believer baptism" -believer's (believer baptism) and 152,000 for "believer's baptism". The former term is the one in use. It is therefore correct based on usage. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:34, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * This article is about BELIEVER BAPTISM, not a particular believer's baptism. Would we call the corresponding practice "infant's baptism"?  No, the related article and subject are not about any particular infant's baptism, but about infant baptism.  I believe in and practice believer baptism.  Both terms are in use, as your Google search showed.  One term is grammatically correct, while the other is mistaken but more common.  An encyclopedia is not supposed to be a mirror of society, but a collection of reliable knowledge.  As such, this article should be titled "believer baptism", not "believer's baptism".    GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 20:05, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * No. It's about believer's baptism. The term is possessive. The corresponding term is infant baptism because that's the term used by that group. The article should be believer's baptism, and has been call this for more than eight years. From what I can see, you have been the first editor to be concerned about this. I have, to date, only heard one person use the term believer baptism, and you're that person. I've been around both terms for close to 25 years. Perhaps some other editors would like to weigh in. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:26, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Please do no not universalize your own experience, and please remember this is an encyclopedia, not a societal memoir. I have heard the term "believer's baptism" my whole life too.  I have also heard the term "irregardless" much more than not, regardless of the fact that it is stupid.  Moreover, most people over correct in using the pronoun "I", and use it inappropriately as the object of a sentence, as in "John helped Jim and I."  No one has mentioned this issue prior because most are either unaware that it is poor English, or (as I up to this point) thought it too trivial an issue.  However, when you think about it, it makes those of us that practice credobaptism sound dumb, and a bit backward.  "Believer baptism" is just as accessible a term, and happens to be grammatically correct.  I too would welcome more voices.  Is this an encyclopedia, or a societal mirror?    GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 21:13, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Neither. It's Wikipedia. Your examples are incomplete, and irrelevant. The term will simply confuse and as such should not be used. That is my point. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:23, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * The examples are not irrelevant because it is a grammatical issue. On the confusion issue, I think you would be right if we were to replace the term with "credobaptism", a term that I like and is accurate (but only used in scholarly works), but the term "believer baptism" is so close to the more familiar term "believer's baptism" that it could hardly be confused by anyone.  Seriously.    GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 22:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * BTW, just for the record, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia (or is supposed to be).  GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 22:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * One point further. Will you go about redacting the more than seventy articles on Wikipedia that use the term and the thirty or so that use a variant? I only found one that uses your term. You must realize that those article all use that term independently of each other. One editor didn't create them all. They all agree that believer's baptism is the correct term. The variants use the terms believers' baptism and believers baptism more frequently than yours. Also, back to Google. Searching for believer baptism (no quotes) returns this article first, and then Baptist which uses the term believer's baptism. In fact, ninety-seven of the first 100 use the term believer's baptism, and one that uses your term has actually removed the term completely from the article. The term may be grammatically incorrect, but the grammatically correct term is used so infrequently that it's virtually unknown. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:57, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * I would be happy to make the effort.   GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 21:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * : I don't like your method of indenting. I never said that believer's baptism was grammatically correct, I merely said that it was more common and as such should be the term used. As for redacting, don't be foolish. You will run into the same problem on every one of those articles as you are here. Explain how you're right because you have some rules of grammar on your side while they will argue that they have common usage on their side. Will you then go about and correct every conversation on the topic? When will you stop your efforts at correcting what doesn't need to be corrected? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 21:21, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Don't do what's right, just do what we've always done. Hmmm.    GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 21:55, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * In this case, right would be wrong. It's not the case where a few people incorrectly use the term "you and I" or talk of "unthawing" meat. It's more along the lines of "pre-heating" an oven, where such an incorrect term has become so common, that it has become correct usage. No matter what you say, it is the common usage. If you want to add a section on what you think the correct usage should be, feel free. But any change is ludicrous and filled with hubris: "I know that almost every person on the planet who speaks English and refers to this uses this term, but here's why you're wrong and a handful of us are really right". --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * I never said "believer baptism" was more common than "believer's baptism". I took your 10:1 stats at face value.  My only concern is that it sounds dumb.  We credobaptists already get thought dumb by paedobaptists (though they are truly biblically in error), why add more fuel to the fire by sounding dumb in using poor English?  It is not hubris to not want to sound dumb.    GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 22:27, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Sorry. Never meant to imply that you said it. Believer's baptism is the grammatically incorrect term, but it is the one in common usage. Te reason why is it a baptism that belongs to an individual believer. It's not done to them: they own it. It's their death and resurrection. The infant has no say in the baptism done to them. Again, that's not a value judgment on my part. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:43, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * I appreciate the grammatical concession. It is correct that the relationship that the baptism represents is one that involves choice on both sides, and that an infant cannot express such a choice, but the point of baptism is not choices made, the point is to express the covenantal union between Christ and his Church in the particular member of the church being recognized as a member of the New Covenant.  Paedobaptists can also point to fine theological points, like the fact that the baptismal recipient is clearly being given a gracious gift that cannot possibly have been bought by merit in the recipient, but again the point is the expression of the covenantal union.  The covenantal union is the point of the act.  I can no more own my baptism than I can own my birth.  It is just who I am.  Yes, it's mine, but I didn't initiate the union, God did.  The point is not what I, the believer, did.   GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 23:24, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * BTW, nice examples... "unthawing" and "pre-heating". :-)    GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 22:39, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Believer's baptism is both more commonly used and grammatically correct. I do not think it should be changed to "Believer baptism". Difu Wu (talk) 21:02, 8 March 2010 (UTC)
 * You're right in that it is more common, but you're wrong in that it is grammatically incorrect for an article title.  GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 21:15, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * "Believer's baptism" is grammatically correct, while "believer baptism" is probably not. The possessive should be used, to denote baptism belonging to the believer. The use of "believer's baptism" has the established usage, while there is no evidence to suggest that "believer baptism" is anything more than someone's original research or a neologism, inappropriate for an encyclopaedic entry. Thanks. Difu Wu (talk) 22:08, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * On the grammatical point alone (because that's all that should matter in an encyclopedia), if you were serious then you should be advocating for the use of the term "infant's baptism" because it is "baptism belonging to the infant". But you are not, because your argument is really resting solely on frequency of usage.  You do not have the grammatical point on your side.  Ask an English teacher.    GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 22:17, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * "Infant's baptism" is grammatically correct, but "infant baptism" is more commonly used. Grammar is not all that should matter in an encyclopedia, but established usage should decide. An encyclopedia is not the place for original research or neologism. Therefore, I would not advocate for the use of "infant's baptism", which though grammatically correct, is not the established usage. On the other hand, "believer baptism" is neither grammatically correct, nor the established usage, hence it should not be used. Difu Wu (talk) 22:41, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 * Dude, really? You do know how to go all in.  I'll give you that.    GUÐSÞEGN  – UTEX – 23:31, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Recent Updates
Sorry for the comment in the reverts. It's not that they comments were off-topic so much as they were unsourced and carrying on a debate within the article. The information is quite interesting and should probably be presented in a more encyclopedic way, with appropriate references, to avoid accusations of POV. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:36, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Request for External Link
Dear Wikipedia,

I would like to request to have a page of my website linked in this section. In my opinion my website offers the following benefits:

- Because I have studied baptism over the last 30 years, the material on the website is very well researched. - The book Believer's Baptism is an important book on the topic, currently at the forefront of the debate between believer's baptism and infant baptism; this site includes a paper responding to that book. - A regular schedule of emails are being sent throughout the next year to over 1,000 Baptist seminary professors, over 1,000 paedobaptist pastors and a growing number of websites for critique and input. - This website is professional in format and is easily navigated. - This website has been analyzed for search engine optimization and it continues to improve consistently.

The page to be linked is:

http://dialogos-studies.com/Dialogos/baptism/infant_baptism.htm

If you have any questions on this you can reach me at herb@dialogos-studies.com.

Thank You,

Herb Kraker

75.40.242.73 (talk) 01:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

 * As long as it meets WP:EL, it should be OK here. The site seems a little disorganized though. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Follow-Up on Request for Link to Dialogos Studies
How does one follow up? I haven't used a format like this before. I would like to ask Walter Goerlitz a question. Herb Kraker 69.221.227.46 (talk) 00:10, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

 * Every user has a talk page. Every article has a talk page as well. You would only usually leave a message for an editor or user on their talk page if it applies only to them. You would only comment on a talk page to discuss something about the article. Talk pages should not be forums for the article though. It sounds like you should probably ask your question here rather than on the my talk page. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:44, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I guess I missed the "edit" function previously. Do I understand your response above that having the above statement is what you are recommending? There is the section on the main page that lists links supporting or opposing the view; it seems like a link to Dialogos would be more appropriate there. Herb —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.159.94.61 (talk) 18:53, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

 * Sorry. I misinterpreted Dialogos as a typographical error of dialog', or dialogue''. You're referring to http://www.dialogos-studies.com/, which is pretty close to being a self-published site according to WP:V. It is definitely a public forum and probably isn't a good source. However, if the forums point to a reliable source (book, article published in a peer-review magazine, etc.) then the original information is valid. You may also want to see WP:ELNO. --Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:05, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the additional information. Concerning your statement, "However, if the forums point to a reliable source (book, article published in a peer-review magazine, etc.) then the original information is valid." - perhaps my original statement was not clear. This site deals for one with the book "Believer's Baptism: Sign of the New Covenant in Christ" which was published by B&H Academic. It was co-authored by ten Baptist professors. That is why I said initially that it is a leading book on this topic at this time. Therefore it would seem that this site meets Wikipedia's requirements. In addition to this, Monergism has referred to the Dialogos Studies pages on baptism as having "extensive resources on the topic." You can see their comment at: http://www.monergism.com/directory/search.php?action=search_links_simple&search_kind=and&phrase=baptism&B1.x=27&B1.y=11 This is my first time of working with Wikipedia - I hope I understand it correctly! Thanks - Herb 205.159.94.61 (talk) 18:50, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

By the way - it's not that often one sees the identity indicated by the umlaut continued into English speaking endeavors. That's good. Unsere Familie kam aus Grafschaft Bentheim. 205.159.94.61 (talk) 16:32, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Connection between circumcision and baptism?
The article stated that defenders of believer's baptism say there is no New Testament statement that links the Mosaic law practice of circumcision with the Christian practice of baptism. This is incorrect, as defenders of infant baptism cite Colossians 2:11-13 as such a statement. Of course, like all Bible verses, this is subject to interpretation, and I tried to word my change to reflect that this verse is cited by infant baptism defenders, not that it is an undeniably clear statement linking the two. The note for the citation provided is after "have claimed" to reflect that the purpose of the citation is to prove that this claim has been made, not to show that the claim is true. --Ginkgo100talk 18:39, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

The term credobaptism is an ugly neologism, a hybrid of a Latin word with a Greek word, and adds neither clarity nor accuracy to the article. In light of the fact that most Christians who reject paedobaptism also reject creeds, there is an air of mockery about it as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.4.54.253 (talk) 00:18, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

image in article is broken or not found
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&wpDestFile=Baptisdcddefefgefefsm_by_immersion.jpg --90.182.221.2 (talk) 06:24, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup?
The article looks like it's a mess. I suggest some sort of outline like this (but argue with me):

It seems to me that the crux of the matter is none other than Covenant Theology, which says that baptism is the church's analog of circumcision. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Washi (talk • contribs) 18:49, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

THEOLOGY (or "DOCTRINE"?)

Positions

Position statement defining believer's baptism. Defer all defense to a Defense section.

Move the Restoration Movement's baptism elsewhere, since the two are not the same; for example, a defense of believer's baptism is by definition counter to the Restoration Movement's baptism, and vice versa. So we're stuck with two separate positions, and two separate sections in defense of those positions. I.E. two articles. At the same time, the biblical references to baptism quoted in the RM paragraph are excellent material for the Defense section.

Defense

Perhaps a topic for each point to defend. Ideally a proper defense would by its nature make plain the strengths and weaknesses of the position, which could then be summarized.

Maybe:

1. how believer's baptism matches the purposes of baptism as used in the NT

2. evidence of believer's baptism in the NT

3. evidence of believer's baptism in the early church

I wonder. This sort of implies that the NT is held as the source of authority on the regulae fide, doesn't it? Is that worth mentioning at all?

Washi (talk) 18:30, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Significance of Jerusalem council in Acts 15
A counterargument for the Col 2:11-13 argument is given as, "Advocates of believer’s baptism counter that the Jerusalem council in Acts 15 was called to clarify circumcision long after the practice of baptism was established." However, for that counterargument to have significance, wouldn't it have to refer to the "practice of infant baptism"? --Ed Brey (talk) 15:35, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Believer's baptism. 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/20050525023151/http://www.anabaptistnetwork.com:80/node/view/162 to http://www.anabaptistnetwork.com/node/view/162

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) 06:41, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Believer's baptism. 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/20100328005503/http://www.catholic.com/library/Infant_Baptism.asp to http://www.catholic.com/library/Infant_Baptism.asp
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100520041454/http://www.acu.edu/sponsored/restoration_quarterly/archives/2000s/vol_43_no_2_contents/foster.html to http://www.acu.edu/sponsored/restoration_quarterly/archives/2000s/vol_43_no_2_contents/foster.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.anabaptistnetwork.com/node/view/162

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) 10:59, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Baptized, not baptised
I do not have the time to do so now, so if someone would like to beat me to the punch, please go ahead. The article inconsitent with the spelling baptized/baptised. As specified here, baptized is the correct American English spelling and should be changed accordingly. Samfoe (talk) 01:51, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

"Patristics"
This entire section is an absolute disaster and needs to be fundamentally rewritten, if not scrapped entirely. Virtually every patristic source whom the author cited as examples of anabaptist beliefs in the early Church was explicitly in favour of baptising infants. St. John Chrysostom: “You see how many are the benefits of baptism, and some think its heavenly grace consists only in the remission of sins, but we have enumerated ten honors [it bestows]! For this reason we baptize even infants, though they are not defiled by [personal] sins, so that there may be given to them holiness, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, brotherhood with Christ, and that they may be his [Christ’s] members” (Baptismal Catecheses in Augustine, Against Julian 1:6:21 [A.D. 388]). St Gregory of Nazianz: “Have you an infant child? Do not let sin get any opportunity, but let him be sanctified from his childhood; from his very tenderest age let him be consecrated by the Spirit. Fearest thou the Seal on account of the weakness of nature?” Gregory Nazianzen, Oration on Holy Baptism, 40:17 (A.D. 381), in NPNF2, 7:365 St Augustine: '“What the universal Church holds, not as instituted [invented] by councils but as something always held, is most correctly believed to have been handed down by apostolic authority. Since others respond for children, so that the celebration of the sacrament may be complete for them, it is certainly availing to them for their consecration, because they themselves are not able to respond” (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:24:31 [A.D. 400]).

“The custom of Mother Church in baptizing infants is certainly not to be scorned, nor is it to be regarded in any way as superfluous, nor is it to be believed that its tradition is anything except apostolic” (The Literal Interpretation of Genesis 10:23:39 [A.D. 408]).

“Cyprian was not issuing a new decree but was keeping to the most solid belief of the Church in order to correct some who thought that infants ought not be baptized before the eighth day after their birth. . . . He agreed with certain of his fellow bishops that a child is able to be duly baptized as soon as he is born” (Letters 166:8:23 [A.D. 412]).

“By this grace baptized infants too are ingrafted into his [Christ’s] body, infants who certainly are not yet able to imitate anyone. Christ, in whom all are made alive. . . gives also the most hidden grace of his Spirit to believers, grace which he secretly infuses even into infants. . . . It is an excellent thing that the Punic [North African] Christians call baptism salvation and the sacrament of Christ’s Body nothing else than life. Whence does this derive, except from an ancient and, as I suppose, apostolic tradition, by which the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal? This is the witness of Scripture, too. . . . If anyone wonders why children born of the baptized should themselves be baptized, let him attend briefly to this. . . . The sacrament of baptism is most assuredly the sacrament of regeneration” (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:9:10; 1:24:34; 2:27:43 [A.D. 412]). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trilobright (talk • contribs) 15:05, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

 * I heartily agree. Most of the material in that section has had "citation needed" templates since March 2014, and the few actual references are to the primary sources, not to reliable secondary sources. I'll wait a few days for someone to supply appropriate references, and if that doesn't happen, will delete the material. Indyguy (talk) 16:40, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

 * I deleted the material. It would be good is someone would add some validly sourced information to replace it. Indyguy (talk) 05:18, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

infant baptism = forced confession of faith
Forced confession should be linked in the article

A forced confession is a confession obtained from a suspect or a prisoner by means of torture (including enhanced interrogation techniques) or other forms of duress.

Depending on the level of coercion used, a forced confession is not valid in revealing the truth.

The person being interrogated may agree to the story presented to them or even make up falsehoods himself in order to satisfy the interrogator and discontinue his suffering.

--Milahu (talk) 11:34, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Believer's baptism


text:
Şaziye İvegin

Şaziye İvegin (born 8 February 1982) is a Turkish retired professional basketball player.

A basketball player’s daughter, İvegin started basketball in 7th school class on the same day together with her two younger sisters. The three sisters played in the Adana-based club Botaşspor and won twice the Turkish Girls’ Basketball League championship title. At her age of 22, she became the youngest women's basketball team captain in the country. After 10 successful years with Botaş, İvegin transferred to Fenerbahçe on May 7, 2004.

İvegin was member of the Turkish national team that participated at the 2005 Mediterranean Games in Almería, Spain and won the gold medal.

She is a student of business administration at the Anadolu University.

Botaş

 * Ronchetti Cup (Euro Cup)
 * 2nd with Botaş: 2000
 * Turkish Youth Championship
 * Winners: 1999, 2000
 * Turkish Championship
 * Winners: 2001
 * Turkish Cup
 * Winners: 2002, 2003
 * Turkish Presidents Cup
 * Winners: 2002, 2003

Fenerbahçe

 * Turkish Championship
 * Winners: 2004, 2006, 2007, 2011
 * Turkish Cup
 * Winners: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007
 * Turkish Presidents Cup
 * Winners: 2004, 2005, 2007, 2010
 * FIBA Europe
 * 2004 : 4th place at Final Four
 * 2005 : 2nd place at Final Four

Galatasaray

 * EuroCup Women
 * Winners: 2008–09

Turkey National

 * 2002–2003
 * European 4th with Turkey U20 national team
 * 2005
 * Mediterranean Games gold medal with Turkey women’s national team

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

title: Şaziye İvegin


text: User talk:69.144.22.24

title: User talk:69.144.22.24


text:
Talk:United States v. Reynolds

United States v. Reynolds
345 U.S. 1 (1953) Docket Number: 21

I. Facts: An airplane carrying several military personnel and several civilians crashed while conducting tests of "secret electronic equipment." The widows of the three civilians killed sued and asked for full disclosure of the Air Force?s accident investigation report. The report included information pertaining to the secret electronic equipment. The Air Force refused to provide the information, saying that to do so would threaten national security. Absent the report, the District Court and Court of Appeals viewed the question of negligence in the widow's favor and ruled for the plaintiffs.

''' II. Question Presented: '''If the government invokes privilege to withhold information in civil proceedings, must the trial court view the point on which evidence is withheld in the plaintiff's favor?

'''III. Final Decission:'''No. In a 6-3 opinion by Chief Justice Fred Vinson, the court held that cause for privilege must be reasonably demonstrated. As a result, the government may withhold information for reasons of national security even when that information is vital to the plaintiff's case. On remand, the plaintiffs lost.

''' IV. The Vote: 6-3'''

Chief Justice Fred M. Vinson -wrote opinion Hugo L. Black - dessent Stanley Reed Felix Frankfurter -dessent William O. Douglas Harold Burton Tom C. Clark Sherman Minton Robert H. Jackson- Dessenting

When referring to a sitting Justice of the High Court
Justices on the US Supreme Court are not addressed as "Mr. Justice Doe" but simply as "Justice Doe". See Supreme Court of the United States. --Triptenator (talk) 00:27, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Large quotation not marked as such
There is a large, sometimes paraphrased quotation (Starting with "We have had broad propositions pressed upon us for decision") from the majority opinion that is not clearly marked as a quote. Also, the court's references to other cases within the quotation are cited as though they were sources for the quotation itself. Ejegg (talk) 12:12, 19 July 2012 (UTC)ejegg

I reduced the large, sometimes paraphrased quotation down to 2 paragraphs and added quote marks. Wikipedia articles about U.S. Supreme Court decisions usually do not have multiple paragraphs verbatim from the decision. Kaltenmeyer (talk) 20:01, 11 July 2013 (UTC)

Discussion of Prosser & Keaton is irrelevant and confusing
The section headed Prosser & Keaton is irrelevant to the subject of this article and can only confuse the reader. That section mistakes "privilege" as being an Affirmative_defense. But that is not what was involved in the Renolds case, which dealt with an evidentiary privilege and its corresponding privilege from discovery. The fact that it was an evidentiary privilege involved rather than an affirmative defense is clear in other parts of the article and in the case opinion the article discusses. The Prosser & Keaton section should be removed entirely and replaced at an appropriate location with a reference to Privilege_(evidence). Marbux (talk) 16:38, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

title: Talk:United States v. Reynolds


text:
Wiener Moderne

The Wiener Moderne or Viennese Modernism is a term describing the culture of Vienna in the period between approximately 1890 and 1910. It refers especially to the development of modernism in the Austrian capital and its effect on the spheres of philosophy, literature, music, art, design and architecture.

Background
Under Emperor Franz Joseph I., the conservative-catholic Austrian-Hungarian Empire reaches its zenith and enters its final phase. Industrialization remains comparatively sluggish, a large administrative apparatus continues to tighten its empire-wide grip, with nationality conflicts in the multi-ethnic state coming to a head. Against this backdrop, in the empire's urban centers (Vienna, Budapest, Prague, Trieste, Zagreb, etc.) intellectual achievements abound in the development of - often contradictory - principles, opinions, scientific approaches and trends. The capital city of Vienna, which in 1900 has more than 2 million inhabitants, has become a cultural melting pot, because it is here that Central Europe's economic and intellectual elite congregates.

Viennese political life is complex and tense. Social Democracy (Victor Adler), Zionism (Theodor Herzl) and Austromarxism (Otto Bauer) develop. Vienna's Mayor Karl Lueger, to use his own words, instrumentalizes open anti-Semitism as a political strategy. In 1914, nine percent of Viennese citizens are Jews. Jewish writers, composers, actors and scientists, men such as Karl Kraus, Arthur Schnitzler, Gustav Mahler, Arnold Schoenberg and Alfred Polgar, play important roles in science and the arts.

In an atmosphere characterized by conservative pomp on the one hand, and the pursuit of progress on the other, artists turn their attention away from naturalism and begin to focus on the inner world and on the psyche. The concept of ego disintegration gains traction. Ernst Mach describes the ego as "unrettbar", i.e. beyond recovery. The connection between the ego and society, the "Ich" and the world, is no longer primarily based on reason, but rather on the border regions between dream and reality, reason and feeling. A "mood" is seen as often expressing more than could be conveyed by mere words.

Ideas and concepts are imported via direct personal relationships between individuals who embraced avant-garde thinking. Friedrich Nietzsche and Richard Wagner play an important role in public discourse. The literary critic and author Hermann Bahr regularly commutes between Berlin and Vienna, thus subjecting himself to relentless change as a result of being exposed to ever newer ideas. Bahr stars out as a Wagnerian and a follower of Bismarck, then becomes a Marxist, a naturalist, a symbolist, an expressionist and, finally, a conservative Catholic.

For the implementation of the ideas of Viennese Modernism (as opposed to architectural and literary historicism) the year 1897, with the founding of the Vienna Secession, proved decisive. Adolf Loos, the influential architect, was substantially informed by, and throughout his life remained true to, the impressions he gathered during his stay in America from 1893 to 1896, especially in Chicago and New York.

Philosophy
Ernst Mach was an influential philosopher of science and physicist. Ludwig Wittgenstein made important contributions in analytic philosophy and philosophy of language. Sigmund Freud caused a revolution in psychology through the foundation of psychoanalysis. He published in 1899 (dated 1900) his famous book "The Interpretation of Dreams".

Architecture
The architect Otto Wagner wrote a book titled "Moderne Architektur von 1895" (en: Modern architecture of 1895), in which he declares the era and predominance of the historic style (especially the buildings on the Ringstraße in the neo-Greek, neo-roman and neo-baroque styles) to be over. He did not know of the term "Moderne" yet, he only spoke of the necessity for architecture to keep up and adapt to new technological developments. Otto Wagner himself would make use of new building materials such as steel and iron and encompass it into his work.

Adolf Loos designed some of the most well known structures of the period. These included the Looshaus, the American Bar, and the Steiner House, among others. The Looshaus in Vienna (also known as the Goldman & Salatsch Building) marks the rejection of historicism, as well as the ornaments used by the Wiener Secession. Adolf Loos received the assignment in 1909, and the building was finished in 1910. Upon opening, its appearance shocked Vienna's citizens, since their overall taste was still very much historically oriented. Because of the lack of ornaments on the façade, people called it the 'house without eyebrows'. The American Bar, also known as the Kärntner Bar, showcases Loos' combination of simple, unadorned forms with opulent materials and fine, simple detailing to give a modern, rich impression. The Steiner house was designed for the painter Lilly Steiner and her husband Hugo. It is located in a Vienna suburb. The Steiner house became a highly influential example of modern architecture; it played a significant role in establishing Loos' reputation as a modern architect to the audience outside of the Viennese community, and became an obligatory reference for architects during the 1920s and 30s. Almost all of the literature of the Modern Movement has reproduced the garden façade as an indisputable example of radical rationalist modern architecture.

Art
Gustav Klimt is the most notable Viennese artist produced in this period. Characterised by his symbolic use of gold to portray beautifully rendered figures, The Kiss is his most famous piece.

Another significant figure in this movement was Egon Schiele, a pupil of Klimt's. They both pioneered the exploration of sexuality typical of the end of a century.

Literature
The most notable literary grouping of this period was the Young Vienna movement, a society of "coffeehouse literati" centred on the writer and critic Hermann Bahr. Bahr's 1890 work Zur Kritik der Moderne (On Criticism of Modernity) established the word modernism as a literary term, whilst Die Überwindung des Naturalismus (The Surpassing of Naturalism) published the following year, declared the then current style of naturalism to be at an end. He was influenced in this by developments in French literature, notably symbolism, which he had encountered while studying in France (1888–1890) where he had come to know the works of avant-garde writers such as Joris-Karl Huysmans, Paul Bourget and Maurice Barrès. Bahr proclaimed a new Romantik der Nerven (romanticism of the nerves), which concentrated on the impressions and sensations of the human soul; in this he referred back to developments in the still new science of psychology and his critical writings were consequently influenced not only by literary writers but also by psychologists, notably Sigmund Freud, and the philosopher of science Ernst Mach. The literary consequence of this Romantik der Nerven was the encouragement of literary forms that foregrounded the perceptions of the individual, among them the unreliable narrator and the interior monologue.

Bahr used his position in Vienna as a theatre critic and feuilletonist to promote other members of the Young Vienna circle, most notably Hugo von Hofmannsthal, who met at the Café Griensteidl and later at the Café Central. Other members of the group included Arthur Schnitzler, Peter Altenberg, Felix Salten, and Stefan Zweig, all of whom, though disparate in styles and interests, demonstrate different facets of the character of the Wiener Moderne in their writing. Schnitzler created one of the earliest examples of modernist stream of consciousness writing in Lieutenant Gustl (1900), and his most famous work, Reigen (La Ronde) (1897), is typical of the fin de siècle interest in sexuality. Hofmannsthal's early poems show the influence of the French symbolists and Stefan George's aestheticism, whilst his work as a librettist for Richard Strauss reflects the interpenetration of the different branches of the arts typical of the epoch. The aphorist Altenberg is notable as much for his archetypically bohemian lifestyle as for his writing. Salten, best known nowadays for his later children's books, is widely regarded as the author of the infamous pornographic novel Josephine Mutzenbacher, a sign arguably of the decadence that was associated with the period. Zweig (also a librettist for Strauss) was, in addition to his own stylistically polished writing, a noted translator of the symbolists, and later a passionate defender of a collective European culture in the face of aggressive nationalism, reflecting the openness of the epoch to foreign cultural influences and indeed the melting pot of different cultures that was part of fin-de-siècle Vienna.

The other dominant voice in Viennese literature during this period was the satirist Karl Kraus. Originally Kraus had been associated with the Young Vienna writers but he broke with them and attacked them in his 1897 essay Die demolierte Literatur (Demolished Literature), which was written after Café Griensteidl burnt down. In his periodical Die Fackel (The Torch), Kraus regularly satirised lazy journalism, which he considered to be exemplified in the feuilleton writing of many of his contemporaries, but his interests ranged over many of the other issues which were prominent in the cultural life of fin-de-siècle Vienna, among them Zionism, psychoanalysis, political corruption and nationalism, all of which he attacked in the pages of Die Fackel. The antagonism between Kraus and other leading Viennese cultural figures, which in the extreme case of his criticism of Felix Salten's feuilletons led to Salten assaulting him in the street, but also encompassed spats with Freud, Theodor Herzl and Hugo von Hofmannsthal among others, might be seen as a sign of the vigorous debate characteristic of the period.

Music
Wholly characteristic of the Wiener Moderne is the conflict between Gustav Mahler and the Vienna Philharmonic, whose conservative tradition did not align with the modern compositions of Mahler. The fundamental goal of Modernism was to break from the past, but Mahler's attempt to upset tradition was poorly received. Other Modernist musicians in Vienna included Schoenberg, Anton Webern, and Alban Berg, whose compositions were central to the Second Viennese School. Modernist music in Vienna was criticized as nagging, demoralizing, and damagingly hostile, yet the Modernists viewed this as a progressive necessity.

External references

 * Architecture
 * http://mimoa.eu/projects/Austria/Vienna/Looshaus
 * http://www.galinsky.com/buildings/americanbar/index.html
 * http://www.galinsky.com/buildings/steiner/index.htm
 * Literature
 * Literatur in der Wiener Moderne – University of Salzburg
 * Hermann Bahr – University of Marburg
 * Karl Kraus – Hypocrisy or Merely Contradiction

title: Wiener Moderne


text: Category:Airports in England

title: Category:Airports in England


text:
Jacques François Dugommier

Jacques François Coquille, known as Dugommier (1 August 1738 – 18 November 1794), was a French military leader during the French Revolutionary Wars.

Early life and career
Jacques François Coquille was born on 1 August 1738 in Trois-Rivières in the island of Guadeloupe, in the French West Indies. He was the son of Germain Coquille, a planter and royal councilor, and Claire Laurent. In 1785, he took the name "Dugommier" after the coffee plantation "Le Gommier" in Basse-Terre, which he bought from his parents in 1768. Dugommier began his military career in the company of "gentlemen cadets" of the colonies in Rochefort, at the age of fifteen. He was employed in the naval batteries at La Rochelle and Île de Ré before being assigned to an infantry company in 1758.

Dugommier fought in the West Indies theatre of the Seven Years' War, serving in the defense of Guadeloupe in 1759 and the defense of Martinique in 1762. He was discharged at his request in 1763, with the rank of ensign of the compagnies franches de la marine, and retired to his plantations in Guadeloupe. In addition to Le Gommier, Dugommier owned the sugar plantations Grand'Anse (34 slaves recorded in 1777) and Grands Fonds, in Trois-Rivières, and Peru in Les Abymes (74 slaves recorded in 1784). He briefly returned to service in 1778, during the American War of Independence, when he led a company of volunteers at the Battle of St. Lucia. In 1765, he married Marie-Dieudonnée Coudroy-Bottée (1740-1810) in Sainte-Anne, Guadeloupe.

At the start of the French Revolution, Dugommier was one of the few planters in Guadeloupe who supported the revolutionary cause. They were opposed to the aristocratic planters, who controlled the colonial assembly and held influence over the governor of Guadeloupe. A long conflict then opposed the two camps. In 1790, part of the troops of the Guadeloupe Regiment, led by Dugommier, participated in three expeditions in support of the revolutionaries of Martinique, but failed to overthrow the governor and the colonial assembly. Dugommier left Guadeloupe definitively in July 1791, in order to represent the interests of the revolutionaries of the colonies in Paris, as a deputy to the National Convention.

French Revolutionary Wars
Having shown himself a true republican in the National Convention, Dugommier was made a maréchal de camp (brigade general) of the French Revolutionary Army on 10 October 1792, though he initially had no assignment. He was given command of a brigade in the Army of Italy in May 1793. In September 1793, Dugommier drove the troops of the Habsburg monarchy and the Kingdom of Sardinia from the County of Nice, and defeated Joseph De Vins' Austrians at the Battle of Gilette on 19 October.

Dugommier was promoted to general of division on 3 November 1793. On the same day, he was appointed to succeed General Jean François Carteaux as commander of the army carrying out the Siege of Toulon. Recognizing that the attack plan of a young artillery captain, Napoleon Bonaparte, was the correct one, Dugommier implemented it. He suffered bruises in the right arm and shoulder while repelling a British sortie on 30 November. On that occasion, Bonaparte reported that "General Dugommier fought with true republican courage." On 17 December, Dugommier led the final assault which recaptured Toulon's fortifications, bringing the siege to a successful conclusion.

Eastern Pyrenees campaign
In January 1794, Dugommier was appointed commander of the Army of the Eastern Pyrenees, which was engaged in the War of the Pyrenees against Spain. His assignment was to retake the territory of Roussillon from the Spanish army of Antonio Ricardos Carrillo. He reorganized the army, weakened as it was by the hard combat of the preceding year spent incessantly and fruitlessly storming the Spanish positions. The Spanish became paralyzed by a leadership crisis following the successive deaths of Carrillo and his replacement, Alejandro O'Reilly, to disease, making Dugommier's task easier.

On 28 April, Dugommier was victorious at the Battle of Tech, followed by a success at the Battle of Albere on 30 April. He achieved a decisive victory against the Count of La Unión at the Battle of Boulou on 1 May, which led to the recovery of Roussillon. Port-Vendres was evacuated by La Unión (who had under his command 400 French noblemen of the Légion Panetier) in May. Collioure fell on 29 May after a four-week siege, in the course of which Dugommier was wounded. He repelled a Spanish assault on 13 August in the Battle of Sant Llorenç de la Muga, and retook the Fort de Bellegarde on 17 September (the siege had lasted since 7 May). On 22 September, an audacious attack gave Dugommier the redoubt and camp of Costouge, putting the Spanish army to flight and capturing most of its equipment.

Dugommier was killed by a Spanish artillery shell on 18 November at the Battle of the Black Mountain. His successor in command, General Dominique-Catherine Pérignon, ended the battle with a French victory on 20 November. Dugommier was buried under a liberty tree in the Fort de Bellegarde on 19 November, and later reburied in Perpignan, where he rests in a pyramidal monument. On 25 November, the National Convention ordered his name to be engraved on a column of the Panthéon in Paris. Napoleon kept his souvenir, bestowing 100,000 Francs to his son for the memory of the Siege of Toulon.

Legacy

 * His name is inscribed in the Panthéon.
 * The Boulevard Dugommier in Marseille is named in his honour.
 * A station of the Paris Metro is named for him.

title: Jacques François Dugommier


text: User talk:84.9.15.56

title: User talk:84.9.15.56


text:
Talk:Narcís Monturiol

Name
This man was named Narciso Monturiol, and not Narcís, as can be checked in his own book "Memoria sobre la navegación submarina" (Memoir on submarine sailing); his signature is transcribed there at the end of a letter, for example.( http://books.google.es/books?id=VSSUs37w3zYC&pg=PA6#v=onepage&q&f=false ) But there are many other independent sources in which you can check it; I leave them as references beside the name.

This is another vandalized article on the part of the Catalan separatists in the English wikipedia. It´s not an exception, nor is it by chance. They value it a lot as a conveyor for their version of history, which is not backed by any conventional enciclopedias around the world, (except, may be, by some very modern Catalan ones). So they try to push on their propaganda here (they call this "internationalize their identity").

By the way, I can´t change the name of the article, if anyone knows how and wants to, it would be great. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.144.117.125 (talk) 17:13, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

 * don't worry about the name. You can be 100% sure his friends and family called him Narcís. The fact Spanish was imposed on Catalonia, and law didn't permit to register catalan names, doesn't change that, so, please don't try to do spanish propaganda. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.5.161.135 (talk) 09:17, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

[Untitled]
Would anybody mind if I cleaned up the translation a bit? BenBurch 16:25, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

Name of the submarins
Hi folks, I just added a pictures of the Ictíneo I submarine and saw that you are using two different names for the submarines in this article: Ictineu and Ictíneu – however, according to the wellknown Enciclopèdia Catalana the right name is Ictíneo.

I would also propose to turn the two submarins into articles of their own, since they are important inventions that should be categorized individually (like already done in the catalan and the german Wikipidia). Greetings --84.137.83.249 13:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

 * I've made articles for Ictineo I and Ictineo II, so now their descriptions in this article can be slimmed down. Salmanazar (talk) 14:16, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:400px-Ictineo II Illustration.jpg
Note that Image:400px-Ictineo II Illustration.jpg currently illustrating this article is listed for possible deletion from Wimimedia Commons for uncertain copyright status tagging. Discussion is at ; if you have information relating to copyright status you may discuss it there. Note if image is not free licensed it will be deleted from Commons, but might be copied here to en:Wikipedia with appropriate fair use rationale; see Non free content. -- Infrogmation (talk) 14:17, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Narcís Monturiol. 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/20100715173736/http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/monturiols-dream-by-matthew-stewart-537440.html to http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/monturiols-dream-by-matthew-stewart-537440.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:53, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Narcís Monturiol. 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/20150421034848/http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_26/monturiol.html to http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_26/monturiol.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:33, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Narcís Monturiol. 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/20091223062315/http://historico.oepm.es/museovirtual/gi_plantilla.asp?acc=1&idioma=en&xml=Monturiol%20Estarriol,%20Narciso.xml to http://historico.oepm.es/museovirtual/gi_plantilla.asp?acc=1&idioma=en&xml=Monturiol%20Estarriol,%20Narciso.xml

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) 07:16, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Speculation
The section on Ictineo I states that "It is likely she was inspired by the prototype Brandtaucher of Wilhelm Bauer, completed in 1851, as Monturiol studied all the available science of submersibles." This is pure speculation; Ictineo looks nothing like the Brandtaucher (which, incidentally, sank like a stone when tested, so was hardly a good example to follow) OTOH it looks a lot like the Villeroi submarine from 1832; make of that what you will. Either way it is just an opinion, so I have deleted it. Xyl 54 (talk) 15:43, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Narcís Monturiol


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The UP ADS

 * 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 -- (drini's page| ☎ ) 01:58, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

The UP ADS
Surprisingly, this doesn't seem to be a copyvio. But it's an unredeemably NPOV bit of puffery for a non-notable campus organization (Google returned 2 hits for their full name). DS 16:26, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Non-notable university cruft. Delete. -- SoothingR 16:28, 8 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete junk --Rogerd 08:06, 9 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:
Müjde Yüksel

Müjde Yüksel (born 9 March 1981) is a former Turkish female basketball player. The 1.80 m (5' 11") national competitor played in the forward position.

After Yüksel played for Migrosspor, she transferred to Fenerbahçe Istanbul. She played for two seasons with Fenerbahçe and won one Turkish Women's Basketball League championship, two Turkey Cup and one President’s Cup title. Yüksel signed a contract with Beşiktaş J.K. for the 2005-06 season, then transferred to Mersin BŞB for the 2006-07 season.

Yüksel played in the national team, which participated in the 2005 Mediterranean Games in Almería, Spain where she won a gold medal.

Upon earning her PhD from the Isenberg School of Management at the University of Massachusetts Amherst, Yuksel joined the Sawyer Business School at Suffolk University in August 2014 as an assistant professor of Marketing.

In October 2015 Müjde married Clint Palermo in Harvard, Massachusetts. In November 2017 they had a baby.

title: Müjde Yüksel


text:
Hong Kong Broadband Network

HKBN Ltd., commonly known for its subsidiary Hong Kong Broadband Network Limited, is a Hong Kong-based Internet, communication and telecommunication company. HKBN was established on 23 August 1999, it is one of the largest residential and enterprise internet, communication and telecommunications service providers in Hong Kong.

Originally a subsidiary of City Telecom, HKBN became an independent company in 2014. In February 2019, HKBN held a 35.8% market share of residential broadband subscriptions and a 19.4% share of the enterprise market in Hong Kong.

Founding and initial growth
Hong Kong Broadband Network Limited was founded on 23 August 1999 as a unit of City Telecom by Ricky Wong Wai-kay as the first operator to launch "triple-play" (Internet broadband, telephony, IP-TV services) on single network in Hong Kong, as well as the first service provider of residential broadband, with speed ranged from 100 Mbit/s to 1000 Mbit/s.

As of February 2019, HKBN has 864,000 residential broadband subscribers and 58,000 enterprise subscribers, made HKBN the second largest telecommunications operator in Hong Kong after HKT.

HKBN Group became a listed company on 12 March 2015 under a new Cayman Islands-incorporated holding company HKBN Ltd.; Hong Kong Broadband Network Limited was under listed company City Telecom (or known as CTI) until CTI sold Hong Kong Broadband Network Limited. In May 2012, private equity firm CVC Capital Partners, acquired the company for HK$4.9 billion. City Telecom (Hong Kong) was then renamed into Hong Kong Television Network. The current holding company of the group, HKBN Ltd., was incorporated on 26 November 2014.

Violation of the use on personal data
HKBN is the first company in Hong Kong to be convicted under section 35G of the Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance by the Magistrates' Court since the law amendment in 2013, which states that it is a criminal offence to fail to comply with a requirement from a data subject to cease to use their personal data in direct marketing.

HKBN's conviction relates to a customer complaint in April 2013; the customer had made an opt-out request to HKBN via both email and post and HKBN subsequently acknowledged receipt of the request in writing. However, the customer still received a voice message through their mobile phone in May 2013, informing the complainant of the termination of their service contract as well as to promote other services of HKBN.

HKBN pleaded not guilty since the call was merely a service renewal "reminder", however Magistrate Debbie Ng Chung-yee ruled that HKBN used the contract's expiry as an excuse to pitch new services, as promotions of new contracts has not been included in the service scope agreed to by subscribers. HKBN was fined HK$30,000 in September 2015.

Expands to mobile broadband
In July 2016, HKBN has secured the Mobile Virtual Network Operator (MVNO) license from the Office of the Telecommunications Authority, as Hong Kong's 26th MVNO, to offer mobile services using its infrastructure of established mobile network operators. Partnering with SmarTone and China Mobile (Hong Kong), HKBN launched mobile services plans for personal and corporate consumers.

HKBN Enterprise Solutions
In 2016, HKBN acquired the telecommunications and online marketing business of New World Telecommunications (NWT) for HK$650 million; the merger was completed on 31 March. NWT was mainly active in the market of providing telephone phone to business customers; after the acquisition NWT was renamed to HKBN Enterprise Solutions. In 2019, HKBN acquired WTT Holding Corp. and renamed the company to HKBN Enterprise Solutions HK Limited.

title: Hong Kong Broadband Network


text:
National Capital Parks

The National Capital Parks was a unit of the National Park System of the United States, now divided into multiple administrative units. It encompasses a variety of federally owned properties in and around the District of Columbia including memorials, monuments, parks, interiors of traffic circles and squares, triangles formed by irregular intersections, and other open spaces.

Selection of the Site and Design of the City
In 1790, Congress, through the Residence Act, authorized President George Washington to procure an area along the Potomac River to locate a new capital for the nation. In 1791, President Washington appointed Pierre Charles L'Enfant to design what would become the City of Washington under the supervision of three Commissioners appointed to oversee the development of what would become the District of Columbia. L’Enfant’s plan was ultimately modified by Andrew Ellicott when he ended in a dispute with the commissioners and Washington ultimately dismissed him. The design created many of the spaces which would ultimately become the National Capital Parks.

Acquisition of Park Lands
The original lands of the National Capital Parks were acquired pursuant to Congress's authorization with the Residence Act of 1790. Under this authority, between 1790 and 1867, The Mall, Monument Grounds, Capitol Grounds, President's Park, Lafayette Park, Franklin Park, Garfield Park and a total of 301 separate reservations in the original City of Washington were acquired as public properties. Much of this land remains Federal property today and is part of the National Capital Parks.

During the American Civil War, 1861–1865, the Union Army built a ring of fortifications to protect the city. These fortifications resulted in additional property becoming federally owned. In 1924, Congress created the National Capital Park Commission to acquire land in the District for the purpose of creating and preserving the sites of the Civil War fortifications and interconnecting parkways.

In 1926, Congress passed legislation to create a system of parks out of the Civil War fortifications, which allowed acquisition of additional property to provide an interconnecting roadway as a parkway ring around the city. This is known today as the Fort Circle Parks. Although the roadway was never built, the property remains today in Federal hands.

In 1933, title and control of parklands in the District was transferred to the National Park Service, creating a new unit of the National Park System called the National Capital Parks. No legislation explicitly created the National Capital Parks. Rather, it was created as a result of an Executive Order which, among other things, abolished several federal agencies including the Arlington Memorial Bridge Commission, Public Buildings Commission, Public Buildings and Public Parks of the National Capital, National Memorial Commission, and Rock Creek and Potomac Parkway Commission and consolidated their functions into the Office of National Parks, Buildings, and Reservations of the Department of the Interior. In 1935, the name was changed back to National Park Service.

In 1975, Baltimore–Washington Parkway was incorporated into the unit.

Administration
Administration of parklands that was in National Capital Parks is now divided among several administrative units of the National Park Service:
 * National Capital Parks-East – administers National Park properties in the District to the East of the Capitol Building, including several properties in Maryland
 * National Mall and Memorial Parks – formerly called National Capital Parks-Central, this unit administers all properties in and around the Mall.
 * White House and President's Park – administers The White House, a visitor center, Lafayette Square, and The Ellipse.
 * Rock Creek Park – administers properties in the north and the northwest of the District
 * George Washington Memorial Parkway – In addition to properties in Virginia, this unit administers properties in the District: Clara Barton Parkway; Theodore Roosevelt Island; Arlington Memorial Bridge; and the Columbia Island parks, including Lady Bird Johnson Park, Lyndon Baines Johnson Memorial Grove, Navy – Merchant Marine Memorial, and the Columbia Island Marina
 * Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park – administers the entire C&O Canal NHP, including the portion inside the District.

title: National Capital Parks


text:
National Mall and Memorial Parks

National Mall and Memorial Parks (formerly known as National Capital Parks-Central) is an administrative unit of the National Park Service (NPS) encompassing many national memorials and other areas in Washington, D.C. Federally owned and administered parks in the capital area date back to 1790, some of the oldest in the United States. In 1933, they were transferred to the control of the National Park Service. These parks were known as the National Capital Parks from their inception until 1965. The NPS now operates multiple park groupings in the D.C. area, including National Capital Parks-East, Rock Creek Park, President's Park, and George Washington Memorial Parkway. National Mall and Memorial Parks also provides technical assistance for the United States Navy Memorial.

Official units administered

 * Belmont-Paul Women's Equality National Monument
 * Constitution Gardens
 * Ford's Theatre National Historic Site, including Petersen House
 * Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial
 * Korean War Veterans Memorial
 * Lincoln Memorial
 * Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial
 * National Mall
 * Pennsylvania Avenue National Historic Site and Park
 * Thomas Jefferson Memorial
 * Vietnam Veterans Memorial
 * Washington Monument
 * National World War I Memorial
 * National World War II Memorial

Other squares, circles, triangles, memorials, and parks
Source:

 * African American Civil War Memorial
 * Albert Einstein Memorial
 * American Veterans Disabled for Life Memorial
 * Andrew W. Mellon Memorial Fountain
 * Benjamin Banneker Circle
 * Benjamin Banneker Park
 * Brevet Lt. General Winfield Scott Hancock statue
 * Columbus Circle
 * Columbus Fountain – Union Station Plaza
 * Daniel Webster Memorial
 * District of Columbia War Memorial
 * Doctor John Witherspoon statue
 * Dupont Circle
 * East Potomac Park including Hains Point
 * Edmund Burke statue
 * Edward J. Kelly Park
 * Edward R. Murrow Park
 * Farragut Square
 * Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial Stone
 * Franklin Square
 * Freedom Plaza
 * George Mason Memorial
 * Henry Wadsworth Longfellow Memorial
 * Holodomor Ukrainian Holocaust Memorial
 * James Monroe Park
 * John Ericsson Memorial
 * National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial
 * Logan Circle
 * Mahatma Gandhi Memorial
 * Martin Luther statue
 * McPherson Square
 * Memorial to Japanese-American Patriotism in World War II
 * Milian Park
 * Nuns of the Battlefield (Civil War Nurses Memorial)
 * Pan American Annex grounds – located between Constitution and Virginia Avenues, NW and 18th and 19th Streets, NW
 * Pulaski Park
 * Judiciary Square Plaza
 * Old Post Office Tower
 * Pershing Park
 * Rawlins Park
 * Rigo Walled Park
 * Samuel Gompers Memorial
 * Samuel Hahnemann Monument
 * Scott Circle
 * Seaton Park
 * Sheridan Circle
 * Temperance Fountain and statue
 * Southwest Waterfront Park (Titanic Memorial)
 * Tomáš Garrigue Masaryk
 * Statues of the Liberators
 * Benito Juarez
 * Bernardo de Gálvez
 * Equestrian of Simón Bolívar
 * General Jose de San Martin Memorial
 * General José Gervasio Artigas
 * Taras Shevchenko Memorial (Ukrainian Independence Park)
 * Thomas Circle
 * United States Navy Memorial
 * Victims of Communism Memorial
 * Vincent R. Sombrotto Memorial Park
 * Walt Whitman Park
 * Washington Circle
 * West Potomac Park

title: National Mall and Memorial Parks


text:
Cornelio Reyna

Cornelio Reyna Cisneros (September 16, 1940 – January 22, 1997), better known as Cornelio Reyna, was a Regional Mexican singer, composer, bajo sextist and actor. He made over 60 recordings of Norteño and Mariachi music. He was the lead vocalist for the group "Los Relámpagos del Norte" (The Lightning Bolts of The North). Reyna was considered a native of the city of Reynosa, Tamaulipas due to his great affection for the city and that his career grew there. As an actor, Reyna appeared in some 30 films about Mexican popular culture.

Life and career
Reyna was born in Notillas Coahuila, Mexico. His parents were María Martínez Cisneros and Román Medellín Reyna. As a teenager, Reyna lived in the city of Monterrey, Nuevo León, and shortly thereafter, moved to Houston, Texas, where he worked as a bricklayer. Later, in Saltillo, Coahuila, Reyna began his musical career by writing songs, singing, and playing the bajo sexto (very similar to a twelve-string guitar)..

In 1957, along with Juan Peña, Cornelio formed the duet Dueto Carta Blanca, frequenting the Cadillac Bar, where many musicians from the region of northern Tamaulipas and southern Texas met. From there, they went out to play at different nightclubs in Reynosa, but Cornelio's goal was to do it professionally, taking advantage of his great ability to perform the bajo sexto.

In 1961, into the same Cadillac Bar walked in a young man named Ramón Covarrubias, who would become famous as Ramón Ayala. He had arrived seeking work as a shoe shiner, but his real skills were elsewhere. Over time, Ramón demonstrated his masterful talent as an accordionist. One day, when Juan Peña decided to take leave from the Dueto Carta Blanca, they invited Ramón to join and present himself as the new companion to Cornelio.

Cornelio and Ramón changed their name to Los Relámpagos del Norte ("The Lightning Bolts of the North" in Spanish), Ramón excelling with his accordion and Cornelio with his Bajo Sexto. In addition, Cornelio gained recognition as the fine songwriter-composer of many of the songs they played.

The new duet toured the bars of Reynosa, until in 1963, a representative of Bego Records offered to record their first album, which produced what would be their first big hit: "Ya No Llores" ("Don't Cry Any More"). From there, their new-found fame slowly spread over northern Mexico and southern Texas with songs like: "Mil Noches", "Tu Traición", "Me Caí de la Nube", "Lágrimas de mi Barrio", "Mil Besos", "Si Tu Supieras", among many others.

The peculiar vocal quality of Cornelio's delivery and the speed with which Ramón played the accordion marked a new style in Norteña music, where to this day groups and soloists continue to emerge, utilizing as a musical foundation the particular rhythms and style initiated by "Los Relámpagos"...The Lightning Bolts from The North.

In 1971, Cornelio and Ramón decided to go their separate ways. Cornelio moved to Mexico City, recording an LP with mariachi, which at that point represented one of his most ambitious projects. Later, he began to parlay his prosperous musical career with the cinema, where he performed as an actor and frequently interpreted the songs he created, such as: "Lágrimas de mi barrio", "Me Sacaron del Tenampa", "Me Caíste del Cielo", among others. Cornelio recorded 60 albums and appeared in some 30 films, many of which included his songs, under the production and direction of Rubén Galindo. He a good measure of success in his recordings with mariachi, but his affection by the Norteña music never waned and he alternated his recordings between these two styles.

Throughout his life he maintained contact with his former musical partner, Ramón Ayala, who had formed the group Los Bravos del Norte. There were many occasions when Cornelio appeared on stage to once again perform with Ramón the well-known hits of their Lightning Bolts From the North years.

The last tour he made was in 1996, appearing in several cities in the United States from June to December 24, 1996. He died less than a month later.

Cornelio Reyna died on January 22, 1997, in Mexico City, due to complications from a stomach ulcer. His body was moved to the Plaza Garibaldi, where he was paid tribute. Later, his remains were transported to Reynosa, Tamaulipas, where a large and profoundly sad crowd awaited his arrival. Cornelio was still relatively young, and although his fame was no longer the same as it had been a few years prior, in the southern region of Texas and northeast of Mexico he continued to have a large and faithful following.

Although Reyna died at a young age, he was able to produce many lasting, now iconic hits. All this success had begun with Los Relámpagos del Norte in 1963, with their eponymous hit song, "Ya No Llores". More recently, Ramon Ayala included it in his latest CD, also titled "Ya No Llores".

Discography

 * El Bohemio De La Cancion Ranchera (1971)
 * Echale Sentimento... Cornelio (1971)
 * Cornelio Reyna (1972)
 * Voz Y Temperamento (1973)
 * Regresa Cornelio Y Su Conjunto (1974)
 * Con El Mariachi Oro y Plata De José Chavez (1975)
 * Cornelio Reyna (1975)
 * Al Calor De Las Copas (1977)
 * El Gallero Del Pueblo (1980)
 * Cornelio Reyna (1984)
 * Eres Igual Que El Dinero (1986)
 * Cornelio Reyna Con Tambora (1988)
 * Cornelio Reyna (1990)

Filmography

 * El ojo de vidrio (1969)
 * Valente Quintero (1973)
 * La yegua colorada (1973)
 * Lágrimas de mi barrio (1973)
 * Me caí de la nube (1974)
 * El hijo de los pobres (1975)
 * El andariego (1978)
 * El llanto de los pobres (1978)
 * De Cocula es el mariachi (1978)
 * El norteño enamorado (1979)
 * Contrabando por amor (1980)
 * El ladrón fenomeno (1980)
 * Maldita miseria (1983)
 * La esperanza de los pobres (1983)

title: Cornelio Reyna


text:
Smålandsnytt

Smålandsnytt is a Swedish regional news programme, broadcast by Sveriges Television (SVT).

The programme covers the three counties in the historical provinces of Småland and Öland in southeast Sweden: Jönköping County, Kalmar County and Kronoberg County. The programme is broadcast from studios located in Växjö, with district newsrooms in Jönköping and Kalmar.

title: Smålandsnytt