User talk:Paul Barlow

This user is a 'Bretagnophile'.

User talk:Paul Barlow/Archive1
user talk:Paul Barlow/Archive 2
user talk:Paul Barlow/Archive 3
user talk:Paul Barlow/Archive 4
user talk:Paul Barlow/Archive 5
user talk:Paul Barlow/Archive 6
user talk:Paul Barlow/Archive 7

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Shakespeare authorship question closed

An arbitration case regarding the Shakespeare authorship question has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

1. Standard discretionary sanctions are enacted for all articles related to the Shakespeare authorship question;
2. NinaGreen (talk · contribs) is banned from Wikipedia for a period of one year;
3. NinaGreen is topic-banned indefinitely from editing any article relating (broadly construed) to the Shakespeare authorship question, William Shakespeare, or Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford;
4. The Arbitration Committee endorses the community sanction imposed on Smatprt (talk · contribs). Thus, Smatprt remains topic-banned from editing articles relating to William Shakespeare, broadly construed, for one year from November 3, 2010.

For the Arbitration Committee, AGK [•] 20:54, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Russell

Paul, I'm five years in writing the fully authorised biography of Ken Russell, and my sources are the actual day by day production records from the BBC, so congratulations for replacing my accurate corrections with guff and for continuing Wikipedia's work of peddling falsehoods and dissuading real academics from sharing their knowledge. My books include Lindsay Anderson, The Diaries (Methuen).— Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.106.80.23 (talk • contribs)

Butting in - these changes are perfectly reasonable (what exactly are "gallery prices"?) and most of your additions remain, at this article anyway. In case you didn't see it, there was a note at your talk page explaining the main problem. Johnbod (talk) 12:29, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Real academics are typically aware of the need to cite sources. As Johnbod says, I left a note on your talk page. Your IP is identical to the one you used then, so you should have seen the yellow strip telling you that you had a message. Or is it the case that real academics do not engage in discussion? If you want real academics to take your views on the matter seriously, I hope you will read some real academic literature on the background to the increase in the value of Pre-Raphaelite art during the '60s. I recently read a PhD on the topic. Ken Russell, strangely, was not accorded a major role. I think my alterations of your text were fairly minor, considering the fact that they contain a number of problematic claims. I left in the following statement: "Dante's Inferno's visual style is taken mostly from the Pre-Raphaelite paintings themselves, many of which, such as Millais's Ophelia are filmed in the actual locations where the paintings were created." I'm not sure what it means to say that a painting is "filmed". Of course I did change your sentence by altering it from "Millais's Death of Ophelia", since "Death of Ophelia" is not the title of the painting. In other words, I removed what you would call "guff", written by someone who calls himself a real academic. I presume you mean that the artist is depicted working on the painting. So perhaps you can explain how exactly the painting was "filmed" in "the actual location"? Obviously, the painting of the Surrey landscape is not depicted. Millais completed the painting in London. He was living in Gower Street at the time, which would have made it feasable for Russell to pop over to film in his old studio. Is that what you meant? The scene is set in a small room. Boshier absurdly has a reproduction of The Hireling Shepherd on the wall behind him, so in one sense at least it is not very realistic! Paul B (talk) 18:02, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Derby refs

Could you add some refs to the second graf as requested by Brianboulton? Tom Reedy (talk) 02:15, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

AN/I

Informational note: this is to let you know that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Regards, -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:05, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Shugborough Inscription

Paul, I've started a specific discussion on the talk page of the Shugborough inscription. I'm afraid it outlines all the reasons why we cannot trust Elephant's word. Can I ask for your mediation, or opinion, or views, because this outrageous man has made a real fool of us. I've been told to gather support, so I hope you can help. 85.179.76.167 (talk) 12:42, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi 85.179.76.167, what you should be doing is asking for unbiased opinion in a neutral and open way, NOT slagging off your opponents and asking for people to back you up in the fight - let other people come along, read the opinions expressed, and decide for themselves without you telling them what you want them to say. What you are doing is called canvassing, and it can get people blocked. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Thomas Jefferson

Thank you for correcting those misspellings but regarding this edit summary... I can see you have thousands of edits and have been around Wikipedia since 2002. In your opinion, is an edit summary the correct place to characterize other editors' spelling? Maybe you're just being sarcastically funny with your writtting and I'm just misssing it... Shearonink (talk) 22:24, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

Gram()arian? Ouch!

Leave we the unlettered plain its herd and crop
Seek we sepulture.
Nice allusion. All is 4given.Nishidani (talk) 15:51, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Lesbian Article

You recently removed a template that linked to the talk page for the Lesbian article. Please do not re-engage the edit war that an administrator recently banned me (24h) for participating in. The tag is unobtrusive and I ask that you add it back until a consensus is reached. Here is a relevant quote from the NPOV FAQ (bolding by me):

It is important to remember that the NPOV dispute tag does not mean that an article actually violates NPOV. It simply means that there is an ongoing dispute about whether the article complies with a neutral point of view or not. In any NPOV dispute, there will be some people who think the article complies with NPOV, and some people who disagree. In general, you should not remove the NPOV dispute tag merely because you personally feel the article complies with NPOV. Rather, the tag should be removed only when there is a consensus among the editors that the NPOV disputes have indeed been resolved.

In any case, I appreciate your contribution to the discussion and I hope that we can find a resolution soon. --Elephanthunter (talk) 02:31, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Okay, obviously I pushed the wrong button. I'll stop leaving "ridiculous" messages on your talk page since you so request. Sorry. --Elephanthunter (talk) 05:41, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Frot

Hello, Paul Barlow. I am coming to you about this because I sometimes see you around on sexuality topics, LGBT topics among them (such as Lesbian). I approach you today about the Frot article, which has been a problematic article for a long time, but also one that I feel I have finally made decent; my improvements to the article have been acknowledged by others (for example, here and here). But there is one editor I cannot seem to satisfy. I have been having disputes with the editor named Mijopaalmc. This can be seen on the talk page. Basically, I feel that I am constantly improving the article (adding reliable sources, tweaking things, balancing things out, etc.) and that he is constantly hindering the article (removing reliably sourced text outright, complaining about trivial matters, nitpicking, etc.). Very recently, he has been removing the text that some frot advocates are concerned with the medical risks associated with anal sex, saying that the references don't back it up. His conclusion is false, as I explained on the talk page. The sources most definitely back up that part of the reason some frot advocates do not engage in anal sex is because of the associated health risks. Several hours ago, I reworded the bit to "diseases" instead of "health risks" and added extra reliable sources to back this up. This was done as I simultaneously fixed up the rest of the section (Debates). Mijopaalmc hasn't reverted or nitpicked again yet, but I feel that he will. If you can help out with discussions or simply watching this article, please do. I need help regarding Mijopaalmc's constant nitpicking of the article. Nothing I do ever seems to satisfy him, and I often worry of violating WP:3RR when interacting with his edits. Several hours ago, I don't feel that I violated 3RR, since I feel I was reverting vandalism; he was outright removing reliably sourced material and without a valid argument or further discussion, and I warned him of this on his talk page.

I'm just asking for help. Everything else we have tried has not truly helped, and we seriously need more editors weighing in or looking after the article. Flyer22 (talk) 17:17, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Strike outs

Could you strike out your edits on the SAQ talk page so we can keep up with them without having to hunt them down on the FAC page? Tom Reedy (talk) 14:56, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

I noticed myself it's taking a lot longer to reload after a change. That might be becasue we're all on it at the same time. I'll back off until later. I'll be out all afternoon and night tomorrow though, and won't be able to get back until Sunday. Tom Reedy (talk) 15:07, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

You are required to make at least one more edit tonight

and take third place in the contributor ranks. Mind you, there's a huge gap to close before you overtake the second main contributor to this article!:) Nishidani (talk) 21:40, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Funny

This is how it was done in 1839. Tom Reedy (talk) 15:24, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

[1] Tom Reedy (talk) 15:54, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations

Thanks for all of your hard work on SAQ and my congratulations on it making FA. I have added the article to my watchlist and am an admin, so if there is anything I can do to help, please let me know. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:12, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Redirects

He did the same at Portraits of Shakespeare. I don't know how to unredirect (or redirect, for that matter). Tom Reedy (talk) 21:19, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Ref templates, citation formats etc-.

Paul, what do you think about the idea of using the model we developed in the SAQ article for these contiguous pages? If you think it may be useful to extend it over them, I'd be quite happy to go through and begin organizing stuff.Nishidani (talk) 10:06, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Tito Minniti

OK. I'll find the references you ask.--NewPangea4 (talk) 16:21, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Roger Scruton

Hi Paul, I've posted an RfC at Talk:Roger Scruton—see here—to ask whether the neutrality tag should remain on the article. There are a number of issues in dispute; if you could comment even on just one of them, or your overall impression of the article's balance, that would be very helpful. I'm leaving this note because you've edited the article or talk page, but if you have no interest in commenting, please feel free to ignore the request. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 20:47, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Effie Gray

Nothing terribly new. The author discusses the various well-known possibilities, notably the sight of her pubic hair (per Mary Lutyens) or of menstrual blood. She tends to favour the latter on the grounds that even Ruskin (who was familiar with the female form from statues, etc) couldn't have been that naive! (It is, incidentally, a very good book, although, as some critics have commented, it quotes very little from the letters on which it is based.) Hope this helps, but let me know if you want more. I don't know how familiar you are with the background. IXIA (talk)

Well, I'm pretty familiar, having written this book [2]. I find the menstural blood argument odd, since anyone as familiar with the Bible as Ruskin was would be very well aware of the concept of menstrual cycles. We also know he consulted a medical expert and that there was a medical statement concerning Effie's lack of deformities, which suggests to me that something about the shape of her body was the issue rather than its fluids. Still, that's very helpful, thanks. Paul B (talk) 14:18, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks. I shall read with great interest. IXIA (talk) 18:12, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on April 23, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 23, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch* ^{۩ ۞} 02:42, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The Shakespeare authorship question is the argument that someone other than William Shakespeare of Stratford-upon-Avon wrote the works traditionally attributed to him. Proponents (called "anti-Stratfordians") say that Shakespeare was a front to shield the identity of the real author or authors, who for some reason did not want or could not accept public credit. Although the idea has attracted much public interest, all but a few Shakespeare scholars and literary historians consider it a fringe belief, and for the most part disregard it except to rebut or disparage the claims. Despite the scholarly consensus, the controversy has spawned a vast body of literature, and more than 70 authorship candidates have been proposed, including Francis Bacon, the 6th Earl of Derby, Christopher Marlowe, and the 17th Earl of Oxford. In 2010 James S. Shapiro surveyed the topic in Contested Will: Who Wrote Shakespeare?, in which he criticised academia for ignoring the topic and effectively surrendering the field to anti-Stratfordians, marking the first time a recognised Shakespeare scholar has devoted a book to the topic. Filmmaker Roland Emmerich's next movie, Anonymous, starring Rhys Ifans and Vanessa Redgrave, portrays Oxford as the real author. (more...)

Shakespeare's sonnets

Hi Paul, I wonder if you know about the sonnet template as used in the inset boxes in all the articles on Shakespeare's sonnets, for example Sonnet 116. Given the template as is, many of the line breaks are off. I would like to widen the box (to allow for accurate line breaks) and left align the text, to reflect how they were written. Do you know how the template might be tweaked? Many of the editors who set it up seem to be inactive these days. Thanks and best wishes 16:24, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Userpage protected

Hi. I've semiprotected your userpage, which was under attack by IP's and socks. See the history and this ANI post. Please let me know if you object to the protection. Bishonen | talk 22:12, 22 April 2011 (UTC).

Tancred Borenius

Nice to see this (Category:Art historians involved in espionage anyone?). I always do a search like this to winkle out further links. Johnbod (talk) 16:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Edwin Durning-Lawrence

Congratulations re Edwin Durning-Lawrence! I take it that my information about him on the talkpage of the Shakespeare authorship question piqued your curiosity. You may like to use my notes here. BrainyBabe (talk) 15:30, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Comments on DYK nom for Spelling of Shakespeare's name

Hook and article length OK. But 2 issues must be resolved: no citation specifically for "most importantly Samuel Taylor Coleridge" in the article; and many uncited paras. Please respond at Template_talk:Did_you_know#Spelling_of_Shakespeare.27s_name. --Philcha (talk) 14:21, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Stockhausen

If a 5-year-old can find a reference in a minute, why don't you have the politeness to add it? This would be helpful to any future reader of the article. This is what I found in a minute. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:22, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Pardon, English is not my first language, I don't understand all you wrote. Also please keep the discussion here, I will watch. - If what you claim and what contradicts the source I found, is in one of the existing sources why don't you simply point out which one and double it??? I would consider that constructive. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:35, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, what you added, doesn't show, my happiness is not the question, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:39, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Quote from my talk page:

It seems that you are so happy to behave in this manner that you didn't even bother to look to see that I did add it. Paul B (talk) 17:32, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't follow what you are saying. I added the souce before you left me a message. What contradicts what source? Paul B (talk) 17:38, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

I have no idea what you mean by your happiness. I might be better if you write in German. I don't know what you mean when you say "what you added, doesn't show", nor do I understand what "contradicts the source" you found. Paul B (talk) 17:42, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

You referred to my happiness. The source I found says he died in Kürten. The source you claim to have added doesn't show, but instead: "Cite error: There are ref tags on this page, but the references will not show without a Reflist template or a references tag; see the help page." It seems that you need help, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:50, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

If there is no reflist tag on the page that is due to the incompetence of people who have been maintaining it. All pages should have reflist tags. That is not my mistake. I will add the appropriate reflist template. I do not claim to have added a source, I did add a source. If you cannot see it is the diff, then you seriously do need help. I never referred to your "happiness". I said you were "happy to behave" in a particular way. In English that means you are willing to behave in a way without being emotionally disturbed by it. I cannot believe that you can really be so incompetent that you do not know that the "he" referred to in my addition is Stockhausen's father. Stockhausen died in Kurten. His father certainly did not. Paul B (talk) 18:01, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for adjusting, please correct spelling and, if possible, be conform with the referencing style of the article, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:13, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

No, you correct the typo. I'm sick of this. If you think a different referencing style is appropriate you adjust it. Make the effort to do something useful instead of something useless and negative. Paul B (talk) 18:26, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Spelling of Shakespeare's name

The DYK project (nominate) 12:03, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Matiene under siege

I note you have been involved in the dispute over trying to label the Indo-Aryan element in Mitanni. The same thing is being done at Matiene. Can you help? Mike Nassau (talk) 23:11, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Authorship of Titus

Very nice intro on the Authorship of Titus Andronicus page; brief, but sets up the article very well. Thanks. And thanks for the move too. And the wikilinks! Bertaut (talk) 18:58, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Better source request for File:Titus title page.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Titus title page.jpg. You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 10:24, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

M.F. Hussain

I appreciate your efforts with the M.F. Husain page and for fighting the good fight. Unfortunately, it still looks a bit shoddy and bereft of any actual examples of his art. Since he died just today, I expect that the trolls will be out in full force but perhaps eventually the page can get to the status of a respectable reference.--Innerproduct (talk) 08:09, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

The Woman's World

Mr Barlow, As you may have noticed I've begun expanding on your work on the above article. I feel it could be quickly brought to a good standard, though I have access to only a single reliable source. If you are interested in working on the subject again your knowledge of the period would be most welcome. Best, --Ktlynch (talk) 21:33, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

hummm

Good edit on Deuteronomy. I had no idea you took an interest in OT scholarship - not a bit dry after General Macdonald? PiCo (talk) 05:22, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

I can't remember now why or when I put Macdonald on my watch-list. It's an interesting story, and I guess that's why. Also a tragic one. PiCo (talk) 02:34, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution

Please help out! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboardThigle (talk) 03:36, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Bronzino

I just casually noted an obvious mess while browsing the Bronzino pages, and tried a quick redraft off the top of the head. As it stands the page is thick with examples of his work but comes up, at least on my screen, with a long blank space before the text which looks extremely ugly. Any way that can be fixed? I know fuck all about formatting, let alone much else, and naturally thought of your professional expertise. Forget it if it is complicated or a bother. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 17:50, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

'dead, dead flesh'. Cripes! Whaddya expect from a butcher's son? I like 'zombie lust', even googled it. Sounds so kitschly Freudian in its fond connubium between thanatos and eros. Thanks in any case. It's nice to be able to count of experts round here. Cheers Nishidani (talk) 19:01, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Ed de Vere

Deal with it accordingly, then. Many specialists in the field flatly refuse to consider alterative authorship theories. Alan Nelson's book is not a high quality source. The other thing we have supported the theory that the grain dealer from Stratford wrote these plays is a name similar to his on the dedication page to some of his plays. Based on this flimsy connection, scores of "specialists" in the field have unwaveringly supported the Straford line. How can we put these specialists at the top of some pyramid? Is there any room for reason here? Finally, I'd like to know what the implication of your threat is in the final line of your rant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.231.114.155 (talk) 02:48, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

There is vastly more evidence than that, and you must surely know it. And I have already pointed out that the name is not "similar". It is spelled "Shakespeare" on the very same legal documents signed by the man from Stratford which proves that it is the same person with variant spellings, just as there are many variant spellings used in publications. The implication of Peter's final line is spelled out in the section above on the Ed de V talk page. Paul B (talk) 21:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

NOGE

I would like to know why you undid my recent edit of the NOGE lede page and other edits. you posted nothing on the talk page and i had to search around even find out who deleted my edits. The NOGE was not founded by clarence 13X. Clarence 13X has only a 31/2 year history. from the time Clarence entered the mosque and recieved the 13x to the day he was excommunicated out the mosque 3 1/2 years later and dropped the X. i dont know what wikipedia's policy is in regard to the name Allah. Mayor lindsey called him Allah and gave him a scholl that still exists at 2122 7th ave. Everyone called him Allah because that is his name and not a title for him or for the NOGe. The family name or surname for the NOGE is Allah. Wikipedia has simply been mis informed and and has bought into the false paradigm that Clarence 13x is somehow the true identity and Allah is a non existent entity or simply a nickname of sorts — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bornking7 (talk • contribs) 17:42, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Egyptian race controversy

I'm just summarizing the "non-black" positions described later in the article. Is that a problem? 24.22.217.162 (talk) 10:13, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Can you please add a brief description of the "outside race" thesis in the intro that you find acceptable? Or even better, summarize the nature of the controversy and its range of views, and move the details of Afrocentrism into the body. 24.22.217.162 (talk) 19:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

I think your recent change (which appears to be based on text deleted earlier) addresses the problem. 24.22.217.162 (talk) 20:10, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Seamus Blake

Hi Paul,

Firstly, let me apologize for the delay in responding to your kind efforts on my behalf. My apology is especially heartfelt as I was anxious to compliment you on the speedy manner in which you answered my inquiry.

I also want to thank you for your offer of help. It would be nice to have a photograph of my son in his Wikipedia entry. The offer of mentorship is also appealing, especially as it's my plan to expand my son's entry in the near future.

Dan Blake--207.216.88.72 (talk) 06:29, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Tristan Banon POV Talk page

Hi Paul,

I see you removed the POV tag, which I support for the reasons you gave.

Unfortunately I accidentally added it back in dealing with content deletion following a fork someone introduced (up for deletion). I assume the template was part of the content removed.

I'll delete it directly. Didn't mean to step on your toes. FightingMac (talk) 18:51, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Venus of Hohle Fels

Paul, considering your interest in the entry for the Venus of Hohle Fels, I wanted to notify you that I just added a link to a paper I recently wrote that interprets the figurine much differently than specialists previously have. If, after reading the paper, you have a problem with anything I wrote, I'd appreciate your discussing it with me before you redact my entry. Thanks in advance. Berlant (talk) 13:54, 12 July 2011 (UTC) Berlant

Hakim Jamal

Hello. I wanted to thank you for writing this article. Have you considered nominating it at WP:Did you know? — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:52, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Interest in Afghan Pashtun tribes and tribal history

Dear Paul,

I noticed on the Wikipedia link to Pashtun People your name is shown in the reference section. May I ask you if this was because you contributed the photos of Afghan kings and previous prominent Afghans, or because you posted other information on this topic?

I travel to Afghanistan annually as part of our small humanitarian effort with women and children in Afghanistan and have become acquainted with a number of Afghans, particularly Pashtuns, who have extensive knowledge about their tribes and family history. I am developing a journal of information I continue to glean about these Pashtun tribes and have decided to begin compiling it into a format that will eventually probably become a book. May I ask you if you are the person who compiled the list of Pashtun kings in the Wikipedia section about Pashtun peoples, or was this accomplished by someone else?

I am at the moment closely associated with individuals who have extensive knowledge and family histories about the Kharoti tribe, the Arsala Khan tribe and the Wafiullah tribe, plus several others who are also interested in sharing this kind of historical information with me.

I recently returned from my 10th humanitarian trip to Afghanistan, we usually bring a small travel team of highly skilled volunteers and work with girls schools, women's prisons and Rotary International projects in Afghanistan.

Any thoughts you might have on this subject would be appreciated.

Sincerely,

Diana Tacey, Executive Director ChildLight Foundation for Afghan Children Mesa, Arizona, USA (480) 964-5484 www.childlightfoundation.org