text:
\section{Introduction}

Determining the atmospheric parameters of a star is fundamental to
characterizing and understanding its nature and evolutionary
state. These parameters are the effective temperature T$_{\rm eff}$,
surface gravity $\log$\,g, metallicity [M/H] and for 1D abundance
analyses also the microturbulent v$_{mic}$. Particularly, the
temperature can be determined with several methods, such as from
photometric colors, flux calibrated low-resolution spectra, the shape
of the Balmer lines in a high-resolution stellar spectrum and
through forcing no trend of Fe\,I absorption line abundances with the
excitation potential of the lines (``excitation balance''), also from
high-resolution spectra. The most common technique is to employ
broadband colors, with many color-temperature calibrations available
for main-sequence stars (e.g., \citealt{alonso_ms, casagrande10}) and
giants (e.g., \citealt{alonso_giants}) based on the infrared flux
method (IRFM). Precise photometry, reliable reddening values and
metallicity information are necessary when using this method. Using
flux-calibrated low-resolution spectra to measure the strength of the
Balmer jump and comparing the spectral shape to grids of synthetic
flux spectra is less common \citep{bessell07}.

In the absence of photometry or stellar libraries, or to test
systematic temperature uncertainties, temperatures can also be
obtained from high-resolution spectroscopy alone. Fitting the shape of
the Balmer lines with synthetic spectra of known stellar parameters
yields temperatures, especially for the warmer main-sequence stars and
subgiants (e.g., \citealt{barklem_balmer}). Finally, another commonly
used method is to employ Fe\,I lines throughout the stellar spectrum
and force their abundances to show no trend with the excitation
potential of each line. Compared to using photometry to derive
temperatures, no reddening information is needed for this technique or
the Balmer line fitting method. But in turn, high-resolution spectra
with resolving power of $R\gtrsim15,000$ are required, preferably with
large wavelength coverage throughout the optical range. A list of Fe
absorption lines covering a large range of excitation potentials is
also needed.

The different methods are known to produce temperatures with
systematic offsets from each other. The ``excitation temperatures''
are thereby known to yield lower effective temperatures than
photometry-based color-temperature calibrations, often by a few
hundred degrees. Stars on the upper red giant branch are most
affected. \citet{johnson2002_23stars} found their 23 metal-poor giants
to be 100 to 150\,K cooler when using the excitation method over
several color-temperature calibrations. Similar results have been
reported by \citet{cayrel2004}, \citet{aoki_studiesIV}
\citet{lai2008}, \citet{ufs}, \citet{hollek11}, and many others. The
approaches and dealings with this issue have been varied, though.

\citet{cayrel2004} reached good agreement between their
photometrically derived temperatures and excitation temperatures after
they excluded strong lines with excitation potential of
$EP=0$\,eV. These often appear to have higher abundances than lines with
higher excitation potential. As a consequence, forcing no trend in
line abundances with excitation potential can yield artificially
cooler temperatures. While a similar approach (cutting $EP<0.2$\,eV)
worked for \citet{cohen08}, it did not yield the same outcome for
\citet{lai2008} and \citet{hollek11}. With or without cutting low-$EP$
lines, the latter two studies found significant trends of abundance
with excitation potential to remain. Consequently, different authors
have adopted either spectroscopic temperatures, or the photometric
ones, or tried to find a middle ground between the results of the two
techniques.

The situation is further complicated by the fact that different model
atmosphere codes have been used over time, producing different results
leading to and possibly increasing the differences between spectroscopic
and photometric temperatures. For example, using a model code that
treated scattering as true absorption \citet{cayrel2004} found larger
discrepancies than when using codes that treated scattering as
Rayleigh scattering.

However, recently, \citet{hollek11} carried out an abundance analysis of
16 metal-poor giants using different versions of the MOOG code
\citep{moog}. They found that if scattering is properly treated, the
temperatures were generally even lower than in an older MOOG version that
treated scattering as true absorption -- the opposite of what was
found by \citet{cayrel2004} (although they make no quantitative
statement about the magnitude of the effect and how it compares to
their proper-scattering treatment when not excluding lines with
$EP<1.2$\,eV).

This study aims at empirically resolving the issue of producing lower
spectroscopic excitation temperatures when employing the latest
version of the widely-used MOOG code that now properly treats the
scattering \citep{sobeck11}. We provide simple corrections to the
slope of the Fe\,I abundances as a function of excitation potential
for metal-poor stars that bring the excitation temperatures in rough
agreement with photometrically derived values. This way, we can use
``the best of both worlds'': not depending on photometry, reddening
and color-temperature relations, while obtaining temperatures and
hence chemical abundances that can be easily and relatively fairly
compared to results based on photometric temperatures. Our pragmatic
approach does not resolve the underlying processes that likely cause
the temperature discrepancies which seem to be manifold (scattering
treatments in codes, line formation of low and high-$EP$ lines,
wavelength coverage of lines and data quality, effects due to
non-local thermodynamic equilibrium, etc.) but at least it provides a
means to facilitate a more homogeneous analysis of stars that have
temperatures derived from different methods. Much work has been
invested in improving photometric temperature scales. For example,
using the IRFM method, \citet{casagrande10} showed this photometric
temperature determination method to be hardly sensitive to theoretical
model parameters, especially the surface gravity and metallicity
(particularly for extremely metal-poor stars). The uncertainty with
respect to their zero-point (well-calibrated, against interferometric
angular diameter measurements and HST spectroscopy) using solar twins
is 15\,K, whereas their final IRFM effective temperatures have typical
uncertainties ranging from 60 to 90\,K for metal-poor stars and
slightly lower values for more metal-rich stars. The independence of
metallicity when deriving temperatures this way makes the IRFM method,
in principle, the preferred one for low-metallicity stars. The only
major caveat would be that the IRFM method sensitively depends on very
accurate reddening values, as an 0.01\,mag change in $E(B-V)$ leads to
$\pm50$\,K change in the final temperature.

Given these facts, it appears timely to bring the somewhat plagued
excitation temperatures onto a comparable scale. Another reason for
such a ``re-calibration'' is that the stellar surface gravities,
usually derived through the Fe\,I-Fe\,II ionization equilibrium,
depend on the derived temperatures. With lower temperatures, lower
gravities are derived. Hence, in many cases of cool giants, much too
low gravities have been obtained (compared with isochrones and
parallax-derived values), to a point that they become unphysical. This
effect is particularly pronounced in metal-poor stars with lower $S/N$
spectra which leave few Fe\,II to be measured (e.g., see Table~5 in
\citet{hollek11}). In the same way, if only primarily strong lines are
measurable in the spectrum, the microturbulent velocity becomes very
large, often past 2.5\,km\,s$^{-1}$.  Especially, metal-poor stars in
dwarf galaxies have been affected by this, since they are all bright
giants and the data quality is often rather poor given their faint
apparent magnitudes \citep{mcwilliametal, koch_her, aoki09, hollek11,
  leo4}.

In summary, adjusting the spectroscopic temperatures leads to improved
stellar parameters, at least in the metal-poor regime and particularly
for metal-poor giants with $\mbox{[Fe/H]}<-2.0$. Broadly adopting this
scheme may prove beneficial for the many high-resolution
spectroscopic surveys (Gaia-ESO, GALAH) that will soon
provide large amounts of stellar spectra that have to be analysed
homogeneously and consistently.

\section{``Calibration'' Sample and Abundance Analysis}

We chose seven metal-poor stars with metallicities of
$-3.3<\mbox{[Fe/H]}<-2.5$ and spanning the largest possible temperature
range from 4600\, to 6500\,K covering warm main-sequence to cool
giants to investigate systematic differences between the excitation
temperatures and photometric temperatures.

All high $S/N$, high-resolution spectra were obtained with the MIKE
spectrograph \citep{mike} on the Magellan-Clay telescope at Las
Campanas Observatory between 2009 and 2011. An $0\farcs7$ slit width
was used resulting in a resolving power of $R\sim35,000$ in the blue
and $\sim28,000$ in the red spectral range. MIKE spectra cover nearly
the full optical wavelength range of 3350--9100\,{\AA}, although the
$S/N$ is low below 3700\,{\AA}. The reduced spectra were normalized,
the orders merged and then radial velocity corrected. The $S/N$ ratio
of the final spectra ranges from 70 to 300 at $\sim4100$\,{\AA}, and
from 70 to 500 at $\sim6700$\,{\AA} per pixel.

Equivalent widths were measured by fitting Gaussian profiles to the
absorption lines. For a metal line list we used the list described in
\citet{roederer10}. Between $\sim$50 and $\sim$230 Fe\,I and 2 and 26
Fe\,II lines were measured in each sample star. See
Table~\ref{Tab:eqw} for the lines used and their measured equivalent
widths, although we only list lines with reduced equivalent widths of
$\gtrsim-4.5$. In Figure~\ref{ew_comp} we furthermore show a
comparison of the $\sim200$ equivalent width measurements of HD122563
common to our lines and those of \citet{aoki_studiesIV} and
\citet{cayrel2004}. Not all our lines were measured by these two
studies, but those that are in common agree very well with each
other. The agreements of our measurements are $0.20\pm0.16$\,m{\AA} and
$0.25\pm0.28$\,m{\AA}, respectively, so no significant offsets exist
between the three data sets.

\begin{figure}[!hb]
 \begin{center}
   \includegraphics[clip=true,width=8cm,bbllx=30, bblly=360,
     bburx=452, bbury=724]{eqw_both.ps} \figcaption{ \label{ew_comp}
     Comparison of equivalent width measurements for HD122563 of this
     study with those of \citet{aoki_studiesIV} (black open circles)
     and \citet{cayrel2004} (red filled circles). The agreement is excellent.}
 \end{center}
\end{figure}

\begin{deluxetable*}{llrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr}
\tablecolumns{11}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tabletypesize{\tiny}
\tablecaption{\label{Tab:eqw} Equivalent Widths and Metal Line Abundances of Stars in the Calibration Sample}
\tablehead{
\colhead{} &
\colhead{} &
\colhead{} &
\colhead{} &
\multicolumn{2}{c}{HD122563} &
\multicolumn{2}{c}{HE~1523$-$0901} &
\multicolumn{2}{c}{BD$-$18 5550} &
\multicolumn{2}{c}{CS22892$-$052} &
\multicolumn{2}{c}{HD140283} &
\multicolumn{2}{c}{CD$-$24 17504} &
\multicolumn{2}{c}{G64$-$12}
\\
\colhead{$\lambda$} &
\colhead{Species} &
\colhead{$\chi$} &
\colhead{$\log{gf}$} &
\colhead{EW} &
\colhead{$\log\epsilon(\rm X)$} &
\colhead{EW} &
\colhead{$\log\epsilon(\rm X)$} &
\colhead{EW} &
\colhead{$\log\epsilon(\rm X)$} &
\colhead{EW} &
\colhead{$\log\epsilon(\rm X)$} &
\colhead{EW} &
\colhead{$\log\epsilon(\rm X)$} &
\colhead{EW} &
\colhead{$\log\epsilon(\rm X)$} &
\colhead{EW} &
\colhead{$\log\epsilon(\rm X)$}
\\
\colhead{[{\AA}]} &
\colhead{} &
\colhead{[eV]} &
\colhead{[dex]} &
\colhead{[m{\AA}]} &
\colhead{[dex]} &
\colhead{[m{\AA}]} &
\colhead{[dex]} &
\colhead{[m{\AA}]} &
\colhead{[dex]} &
\colhead{[m{\AA}]} &
\colhead{[dex]} &
\colhead{[m{\AA}]} &
\colhead{[dex]} &
\colhead{[m{\AA}]} &
\colhead{[dex]} &
\colhead{[m{\AA}]} &
\colhead{[dex]} }
\startdata
 5889.950&   Na\,I&  0.00&   0.108& 196.64&   4.00& 175.91&   3.54& 141.05&   3.52& 153.99&   3.72& 112.99&   3.84&  29.91&   2.70&  35.99&   2.94 \\
 5895.924&   Na\,I&  0.00&$-$0.194& 166.54&   3.89& 155.12&   3.51& 117.04&   3.37& 126.36&   3.53&  89.59&   3.70&  19.75&   2.76&  18.90&   2.86 \\
 3829.355&   Mg\,I&  2.71&$-$0.208&\nodata&\nodata&\nodata&\nodata&\nodata&\nodata&\nodata&\nodata& 132.91&   5.17&  85.21&   4.68&  77.74&   4.55 \\
 3986.753&   Mg\,I&  4.35&$-$1.030&  33.86&   5.22&\nodata&\nodata&  19.58&   4.99&\nodata&\nodata&  15.29&   5.26&\nodata&\nodata&\nodata&\nodata \\
...
\enddata
\end{deluxetable*}

For our 1D LTE abundance analysis, we used model atmospheres from
\citet{castelli_kurucz} and the MOOG analysis code of \citet{moog},
albeit the latest version that appropriately treats scattering as
Rayleigh scattering and not as true absorption as done in previous
versions \citep{sobeck11}. The metal line abundances are presented in
Table~\ref{Tab:eqw}. Our study about stellar parameter determinations
is based on equivalent width measurements of Fe lines between
3700 and 7000\,{\AA}.

\section{Adjusting the ``Excitation Temperature'' Scale}\label{sec:adjust}

We used our sample of well-studied stars to produce a straight-forward
method of adjusting the excitation temperature scale in order to arrive
at spectroscopic temperatures that agree with photometric ones. After
measuring the equivalent widths we first determined the stellar
temperatures by forcing no trend of the abundances of individual Fe\,I
lines as a function of their excitation potential.  In the process we
varied the microturbulent velocity to produce no trend of the line
abundances with reduced equivalent widths. Simultaneously, to
determine the surface gravity, the Fe\,II abundance was matched to the
Fe\,I abundance. Finally, another input parameter of the model
atmosphere is the metallicity [m/H] of the star. We use a general
prescription of $\mbox{[m/H]} = \mbox{[Fe/H]} +0.25$ to account for the
overabundances of $\alpha$-elements of $\mbox{[$\alpha$/Fe]}\sim0.3$
as well as small overabundances of carbon and/or oxygen
($\mbox{[C,O/Fe]}\sim0.3$) which are all typical for metal-poor halo
stars.

We then carried out an extensive literature search to assess the range
of photometric temperatures determined for each star.
Table~\ref{Tab:teff_lit} shows a representative range of values found
in the literature, including the colors and the color-temperature
relations used for their calculation.  For comparison, we also include
T$_{\rm eff}$ values calculated using the IRFM method in recent works
whose color- temperature relations are commonly used (e.g., Alonso et
al.\ 1996, 1999, Casagrande et al.\ 2010).  For two stars, CD$-$24
17504 and G64$-$12, we found relatively few photometrically derived
values, and most where done using older temperature calibrations. We
thus calculated photometric temperatures ourselves, based on
literature photometry and reddening values and using the
\citet{casagrande10} scale. Finally, for HE~1523$-$0901, only one
photometric temperature is available \citep{he1523} but at least it
was an average based on six different colors.

As can been seen, temperature ranges of several hundred degrees were
found for some cases, making it difficult to assess which individual
temperatures would be ``the best''.  Hence, we resorted to choosing
``common sense'' values, as our original aim was to re-calibrate our
excitation temperature scale to a level common with that of
photometric temperatures found using the more recent color-temperature
relations. Our initial excitation temperatures and associated adopted
literature values (based on photometry) are listed in
Table~\ref{Tab:stell_par_calib}.  We stress that the photometric
temperatures we have adopted are not strictly averages of the values
listed in Table~\ref{Tab:teff_lit}, rather they are appropriate
near-median quantities from the range of values found by multiple
authors using different color-temperature relations and photometry.

Figure~\ref{calib} (upper panel) then shows the differences in
effective temperatures between our initial excitation temperatures and
our adopted literature values as a function of the initial
temperatures. We find a strong, linear relation, with the largest
differences at the cooler temperatures of upper red giant branch
stars. An (unweighted) least-square regression yields the following
relation:

\begin{equation}
T_{\rm{eff, corrected}} = T_{\rm{eff, initial}} - 0.1 \times T_{\rm{eff, initial}} + 670
\end{equation}

This temperature dependent behavior is completely in line with the
vast majority of previous studies that reported differences between
spectroscopic and photometric temperatures of several hundred degrees,
as most analyzed star were giants. However, main-sequence stars are
hardly affected, as we find essentially the same temperatures. We also
overplot nominal error bars of 134\,K which reflect typical
uncertainties in temperature determinations (60\,K for photometric and
120\,K for spectroscopic values).

\begin{figure}[!hb]
 \begin{center}
   \includegraphics[clip=true,width=8cm,bbllx=30, bblly=260,
     bburx=462, bbury=784]{teff_recalibration.ps}
   \figcaption{ \label{calib} Differences in effective temperatures
     between our initial excitation temperatures and adopted
     literature photometry-based values (top panel) and those
     calculated from $V-K$ (bottom panel). We also show the slope from
     the top panel in the bottom panel (red line) The differences are
     most pronounced at the cooler temperatures of upper red giant
     branch stars, whereas main-sequence stars are hardly affected.}
 \end{center}
\end{figure}

\begin{deluxetable*}{llllll}
\tablecolumns{6}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tabletypesize{\tiny}
\tablecaption{\label{Tab:teff_lit} Effective Temperatures Collected from Literature}
\tablehead{
\colhead{$T_{\rm{eff}}$ } &
\colhead{$\sigma$} &
\colhead{Colors} &
\colhead{Method} &
\colhead{Reference} &
\colhead{Comments}}
\startdata
\multicolumn{6}{c}{HD122563}\\\hline
 4670 & 28\tablenotemark{1}& V,J,K       & COH78, FRO 83     & \citet{peterson90}     & phot. from NIC78, CAR83\\
 4650 & 30\tablenotemark{2}& B,V,R,I     & BG78, BG89        & \citet{ryan96}         & their phot., BN84, GS91\\
 4572 & 61                 & IRFM        & their calibration & \citet{alonso_giants}  & as quoted in PASTEL database\\
 4617 & 44\tablenotemark{1}& B,V,R,J,K   & ALO99             & \citet{cayrel2004}     & phot. from ALO98, BEE07, EPC99; adopt 4600\\
 4546 & 75\tablenotemark{1}& B,V,K       & ALO99             & \citet{honda04}        & phot. from Simbad; adopt 4570\\
 4616 & 17\tablenotemark{1}& B,V,K,b,y   & ALO99             & \citet{lai}            & phot. from Simbad, HM98 \\
 4843 & \nodata            & B,V,R,J,K   & RM05              & \citet{yong13_II}      & phot. from CAY04, HON04\\\hline\\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{HE~1523$-$0901}\\\hline
 4630 & 40                 & B,V,R,I,J,H,K& ALO99            & \citet{he1523}         & phot. from BEE07\\\hline\\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{BD$-$18 5550}\\\hline
 4750 &  0\tablenotemark{1}& V,J,K       & COH78, FRO83      & \citet{peterson90}     & phot. from CAR78, CAR83\\
 4789 & 27\tablenotemark{1}& B,V,R       & BG78, BG89        & \citet{mcwilliametal}  & their phot.\\
 4668 & \nodata            & IRFM        & their calibration & \citet{alonso_giants}  & as quoted in PASTEL database \\
 4700 & 129\tablenotemark{1}&B,V,R,J,K   & ALO99             & \citet{cayrel2004}     & phot. from ALO98, BEE07, EPC99; adopt 4750\\
 4558 & \nodata            & B,V,R,J,K   & RM05              & \citet{yong13_II}      & phot. from CAY04\\\hline\\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{CS~22892$-$052}\\\hline
 4763 & 54\tablenotemark{1}& B,V,R       & BG78, BG89        & \citet{mcwilliametal}  & their phot.\\
 4850 & \nodata            & B,V         & see RYA96b        &\citet{1997norriscarbon}& phot. from RYA89, BPS92, NOR97\\
 4860 & 83\tablenotemark{1}& B,V,R,I,J,K & ALO99             & \citet{cayrel2004}     & phot. from  ALO98, BEE07, EPC99; adopt 4850\\
 4740 & 69\tablenotemark{1}& B,V,K       & ALO99             & \citet{honda04}        & adopt 4790\\
 4825 & \nodata            & B,V,R,J,K   & RM05              & \citet{yong13_II}      & phot. from CAY04, HON04\\\hline\\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{HD140283}\\\hline
 5691 & \nodata            & IRFM        & their calibration & \citet{alonso_ms}      & as quoted in HOS09 \\
 5640 & \nodata            & V,R,I,K     & their calibration & \citet{bikmaev96}      & as quoted in MAS99 \\
 5750 & 50\tablenotemark{2}& B,V,R,I     & BO86, BK92        & \citet{ryan96}         & their phot.\\
 5750 & 53                 & V,J,K       & HOU00             & \citet{cohen02}        & their phot.\\
 5609 & 34\tablenotemark{1}& B,V,K       & ALO96             & \citet{honda04}        & phot. from Simbad; adopt 5630\\
 5751 & 50\tablenotemark{2}& uvby-$\beta$& ALO96             & \citet{jonsell05}      & phot. from OLS83, SN88\\
 5777 & 55                 & IRFM        & their calibration & \citet{casagrande10}   & \\
 5711 & \nodata            &             & CAS10             & \citet{yong13_II}      & phot. from COH02, HON04\\\hline\\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{CD$-$24 17504}\\\hline
 6060 & 54\tablenotemark{2}& B,V,R,I,b,y & BO86, BK92, MAG87,& \citet{ryan96a}        & phot. from RYA89\\
      &                    &             & VB85              &                        &  \\
 6373 & \nodata            & IRFM        & their calibration & \citet{alonso_ms}      & as quoted in PRI00b\\
 6237 & 79\tablenotemark{1,3}& b,y       & CAR83, KIN93      & \citet{primas}         & phot. from RYA99 \\
 6455 & 62                 & IRFM        & their calibration & \citet{casagrande10}   & \\
 6236 & \nodata            &             & CAS10             & \citet{yong13_II}      & phot. from RYA91\\
 6290 & \nodata            & V,R,I,J,K   & CAS10             & This Study             & phot. from RYA91\\\hline\\\\
\multicolumn{6}{c}{G64$-$12}\\ \hline
 6325 & \nodata            & B,V,R,I,b,y &BUS87, BO86, KUR89,& \citet{ryanSDIV91}     & phot. from RYA89, SN88, CAR83, this work \\
      &                    &             & MAG87, VB85       &                        &  \\
 6290 & 44\tablenotemark{2}& B,V,R,I,b,y & BO86, BK92, MAG87,& \citet{ryan96a}        & phot. from CAR78, CAR89, CS92, SN89, SCH93\\
      &                    &             & VB85              &                        &  \\
 6470 & 90                 & IRFM        & their calibration & \citet{alonso_ms}      & as quoted in PRI00a\\
 6430 & 75\tablenotemark{1}& B,V,R,I,K   & ALO96             & \citet{Aokihe1327}     &    \\
 6464 & 61                 &             & IRFM              & their calibration      & CAS10 \\
 6450 & 35\tablenotemark{1}& B,V,R,I,K   & CAS10             & This Study             & phot. from AOK06 colors \\
\enddata
\tablenotetext{1}{Standard deviations of the average temperatures (column 1) calculated from the different colors (column 3).}
\tablenotetext{2}{Error based on assessment of errors in photometry/reddening.}
\tablenotetext{3}{Average of values from two different color-T$_{\rm eff}$ relation.}

\tablecomments{JHK magnitudes were used in many of the cited studies and most are taken from 2MASS \citep{2MASS}.
References for photometry and color-temperature relations:
ALO96 -- \citet{alonso_ms};
ALO98 -- \citet{alonso98};
ALO99 -- \citet{alonso_giants};
AOK06 -- \citet{Aokihe1327};
BO86  -- \citet{bell86};
BEE07 -- \citet{beers_photom};
BG78  -- \citet{bell78};
BG89  -- \citet{bell89};
BK92  -- \citet{buser92};
BN84  -- \citet{cd38};
BPS92 -- \citet{BPSII};
BUS87 -- Buser, private communication in \citet{ryanSDIV91};
BK92  -- \citet{buser92};
CAR78 -- \citet{carney78};
CAR83 -- \citet{carney83};
CAR89 -- \citet{carney89};
CAS10 -- \citet{casagrande10};
CAY04 -- \citet{cayrel2004};
CS92  -- \citet{cayreldestrobel92};
COH78 -- \citet{cohen78};
COH02 -- \citet{cohen02};
EPC99 -- \citep{epchtein99};
FRO83 -- \citet{frogel83};
GS91  -- \citet{gratton91};
HM98  -- \citet{hauck98};
HOU00 -- \citet{houdashelt00};
HON04 -- \citet{honda04};
HOS09 -- \citet{hosford09};
KIN93 -- \citet{king93};
KUR89 -- Kurucz, private communication in \citet{ryanSDIV91};
MAG87 -- \citet{magain87};
MAS99 -- \citet{mashonkina_ba_nlte};
NIC78 -- \citet{nicolet78};
NOR97 -- \citet{1997norriscarbon};
OLS83 -- \citet{olsen83};
PASTEL -- \citet{soubiran10};
PRI00a -- \citet{primas2000};
PRI00b -- \citet{primas};
RM05  -- \citet{ramirez05};
RYA89 -- \citet{ryan89};
RYA91 -- \citet{ryanSDIV91};
RYA96b -- \citet{ryan96};
RYA99 -- \citet{ryan_postprim};
SN88  --\citet{schuster88};
SN89  -- \citet{schuster89};
SCH93 -- \citet{schuster93};
VB85  -- \citet{vandenberg85}
}
\end{deluxetable*}

\begin{deluxetable*}{lcc|cccc|cccc}
\tablecolumns{7}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tabletypesize{\small}
\tablecaption{\label{Tab:stell_par_calib} Stellar Parameters of the Sample}
\tablehead{
\colhead{}&
\colhead{}&
\colhead{}&
\multicolumn{4}{c}{initial determination}&
\multicolumn{4}{c}{after temperature correction}\\
\cline{4-7}\cline{8-11}
\colhead{Star}  &
\colhead{$T_{\rm{eff}, adop.}$ } &
\colhead{$T_{\rm{eff},V-K}$} &
\colhead{$T_{\rm{eff}}$ } &
\colhead{$\log (g)$ }    &
\colhead{$\mbox{[Fe/H]}$ }  &
\colhead{$v_{\rm{micr}}$ }  &
\colhead{$T_{\rm{eff}}$}&
\colhead{$\log (g)$ }    &
\colhead{$\mbox{[Fe/H]}$ }  &
\colhead{$v_{\rm{micr}}$ }\\
\colhead{}&
\colhead{[K]}&
\colhead{[K]}&
\colhead{[K]}&
\colhead{[dex]}&\colhead{[dex]}&\colhead{[km\,s$^{-1}$]}&
\colhead{[K]}&\colhead{[dex]}&\colhead{[dex]}&\colhead{[km\,s$^{-1}$]}
}
\startdata
 HD122563       & 4650 &  4644 & 4380 & 0.10 & $-2.93$& 2.65 & 4612& 0.85 & $-2.79$& 2.30 \\
 HE~1523$-$0901 & 4630 &  4688 & 4380 & 0.05 & $-2.97$& 2.85 & 4612& 0.80 & $-2.85$& 2.70 \\
 BD $-$18 5550  & 4720 &\nodata& 4570 & 0.80 & $-3.20$& 2.05 & 4783& 1.25 & $-3.02$& 2.00 \\
 CS22892-052    & 4800 &  4903 & 4620 & 0.85 & $-3.24$& 2.20 & 4828& 1.35 & $-3.08$& 2.15 \\
 HD140283       & 5700 &  5637 & 5550 & 2.95 & $-2.74$& 1.50 & 5665& 3.20 & $-2.64$& 1.45 \\
 CD $-$24 17504 & 6280 &  6276 & 6210 & 3.60 & $-3.26$& 1.35 & 6259& 3.65 & $-3.23$& 1.40 \\
 G64$-$12       & 6420 &\nodata& 6430 & 4.35 & $-3.30$& 1.45 & 6457& 4.40 & $-3.28$& 1.50
\enddata
\end{deluxetable*}

Since we adopted common sense representative photometric
temperatures from the literature that are based on a variety of colors
and color-temperature relations, we also attempted to calculate
temperatures ourselves, for an exemplary color, $V-K$, and using the
\citet{alonso_giants} and \citet{alonso_ms} calibrations. We chose
$V-K$ since it is least affected by reddening. The reddening in the
direction of each object was obtained from the dust maps of
\citet{schlegel} maps. However, it is known that these maps
overpredict the reddening, in some cases quite
significantly. Accordingly, different reddening correction were
invoked, following the procedures of \citet{reddening_bonifacio} and
\citet{melendez08}. Temperatures were then calculated based on the
two reddening estimates to investigate the impact of these reddening
uncertainties. In a few cases, we adopted yet a different value.  For
HD140283, we also adopt $E(B-V)=0.01$, following \citet{ryan96},
rather than $E(B-V)=0.16$ from the dust maps. For HD122563, we also
adopt $E(B-V)=0.0$, following \citet{honda04}.

We also find a strong relation between the difference in temperatures
as a function of the initial spectroscopic temperatures, as can be
seen in Figure~\ref{calib} (bottom panel). The slope is even steeper
because $V-K$ produces temperatures for giants that are warmer than
what we adopted. Within the error bars, however, the slope of our main
temperature comparison is still in rough agreement with what we
determined based on $V-K$ colors. We note that this comparison only
contains five of the seven sample stars. We had to exclude two
stars (BD$-$18 5550 and G64$-$12) because their $V-K$ temperature were
rather different (more than 200\,K in the case of BD$-$18 5550) from
what one would expect the temperatures of these stars to be,
regardless of any employed method.

In the end we adopt the slope of our initial comparison because our
overall aim is to adjust the spectroscopic temperatures to
\textit{average} photometrical values. Even with photometry and
color-temperature relations available, the temperatures derived from
different colors often vary 100-200\,K, as can be seen in
Table~\ref{Tab:teff_lit}.
Finding a different slope based on the $V-K$ temperatures appears to
reflect this dispersion.

We then turned the temperature differences from Figure~\ref{calib}
into values for the slope of the abundance trends to adopt in the
Fe\,I line abundance vs. excitation potential diagnostics. This is
shown in Figure~\ref{slope}. In the top panel we show how the values
of the slopes of the Fe\,I line abundances after only correcting for
the temperature and before adjusting the microturbulent velocity and
the gravity. To guide the eye, we fit the data points with a
second-order polynomial, which is also shown in the Figure. We
estimate typical uncertainties in the slope to be 0.005\,dex/eV or
less.

\begin{figure}[!hb]
 \begin{center}
 \includegraphics[clip=true,width=7.5cm,bbllx=40, bblly=100,
   bburx=502, bbury=710]{teff_slopes.ps} \figcaption{ \label{slope}
   The slopes of the Fe\,I line abundances as a function of their
   excitation potentials after only adjusting the temperature
   according to our method (top panel) and after also adjusting the
   surface gravity and microturbulent velocity (bottom panel) to
   arrive at the final stellar parameters. The maximum slope in the
   bottom panel nominally corresponds to $\sim150$\,K compared with a
   slope of 0.000\,dex/eV.}
 \end{center}
\end{figure}

For near main-sequence stars, the spectroscopic method delivers nearly
the same temperatures as photometry, hence there is no significant
slope of line abundances with excitation potential
($\sim0.00$\,dex/eV). For the giants, however, applying significant
temperature corrections according to Eq. (1) produces an initial slope
of up to $-$0.09\,dex/eV.  We then carried out the remaining parts of
the analysis: re-determining the microturbulent velocity and the
surface gravity while ignoring the slope in the temperature diagnostic
plot of line abundance vs. excitation potential. While the gravity was
adjusted by up to $\sim0.7$\,dex for the most extreme cases, the
microturbulent velocity decreased by less ($\sim$0.1 or less in most
cases). The model metallicity [m/H] was usually increased by about 0.1
to 0.2\,dex following the increase in the Fe abundance.

Through the process of adjusting the remaining stellar parameters
(gravity, microturbulent velocity, metallicity), we actually found
that the slope of abundance with excitation potential was
reduced. Figure~\ref{slope} (bottom panel) shows the final slopes in
the temperature diagnostic plots. The most extreme one is now only
$-$0.07\,dex/eV which, in the end, only corresponds to a temperature
difference of 150\,K compared to a slope of 0.000\,dex/eV. However, we
caution that if one would change the temperature again to produce no
trend, the gravity and microturbulent velocity would change again, and
one would once again iterate towards the lower temperature/lower
gravity/higher microturbulent velocity solution. Regardless, 150\,K is
of the same order as what uncertainties in spectroscopic effective
temperatures generally are. It is thus reassuring that despite of
applying our temperature corrections, we are producing temperatures
that nominally are no more than 150\,K away from a trend with no
slope. Table~\ref{Tab:stell_par_calib} shows the initial and corrected
final sets of stellar parameters of all sample stars.

In Figure~\ref{texcit}, we show the Fe\,I line abundances as a
function of excitation potential for all sample stars. Plotted are the
line abundances showing no trend of excitation potential as initially
derived and the final line abundances after temperature correction and
subsequent adjustment of v$_{mic}$ and $\log$\,g. This illustrates how
the slope changes as a result of our analysis, which is also
quantified in the two panels in Figure~\ref{slope}.

\begin{figure*}
 \begin{center}
   \includegraphics[clip=true,width=16cm,bbllx=30, bblly=165,
     bburx=552, bbury=774]{texcit_comp.ps} \figcaption{ \label{texcit}
     Fe\,I line abundances as a function of excitation potential
     $\chi$ for all sample stars. Plotted are the line abundances
     showing no trend of excitation potential as initially derived
     (blue squares), and the final line abundance trends following the
     temperature adjustment and after v$_{mic}$, $\log$\,g and
     metallicity have been adjusted (red triangles). Shown also are
     the corresponding initial (in brackets) and final temperature.}
 \end{center}
\end{figure*}

We then checked how the initial and corrected sets of stellar
parameters compare with an isochrone. We used 12\,Gyr isochrones with
$\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-3.0$, $-2.5$ and $-2.0$ and $\alpha$-enhancement of
$\mbox{[$\alpha$/Fe]}=0.3$ \citep{Y2_iso}. Figure~\ref{calib_iso}
shows the results. The initial, too cool temperatures pushed the
giants off the isochrones at $<4500$\,K. The corrected values agree
very well with the isochrones. The only small exception is the
subgiant HD140283, which is $\sim$0.3\,dex off the subgiant branch or
250\,K from the base of the giant branch. However, the initial stellar
parameters made this star more of a warm giant rather than a
subgiant. Hence, the corrected stellar parameters provide better
solution for this star.

\begin{figure}[!ht]
 \begin{center}
 \includegraphics[clip=true,width=8cm,bbllx=70, bblly=460, bburx=512,
   bbury=770]{stars_in_isochrone_y2} \figcaption{ \label{calib_iso}
   Our initial (small black open circles) and corrected stellar
   parameters (larger open blue circles) plotted over 12\,Gyr
   isochrones with $\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-3.0$, $\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-2.5$ and
   $\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-2.0$, all having an $\alpha$-enhancement of
   $\mbox{[$\alpha$/Fe]}=0.3$ \citep{Y2_iso}. The agreement of the
   stellar parameters with the isochrones following the temperature
   adjustment is very good. The cooler giants do not extend past
   the upper red giant branch of the isochrones anymore.}
 \end{center}
\end{figure}

Finally, we checked how the microturbulent velocities as a function of
the surface gravity compare with those of other studies. In
Figure~\ref{vmic} we compare our values with those of
\citet{cayrel2004} and \citet{heresII} who used photometrically
determined temperatures for their studies. There exists some scatter
in the microturbulent velocities for a given gravity within each study
and perhaps also some small systematic difference. While the Cayrel et
al. values have been derived with the same methodology as used in this
study, the Barklem et al. values are derived from synthesizing
spectral lines by simultaneously solving for all four stellar
parameters (although based on appropriate initial guesses). Table~3 of
\citet{heresII} suggests that with this technique slightly higher
surface gravities and higher microturbulent velocities (0.1 to
0.3\,km\,s$^{-1}$) are derived, compared to other literature studies.
Assuming typical uncertainties of 0.3\,km\,s$^{-1}$ our microturbulent
velocities are in good agreement with those from the literature.

\begin{figure}[!ht]
 \begin{center}
   \includegraphics[clip=true,width=8cm,bbllx=50, bblly=430,
     bburx=472, bbury=724]{vmic_comp.ps} \figcaption{ \label{vmic}
     Final microturbulent velocities as function of the surface
     gravity for the sample stars (black filled circles) as well as
     the \citet{cayrel2004} sample (small red circles) and
     \citet{heresII} sample (without the horizontal branch stars;
     small blue circles).}
 \end{center}
\end{figure}

Based on the properties of our chosen sample of stars, this method has
been accurate for metal-poor subgiants and giants with
$-3.3<\mbox{[Fe/H]}<-2.5$ that have high-resolution spectra with a
large wavelength coverage (at least 4750 to 6800\,{\AA}).

We carried out further tests to asses the validity of our adjustment
scheme at $\mbox{[Fe/H]}<-3.5$. As part of this we analyzed CD$-$38
245 ($\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-4.2$; e.g., \citealt{yong13_II}), HE~1300+0157
($\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-3.7$; \citealt{frebel_he1300}), HE~0557$-$4840
($\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-4.8$; \citealt{he0557}), HE~0107$-$5240
($\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-5.4$; \citealt{HE0107_Nature}), and HE~1327$-$2326
($\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-5.6$; \citealt{HE1327_Nature}). In all cases, we
found that the excitation temperatures yield much lower values
($\Delta$T$_{\rm eff}$ of 500 to 1400\,K) for these ultra metal-poor
stars than what was found for our sample of seven extremely metal-poor
stars (the maximal $\Delta$T$_{\rm eff}$ is 270\,K, see
Figure~\ref{calib}). Hence, we speculate that at $\mbox{[Fe/H]}<-3.5$
the excitation method to determine effective temperatures may not be
sufficient for the task, perhaps because of (metallicity dependent)
effects, such as NLTE effects or the accuracy of model atmospheres
(e.g. plane-parallel models for cooler, extended giants), or simply
because at those metallicities, only relatively few Fe lines are
available from the spectra.  While we used all known stars with
$\mbox{[Fe/H]}<-4.0$ that had published equivalent widths, the number
of stars remains small, and our individual $\Delta$T$_{\rm eff}$
values should perhaps be regarded as somewhat anecdotal. In summary,
we suggest that our calibration appears to be breaking down at
$\mbox{[Fe/H]}\sim-4.0$.

We also tested if any of our results would change if fewer blue lines
would be available due to the use of spectrographs other than MIKE on
Magellan or Xshooter on VLT that yield (nearly) full optical
coverage. Mimicking a Subaru/HDS two-arm setting (4000 to 6800\,{\AA})
and the VLT/UVES 580nm setting (4750 too 6800\,{\AA}), we checked
whether using reduced wavelength ranges would change our stellar
parameters. Only small changes were found. Temperatures changed by up
to 40\,K (making the stars warmer, although not in all cases) and the
microturbulent velocity changed between 0.05 and
0.3\,km\,s$^{-1}$. The main concern with this exercises was to have
sufficient number of Fe\,I lines (between 50 and 150) and Fe\,II lines
(more than at least 2 to 3) available, many of which (especially
Fe\,II) are located between 4400 and 4650\,{\AA}. Hence, for the near
main-sequence turn-off stars cutting at 4750\,{\AA} did not yield
well-determined stellar parameters since only 20 (for G64-12) and 6
(for CD$-$24 17504) Fe\,I and only 2 Fe\,II (both stars) were
available.

Finally, we note that any line abundance corrections based on line
formation under non-local thermodynamic equilibrium (NLTE) would
increase the surface gravity. We made a test where we assumed a simple
average correction for Fe\,I of 0.2\,dex, and assuming that NLTE does
not affect Fe\,II (e.g., \citealt{asplund_araa}). This increases the gravity of about
0.5\,dex.  Such a large change might be welcome for the cooler giants
when not applying our adjustments, i.e. in combination with the too
cool temperatures that result in too low gravities, but for
near-main-sequence stars a large gravity increase would pose problems
regardless. More detailed stellar parameter determination techniques
seem to be required to resolve this issue (e.g. \citealt{bergemann12,
  lind12}).

\section{Metal Abundance Results and Comparison with Literature Values}\label{ab_pa}

For completeness, we present the chemical abundances of our sample
stars in Table~\ref{abund}. Solar abundances are taken from
\citet{asplund09}. We note that while for the Fe abundances we employed
only lines with wavelengths longer than 3700\,{\AA}, but for a few
other elements (Ti, Cr, Ni) we also included a few lines at shorter
wavelengths for better statistics whenever they were measurable. For
each star, we also compared the abundances with those of another study
from the literature \citep{Norrisetal:2001, honda04,
  cayrel2004,Aokihe1327}. We chose those studies because they yielded
stellar parameters for a given star that agreed well with our
results. We took the abundances from \citet{frebel10} to ensure that
all studies employ the same solar abundances. The stellar abundance
differences in the final [X/Fe] values between our and the literature
studies are reasonable and typically within 0.2\,dex.

 \begin{deluxetable*}{lrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr}
 \tabletypesize{\tiny}
 \tablewidth{0pc}
\tablecaption{\label{abund} Magellan/MIKE Chemical Abundances of the Sample Stars}
 \tablehead{
 \colhead{}&
 \multicolumn{4}{c}{HD122563}&\colhead{}& \multicolumn{4}{c}{HE~1523$-$0901}&\colhead{}& \multicolumn{4}{c}{BD $-$18 5550}&\colhead{}& \multicolumn{4}{c}{CS22892-052}\\
 \cline{2-5} \cline{7-10}\cline{12-15}\cline{17-20}
 \colhead{Species} &
 \colhead{$\lg\epsilon (\mbox{X})$} & \colhead{[X/Fe]}& \colhead{$N$}& \colhead{$\sigma$}&\colhead{}&
 \colhead{$\lg\epsilon (\mbox{X})$} & \colhead{[X/Fe]}&  \colhead{$N$}& \colhead{$\sigma$}&\colhead{}&
 \colhead{$\lg\epsilon (\mbox{X})$} & \colhead{[X/Fe]}&  \colhead{$N$}& \colhead{$\sigma$}&\colhead{}&
 \colhead{$\lg\epsilon (\mbox{X})$} & \colhead{[X/Fe]}&  \colhead{$N$}& \colhead{$\sigma$} }
 \startdata
  Na\,I & 3.95 &     0.50 &     2 &0.05 &&  3.52 &   0.13 &  2 & 0.02 &&   3.45 &   0.23 &   2 & 0.07 &&   3.62 &    0.46&   2 &   0.10  \\
  Mg\,I & 5.26 &     0.45 &     7 &0.07 &&  5.08 &   0.33 &  6 & 0.09 &&   4.99 &   0.41 &   7 & 0.06 &&   4.85 &    0.33&   5 &   0.09  \\
  Si\,I & 5.17 &     0.45 &     3 &0.06 &&  5.09 &   0.43 &  1 & 0.00 &&   4.90 &   0.41 &   1 & 0.00 &&   5.05 &    0.62&   1 &   0.00  \\
  Ca\,I & 3.87 &     0.32 &    25 &0.08 &&  3.78 &   0.29 & 21 & 0.08 &&   3.72 &   0.40 &  25 & 0.08 &&   3.66 &    0.39&  18 &   0.08  \\
  Sc\,I & 0.42 &     0.07 &    13 &0.07 &&  0.27 &$-$0.03 & 12 & 0.08 &&   0.17 &   0.04 &   9 & 0.06 &&   0.03 & $-$0.04&   6 &   0.07  \\
  Ti\,I & 2.28 &     0.12 &    31 &0.07 &&  2.26 &   0.16 & 26 & 0.09 &&   2.15 &   0.22 &  28 & 0.09 &&   2.07 &    0.19&  13 &   0.09  \\
  Ti\,II& 2.37 &     0.21 &    51 &0.10 &&  2.35 &   0.24 & 41 & 0.11 &&   2.16 &   0.23 &  49 & 0.11 &&   2.10 &    0.22&  36 &   0.10  \\
  Cr\,I & 2.56 &  $-$0.29 &    21 &0.08 &&  2.65 &$-$0.15 & 14 & 0.11 &&   2.43 &$-$0.19 &  20 & 0.03 &&   2.26 & $-$0.30&  10 &   0.06  \\
  Cr\,II& 2.89 &     0.04 &     3 &0.05 &&  3.12 &   0.32 &  2 & 0.12 &&   2.73 &   0.11 &   3 & 0.05 &&   2.45 & $-$0.11&   1 &   0.00  \\
  Fe\,I & 4.71 &     0.00 &   222 &0.12 &&  4.65 &   0.00 &183 & 0.12 &&   4.48 &   0.00 & 233 & 0.11 &&   4.42 &    0.00& 191 &   0.12  \\
  Fe\,II& 4.72 &     0.01 &    26 &0.10 &&  4.65 &$-$0.00 & 25 & 0.13 &&   4.49 &   0.01 &  24 & 0.08 &&   4.44 &    0.01&  21 &   0.10  \\
  Co\,I & 2.42 &     0.22 &     6 &0.10 &&  2.49 &   0.34 &  4 & 0.20 &&   2.24 &   0.27 &   8 & 0.10 &&   2.20 &    0.29&   7 &   0.10  \\
  Ni\,I & 3.56 &     0.13 &    24 &0.08 &&  3.40 &   0.03 & 17 & 0.09 &&   3.35 &   0.15 &  22 & 0.11 &&   3.36 &    0.22&  11 &   0.09  \\
  Zn\,I & 1.92 &     0.15 &     2 &0.04 &&  1.92 &   0.20 &  2 & 0.04 &&   1.86 &   0.33 &   2 & 0.05 &&   2.06 &    0.58&   1 &   0.00  \\\hline
 \colhead{}&
 \multicolumn{4}{c}{HD140283}&\colhead{}& \multicolumn{4}{c}{CD$-$24 17504}&\colhead{}& \multicolumn{4}{c}{G64$-$12}\\
 \cline{2-5} \cline{7-10}\cline{12-15}
 \colhead{Species} &
 \colhead{$\lg\epsilon (\mbox{X})$} & \colhead{[X/Fe]}& \colhead{$N$}& \colhead{$\sigma$}&\colhead{}&
 \colhead{$\lg\epsilon (\mbox{X})$} & \colhead{[X/Fe]}&  \colhead{$N$}& \colhead{$\sigma$}&\colhead{}&
 \colhead{$\lg\epsilon (\mbox{X})$} & \colhead{[X/Fe]}&  \colhead{$N$}& \colhead{$\sigma$} \\\hline
  Na\,I &    3.77 &     0.17  &   2 &   0.07 &&    2.73 &  $-$0.28  &  2 &    0.03 &&    2.90  & $-$0.06 &   2 &    0.04 \\
  Mg\,I &    5.26 &     0.30  &   9 &   0.07 &&    4.75 &     0.38  &  5 &    0.08 &&    4.70  &    0.38 &   6 &    0.09 \\
  Si\,I &    5.41 &     0.54  &   2 &   0.03 &&    4.40 &     0.12  &  1 &    0.00 &&    4.52  &    0.29 &   1 &    0.00 \\
  Ca\,I &    4.00 &     0.30  &  20 &   0.07 &&    3.32 &     0.21  &  3 &    0.06 &&    3.58  &    0.52 &  13 &    0.08 \\
  Sc\,I &    0.54 &     0.03  &   7 &   0.05 &&    0.21 &     0.29  &  1 &    0.00 &&    0.17  &    0.30 &   1 &    0.00 \\
  Ti\,I &    2.55 &     0.25  &  20 &   0.08 &&    3.12 &     1.40  &  2 &    0.02 && \nodata  & \nodata &   0 & \nodata \\
  Ti\,II&    2.52 &     0.21  &  44 &   0.08 &&    1.85 &     0.13  &  9 &    0.06 &&    2.18  &    0.51 &  14 &    0.07 \\
  Cr\,I &    2.83 &  $-$0.17  &  14 &   0.07 &&    2.26 &  $-$0.15  &  5 &    0.06 &&    2.22  & $-$0.14 &   6 &    0.08 \\
  Cr\,II&    3.09 &     0.09  &   3 &   0.08 &&    2.71 &     0.30  &  1 &    0.00 && \nodata  & \nodata &   0 & \nodata \\
  Fe\,I &    4.86 &     0.00  & 185 &   0.08 &&    4.27 &     0.00  & 49 &    0.11 &&    4.22  &    0.00 &  70 &    0.08 \\
  Fe\,II&    4.87 &     0.01  &  19 &   0.07 &&    4.29 &     0.01  &  2 &    0.02 &&    4.24  &    0.02 &   3 &    0.01 \\
  Co\,I &    2.59 &     0.24  &   6 &   0.05 &&    2.48 &     0.72  &  3 &    0.05 &&    2.17  &    0.46 &   2 &    0.02 \\
  Ni\,I &    3.77 &     0.20  &  22 &   0.08 &&    3.33 &     0.33  &  7 &    0.09 &&    3.19  &    0.25 &  10 &    0.09 \\
  Zn\,I &    2.05 &     0.14  &   2 &   0.05 && \nodata &  \nodata  &  0 & \nodata && \nodata  & \nodata &   0 & \nodata \\
 \enddata
 \tablecomments{ [X/Fe] abundance ratios are computed with [Fe\,I/H]
   abundances of the respective stars. Solar abundances have been
   taken from \citet{asplund09}. The uncertainties listed are standard
   deviations of the line abundances for each element. Standard errors
   for each abundance will be much smaller. For abundances measured
   from only one line, we adopt a nominal uncertainty of 0.10\,dex.}
\end{deluxetable*}

Table~\ref{Tab:stell_par_literature} lists stellar parameters for an
additional five stars from the sample of \citet{cayrel2004} for which
we also had Magellan/MIKE spectra. We used these stars to further test
our method and stellar parameter determination technique. Furthermore,
we add three of our sample stars (HD122563, BD $-$18 5550,
CS22892-052) because they are also part of the Cayrel et
al. sample. This allows up to compare our stellar parameters with the
Cayrel et al. results as well as with those of \citet{yong13_II} who
analyzed the Cayrel et al. stars as part of a sample of 190
metal-poor stars from the literature. Figure~\ref{iso_literature}
illustrates the results and shows the good agreement of our effective
temperature and surface gravity compared to the photometrically
derived temperatures and gravities (also derived from the Fe\,I-Fe\,II
ionization equilibrium) by \citet{cayrel2004} (top panel) and
\citet{yong13_II} (bottom panel).

\begin{deluxetable}{lcccc}
\tablecolumns{5}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tabletypesize{\tiny}
\tablecaption{\label{Tab:stell_par_literature} Stellar Parameters of a Test Sample}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Star}  &
\colhead{$T_{\rm{eff}}$}&\colhead{$\log (g)$ }    &\colhead{$\mbox{[Fe/H]}$ }  &\colhead{$v_{\rm{micr}}$ }\\
\colhead{}&
\colhead{[K]} &\colhead{[dex]}&\colhead{[dex]}&\colhead{[km\,s$^{-1}$]}
}
\startdata
\multicolumn{5}{c}{initial determination}\\\hline
CS22873-166 &  4350 &   0.10 & $-$3.02 & 2.70  \\
HD122563    &  4380 &   0.10 & $-$2.93 & 2.65  \\
CS30325-094 &  4380 &   0.40 & $-$3.90 & 2.40  \\
HD186478    &  4520 &   0.60 & $-$2.64 & 2.10  \\
CD$-$38 245 &  4500 &   0.85 & $-$4.28 & 2.05  \\
BD$-$18 5550&  4570 &   0.80 & $-$3.20 & 2.05  \\
CS31082-001 &  4640 &   1.25 & $-$3.00 & 2.25  \\
CS22892-052 &  4620 &   0.85 & $-$3.24 & 2.20  \\
HD2796      &  4660 &   0.45 & $-$2.65 & 2.35  \\\hline

\multicolumn{5}{c}{after temperature correction}\\\hline
CS22873-166 &  4585 & 0.90 & $-$2.90 &2.60  \\
HD122563    &  4612 & 0.85 & $-$2.79 &2.30  \\
CS30325-094 &  4612 & 1.05 & $-$3.70 &2.15  \\
HD186478    &  4738 & 1.30 & $-$2.50 &2.15  \\
CD$-$38 245 &  4720 & 1.40 & $-$4.06 &1.95  \\
BD$-$18 5550&  4783 & 1.25 & $-$3.02 &2.00  \\
CS31082-001 &  4846 & 1.70 & $-$2.82 &2.25  \\
CS22892-052 &  4828 & 1.35 & $-$3.08 &2.15  \\
HD2796      &  4864 & 1.00 & $-$2.50 &2.25  \\\hline

\multicolumn{5}{c}{Cayrel et al. (2004)}\\\hline
CS22873-166 &  4550 & 0.90 &$-$2.97 & 2.10 \\
HD122563    &  4600 & 1.10 &$-$2.82 & 2.10 \\
CS30325-094 &  4950 & 1.50 &$-$3.30 & 2.00 \\
HD186478    &  4700 & 1.30 &$-$2.59 & 2.00 \\
CD$-$38 245 &  4800 & 1.50 &$-$4.19 & 2.20 \\
BD$-$18 5550&  4750 & 1.40 &$-$3.06 & 1.80 \\
CS31082-001 &  4825 & 1.80 &$-$2.91 & 1.50 \\
CS22892-052 &  4850 & 1.60 &$-$3.03 & 1.90 \\
HD2796      &  4950 & 2.10 &$-$2.47 & 1.50 \\\hline

\multicolumn{5}{c}{Yong et al. (2013)}\\\hline
CS22873-166 &  4516 & 0.77 &$-$2.74 & 1.60 \\
HD122563    &  4843 & 1.62 &$-$2.54 & 1.80 \\
CS30325-094 &  4948 & 1.85 &$-$3.35 & 1.60 \\
HD186478    &  4629 & 1.07 &$-$2.68 & 2.00 \\
CD$-$38 245 &  4857 & 1.54 &$-$4.15 & 2.20 \\
BD$-$18 5550&  4558 & 0.81 &$-$3.20 & 1.70 \\
CS31082-001 &  4866 & 1.66 &$-$2.75 & 1.40 \\
CS22892-052 &  4825 & 1.54 &$-$3.03 & 1.60 \\
HD2796      &  4923 & 1.84 &$-$2.31 & 1.60
 \enddata
\tablecomments{The original abundance from \citet{cayrel2004} have been
  redetermined using the solar abundances from \citet{asplund09}. }
\end{deluxetable}

\begin{figure}[!hb]
 \begin{center}
 \includegraphics[clip=true,width=8cm,bbllx=70, bblly=210, bburx=512,
   bbury=770]{stars_in_isochrone_cayrel_stars}
 \figcaption{ \label{iso_literature} Initial (small open circles),
   corrected (larger open circles) stellar parameters compared with
   literature values (crosses) of \citet{cayrel2004} (top panel) and
   \citet{yong13_II} (bottom panel). Color code: green: HD2796, red:
   CS22873-166, black: CS30325-094,  blue: HD186478,
   cyan: CS31082-001. Overplotted are 12\,Gyr isochrones with
   $\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-3.0$, $\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-2.5$ and $\mbox{[Fe/H]}=-2.0$
   (from left to right), all having an $\alpha$-enhancement of
   $\mbox{[$\alpha$/Fe]}=0.3$ \citep{Y2_iso}. See text for
   discussion. }
 \end{center}
\end{figure}

The only star for which we determine very different stellar parameters
than \citet{cayrel2004} and \citet{yong13_II} is CS30325-094. We find
its corrected temperature to be about 340\,K cooler. A simple check of
the shape of the Balmer lines in comparison with the stars from our
sample suggests the star to be not warmer than 4800\,K (on our
adjusted scale). This remains in contrast with what has been found
from photometry.

A similar, albeit less severe case, is HD2796. Our corrected temperature
is about 100\,K cooler, but this star also has a somewhat higher
metallicity ($\mbox{[Fe/H]}\sim-2.5$). If the differences between excitation
temperatures and photometric temperatures was less severe for giants
at higher metallicity, this could explain the discrepant
temperature. However, both our initial and final stellar parameter
solutions as well as that of \citet{cayrel2004} do not match any
position of the red giant branch on the isochrone. Rather, the star sits
slightly above it, perhaps suggesting that the star is descending onto
the horizontal branch. However, \cite{yong13_II} do find a gravity
that that matches the isochrone. Again, the shape of the
Balmer lines suggest a cooler temperature than the photometrically
derived temperatures.

\section{Conclusion}\label{sec:conc}

We have presented a straight-forward method to adjust spectroscopic
temperatures that have been derived from Fe\,I line abundances as a
function of their excitation potential. The main aim was to avoid
obtaining too cool spectroscopic temperatures especially for upper red
giant branch stars that are often several hundred degrees cooler than
photometrically derived temperatures. A pleasant side effect of this
temperature adjustment is that higher surface gravities are obtained
and artificially high microturbulent velocities are avoided. Overall
this brings the fully spectroscopic, reddening independent stellar
parameters in agreement with photometrically derived ones, and also
with isochrones of the respective stellar metallicities. While the
stellar sample is based on stars with $-3.3<\mbox{[Fe/H]}<-2.5$,
additional tests indicate that our adjustment scheme is not usable for
stars with $\mbox{[Fe/H]}<-4.0$.

We tested our method with additional stars from the \citet{cayrel2004}
sample that were also analyzed by \citet{yong13_II} and generally
found agreement to within $\sim$50\,K. The results of applying the new
temperature determination method to new samples of extremely
metal-poor stars will be reported in a forthcoming paper.

\acknowledgements{A.R.C. acknowledges the financial support through
  the Australian Research Council Laureate Fellowship 0992131, and
  from the Australian Prime Minister's Endeavour Award Research
  Fellowship, which has facilitated his research at MIT. This research
  has made use of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg,
  France and of NASA's Astrophysics Data System Bibliographic
  Services.}

\textit{Facilities:} \facility{Magellan-Clay (MIKE)}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaArXiv


Our Calgary Stampeders are back in the Grey Cup game taking place this Sunday November 25th, 2018. We will feature the big game live with sound at the Stage Bar and in the Blaze Bar & Grill. Our game day features will include ½ price wings during the game, along with a drink feature at both the Blaze Bar and Stage Bar. Rewards Club Members will also enjoy the perks of the 106th Grey Cup as we will offer 106 bonus Rewards Club points all day when they swipe their Rewards Cards.
The 106th Grey Cup will be featured live with sound at the Stage Bar and Blaze Bar & Grill.
Rewards Club Members will enjoy the perks of the 106th Grey Cup with a daily bonus of 106 Rewards Club Points when they swipe their card on Sunday November 25th, 2018 between 9:30am – 11:55PM.


text:
Home » Articles » Culture » Tattoos During Covid: How D.C. Area Artists + Shops Are Meeting the Moment
Globe Electric Tattoo. Photo by Jeff Marsala.
Tattoos During Covid: How D.C. Area Artists + Shops Are Meeting the Moment
March 1, 2021 @ 4:45pm | Haley McKey
It's been a year since our lives were turned upside down by the pandemic. New words and ways of being have become part of our daily experience. From masking up to social distancing to quarantine bubbles, we're navigating uncharted territory every day.
Covid-19 also changed how we take care of ourselves, who we let into our space, and the things we do to our hair, nails and skin to feel good and express who we are. People still want tattoos, and tattoo artists – with some new precautions in place – are still putting incredible works of art on their clients. We spoke with area artists and shop owners to learn what's changed, and what's stayed the same, about getting tattooed.
The first stage of pandemic was a frightening time for many artists.
"If I had somehow known when the lockdown would end, I think I could've made better use of the time," says Eric Doyle, who co-owns Globe Electric Tattoo in Columbia Heights. "The only thing I could muster sustained focus for was completing applications for grants and loans."
Osei K, known in the DMV as the Freehand King, uses a special technique, tattooing directly on his clients without a stencil at his private studio in Takoma. He says the lockdown period was tough, but did have some unexpected benefits.
"I've never really had that much downtime since my early teens," Osei K notes. "Just being able to sit for a few months actually freed my mind of all that clutter and allowed me to focus on the non-work aspects of life a whole lot more."
Many artists say they've used the time to work on other creative projects, along with constantly refreshing the news for updates like everyone else.
Globe Electric Tattoo. Photo by Victoria Milko.
The summer reopening period presented its own challenges. The pandemic hit right as Billy Stardust, owner of Electric Unicorn Tattoo Collective in Sterling, Virginia, was planning to open his own shop with his husband. They went ahead and signed a lease in April 2020.
"We said, 'Why not just do this now?'" Stardust recalls. "Then we can be ready for all the mandatory things we'll need to do [when we reopen]."
After months of preparation, Electric Unicorn opened in August of last year. The pandemic required some changes to the layout: Instead of a long bar up front, Stardust installed separate, stainless steel island tables that encourage people to keep their distance while looking over portfolios.
"It's like 'Full Metal Jacket.' This is my little island, there are many like it, but this one is mine."
One part of the tattoo experience that's definitely changed due to Covid? Walk-in tattoos. Stardust offers walk-ins, but is taking a new approach.
"Typically, someone walks in with three or four friends, and they hang out and watch the process. Now, we limit the number of guests and let them stay until we apply the stencil. Then we ask our lobby to be client-free unless you're actually getting a service."
Stardust notes it's important to clients to have that support, especially when they're getting tattooed for the first time.
"We don't want to take away your comfort or your sounding board, but we don't want to have 13 people in here cheering you on," he says.
Other shops have eliminated walk-ins for now.
"I do miss being more of a fast-paced, walk-in shop, but I don't see us going back to having packed waiting rooms anytime soon," says Sarah Fendlay, co-owner and tattooer at Electric Cat Scratch Tattoos & Piercings. We're running more like a private studio right now and just taking it week by week. What else can you really do after such an unexpectedly bonkers year?"
Electric Unicorn Tattoo Collective. Photo courtesy of location.
Even though most shops are using the private appointment model right now, Doyle says he doesn't see them replacing traditional shops anytime soon.
"Personally, I think it would be tragic if they ever did. There's something very special about an older but well-maintained, traditional, walk-in tattoo shop. There's no replicating the mystique of one of those places."
Something else that has changed during the pandemic are refunds and rescheduling policies. Artists are adapting to their clients' needs. Osei K says he typically doesn't offer refunds, but made an exception for one client in another industry hard hit by Covid: bars and restaurants.
"I have a client who is a bartender. He put down a deposit before I closed up [at the beginning of the pandemic]. I reached out and said, 'Hey, I know you're a bartender. You can rebook if you're not making money.'"
It's also good for protecting client and artist safety. Fendlay says Electric Cat Scratch has been flexible with their deposit and rescheduling policies "because we want people to feel comfortable moving their appointment if they've been exposed."
So, how can clients give back to their favorite artists as the pandemic drags on?
"As long as we remain able to operate safely, [people can] get tattooed," Doyle says. "Also, please be patient when scheduling. The protocols everyone need to follow to reduce risk are still relatively new, so don't be surprised if there are some hiccups or inconveniences along the way."
Osei K. Photo courtesy of subject.
"If your artist isn't currently working, book an appointment for a later date," Osei K adds. "It'll help provide some security when things get back to normal."
Stardust says that along with keeping scheduled appointments, there are other creative ways to lend support to artists.
"Check out the other artwork they have for sale, or even commission original art from them. Even interacting with social media posts and resharing to your own personal pages can make a difference: the more exposure, the better."
For a lot of people, getting a tattoo isn't just about collecting a new piece. It's a way to connect, especially right now.
"[Clients] want what comes with a tattoo: camaraderie, friendship, all the humanity that you're missing," Stardust adds. "They know we'll make sure they're safe, and this is an appointment they can keep that makes them feel a little normal."
The pandemic has made it clear to many artists that the rewards of the tattooing process flow both ways.
"The main takeaway from this experience is a tremendous appreciation for our clients," Doyle notes. "Not only the debt of gratitude I owe them for supporting us financially, [but] it's [also] a privilege to interact with other people, have conversations and collaborate on projects."
At Electric Cat Scratch, Fendlay shares a similar sentiment.
"Tattooing has always been a form of claiming control of your body, but recently it's become more. For some of my clients, I'm the only person they have physically been in contact with in months. I am as grateful to spend time with them as they are with me."
Princess Leia by Sarah Fendlay. Photo courtesy of Electric Cat Scratch Tattoos & Piercings.
Electric Cat Scratch Tattoos: 505 Florida Ave. NW, DC; www.ecstattoos.com // @tattoosbysarah + @ecstattoos
Electric Unicorn Tattoo Collective: 45665 West Church Rd. Suite 101, Sterling, VA; electricunicorntattoo.net // @billystardust + @electricunicorntattoo
Freehand King Studios: 7410 Georgia Ave. 2nd floor (Unit 3), NW, DC; www.freehandking.com // @freehandking (Note: Not currently booking new appointments)
Globe Electric Tattoo: 3821 14th St. Unit C, NW, DC; www.globetattoodc.com // @globe_electric + @eodoyle

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


It's no secret that coriander is g-damn divisive. Love it, or hate it, you're bound to have a strong opinion about whether or not it's perfectly acceptable to pepper your plate with it.
And for years, we've merely speculated about why the leafy green herb causes so many to turn up their noses. But now, we finally have a definitive answer: it's hard-wired into our genes.
"We have smell receptors in our nose that are responsible for identifying volatile compounds in the atmosphere, including volatile compounds released from potential foods," explains Professor Russell Keast, a specialist in sensory and food science at Deakin University.
Your hatred for the herb could also have been determined by your exposure to it during childhood.
The bad news? If you're not already a fan, you're unlikely to come around to the taste.
"If somebody has the genetic receptor variant and is experiencing high levels of bitterness, having repeated exposure to that food isn't necessarily going to teach the likening of that food," Keast concludes.


All publications are in .PDF format, unless otherwise noted. If unable to access the .PDF documents, please ensure that you have Adobe Acrobat Reader to use the forms. You may download it for free from Adobe. If you already have a copy of Adobe Reader and one of the forms will not work for you. Visit Adobe and ensure you have the most recent version of the software.


Party in Pink 2015 with ZJ Anna & Carlos!!!
*Pics: Double ZES Richardo & Ai Lee from Switzerland MasterClass!
ZUMBAKO.com is hitting the TV media!!!
Rogers TV came to investigate this new ZUMBA fitness craze!
A BIG THANK YOU to Everyone for coming and lending us your energy, spirit, and enthusiasm!!!
Richmond Hill Class Launch Event!!
The Grand Opening was a OVERWHELMING Zumbalicious PARTY!!!!
OOOMMMGG!!! Beyond all our *wildest dreams*!!!
2nd Set of Professional Photos are in!
He is Zumba Convention's Hip-Hop Specialist Presenter!! He is the STAR of the ZIN23 & ZIN28 & Exhilarate DVD release! He is the SuperStar ZES from half the Globe away!!
And he Blew Our Mind with his wicked Energy today!!! Thank you SOOOOO much, George for showing Toronto how to PARTY!!!
Saturday AM Class Launch Event!!
Another one of the Legendary Mario Zumba Party!!! Needless to say, Hot Hot HOT!!!
Markham Street Festival would not be the same without Music, and ZUMBA!!!
One word, Fun, Fun, FUN!!! Wicked instructors line up, 2hrs of a sweating good time!!
ZIN Day Canada 2012 + ZIN41 Live Filming!!!
ZIN41 Filming with Zumba Super Stars Betsy Dopico & Ricardo Marmitte!!! Thank you Zumba HQ for bringing a mini-Convention to our fair city of Toronto!! Zumba Instructors from all over Canada gathered here today to celebrate, and party with the best!!! That's the entire Canadian ZES & Jammers team + Betsy Dopico!!!
Zumba Fitness INVADED Richmond Hill!!!
OMG!! Thank you, Thank You EVERYONE for making our Thursday Nite Class an OVERWHELMING Success!! The Passion, the Energy, the Enthusiasm, and the POPULATION were OFF THE HOOK! We are truly humbled and blessed by having such a wonderful crowd for our Grand Opening in Richmond Hill. We LOVE you ALL!!!!
Zumba Charity Event to End Women's Cancer 2012!!!
Zumba Convention 2011 @ Orlando, FL!!!
We had the Time of our LIVES at the Zumba Convention 2011!!!
YES, that is PITBULL!!! Live!!!
And a Concert with WYCLEF JEAN in the Zumba Glow & Glitter White Party!!!
CanFitPro 2011 convention's Zumba After-Party!! ~ with the Zumba Princess Tanya Beardsley!!!
Zumba Fitness invades Spring DanceSport Challenge!!!
The Toronto Team showcased what Latin HEAT is all about; Zumba Party Style!!
We all had an AWESOME time seeing the world of competitive ballroom, and are thrilled to be part of this amazing dance competition event.
Another angle here, with HD version.
#2 Emergency Zumba Charity for Japan!
Was a TOTAL SUCCESS!!! We raised $2788 for a country that needs our help!
Thank you to The Group of 7 + Z-Jammer Edgar + Others Fabulous Instructors for bringing PARTY ON for Japan again!
Playdium is a place known for FUN! and tonite, we Cranked up the FUN at the most FUN place in town with ZUMBA!!! Hosted by Cha Cha of CultureKingdom + 10 Z-Instructors + 1 ZES: Andrea Sandu It was a party that ROCKED the night!!
The year's BIGGEST Event, the Zumbathon Charity for Princess Margaret Hospital!! At the most Grand of locations, the Royal York Hotel!!!
With close to 200 participates, we raised more than $4000 for Cure for Breast Cancer!!!
If you were there at the Emergency Zumba Charity Event for Japan, You know that the party ROCKED!!!!
We raised more than $1600 All thx to you!!
Club Viva is a GORGEOUS, and Huge Dance studion, perfect for us to get together to celebrate Valentine's Day the proper way! 7 Dynamic Instructors lead the Party to a frezy level!! Dance, Dance, DANCE! :) With 4 ballroom dancers in the instructors team, we all got to experience the different and graceful styles of Zumba!
ZumbaKo is honored to be part of the instructors team, throwing a Zumba Party for a Great Cause, what could be better than Zumba-ing for charity!
The weather got suddenly REALLY wet, as thunderstorm rolled into the GTA, but the Party continued!
A BIG Zumba Hug for all those who braved the storm, and had a ROCK'IN GOOD TIME with us!!
…...…Zumba = Spicy Latin Dance + Cardio Fitness!!
ZUMBAKO.com is hitting the TV media!!! Rogers TV came to investigate this new ZUMBA fitness craze!
[HD Pictures of Rogers TV interview] Rogers TV asked us, "what is this Zumba craze all about?" We told them that it's something they must experience. So they came to one of our ROCK'IN classes … with a camera crew …!The Energy of the class totally BLEW THEM AWAY!! Pictures' worth 1,000 words, see for yourself! :) A BIG THANK YOU to Everyone for coming and lending us your energy, spirit, and enthusiasm!


Unsure of how to improve your organisation's password security?
Our Developing a Password Policy Fact Sheet can help you set guidelines for creating, protecting and changing passwords. It outlines the objectives of a policy, what your policy should cover, and contributes to your overall IT security.


text:
Mimela discalis är en skalbaggsart som beskrevs av Ohaus 1915. Mimela discalis ingår i släktet Mimela och familjen Rutelidae. Inga underarter finns listade i Catalogue of Life.

Källor

Skalbaggar
discalis

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


text:
Positively Austen
Posted on May 22, 2014 by lillianmwoodall
Music: REM – Accelerate
This past week my electricity has been on and off. An army of emergency roadwork-men and their torture instruments have rendered my bedroom (at the front of the house with poorly-fitted windows) a place of misery and headaches. And I've lost so many documents halfway through the creation, between power surges, bah.
This afternoon the electricity has, however, steadied itself, so I've caught up on a few things.
So have I used my internet-deprived time wisely? Well, I read Emma (1815). And P&P has been supplanted from its post of L's Favourite Austen.
Firstly, a quick summary.
Twenty-one-year-old Emma Woodhouse, rich, clever and beautiful, is Highbury's most successful matchmaker…whose conspiracies accidentally ruin the prospects of all those round her, and eventually her own.
2009 BBC serial adaptation starring Romola Garai – "Oohoo, my evil matchmaking plot is going to plan!"
The long version:
Harriet Smith falls in love three times in a single year;
pompous vicar Mr Elton and his vulgar wife cannot find anything to say that could possibly entertain Miss Woodhouse;
old Mr Woodhouse remarks upon the wholesome nature of gruel;
Mr John Knightley disdains all that threatens his independence;
Mrs Isabella Knightley talks of Dr Wingfield, and her father Mr Woodhouse of Dr Perry;
Perry's children steal the cake;
Mr Weston is too hospitable, and his wife too commending of Emma;
Emma flirts with Frank;
Frank gives Miss Fairfax five alphabet blocks spelling a name of some embarrassment;
Miss Fairfax remains 'reserved',
though her aunt Miss Bates expounds [at great, great length] upon her virtues every Wednesday;
Emma insults Miss Bates;
Mr Knightley scolds Emma;
and Emma finally realises that if anyone marries Mr Knightley, then it must be herself—Mr Knightley, her lifelong friend, confidante, the only one to point out her faults, whom she has taken for granted all her life, who has loved her eight years, but never kissed her hand.
excursion to Box Hill, with all the main cast
Some are quick to note that Emma Woodhouse is an anomaly amongst Austen's other heroines. Her financial circumstances are already advantageous, and she does not mean to marry. Though she promotes matches, and advocates the feelings of all her acquaintances, she does not know her own!
Emma and the exciting Frank Churchill
Nevertheless, in my opinion Emma is Austen at her most romantic. Not because Emma calls herself a matchmaker, but because the novel is her journey to discovering that she is in love, and he has been waiting for her all that time. In the ups and downs of their relationship, he is always right, and she wrong. His influence over her is the most beautiful thing—for he is the only one whose candid opinion Emma admits, however unpleasant. They know one another so well they'll fit easily into conjugal routine—whereas even Lizzy and Darcy have only known one another a year.
C'mon, I couldn't leave this out.
P&P is the ultimate happily-ever-after love story, and Darcy the 'babe' of 'babes' (due in some part, I confess, to Colin Firth in a wet shirt).
Personally I don't feel that Elizabeth suffers enough. Her pride is wounded, eventually her love—but her interminable wit is her buoy in a roiling sea. Emma's active presumption carves her misfortunes; she deals with guilt. Elizabeth is surrounded by people who have far more to regret than she! Emma is an anti-heroine (as, in effect, most of us are), but Knightley's devotion is oddly more justified than any of Austen's other heroes'–why, in the last pages of Northanger Abbey it's admitted that Henry Tilney loves Catherine Morland out of gratitude! What if that were a universal rule?
"Abominable flirting! I want to dance with Emma!"
P&P wouldn't even rival Emma were it not more tightly written (80k as opposed to 120k), and lacking the incontestable Miss Bates and Mr Woodhouse (I feel like screaming every time he mentions his gruel. No censure of John Knightley for voicing his frustration).
Persuasion is another rival of the time-assured P&P. It is Austen's latest, and her characters comparatively 'aged' (Catherine is fifteen, roughly half the age of Anne Elliot). When I said that Elizabeth has not suffered enough, she has not half the suffering of poor Anne. ANNE IS STILL IN LOVE WITH CAPTAIN WENTWORTH, eight years after she rejected him. But she is gracious enough to suppress it, for his sake. The world needs more books about rejection. (Plus it's so cool to think rejection is the only power women of that era had. Hence tragic that Anne was manipulated into it, and the Captain won't humble himself a second time.)
Sally Hawkins looking tragic as Anne Elliot in the 2007 adaptation
Both film adaptations of Persuasion I find excellent. Equally heart-wrenching are the looks between Anne and Wentworth—in love, in denial, each in ignorance of the other's devotion. It reads like a dream, for that's what it is.
Another awesome thing about Emma is that there's no direct antagonist. Emma's demon conceit wreaks havoc, but she's so HUMAN…I, at least, recognise her desire to manipulate people's lives for her own amusement and triumph, though she may disguise it as genuine philanthropy. You can excuse her for wanting something to do with her life: single, childless, with an old father and an empty house, besides the societal pressures of being a woman at that time, Emma frankly has nothing better to do.
Mrs Elton and her 'caro sposo, Mister E', bleurgh *throws slimeballs*
Anyway, there aren't any Willoughbys and Wickhams with questionable motives: just a small town of multi-dimensional people who make their own suffering, not usually out of spite (the Eltons' motives could be debated, but I find them more droll than malicious).
Finally the word play. Austen is famous for her way of twisting words to mock human and societal folly. Many people read her books solely for that purpose-
I was going to cite a few examples and analyse them and extol their wit, but I wrote this post in September and can't remember where on earth my thought-chain was going. Perhaps I'll finish that paragraph when I next read Austen. Sorry for any inconvenience caused, and for the abrupt(!) manner of ending. Perhaps it will amuse you.
"Hey, I didn't even know Mr Knightley could dance!" – the best of the Austen dances, hands down
This entry was posted in Reading and tagged Anne Elliot, anti-heroism, Austen, books, Catherine Morland, character, character suffering, Elizabeth Bennet, Emma, Emma Woodhouse, Jane Austen, Jonny Lee Miller, Mr Knightley, Northanger Abbey, Persuasion, Pride and Prejudice, reading, romance, Romola Garai, societal pressures, society, TV adaptations by lillianmwoodall. Bookmark the permalink.
4 thoughts on "Positively Austen"
Miss Alexandrina on May 22, 2014 at 2:14 pm said:
"Emma is Austen at her most romantic." Agreed. For the same reasons you've given. 🙂 Knightley is a great deal nicer than Darcy as well – and, dare I say it? sensitive to those around his world.
Personally, I'm rather taken with the 1996 film version, starring Mark Strong (let it never be said that he only plays bad guys!) and the wonderful Kate Beckinsale (you might recall that she played Alice in my much favoured Through the Looking Glass).
lillianmwoodall on May 23, 2014 at 9:07 pm said:
Yes! Knightley has 'solicitude', Austen would say 😉
I didn't know there was a film! I'll put it on my birthday list (the more adaptations, the better). I knew there was a 1995 serial, which was so awful I couldn't finish episode one.
A.M.B. on May 31, 2014 at 9:30 pm said:
For a long time, Emma was my favorite Austen. With age, I've started to identify more with Anne, and so Persuasion is now my favorite. I thought Sally Hawkins was a great Anne, but the running scene at the end was a little too much for me. I prefer the earlier version with Amanda Root, not that the bizarre kiss was any better than all the running in the later version!
lillianmwoodall on June 1, 2014 at 8:02 pm said:
I'm sixteen, but to be honest I identify with Anne more than the younger ones. All the contradictions and drawn-out-ness of Anne's thoughts (the introversion and emotional repression, I suppose) resonates with my experience rather better than parties and attention!
I loved Amanda Root as well – thus far it's the only Austen of which I really like more than one adaptation. They're done very differently, too – the 2007 one has a lot of tragic diary-writing and staring-directly-into-camera. Accepting that they're both equally good, the main swayer towards the 2007 one would be Rupert Penry-Jones' beautiful eyes 😉


text:
namespace caprica { namespace pex {

struct PexAsmWriter final
{
  // The indent level. Yes, this spelling is deliberate.
  size_t ident{ 0 };

  explicit PexAsmWriter(std::ostream& dest) : strm(dest) { }
  PexAsmWriter(const PexAsmWriter&) = delete;
  ~PexAsmWriter() = default;

  template<typename T>
  void writeKV(const char* key, T val) {
    static_assert(false, "Unknown type for the value!");
  }

  template<>
  void writeKV(const char* key, time_t val) {
    ensureIndent();
    // TODO: Add a comment output of the times in the local time.
    strm << '.' << key << ' ' << (unsigned long long)val;
    writeln();
  }

  template<>
  void writeKV(const char* key, std::string val) {
    ensureIndent();
    strm << '.' << key << " \"" << escapeString(val) << "\"";
    writeln();
  }

  template<>
  void writeKV(const char* key, PexUserFlags val) {
    ensureIndent();
    strm << '.' << key << " " << val.data;
    writeln();
  }

  template<typename... Args>
  void write(const std::string& msg, Args&&... args) {
    ensureIndent();
    strm << formatString(msg, args...);
  }

  template<typename... Args>
  void writeln(const std::string& msg, Args&&... args) {
    ensureIndent();
    strm << formatString(msg, args...);
    writeln();
  }

  void writeln() {
    haveIndented = false;
    strm << std::endl;
  }

  static std::string escapeString(const std::string& str) {
    std::ostringstream dest;

    for (auto c : str) {
      switch (c) {
        case '\n':
          dest.put('\\');
          dest.put('n');
          break;
        case '\t':
          dest.put('\\');
          dest.put('t');
          break;
        case '"':
          dest.put('\\');
          dest.put('"');
          break;
        case '\\':
          dest.put('\\');
          dest.put('\\');
          break;
        default:
          dest.put(c);
          break;
      }
    }

    return dest.str();
  }

private:
  bool haveIndented{ false };
  std::ostream& strm;

  void ensureIndent() {
    if (!haveIndented) {
      for (size_t i = 0; i < ident; i++) {
        strm << "  ";
      }
      haveIndented = true;
    }
  }

  template<typename... Args>
  static std::string formatString(const std::string& msg, Args&&... args) {
    constexpr bool hasArgs = sizeof...(args) != 0;
    if (hasArgs) {
      size_t size = std::snprintf(nullptr, 0, msg.c_str(), args...) + 1;
      std::unique_ptr<char[]> buf(new char[size]);
      std::snprintf(buf.get(), size, msg.c_str(), args...);
      return std::string(buf.get(), buf.get() + size - 1);
    } else {
      return msg;
    }
  }
};

}}

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


OK, men aren't all bad. There's enough to love there, even if sometimes they make you want to tear your hair out. One point in which they're not particularly "on it" is when it comes to marriage. It's not that they're against the idea, it's just that they're not always as proactive as you'd like. They take way too long to get down on one knee, while all the while you're just sitting there, waiting to be asked. While you can't rush him along, you can nudge him in the right direction! We show you how to do it below. Take the advice, and you might just be engaged sooner than you think!
There are no guarantees in life. Just because you're both fully committed to each other now, there's nothing to say that it won't all come undone tomorrow, or some other point further on down the line. Relationships take work, and if you're letting yours run on autopilot because you assume a proposal is inevitable, then you might be waiting a long time. If you want to get married, then have a marriage worthy relationship. If you make it impossible for him to think of marrying anyone other than you, he'll get the message sooner rather than later.
When you're married, you're a bona fide team. But you don't have to wait until you're hitched to start thinking in terms of "we"; that can happen as soon as you feel it. A marriage is a union of two people, but the actual union happens well before the proposal; that's just a natural evolution of the love. If you're loyal to him and he's loyal to you, then the engagement will naturally follow. The team aspect doesn't just apply to here and now, either; it can apply to when you're talking about the future, too.
It's likely that he's already thought about marriage, and that you're already lightly discussed the possibility before. But if you think he's in any doubt about your readiness, you can drop subtle hints into conversations about your commitment to him and the type of engagement you'd like. You can gently mention that you prefer more classic styles of rings, or the location that you think is the most romantic in your neighborhood. As you're mentioning all these things, an image will slowly form in his mind about what you're looking for: and he'll know, in no uncertain terms, that marriage is not a terrifying proposition for you.
When you get married, you're not just bringing your beloved into your world. You're also bringing with them their closest friends and family. They won't just be connections you know through your partner; they'll be your nearest and dearest, too. But you can't go from barely knowing them to knowing them inside out. As such, if you want your partner to get down on one knee, you'll want to make an effort with his friends and family. If you fit in seamlessly into his world – as in, you enjoy spending time with the people who are the most important in his world – then he'll know your marriage material.
You might be eager to get married. But there's more to an engagement that just the shared love; it can be expensive, or the timing might not be right and so on. Just because he hasn't asked you to be his wife just yet, that doesn't mean that he won't one day, or that he doesn't already see you as the love of his life. So be happy. If you're thinking about marriage, then you've already won the lottery of love: the ceremony and party is just the cherry on top of the delicious cake that is your love. Sometimes, your eagerness to get married might just detract from the happiness you should be feeling. Focus on the good times, and the rest will inevitably follow.


text:
Nibea semifasciata är en fiskart som beskrevs av Chu, Lo och Wu, 1963. Nibea semifasciata ingår i släktet Nibea och familjen havsgösfiskar. Inga underarter finns listade i Catalogue of Life.

Källor

Havsgösfiskar
semifasciata


text:
The world's last VCR will be manufactured this month
By: Drew Gardner
Posted: Jul 22, 2016 6:39 AM EST | Updated: Jul 22, 2016 6:45 AM EST
By Yazhou Sun and Sophia Yan
(CNNMoney) -- Funai Electric, the world's last known VCR manufacturer, says it will cease production of video-cassette recorders this month.
Japanese firm Funai started manufacturing VCRs in 1983, and at one point was selling 15 million units a year. Alas, the clunky VCR has since been replaced by an array of new technologies: DVDs, Blu-ray, and now, streaming video services.
Last year, Funai sold 750,000 units, and found it was getting harder to find the parts to make VCRs.
A Funai spokesperson said that customers have been the company and asking where they can find the last few products.
VCRs for home use were introduced in the 1960s, gaining traction after Sony brought lower-priced models to market. Other Japanese manufacturers, including Panasonic, RCA, JVC and Toshiba, were also instrumental in developing the VCR.
The electromechanical device records, stores, and plays back television programs using a magnetic tape cassette.
In 1984, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that home use of VCRs to record television didn't constitute a violation of copyright law, paving the way for an explosion of the technology in American homes.
For a time, a battle ensued between Sony's Betamax and JVC's VHS -- both VCR tape formats -- but VHS eventually won out.
TM & © 2016 Cable News Network, Inc., a Time Warner Company. All rights reserved.
Salvation Army Kroc Center celebrates 10 years in South Bend
Marshall County News
Beyond the Badge: Meet the father-son duo who starts every shift with a special sendoff


text:
Quick links... Weather Local Investigates State National Election 2022 SWFL Life Your Healthy Family Video As Seen on 4 Contests TV Listings Florida Lottery Hurricane Relief Fund
4 Top-Rated Pairs Of Uggs For Women You Can Snag On Amazon
Copyright Adobe
Adobe
By: Bridget Sharkey
Ugg season is upon us! Ever since Uggs shot to popularity in the early 2000s, these cozy sheepskin boots have been a staple of countless winter wardrobes. Even on the coldest days, pulling on your Uggs feels like a lush hug for your tootsies. While a certain look may come to mind when you think of Uggs for women, these days, they have evolved beyond just the classic tall, fuzzy boot.
There are many new Uggs styles that feel minimalist and sophisticated, and not like you're mimicking Paris Hilton circa 2001. Here are some of our favorite styles of Uggs for women that you can find on Amazon right now.
Adirondack III Tipped Snow Boot ($245)
One issue that comes with the classic Uggs is that they aren't waterproof, and can be prone to unsightly salt stains. That's why we love that Ugg is now making actual snow boots that are chic but still functional. The Adirondack III Tipped Snow Boot is a style of Uggs for women that features waterproof leather and authentic sherpa lining with a suede upper. In other words, this is a snow boot that will stand the test of time, and it is gorgeous enough to make you wish for yucky weather so you can show them off.
The Adirondack III is highly rated on Amazon, although the number of reviews tallies less than 100 as of this writing. Reviewers say that "They are so warm and comfy" and that they are " Very supportive and feel like slippers. Can hike and run in them and they are super warm."
These Uggs range anywhere from about $220 to $240, depending on the size you need. That's hardly a bargain, but they should be quality boots that you can rock for years to come. And come Cyber Monday, Uggs often has tempting discounts that will hopefully bring down the cost of these babies a little more.
Koolaburra by Ugg Women's Victoria Tall Fashion Boot ($80)
If you aren't necessarily in the position to splurge on a $250 pair of Uggs this year (or were too naughty for Santa to bring you any), you've got to love the Koolaburra line from Ugg. Koolaburra offers more affordable options but in the classic Ugg style and still made with sheepskin and impeccable attention to detail. Uggs and Koolaburras are manufactured by the same company, so when searching for Uggs for women, don't sleep on the Koolaburra brand. It's not a knock-off, they are just slightly less lush when compared to Uggs.
So no wonder the Koolaburra by Ugg Women's Victoria Tall Fashion Boot has over 10,000 reviews on Amazon and a rating of 4.7 stars out of 5. They come in several different colors and start around $80 as of this writing. Reviewers say that the Koolaburra Victoria boot is comparable in quality to Uggs and that they hold up for years.
"I love the Ugg boots and slippers that I have ordered in the past – and these new Koolaburra by Ugg boots live up to my expectations!" one reviewer wrote. "They are beautiful! I read mixed reviews about the fur lining but I find the lining super comfortable and plush."
Ugg Women's Classic Mini II Winter Boot ($150)
If you are looking for Uggs for women for under $200, the Classic Mini is a good bet. These winter boots come in a variety of colors and are highly rated on Amazon with over 12,000 reviews and a 4.7-star mark. They are just under $150, and you can choose from shades including Ash, Navy, Violet and Neon Pink.
Reviewers love the Classic Mini Uggs for Women, with one writing, "They go with just about everything and whenever I wear them, it's like walking on a cloud."
Ugg Women's Fluff Yeah Slide Slipper ($50-$110)
Looking for a pair of slippers that you can confidently wear outside the house? The Fluff Yeah Slide Slipper from Ugg can be worn wherever, and they are so stylish that even celebs like Selena Gomez and Gigi Hadid have been spotted wearing them while running errands. Fluff Yeah Uggs come in a multitude of hues, whether you like neon, tie-dye, leopard or neutral shades. They cost between $50-$110 at Amazon depending on the color you choose.
These Uggs for women have over 15,000 reviews, most of them glowing, leading to an overall grade of 4.7 stars.
"Love these! Was going to use them as indoor slippers only but I wear them everywhere," wrote one reviewer. Another wrote, "These shoes are beautiful and super soft. Fur is really thick and warm….Good quality materials. Getting tons of compliments…You're really going to want to show them off lol."


The quiz has 9 questions.
This quiz will take around 90 seconds to complete and you'll get your results and customized advice at the end.
Have you implemented pre-sell and post-sell upsells and/or downsells on all of your most popular products and services?
Do you regularly split test various parts of your funnel?
Do you have pre-sale and post-sale auto-responder messages setup to nudge your prospects and customers to buy and/or buy more?
I have some emails setup, but not all of them.
Do you contact your customers and prospects at least once a week?
Do you know and regularly keep track of all of the important numbers in your business (average transaction size, lifetime value of a customer, how much it costs you to get a customer, etc.?
Do you know who your top 20 most profitable customers are and do you give them A LOT more attention than the rest of your customers?
Do you survey your customers every 3 months to find out what their current wants and needs are?
Do you offer premium solutions that are the most expensive solutions in your industry?
I have some premium versions.
Have you implemented retargeting campaigns in your business?
Yes and I regularly optimize them.
Yes, but I don't keep up with optimizing them.


text:
Красносільська культура — археологічна культура заключної давньокам'яної доби. Була поширена у Надрип'ятті, Надніманні та Верхів'ях Наддіпрянщини у ІХ тисячоріччі до Р. Х.

Найменована за стоянкою у села Красносілля Володимирецького району Рівненської області.

Інвентар
Красносільська культура характерна грубими черешковими наконечниками стріл, часто асиметричної форми, сколовою технікою розколювання кременю, одноплощинними нуклеусами, короткими скребачками, ретушованими різцями на сколах.

Красносільська людність полювала на північних оленів.

Пам'ятки
В українському Поліссі до цього типу культури належать виявлені та досліджені стоянки поблизу сіл: Красносілля, Великий Мидськ (обидва — Рівненської області), Лютка, Самари (обидва — Волинської області), Раска (Київської області); в урочищі Бір у Новгород-Сіверському районі Чернігівської області.

Їхні мешканці жили в холодних умовах льодовикового періоду.

Походження
Культура має походження від лінгбійської культури, населення якої 11 тисяч років тому просунулося за стадами оленів із Заходу на Полісся. На ранніх красносільських стоянках виявлено великі наконечники типу лінгбі. Наприкінці ІХ тисячоріччя до Р. Х., із заходу посунула людність свідерської культури, тому красносільська людність рушила з Полісся через Горішню Наддніпрянщину на Горішнє Надволжя, де воно відіграло значну роль у первинному заселенні тих країв.

Внаслідок потепління близько 10 тисяч років тому призвело до виникнинню на основі красносільської культури заключної давньокам'яної доби середньокам'яних культур:

 пісочнорівської у Подесінні,
 гренської і Горішній Наддніпрянщині,
 ієнівської у Горішньому Надволжі.

Джерела

 Періодизація та культурна диференціація Верхнього палеоліту України, Л. Л. Залізняк, 2010 рік, ISSN 0235-3490. Археологія, 2010, № 4
Залізняк Л. Л., Передісторія України Х—V тис. до н. е. — , 1998.

Посилання
 Красносільська культура  у базі Інституту історії України НАН України

Культури пізньої давньокам'яної доби України
Археологічні культури Волинської області
Археологічні культури Київської області
Археологічні культури Рівненської області
Археологічні культури Чернігівської області
Археологічні культури Білорусі
Археологічні культури Східної Європи