1,720,960 research outputs found

    Pinopolis United Methodist Church

    No full text
    Pinopolis Historic District South, which contains 13 properties, consists of the historic core of the planters’ retreat community of Pinopolis. The district contains numerous early- to mid-19th century summer houses, the Gothic Revival-influenced Pinopolis United Methodist Church (ca. 1900), and other later 19th century buildings. Interest in building a Methodist church in Pinopolis, according to local historians, was present as early as 1887. The site of the current church was purchased from the estate of William Cain in 1897 for 100.ThepresentbuildingwasdedicatedinApril1900.LafayetteParkerloanedthechurch100. The present building was dedicated in April 1900. Lafayette Parker loaned the church 500 needed to construct the building with the requirement that the timber be of long leaf pine. It is a single-story, frame building sheathed in weatherboard with a steep gabled roof and a small open belfry. The façade is three bays, with a lancet arch encompassing the central double doors and single round-headed windows flanking. The church rests upon a brick pier foundation, which has been in filled with brick. Source: NRHPhttps://digitalcommons.wofford.edu/umcschistoric/1024/thumbnail.jp

    Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis

    Full text link
    The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
    corecore