text:
Abbie Hoffman

Abbot Howard Hoffman (November 30, 1936 – April 12, 1989) was an American political and social activist who co-founded the Youth International Party ("Yippies") and was a member of the Chicago Seven. He was also a leading proponent of the Flower Power movement.

As a member of the Chicago Seven, Hoffman was charged with and tried for activities during the 1968 Democratic National Convention, for conspiring to use interstate commerce with intent to incite a riot and crossing state lines with the intent to incite a riot under the anti-riot provisions of Title X of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. Five of the Chicago Seven defendants, including Hoffman, were convicted of crossing state lines with intent to incite a riot; all of the convictions were vacated after an appeal and the U.S. Department of Justice declined to pursue another trial. Hoffman, along with all of the defendants and their attorneys were also convicted and sentenced for contempt of court by the judge; these convictions were also vacated after an appeal.

Hoffman continued his activism into the 1970s and remains an icon of the anti-Vietnam war movement and the counterculture era. He committed suicide with a phenobarbital overdose in 1989 at age 52.

Early life and education
Abbot Howard Hoffman was born November 30, 1936, in Worcester, Massachusetts, to Florence (née Schanberg) and John Hoffman. Hoffman was raised in a middle-class Jewish household and had two younger siblings. He was Jewish.

During his school days, he became known as a troublemaker who started fights, played pranks, vandalized school property, and referred to teachers by their first names. In his second year, Hoffman was expelled from Classical High School, a now-closed public high school in Worcester. As an atheist, Hoffman wrote a paper declaring that, "God could not possibly exist, for if he did, there wouldn't be any suffering in the world." The irate teacher ripped up the paper and called him "a Communist punk." Hoffman jumped on the teacher and started fighting him until he was restrained and removed from the school. On June 3, 1954, 17-year-old Hoffman was arrested for the first time, for driving without a license. After his expulsion, he attended Worcester Academy, graduating in 1955. Hoffman engaged in many behaviors typical of rebellious teenagers in the 1950s, such as riding motorcycles, wearing leather jackets, and sporting a ducktail haircut.

Upon graduating, he enrolled at nearby Brandeis University, where he studied under professors such as noted psychologist Abraham Maslow, often considered the father of humanistic psychology. He was also a student of Marxist theorist Herbert Marcuse, who Hoffman said had a profound effect on his political outlook. Hoffman would later cite Marcuse's influence during his activism and his theories on revolution. He was on the Brandeis tennis team, which was coached by journalist Bud Collins. Hoffman graduated with a B.A. in psychology in 1959. That fall, he enrolled at the University of California, Berkeley, where he completed coursework toward a master's degree in psychology. Soon after, he married his girlfriend Sheila Karklin in May 1960.

Early activity
Before his days as a leading member of the Yippie movement, Hoffman was involved with the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), and organized Liberty House, which sold items to support the civil rights movement in the southern United States. During the Vietnam War, Hoffman was an anti-war activist, using deliberately comical and theatrical tactics.

In late 1966, Hoffman met with a radical community-action group called the Diggers and studied their ideology. He later returned to New York and published a book with this knowledge. Doing so was considered a violation by the Diggers. Diggers co-founder Peter Coyote explained:

"Abbie, who was a friend of mine, was always a media junky. We explained everything to those guys, and they violated everything we taught them. Abbie went back, and the first thing he did was publish a book, with his picture on it, that blew the hustle of every poor person on the Lower East Side by describing every free scam then current in New York, which were then sucked dry by disaffected kids from Scarsdale."

One of Hoffman's well-known stunts was on August 24, 1967, when he led members of the movement to the gallery of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). The protesters threw fistfuls of real and fake dollar bills down to the traders below, some of whom booed, while others began to scramble frantically to grab the money as fast as they could. Accounts of the amount of money that Hoffman and the group tossed was said to be as little as $30 to $300. Hoffman claimed to be pointing out that, metaphorically, that's what NYSE traders "were already doing." "We didn't call the press," wrote Hoffman, "At that time we really had no notion of anything called a media event." Yet the press was quick to react and by evening the event was reported around the world. After that incident, the stock exchange spent $20,000 (approximately ) to enclose the gallery with bulletproof glass.

In October 1967, David Dellinger of the National Mobilization Committee to End the War in Vietnam asked Jerry Rubin to help mobilize and direct a march on the Pentagon. The protesters gathered at the Lincoln Memorial as Dellinger and Dr. Benjamin Spock gave speeches to the mass of people. From there, the group marched towards the Pentagon. As the protesters neared the Pentagon, they were met by soldiers of the 82nd Airborne Division who formed a human barricade blocking the Pentagon steps. Not to be dissuaded, Hoffman vowed to levitate the Pentagon claiming he would attempt to use psychic energy to levitate the Pentagon until it would turn orange and begin to vibrate, at which time the war in Vietnam would end. Allen Ginsberg led Tibetan chants to assist Hoffman.

Chicago Seven conspiracy trial
Hoffman was a member of a group of defendants that became known as the Chicago Seven (originally known as the Chicago Eight), which included fellow Yippie Jerry Rubin, David Dellinger, Rennie Davis, John Froines, Lee Weiner, Tom Hayden, and Bobby Seale (before his trial was severed from the others), who were charged by the United States federal government with conspiracy, crossing state lines with intent to incite a riot, and other charges related to anti-Vietnam War and countercultural protests in Chicago, Illinois during the 1968 Democratic National Convention.

Presided over by Judge Julius Hoffman (no relation to Hoffman, about which he joked throughout the trial ), Abbie Hoffman's courtroom antics frequently grabbed the headlines; one day, defendants Hoffman and Rubin appeared in court dressed in judicial robes, while on another day, Hoffman was sworn in as a witness with his hand giving the finger. Judge Hoffman became the favorite courtroom target of the Chicago Seven defendants, who frequently would insult the judge to his face. Abbie Hoffman told Judge Hoffman "you are a shande fur de goyim [disgrace in front of the gentiles]. You would have served Hitler better." He later added that "your idea of justice is the only obscenity in the room." Both Davis and Rubin told the judge, "This court is bullshit." When Hoffman was asked in what state he resided, he replied the "state of mind of my brothers and sisters."

Other celebrities were called as "cultural witnesses" including Allen Ginsberg, Phil Ochs, Arlo Guthrie, Judy Collins, Norman Mailer and others. Hoffman closed the trial with a speech in which he quoted Abraham Lincoln, making the claim that the president himself, were he alive today, would also have been arrested in Chicago's Lincoln Park.

On February 18, 1970, Hoffman and four of the other defendants (Rubin, Dellinger, Davis, and Hayden) were found guilty of intent to incite a riot while crossing state lines. All seven defendants were found not guilty of conspiracy. At sentencing, Hoffman suggested the judge try LSD and offered to set him up with "a dealer he knew in Florida." (The judge was known to be headed to Florida for a post-trial vacation.) Each of the five was sentenced to five years in prison and given a $5,000 fine.

However, all convictions were subsequently overturned by the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals.

Continuing protests
At Woodstock in 1969, Hoffman interrupted The Who's performance to attempt to speak against the jailing of John Sinclair of the White Panther Party. He grabbed a microphone and yelled, "I think this is a pile of shit while John Sinclair rots in prison ..." Pete Townshend was adjusting his amplifier between songs and turned to look at Hoffman over his left shoulder. Townshend shouted "Fuck off! Fuck off my fucking stage!" and reportedly ran at Hoffman with his guitar and hit Hoffman in the back, although Townshend later denied attacking Hoffman. Townshend later said that while he actually agreed with Hoffman on Sinclair's imprisonment, he would have knocked him offstage regardless of the content of his message, given that Hoffman had violated the "sanctity of the stage," i.e., the right of the band to perform uninterrupted by distractions not relevant to the show. The incident took place during a camera change and was not captured on film. The audio of this incident, however, can be heard on The Who's box set Thirty Years of Maximum R&B (Disc 2, Track 20, "Abbie Hoffman Incident").

In 1971, Hoffman published Steal This Book, which advised readers on how to live for free. (Many readers followed his advice and stole the book, leading many bookstores to refuse to carry it.) The book contained a section called "Free Communication," in which Hoffman encourages his readership to take to the stage at rock concerts to use the pre-assembled audience and PA system to get their message out. However, he mentions that "interrupting the concert is frowned upon since it is only spitting in the faces of people you are trying to reach."

In Woodstock Nation, Hoffman mentions the incident and says he was on a bad LSD trip at the time. Joe Shea, then a reporter for the Times Herald-Record, a local newspaper that covered the event on-site, said he saw the incident. He recalled that Hoffman was actually hit in the back of the head by Townshend's guitar and toppled directly into the pit in front of the stage. He does not recall any "shove" from Townshend, and discounts both men's accounts.

Hoffman was also the author of several other books, including Vote! co-written with Rubin and Ed Sanders.

Arrest and flight
Hoffman was arrested on August 28, 1973, for intent to sell and distribute cocaine. He always maintained that undercover police agents entrapped him into a drug deal and planted suitcases of cocaine in his office. In the spring of 1974, Hoffman skipped bail, underwent cosmetic surgery to alter his appearance, and hid from authorities for several years.

Some believed that Hoffman made himself a target. In 1998, Peter Coyote stated:

"The FBI couldn't infiltrate us. We did everything anonymously, and we did everything for nothing because we wanted our actions to be authentic. It's the mistake that Abbie Hoffman made. He came out, he studied with us, we taught him everything, and then he went back and wrote a book called Free, and he put his name on it! He set himself up to be a leader of the counterculture, and he was undone by that. Big mistake."

Hoffman lived under the name Barry Freed in Fineview, New York, near Thousand Island Park, a private resort on the St. Lawrence River. He helped coordinate an environmental campaign to preserve the St. Lawrence River. Hoffman also was the travel columnist for Crawdaddy! magazine. On September 4, 1980, he surrendered to authorities, and he appeared the same day on a pre-taped edition of ABC's 20/20 in an interview with Barbara Walters. Hoffman received a one-year sentence but was released after four months.

Return to activism

In November 1986, Hoffman was arrested along with 14 others, including Amy Carter, the daughter of former President Jimmy Carter, for trespassing at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. The charges stemmed from a protest against the Central Intelligence Agency's recruitment on the UMass campus. Since the university's policy limited campus recruitment to law-abiding organizations, the defense argued that the CIA engaged in illegal activities. The federal district court judge permitted expert witnesses, including former Attorney General Ramsey Clark and a former CIA agent who testified that the CIA carried on an illegal Contra war against the Sandinista government in Nicaragua in violation of the Boland Amendment.

In three days of testimony, more than a dozen defense witnesses, including Daniel Ellsberg, and former Contra leader Edgar Chamorro, described the CIA's role in more than two decades of covert, illegal, and often violent activities. In his closing argument, Hoffman, acting as his own attorney, placed his actions within the best tradition of American civil disobedience. He quoted from Thomas Paine, "the most outspoken and farsighted of the leaders of the American Revolution: 'Every age and generation must be as free to act for itself, in all cases, as the ages and generations which preceded it. Man has no property in man, neither has any generation a property in the generations which are to follow.'"

Hoffman concluded: "Thomas Paine was talking about this Spring day in this courtroom. A verdict of not guilty will say, 'When our country is right, keep it right; but when it is wrong, right those wrongs.'" On April 15, 1987, the jury found Hoffman and the other defendants not guilty.

After his acquittal, Hoffman acted in a cameo appearance in Oliver Stone's later-released anti-Vietnam War film, Born on the Fourth of July. He essentially played himself in the movie, waving a flag on the ramparts of an administration building during a campus protest that was being teargassed and crushed by state troopers.

In 1987 Hoffman summed up his views:

"You are talking to a leftist. I believe in the redistribution of wealth and power in the world. I believe in universal hospital care for everyone. I believe that we should not have a single homeless person in the richest country in the world. And I believe that we should not have a CIA that goes around overwhelming governments and assassinating political leaders, working for tight oligarchies around the world to protect the tight oligarchy here at home."

Later that same year, Hoffman and Jonathan Silvers wrote Steal This Urine Test (published October 5, 1987), which exposed the internal contradictions of the War on Drugs and suggested ways to circumvent its most intrusive measures. Although Hoffman's satiric humor was on display throughout the book, Publishers Weekly wrote that "the extensive, in-depth research and a barrage of facts and figures... make this the definitive guide to the current drug-testing environment."

Stone's Born on the Fourth of July was released on December 20, 1989, just eight months after Hoffman's suicide on April 12, 1989. At the time of his death, Hoffman was at the height of a renewed public visibility, one of the few 1960s radicals who still commanded the attention of the media. He regularly lectured about the CIA's covert activities, including assassinations disguised as suicides. His Playboy article (October 1988) outlining the connections that constitute the "October Surprise", brought that alleged conspiracy to the attention of a wide-ranging American readership for the first time.

Personal life
In 1960, Hoffman married Sheila Karklin, and had two children, Andrew (born 1960) and Amy (1962–2007), who later went by the name Ilya. Hoffman and Karklin divorced in 1966. In 1967, he married Anita Kushner in Manhattan's Central Park. They had one son whom they named america [sic] Hoffman, deliberately using a lowercase "a". He and Kushner were effectively separated when Hoffman became a fugitive in 1973, although they were not formally divorced until 1980. While underground, Hoffman's companion was Johanna Lawrenson.

His personal life drew a great deal of scrutiny from the Federal Bureau of Investigation, whose file on him was 13,262 pages long.

His brother Jack died of COVID-19 on June 2, 2020.

Death
Hoffman was found dead in his apartment in Solebury Township, Pennsylvania, on April 12, 1989, age 52. The cause of death was suicide by overdose from 150 phenobarbital tablets and liquor. Two hundred pages of handwritten notes were nearby, many detailing his moods. He had been diagnosed with bipolar disorder in 1980. He had recently changed treatment medications and was reportedly depressed when his 83-year-old mother was diagnosed with cancer (she died in 1996 at age 90). Some who were close to him claimed that he was also unhappy about reaching middle age, combined with the fact that the liberal upheaval of the 1960s had produced a conservative backlash in the 1980s. In 1984, he had expressed dismay that the current generation of young people were not as interested in protesting and social activism as the youth had been during the 1960s.

His death was officially ruled a suicide. Hoffman's fellow Chicago Seven defendant David Dellinger disputed this; he said, "I don't believe for one moment the suicide thing" and said that Hoffman had "numerous plans for the future." However, the coroner stood by the ruling, saying, "There is no way to take that amount of phenobarbital without intent. It was intentional and self-inflicted."

His memorial service was held a week later in Worcester, Massachusetts, at Temple Emanuel, the synagogue that he attended as a child, with 1,000 friends and family members in attendance.

Books

 * Fuck the System (pamphlet, 1967) printed under the pseudonym George Metesky
 * Revolution For the Hell of It (1968, Dial Press)    published under the pseudonym "Free"
 * Revolution for the Hell of It: The Book That Earned Abbie Hoffman a 5 Year Prison Term at the Chicago Conspiracy Trial. Including Abbie Hoffman's Special Introduction to this edition "Chicago: Two Years After" (1970 reprint, Pocket Books, )
 * Revolution for the Hell of It: The Book That Earned Abbie Hoffman a 5 Year Prison Term at the Chicago Conspiracy Trial (2005 reprint, ISBN 1-56025-690-7)
 * Woodstock Nation: A Talk-Rock Album (1969, Random House)
 * Steal This Book (1971, Pirate Editions)
 * Steal This Book (1996 reprint, ISBN 1-56858-217-X)
 * Authorized online location
 * Vote! A Record, A Dialogue, A Manifesto – Miami Beach, 1972 And Beyond (1972, Warner Books) by Hoffman, Jerry Rubin, and Ed Sanders
 * To America With Love: Letters From the Underground (1976, Stonehill Publishing) by Hoffman and Anita Hoffman
 * To America With Love: Letters From the Underground (2000 second edition, ISBN 1-888996-28-5)
 * Soon to Be a Major Motion Picture (1980, Perigee, ISBN 0-399-50503-2)
 * The Autobiography of Abbie Hoffman (2000 second edition, ISBN 1-56858-197-1)
 * Square Dancing in the Ice Age: Underground Writings (1982, Putnam, ISBN 0-399-12701-1)
 * Steal This Urine Test: Fighting Drug Hysteria in America (1987, Penguin, ISBN 0-14-010400-3) by Hoffman and Jonathan Silvers
 * The Best of Abbie Hoffman (1990, Four Walls Eight Windows, ISBN 0-941423-42-5)
 * Preserving Disorder: The Faking of the President 1988 (1999, Viking, ISBN 0-670-82349-X) by Hoffman and Jonathan Silvers

Record

 * Abbie Hoffman and The Joint Chiefs of Staff. Wake Up, America! Big Toe Records (1971)

Interviews

 * Ken Jordan interview from January 1989, published in Reality Sandwich, May 2007

Appearances in documentary films
Hoffman is featured in interviews and archival news footage in the following documentaries:
 * Last Summer Won't Happen (1968), film by Peter Gessner & Tom Hurwitz; "a sympathetic but not uncritical document of the East Village in New York during that year (1968), capturing the movement's internal conflicts and contradictions".
 * Hoffman's speech during the 1968 Democratic National Convention is featured in the 1970 Canadian fiction/documentary hybrid film, Prologue.
 * Breathing Together: Revolution of the Electric Family (1971)
 * Lord of the Universe (1974), satirical documentary, winner of the DuPont-Columbia Award in broadcast journalism, ISBN 0-89774-102-1
 * It Was 20 Years Ago Today (1987) Documentary about the year in which the Beatles' Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band was released.
 * Growing Up in America (1988), documentary on radical politics in the 1960s, First Run Features
 * My Dinner with Abbie (1990).
 * My Name Is Abbie (1998), Hoffman's first interview after seven years in hiding, Mystic Fire Video, ISBN 1-56176-381-0
 * Phil Ochs: There but for Fortune (2010), biographical documentary on the life and times of the singer-songwriter, First Run Features

Appearances in feature films

 * Born on the Fourth of July (1989); Hoffman appears as an organizer of the Syracuse University student strike which was triggered by the Kent State shooting. He died before the film was released, and a dedication to him is included in the credits.

Appearances on television

 * The Merv Griffin Show, March 27, 1970. Merv's guests were Abbie Hoffman, Daria Halprin, Mark Frechette, Virginia Graham, and Tony Dolan. CBS blurred the video of Hoffman so viewers at home would not see his American flag pattern shirt, even though other guests had worn the same shirt in the past, uncensored, and Pat Boone appeared in an automobile commercial on that very broadcast wearing a similar flag-motif shirt.
 * Vanguard Press's 10th Anniversary Media Bash, February 17, 1988, Moderated by Peter Freyne. With Abbie Hoffman, Dave Dellinger, and Bernie Sanders.
 * The Coca Crystal Show: If I Can't Dance, You Can Keep Your Revolution, Manhattan Cable Television (Channel J), Public Access Cable TV, New York City.

Appearances on radio

 * Abbie Hoffman on WMCA radio, 1971
 * Abbie Hoffman on WBAI radio
 * August 27, 1968 telephone recording of speeches during the Chicago DNC protests broadcast by Bob Fass

 * Abbie Hoffman – 1988 – Howard Stern Show

In popular culture

 * Michael Lembeck portrayed Hoffman in the 1987 HBO television film Conspiracy: The Trial of the Chicago 8.
 * Hoffman was portrayed by Richard D'Alessandro in the 1994 film Forrest Gump, speaking against "the war in Viet-fucking-nam" at a protest rally at the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool facing the Washington Monument.
 * Hoffman's life was dramatized in the 2000 film Steal This Movie!, in which he was portrayed by Vincent D'Onofrio.
 * Hank Azaria's voice is heard as the animated Hoffman in the film Chicago 10 (2007).
 * Thomas Ian Nicholas portrays Hoffman in the 2010 film titled The Chicago 8.
 * Bern Cohen played the lead role in the 2011 Off Broadway play Abbie.
 * Hoffman is portrayed by Sacha Baron Cohen in The Trial of the Chicago 7 (2020). Cohen was nominated for Best Supporting Actor in the 93rd Academy Awards.
 * Hoffman is mentioned in the song "Stuck in the 90's" on the 1993 album Bargainville by Canadian vocal group Moxy Früvous.
 * A doll in Hoffman's likeness is used in a Raggedy Ann parody in the animated series Histeria!.
 * In Wings 1993 season 4 episode 13 "Labor Pains" Faye describes an encounter with Hoffman at a protest in 1966.

title: Abbie Hoffman


text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject History

Welcome to the History WikiProject on the English Wikipedia!

We are a group dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to history. If you would like to join us, please feel free to add your name to the list of project members.

Popular pages
You can view a list of our popular pages, at: WikiProject_History/Popular_pages

Lists and outlines
The list of basic history topics is intended to provide an overview of the coverage of history on Wikipedia. It is rapidly becoming one of the best history browsing tools on Wikipedia. The List of history topics page provides a history link for every subject for which there is a list on that page, still has some redlinks. Some of those redlinks can be edited to point to existing article sections (in the main article for the corresponding subject), while the rest need articles or sections created so that they can be pointed to them.

 * See also: Timeline standards

Source for the sub-sections below: WikiProject History/Collaboration

Article alerts
As per the notice at the top of this page, this project is not fully active. however, below are some automated features that you may find useful for working on articles on history-related topics.

 * "Article Alerts" is an automated feature that provides constant updates on various articles that relate to history.
 * You can view a list of all sub-pages of this WikiProject, at the page: WikiProject History/Index
 * You can view a list of all task forces of this WikiProject, at the page: WikiProject History/Task forces

Founding and development
Significant milestones for this WikiProject:

 * Founded on October 22, 2001, by User:Sjc and User:MichaelTinkler.
 * It was first formatted and explicitly labeled as a WikiProject after a series of edits by User:Reddi, which started on May 31, 2007 and ended around June 5, 2007.
 * as of July 2008, the four users below were the coordinators for this WikiProject, as per this version of the page for Coordinators:

WikiProject structure
WikiProject History has developed several structural features to help manage our work:
 * Coordinators are responsible for maintaining the administrative aspects of the project
 * Working groups host work on several specialized tasks, including article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, and offline publication.
 * Task forces are more informal groups for collaboration on specific topics within history.
 * WikiProject history recently expanded into Wikibooks.
 * See below for more information, including various additional roles and group information, in the section project staff and working groups.

Goals
The goals of this wikiproject are: a) to improve Wikipedia's coverage of history by creating, expanding, and maintaining history-related articles. b) to provide guidelines and recommendations for articles that describe all aspects of history. c) to serve as the central point of discussion for issues related to history in Wikipedia, d) to maintain the history portal and its sub-portals, e) to answer queries about history on the reference desk, especially the humanities reference desk.

Outline of history articles
The entire subject and Wikipedia's coverage of it is intended to be summarized in the Outline of history and its branch outlines. These are in turn is part of Wikipedia's outline system which is one of Wikipedia's main contents systems. Please see the article Outline of history. Please look this over and fill-in missing topics.If Wikipedia has an article or article section about those topics, please add links to them.

While analyzing the outline, please answer the following questions (and fix the outline as needed):

 * What's missing? Is the structure of the outline (sections and indents) representative of the subject? Does the outline help understand the relationships between the topics presented in the best way possible?

The overall purpose of the outline is to help readers comprehend the subject by showing what belongs to it, and within the subject what belongs to what.The outline is a taxonomy of the subject, and also serves as a table of contents and navigation aid to browse Wikipedia's articles (and article sections) about the subject.

It is also a useful tool for the WikiProject to analyze, plan, develop, and revise history-related material. It is a hub from which to organize historical topics.

It was built as a "reverse outline", a structural model of an existing work, which in addition to being a summary of the work, can reveal the gaps and other weaknesses for revision purposes.Please help improve it. It's our bird's eye view.Thank you.

Scope
Most articles within Category:History and its sub-categories are within our scope. There are already several other history projects with more specific scopes so the majority of our work is on articles that do not seem to fall into other projects' scopes. For further clarification:
 * Articles with a "History" section, however long, are not in our scope
 * "History of..." articles are within our scope

The list of history topics lists of basic history topics are some articles that are in this project's scope. The latter list is not intended to be a comprehensive treatment of the subject, but rather an overview. The Lists of topics are intended to be comprehensive and to include links to every article related to the subject on Wikipedia. See List of mathematics topics and List of psychology topics as examples.

A number of lists and meta-lists are maintained in Wikipedia:
 * Battles or wars should be listed in List of battles or War.
 * Saints should go into List of saints.
 * Lists of incumbents are becoming increasingly popular (see List of French monarchs; List of German Kings and Emperors); list those lists in Lists of incumbents

Peer review requests
This is from the page: User:AnomieBOT/C/History peer reviews

 * hui_pan-nationalism requesting review and feedback Linnea2853 (talk) 07:08, 25 May 2021 (UTC)

Article alerts
Generated by bot as per Article alerts.

To watch the page for Article alerts, please add this page to your watchlist: WikiProject History/Article alerts

Project staff and working groups
The goal of this project is to serve as an active resource, where other editors can seek help or get questions answered, or get help with any topical efforts they may be working on. and also, at some point, we will try to resume various basic wikiproject tasks such as article assessment, working on group projects. to that end, we may create some sort of list here of active volunteers, or editors, or just anyone who can occasionally take a little time to answer questions, help with various tasks and efforts.

Project Coordinators

Coordinators. The coordinators are generally responsible for maintaining all of the procedural and administrative aspects of the project, and serve as the designated points-of-contact for procedural issues. They are not, however, endowed with any special executive powers.
 * Chairman, and Lead Coordinator:

 * Coordinators::
 * Key Editors:
 * Former project leaders, with thanks:
 * , joined June 22, 2022.
 * Former project leaders, with thanks:
 * , joined June 22, 2022.

Responsibilities

 * Coordinators. The primary responsibility of the regular coordinators for the WikiProject, as well as the page coordinators, are the maintenance and housekeeping work involved in keeping the project and its internal processes running smoothly; this includes a variety of tasks, such as keeping the announcement and open task lists updated, overseeing the assessment and review processes, managing the proposal and creation of task forces, and so forth.

 * There is fairly little involved that couldn't theoretically be done by any other editor, of course, in only a few places have the coordinators been explicitly written into a process, but since experience suggests that people tend to assume that someone else is doing whatever needs to be done, it has proven beneficial to formally delegate responsibility for this administrative work to a specified group.

 * The coordinators also have several additional roles. They serve as the project's designated points of contact, and are explicitly listed as people to whom questions can be directed in a variety of places around the project. In addition, they have (highly informal) roles in leading the drafting of project guidelines, overseeing the implementation of project decisions on issues like category schemes and template use, and helping to resolve disputes and keep discussions from becoming heated and unproductive.

Assessment

The Assessment Working Group finds historical articles for the first time and rates them on quality and importance scales.

Current active members:

(Please feel free to add your name to join!!)

Collaboration

The Collaboration working group serves to improve articles that have been assessed by the assessment department by assigning large groups of editors to improve those articles. Help can be requested for an article you are working on or you have found abandoned. A list of open tasks can also be found in a section above.

Current active members:

 * Vami_IV

(Please feel free to add your name to join!!)

Review

The Review working group carries out peer reviews on historical articles and nominates articles for good and featured status. It also carries out A-Class reviews on articles within our scope. Current active members:

(Please feel free to add your name to join!!)

Outreach

The Outreach working group acts as a central location for various member outreach work, including project newsletters, recruitment and welcoming banners, and other related initiatives. Current active members:

(Please feel free to add your name to join!!)

Informal subgroups

Informal subgroups are any individual subgroup that any editor wishes to set up, on an informal or formal basis, for the purpose of gathering any group of editors together. This will be to enable editors to form their own subgroups for working with and communicating with other editors, but without taking on the formal roles and responsibilities of an official task force.

These subgroups could be formed based on any criteria at all. so any editor could form a subgroup for communicating with editors who are new to this topical area. or it could be an informal group for brainstorming ideas for a particular topic, or a particular editing drive, or group effort, or for a specific effort to delve into a particular topic, or to set up a single new article or set of articles, or for any other reason.

Our reason for setting up this new type of subgrouping is simple; history is a very broad and varied field. We would like to encourage all editors to take an active role here, as much as they might wish. so if you wish to set up any such subgroup, please feel free to post a notice on the talk page. We will be glad to help to promote any such efforts here. thanks!!

Task forces
We can have Task Forces for specific historical eras, or alternatively for specific topical areas. Please choose a Task Force below that matches the area that you most wish to work on. If you don't see an area listed that you want to work on, then please feel free to simply add it. thanks!!!!

Sub-page for Task Force information:
 * WikiProject History/Task forces

Task Forces by era or topic

 * TF Contemporary History:
 * Members:
 * Writes and updates articles on contemporary history, including the items below.
 * Timelines for current year,
 * articles on current time periods;
 * historical articles in need of updates for current events.
 * articles on current time periods;
 * historical articles in need of updates for current events.

 * TF Ancient History:
 * Members:
 * (Coordinater)
 * Covers Ancient history; usually defined as history from the earliest civilizations up to the fall of the Roman Empire.
 * Goals (will be updated):

 * TF Political history
 * Members
 * Covers political history as an area and as an ongoing topical subject for ongoing development. Please note, "political history" is a broad phrase; it refers to the central flow of history itself, as it pertains to the changes in society in general, as well as politics, and government, which most affect society, countries, world politics, and world history as a whole.
 * Covers political history as an area and as an ongoing topical subject for ongoing development. Please note, "political history" is a broad phrase; it refers to the central flow of history itself, as it pertains to the changes in society in general, as well as politics, and government, which most affect society, countries, world politics, and world history as a whole.

 * by delineating this as a subject area, we can enable editors to give this area specific attention, separate, apart, and unique from other established areas of history, all of which also receive broad and extensive coverage here at Wikipedia.

 * TF Medieval History:
 * Members:
 * None
 * Covers Medieval history;, usually defined as history from the the fall of the Roman Empire until the Renaissance.

 * TF Renaissiance:
 * Members
 * None.
 * Covers the Renaissance era

 * TF Early modern history:
 * Members:
 * None.
 * Covers Early modern history, usually defined as approximately 1500 until 1800.

 * TF Late modern history:
 * Members:
 * None.
 * Covers Late modern history, usually defined as the 1800 until the present day.

Task forces by subject area

 * Industrial history
 * Members:
 * None.
 * Covers History of industry
 * Cultural history
 * Members:
 * None.
 * Covers History of Culture
 * Economic history
 * Members:
 * None.
 * Covers History of economics
 * Technological history
 * Members:
 * None.
 * Covers History of technology,, History of communications, History of writing, History of printing, History of transport, and the broad range of human inventions, technological development, and civilization throughout human history; as well as specific key areas such as the rise of History of telecommunication, the Industrial Revolution, modern forms of transport, and the development of computers and artificial intelligence which characterize the Modern Age.

Outreach, members, templates
If you want to post the photo from the logo for WikiProject History, you can do so using this text:. this image will appear in line, as it does here.

Userboxes
WikiProject History maintains a number of userboxes:

 * User WPH

 * User WP History

 * User WikiProject History

Project templates
Project banner

The banner WikiProject History should be added to the talk pages of all relevant articles.

Infobox Historical Event

The Infobox Infobox historical event should be added to the pages of notable events.

Country/Region history

A navbox from Category:History by region navigational boxes should be added to History of a 'x' country pages.

Other useful info boxes and templates can be found in the category: Category:History and events templates.

Good articles

 * Former featured articles
 * History of Alaska
 * Former good article
 * History of Baku
 * Human history

Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team
The following articles have been selected for inclusion in one or more release versions of Wikipedia. Please help ensure that these articles remain of the highest possible quality.
 * Version 1.0 Editorial Team release version selections
 * American Revolutionary War
 * Battle of Midway
 * Christopher Columbus
 * David Hume
 * Herodotus
 * Historiography
 * History
 * History of Alaska
 * History of Arizona
 * History of Baltimore City College
 * History of Earth
 * Human history
 * Industrial Revolution
 * List of European Union member states by accession
 * Napoleonic Wars
 * Renaissance
 * The Holocaust

DYKs
The following articles have all been featured in the Main page Did You Know section:
 * Anti-tobacco movement in Nazi Germany – 6 June 2008.
 * History of African Americans in Chicago – 2 May 2007.
 * History of Berne – 19 March 2006.
 * History of Dhaka – 7 September 2006.

Categories
Every article on a historical topic should be assigned to as specific a sub-category under the Category:History as possible, as well as to any non-history categories to which it belongs. Since Wikipedia has tens of thousands of articles on historical subjects, they shouldn't all be placed directly in Category:History; there is an elaborate hierarchy of historical categories, described here, and only the lowest-level category need be assigned.

Category tree

 * List of

Organization of Category:History

Category:History contains only the most general articles, such as History and Human history. Other historical articles appear in one or more sub-categories

Category names

The category for the history of the modern nation X should be called "History of X" or "History of the X" and included.

Organization of national histories
Few nations have neat histories: most have changed name, constitution and boundaries over their history. This section gives advice on creating sub-categories to reflect these changes.

Don't over-categorize Having added an article to, say, Category:Military history of the United Kingdom, there's no need to also add that article to Category:Military history, Category:History of the United Kingdom, Category:United Kingdom or Category:History. The category hierarchy expresses the fact that every article about the military history of the UK is an article about military history and an article about the UK.

Children
Related Child Projects: This project is parent to some other similar projects.
 * WikiProject Years
 * WikiProject Ancient Germanic studies
 * WikiProject Iran
 * WikiProject United States History
 * WikiProject European history
 * WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome
 * WikiProject Dacia
 * WikiProject Military history
 * WikiProject History of Science
 * Wikiproject Mesoamerica
 * WikiProject Jewish history
 * WikiProject Former countries
 * WikiProject Australian maritime history
 * WikiProject Chinese history
 * WikiProject Three Kingdoms
 * WikiProject Indian history
 * WikiProject History of Pakistan
 * WikiProject Ancient Near East
 * WikiProject Ancient Egypt
 * WikiProject History of Poland
 * WikiProject Russian history
 * WikiProject Norse history and culture
 * WikiProject Medieval Scotland
 * WikiProject Hanseatic League
 * WikiProject Aztec
 * WikiProject Leaders by year
 * WikiProject Australian history
 * WikiProject Cold War
 * WikiProject History of photography
 * WikiProject Middle Ages
 * WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms
 * WikiProject Piracy

Related projects

 * WikiProject Biography
 * WikiProject Museums

Related subprojects

 * WikiProject Bangladesh/History Workgroup
 * WikiProject Korea/History

Related
 External sister projects  History on Wikiquote History on Commons History on Wikisource History on Wikibooks

Technical items and resources

 * Userboxes/History

Guidelines and resources

 * Main:
 * Historiography

 * Timeline guides:
 * Timeline
 * Timeline standards

 * Portal:
 * Portal:History

 * Resources:
 * Category schemes
 * Article titles

 * Other:
 * History standards for China-related articles

Wikisource

 * Wikisource for original text (or primary sources). Wikisource is a repository of source texts in any language which are either in the public domain, or are released under the GFDL.

Useful essays

 * What Wikipedia is not
 * Verifiability
 * Public domain resources

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

title: Wikipedia:WikiProject History


text:
Wikipedia talk:History standards

 * 1) Old talk archived at Wikipedia talk:History standards/Archive.
 * 2) Not quite so old talk (June 2002, apparently, until Jan 2003) archived at Wikipedia talk:History standards/Archive2. djmutex 19:13 8 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Use the form most familiar to English speakers (usually English-language)as the FIRST citation of terms
 * Since this is English-language wikipedia we should strive to use the English term when there is one. E.g., "Amber road (Bernsteinstrasse)".

Supporters include: MichaelTinkler, Christian, sjc, User:JHK, User:Derek Ross, salt28, User:David Parker (with reservation, below), Ed Poor (except East Asian names as described below)

Opponents include:

Mixed opinion: User:Taw (Miyazaki Hayao looks better as-is, with Japanese names of his movies first), and User:clasqm who broadly agrees with the proviso that we include the native-language term where we reasonably can, also some people's names do not translate (eg Ludwig van Beethoven does not become Louis ...)
 * I think that the titles of works of art do have a claim to be represented in their original form, probably even as their initial representation. User:MichaelTinkler
 * Ditto, perhaps a very sensible exception here. User:sjc
 * To my mind, there's no problem with using the native-language term, if that's the commonest one used in English: Ludwig van B. is never called anything else.
 * Books, too, perhaps, where there isn't an English edition: I don't think Beethoven's a problem - obviously we'll use the original form of most modern personal names, whatever language they're from, even where they contain a geographical element - just think Leonard of Vinci - though it's difficult to pinpoint where in the evolution of surnames "of Bruges" should become "van Brugge". Where it's a genuine title, that's a different matter (though with some noble houses the name and the "of" title are going to be the same, the title will take precedence anyhow). User:David Parker
 * Another case is the name of Roman Catholic documents such as decrees and encyclicals where the customary usage is the Latin, not the translation (which should be included in an article about the document itself. User:ClaudeMuncey

salt28 would like to point out the obvious, that most 'opponents' are actually supporters when you read the statement, specifically most familiar to English speakers (usually English-language) June 22, 2002. - Names of kings and queens should include their kingdom

E.g.: Alphonso XII of Spain

As most monarchical history likely to fetch up in Wikipedia will deal with the English monarchy, and for reasons of concision, kings and queens of England do not require a qualification of nationality; otherwise, the reference should state the nationality of which they were monarch, unless:
 * they are completely unique (e.g. they are someone like Vlad Tepes)
 * (other exceptions)
 * In the case of Holy Roman Emperors, it should be e.g. Henry V, Holy Roman Emperor.
 * In the case of the kings of France, it should be e.g. Henry I of France or, to add a common nickname, Philip IV of France, the Fair.

Supporters include: User:sjc, User:David Parker (except I'd include "of England")

Opponents include:

Those with mixed opinions include: User:MichaelTinkler, who sees no reason to privilege the monarchs of England (Christian and User:David Parker agrees), since the names are in their language anyway. User:JHK, who thinks the cognomens might should be part of the link itself... salt28 thinks maybe one day, say 2054, people won't automatically think we're talking about England. Nor would aliens who find a CD containing wikipedia in the year 10,000 after humanity has destroyed itself think that.It would be nice if we tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help us God. June 22, 2002. Vicki Rosenzweig because it's not even true that English monarchs are mostly likely to end up in here; we already have lots of German nobility, for example. It's a lot easier to put the longer form (Edward II of England) to start with than have to go back later if it turns out some other country also had two or more kings named Edward. user:Ktsquare: All English monarchs should include ("of England"). As far as I know, Portugal has a King Edward, Greece has both George I and II. However, if one prefers using native languages, the Portugese case becomes King Duarte. No ambiguity would surface, in which case "of England" is not necessary for Edward Longshanks. IMO this issue and the "Use the form most familiar to English speakers" issue should be pulled together into a grand standard, i.e. e.g. Olof Skotkonung means Olof the "Tax King". My suggestion is using Skotkonung since 1) the "Tax king" is not used widely by historians. 2) This Olof may not be the fourth.
 * If there exists a posthumous naming of a sovereign, like Charles the Fat, Edward Longshanks or Olof Skotkonung etc., use that for the main page of info about the person. All pages of Edward I, Charles III and Olof IV and the names with "of (country name)" should direct links to it. All posthumous names, IMO, were used for distinguishing a monarch from other by his or her action during his reign. No one would be so "imaginative" enough to create an exactly same posthumous name for 2 or more sovereigns having the same first name. Even if the names are in foreign languages, it is better to include them since the numbering may not be so clear-cut.
 * If no posthumous name survived, use "of country" standard.

Addition to the "of country" standard

Let's keep the "of country" standard -- wherever applicable. As much as I prefer to see, e.g., Philip the Fair (of France), it makes more sense to keep him Philip IV of France. That said, sometimes we DO use cognomens most often -- for example, Charles the Bald doesn't usually get a number, neither does Charlemagne or Louis the Pious -- or Ethelred the Unread(y). Strongly suggest doing background research before creating pages with titles that just don't work -- one of the basic 'pedia standards. Basically, use the most familiar name, if the ordinal and "of country" doesn't work

 * Supporters include: JHK, Christian

 * Opponents include:

 * see also Royal and noble styles

User:JHK suggests,

Names of titled, landed peers should read x (full name), (possible) ordinal of Title

So Arthur Wellesley (sp?), 1st Duke of Wellington

They absolutely SHOULD NOT be the first and middle names, no last name, no title -- which is being used far too often!

supporters include: User:MichaelTinkler, rbrwr (in the UK context, at least, and where there's no absolutely compelling reason to use the "common name" as with User:Bertrand Russell)

opponents include:

Unsure about the ordinal: User:David Parker (are they general? I don't recall seeing any in a non-UK context, but I probably haven't been looking) -

When making entry on battle or war, list it in List of battles or War and put standard header

Supporters include: szopen

 * what is the standard header for battles or wars? Does it include dates for the war (eg Franco-Prussian War) Tarquin, Tuesday, June 18, 2002

When writing dates, use BCE and CE (Christian Era) like the historians do, instead of BC and AD like the Christians do. (caveat: this rule has more opponents than supporters listed below)

Supporters include:

 * Ark (let's face it, there was no Christ!)

 * Slrubenstein (I am sure that for many this would be their first encounter with "BCE" and "CE," but isn't this the whole point of an encyclopedia? To learn new things?  Most contemporary historians I have read use this terminology.  It only makes sanse -- if the calendar is now simply convention and has no religious significance, why use "before christ" and "in the year of our lord?")

 * There's one more problem with "AD". Since it means "in the year of Our Lord", I guess it's incorrect to use it with decades, centuries, etc. (eg. what does "3rd century AD" mean? "3rd century the year of Our Lord"? Makes no sense). In such cases we have to use CE. And if we use CE for centuries and the like, then for consistency we'll have to use it for years as well. --Kpalion 09:28, 6 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree on the use of CE/BCE, especially for articles on history, and particularly for history that spans the BCE to CE transition, such as Roman or Iron Age articles. Its commonly accepted current practice in that field, and is thus my preference there. What particularly irks me though, is when references to CE/BCE are edited to AD/BC with an edit comment that this is the current policy. It clearly isn't; it seems opinions are divided and it depends on the context and the type of article. Oh, and I moved the supporting comments into the supporters section and added a neutralsection :) --Nantonos 13:12, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Opponents include:

I'm not a christian, but I have no problem with BC and AD. The existing Wikipedia year pages use BC. BTW in the new politically correct system, CE is not Christian Era, but Common Era. Eclecticology, Tuesday, June 18, 2002

I just wanna mention that this is the first time I ever read that there is another way of notation. Do you think most people that come here will know what BCE and CE mean? I'll continue using BC and AD untill BCE and CE become standard in the English language.I doubt that will ever happen since it is so deeply implented, but if it does, I'll play along.Common spelling, not common era.salt28 June 22, 2002

 * Christian agrees with salt28 and thinks we should stick to the agreed upon Timeline standards

isn't this a violation of the policy of using what is most common and familiar? Vera Cruz

 * Trainspotter agrees and feels that it is in direct contradiction to spirit of the rule "Use the form most familiar to English speakers".

I agree. BC/AD are universally recognisable. BCE/CE aren't. FearÉIREANN 19:51, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Neutral:

 * I can't get excited about it at all: BCE or BC, it's the same calendar. Anno Domini doesn't signify anything, since Dionysius Exiguus got the dates wrong.  Christians don't seem to be clamouring to fix it.  Any calendar will have an arbitrary base point.  The idea of using proper integers, with negative numbes before a year zero has some appeal though, but would probably cause too much confusion and off-by-one errors to be worth bothering with here.

 * One nit I want to pick is that if people are going to use Anno Domini dating, put the abbreviation before the number of the year, not after. Formal English usage (which is what we are following whenever AD is used), is to state the date as follows, "In the Year of Our Lord 2002 . . ." -- hence AD 2002.

 * If you don't want to use AD, go ahead & put CE after the date. Or leave AD out entirely if it's clear from the context which era you're talking about. But if you use it, the correct usage is to put the abbreviation of the era before the year. -- llywrch 05:47 Nov 21, 2002 (UTC)

New Suggested Standards -- digest form

Use the form most familiar to English speakers (usually English-language)as the FIRST citation of terms

Names of kings and queens of modern kingdoms should include their kingdom This is to differntiate between many rulers with the same name and number. English rulers get "of England" added. No Cognomens (nicknames) in article titles -- they go in the first line of the article.

Rulers of principalities, duchies, etc., are "So-and-so, ordinal (if appropriate) title of place People who have more than one title are listed under their highest title.  NO FAMILY OR MIDDLE NAMES, except where English speakers normally use them. No Cognomens (nicknames) in article titles -- they go in the first line of the article.

For kings of no-longer-existing countries, or of peoples, revert to rule one -- use the most common English name.  For many rulers, we just don't use numbers, e.g., Alfred the Great, Charlemagne, Louis the Pious. For some rulers, the country is obvious -- Cleopatras are Egyptian, for example. An exception might be Macedon, because there are a bunch of Philips who could be confused with modern Philips.

Roman Emperors just get their name. The first line of the article can say when (and which empire) they ruled. Otherwise, we get stuck with Roman Emperor, Western R. E., Eastern R.E, Byzantine E, and (under the Carolingians) Roman Emperor (again)

Saints go by their most common English name, minus the "Saint"

''This is not a genealogy. Don't link back to people unless their entry includes more than their dates, parentage, spouse(s), and descendants. They need to have DONE something to deserve their own article!''

Supporters include:JHK, Danny, maveric149 (except for #6: Toby is right "saint" is a natural disambiguator. However, I don't think there is a need to tack on saint to Paul of Tarsus becuase that title is both; widely used and already naturally disambiguated. But more ambiguous stuff like Stephen or Denis really do need to have some form of natural disambiguation).

Opponents include:

Those with mixed opinions include: Toby Bartels;

Toby Bartels' mixed opinion:
 * 1) I actually prefer "Bernsteinstrasse (Amber Road)". I realise that I'm pretty unusual in my strong preference for original language names. I'm not about to put up a fight on this one.
 * 2) Agree, but add (in nondigest version at least) that we encourage redirects from nicknames that are likely to be accidental links, and disambiguation pages for ambiguous names that are likely to be accidental links.
 * 3) Agree, if you move the comma to after the ordinal ^_^. And note that often (such as with Germans), the Christian name that we use here actually appears about a third of the way through a list of half a dozen.
 * 4) I'd like to stick to rule 2 as much as possible; we revert to rule 1 only when rule 2 just doesn't work. Thus England's Saxon Edwards follow rule 1, but her Saxon Edmunds follow rule 2 (as is done now, see List of British monarchs for links to all these guys).
 * 5) Fair enough; Rome's pretty significant.
 * 6) Disagree; the article title should definitely include "Saint", it's a natural disambiguator.
 * 7) What's "this"? I agree that we shouldn't write articles that don't say something interesting about a person, but I also think that everybody potentially deserves an article (except for the really old guys that historians simply don't have any information on), so we should include links to articles on them in pages about other people. Those articles just shouldn't be written unless they say something — as is true throughout the Wikipedia.

Eclecticology's mixed opinions.
 * 1) Usually English does not mean always English. I've always found Franz to be more common than Francis for the Austrian monarchs.  Who would say Francis Haydn?
 * 2) Agree. On this basis those articles with "of the United Kingdom" should be changed to "of England".  Simplicity should prevail over historical pedantry.
 * 3) Consistency would be nice. The English Royal family is chaotic.  We have Charles Philip Arthur Windsor, Princess Margaret and Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon.  With that going on who's to know what format applies he's looking for any royal.
 * 4) There's nothing wrong with continuing the "of country" approach right into ancient times. Ambiguous ancients can appear out of nowhere.  Also many of the old names have strange spellings by modern standards; they might more easily be found on a search engine if the country is beside the name.  Again we like to know right away where the monarch of an obscure place is from.
 * 5) I wouldn't be too hasty about leaving off references to Rome and its successors. e.g. the eastern empire had several Constantines (not to mention Constans and Constantius): modern Greece has also had a Constantine.
 * 6) Keep "Saint". It's part of the most common English language usage.
 * 7) Simply listing and linking parents, spouses, siblings and children is not doing genalogy. We can't know the limitations about a linked person until the article.  Linking these people is tantamount to voting for them to be on the most wanted.  If there's only a single link, the article has limited chance of ever being written.

Ktsquare's mixed opinions.
 * 1) Agree
 * 2) Agree
 * 3) As Eclecticology said, consistency is definitely needed. This rule need to be detailed further.
 * 4) Add something more (maybe the of country, of people etc.) to monarchs of non-existing countries. Some monarchs are pretty obvious where they are from but some aren't. Consistency needed to distinguish each one of them. BTW we want a unique title for a particular sovereign.
 * 5) Just add (so and so, Roman Emperor, Byzantine Emperor etc.) or this rule can be incorporated with rule 4. I.E. add Roman, Byzantine Emperor etc. if the we don't which individual sovereign is without these affixes.
 * 6) Definitely keep Saint. It's a natural disambuguator and added it in front of a personal name greatly increased chance of being found by search engines. If one tries to found Saint Andrew and not someone named Andrew on web, one would defdinitly add "Saint" in front.
 * 7) Well said by Eclecticology.

Jeronimo's (very) mixed opinions

 * 1) Emphasis on the "familiarity for English speakers", not for English-language (Eclecticology's point).
 * 2) Why make an exception for the ancient kingdoms? Later, several of the current kings/queens may also get nicknames. So will we move the article to there then? And what are modern kingdoms? Kingdoms that still exist? England still exists. Or do we start from 1xxx? With the naming convention for cities, the emphasis was on consistency. Why not keep things consistent here as well?
 * 3) Agree.
 * 4) See above.
 * 5) See above.
 * 6) As many saints will share (anglicised) names with kings, (f.e. George), the Saint should be included. Question is whether to make it St. George or Saint George.
 * 7) See Toby Bartels and Eclecticology's remarks.

Vicki Rosenzweig's mixed opinion/footnote: as has been noted, there are often several saints with the same names. Furthermore, there is a common Christian practice of giving children, including those likely to grow up to be monarchs, saint's names. There are at least two saints Louis, for example, one of whom was also king of France--does he get "Saint Louis IX of France"?

I don't think that this has shown up anywhere on this page (or its talk), so let me say this here: I've come to agree with Julie that "Saint" should be left out of the title, when there is some other natural disambiguator, such as "IX of France", "the Evangelist", or a surname. I only want to keep "Saint" for people that are always identified as such because there is no other identifier, such as Saint Stephen (which currently redirects to Stephen!). Nobody calls him "that Stephen guy that got stoned in Acts", nor do they call him just "Stephen" in a generic context, but everyboyd calls him "Saint Stephen", including atheists like me. — Toby 03:59 Aug 9, 2002 (PDT)

The "suggested standard" on the main History standards page is an exact copy of the one above, with only one addition (the last entry about capitalization.) djmutex 19:13 8 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Some modifications.

 * 1) Categorized rules.
 * 2) Took out former rule 7: "This is not a genealogy.  Don't link back to people unless their entry includes more than their dates, parentage, spouse(s), and descendants.  They need to have DONE something to deserve their own article!" since in the discussion above, everybody seemed to oppose.
 * 3) Added new rule: "Use "AD 1234" and "1234 BC", if a date is ambigous.", deduced from apparent majority opinion above.
 * 4) Added lists to bottom of page. djmutex 08:39 9 Jul 2003 (UTC)

title: Wikipedia talk:History standards


text:
Battle of Lewes

The Battle of Lewes was one of two main battles of the conflict known as the Second Barons' War. It took place at Lewes in Sussex, on 14 May 1264. It marked the high point of the career of Simon de Montfort, 6th Earl of Leicester, and made him the "uncrowned King of England". Henry III's forces left the safety of Lewes Castle and St. Pancras Priory to engage the barons in battle and was initially successful, with his son Prince Edward routing part of the baronial army with a cavalry charge. However, Edward pursued his quarry off the battlefield and left Henry's men exposed. Henry was forced to launch an infantry attack up Offham Hill where he was defeated by the barons' men defending the summit. The royalists fled back to the castle and priory and the King was forced to sign the Mise of Lewes, ceding many of his powers to de Montfort.

Background
Henry III was an unpopular monarch due to his autocratic style, displays of favouritism and refusal to negotiate with the barons. The barons eventually imposed a constitutional reform known as the Provisions of Oxford upon Henry, including provision for a thrice-yearly meeting led by Simon de Montfort to discuss matters of government. Henry sought to escape the restrictions of the provisions and applied to Louis IX of France to arbitrate in the dispute. Louis agreed with Henry and annulled the provisions. Montfort was angered by this and rebelled against the King along with other barons in the Second Barons' War.

The war was not initially openly fought, each side toured the country to raise support for their army. A series of massacres of Jews in Worcester, London, Canterbury and other cities was conducted by Montfort's allies.

By May, the King's force had reached Lewes where they intended to halt to allow reinforcements to reach them. The King encamped at St. Pancras Priory with a force of infantry, while his son, Prince Edward (later King Edward I), commanded the cavalry at Lewes Castle 500 yd to the north. De Montfort approached the King with the intention of negotiating a truce or, failing that, to draw him into open battle. The King rejected the negotiations, and de Montfort moved his men from Fletching to Offham Hill, a mile to the north-west of Lewes, in a night march that surprised the royalist forces.

Deployment
The royalist army approached twice the size of de Montfort's. Henry commanded the centre, with Prince Edward, William de Valence, 1st Earl of Pembroke, and John de Warenne, 6th Earl of Surrey, on the right; and Richard, 1st Earl of Cornwall, and his son, Henry of Almain, on the left. The barons held the higher ground overlooking Lewes and had ordered their men to wear white crosses as a distinguishing emblem. De Montfort split his forces into four parts, giving his son, Henry de Montfort command of one quarter; Gilbert de Clare with John FitzJohn and William of Montchensy another; a third portion consisting of Londoners was placed under Nicholas de Segrave whilst de Montfort himself led the fourth quarter with Thomas of Pelveston.

Battle
The baronial forces commenced the battle with a surprise dawn attack on foragers sent out from the royalist forces. The King then made his move. Edward led a cavalry charge against Segrave's Londoners, placed on the left of the baronial line, that caused them to break and flee to the village of Offham. Edward pursued them for some four miles, leaving the King unsupported. Henry was forced to launch an attack with his centre and right divisions straight up Offham Hill into the baronial line which awaited them at the defensive. Cornwall's division faltered almost immediately but Henry's men fought on until compelled to retreat by the arrival of de Montfort's men who had been held back as the baronial reserve.

The King's men were forced down the hill and into Lewes where they engaged in a fighting retreat to the castle and priory. Edward returned with his weary cavalrymen and launched a counterattack but upon locating his father was persuaded that, with the town ablaze and many of the King's supporters having fled, it was time to accept de Montfort's renewed offer of negotiations. The Earl of Cornwall was captured by the barons when he was unable to reach the safety of the priory and, being discovered in a windmill, was taunted with cries of "Come down, come down, thou wicked miller."

Aftermath
The King was forced to sign the so-called Mise of Lewes. Though the document has not survived, it is clear that Henry was forced to accept the Provisions of Oxford, while Prince Edward remained a hostage of the barons. This put de Montfort in a position of ultimate power, which would last until Prince Edward's escape, and de Montfort's subsequent defeat and death at the Battle of Evesham in August 1265. Following the battle, debts to Jews were cancelled, and the records destroyed; this had been a key war aim.

In 1994, an archaeological survey of the cemetery of St Nicholas Hospital, in Lewes revealed the remains of bodies that were thought to be combatants from the Battle of Lewes. However, in 2014, it was revealed that some of the skeletons may actually be much older, with a skeleton known as "skeleton 180" being contemporary with the Norman invasion.

Location
There remains some uncertainty over the location of the battle, with Offham Hill's eastern and lower slopes covered by modern housing. Recently, a new consensus on the location of the main engagement places it on the current location of HM Prison Lewes. Contemporary sources suggest the initial engagement took place along the approximate lines of what is now Nevill Road. The top and southern slopes remain accessible by footpaths across agricultural land, and the ruins of the priory and castle are also open to visitors.

title: Battle of Lewes