text:
Wilberforce

Wilberforce may refer to:

People

 * Wilberforce (name), for people (and fictional characters) with the name
 * William Wilberforce (1759–1833), British politician, evangelical reformer and campaigner against the slave trade

Australia

 * Wilberforce, New South Wales
 * Wilberforce Cemetery
 * Wilberforce Park

Canada

 * Wilberforce, Ontario
 * Wilberforce Colony, Ontario; an 18th-century colony of American Black citizens
 * Kattimannap Qurlua (formerly Wilberforce Falls), in Wilberforce Gorge, Nunavut
 * North Algona Wilberforce, a township in Renfrew County, Ontario; formed from North Algona and Wilberforce Townships

United Kingdom

 * Wilberforce House, the birthplace of William Wilberforce, in Hull, England
 * Wilberforce Way, a walking route between Hull and York, England
 * Wilberfoss, East Riding of Yorkshire, England
 * Wilberforce Oak, a tree stump near Holwood House, Keston, England

Other

 * Wilberforce, Ohio, United States
 * Wilberforce, Sierra Leone
 * Wilberforce River, in the Southern Alps of New Zealand

Education

 * Wilberforce College, in Hull, England
 * Wilberforce Institute, research institute at the University of Hull, England
 * Wilberforce School, in Princeton Junction, New Jersey
 * Wilberforce University, in Wilberforce, Ohio
 * Central State University, a public, historically black university in Wilberforce, Ohio (formerly Wilberforce State University)

Other uses

 * Wilberforce (cat), who lived at 10 Downing Street between 1973 and 1987
 * Wilberforce pendulum

title: Wilberforce


text:
Prime meridian

A prime meridian is an arbitrarily-chosen meridian (a line of longitude) in a geographic coordinate system at which longitude is defined to be 0°. Together, a prime meridian and its anti-meridian (the 180th meridian in a 360°-system) form a great circle. This great circle divides a spheroid, like Earth, into two hemispheres: the Eastern Hemisphere and the Western Hemisphere (for an east-west notational system). For Earth's prime meridian, various conventions have been used or advocated in different regions throughout history. Earth's current international standard prime meridian is the IERS Reference Meridian. It is derived, but differs slightly, from the Greenwich Meridian, the previous standard.

A prime meridian for a planetary body not tidally locked (or at least not in synchronous rotation) is entirely arbitrary, unlike an equator, which is determined by the axis of rotation. However, for celestial objects that are tidally locked (more specifically, synchronous), their prime meridians are determined by the face always inward of the orbit (a planet facing its star, or a moon facing its planet), just as equators are determined by rotation.

Longitudes for the Earth and Moon are measured from their prime meridian (at 0°) to 180° east and west. For all other Solar System bodies, longitude is measured from 0° (their prime meridian) to 360°. West longitudes are used if the rotation of the body is prograde (or 'direct', like Earth), meaning that its direction of rotation is the same as that of its orbit. East longitudes are used if the rotation is retrograde.

History

The notion of longitude for Greeks was developed by the Greek Eratosthenes (c.276 – 195BCE) in Alexandria, and Hipparchus (c.190 – 120BCE) in Rhodes, and applied to a large number of cities by the geographer Strabo (64/63BCE – c.24CE). But it was Ptolemy (c.90 – 168CE) who first used a consistent meridian for a world map in his Geographia.

Ptolemy used as his basis the "Fortunate Isles", a group of islands in the Atlantic, which are usually associated with the Canary Islands (13° to 18°W), although his maps correspond more closely to the Cape Verde islands (22° to 25° W). The main point is to be comfortably west of the western tip of Africa (17.5° W) as negative numbers were not yet in use. His prime meridian corresponds to 18° 40' west of Winchester (about 20°W) today. At that time the chief method of determining longitude was by using the reported times of lunar eclipses in different countries.

One of the earliest known descriptions of standard time in India appeared in the 4th century CE astronomical treatise Surya Siddhanta. Postulating a spherical Earth, the book described the thousands years old customs of the prime meridian, or zero longitude, as passing through Avanti, the ancient name for the historic city of Ujjain, and Rohitaka, the ancient name for Rohtak (28.9°N, 76.63333°W), a city near the Kurukshetra.

Ptolemy's Geographia was first printed with maps at Bologna in 1477, and many early globes in the 16th century followed his lead. But there was still a hope that a "natural" basis for a prime meridian existed. Christopher Columbus reported (1493) that the compass pointed due north somewhere in mid-Atlantic, and this fact was used in the important Treaty of Tordesillas of 1494, which settled the territorial dispute between Spain and Portugal over newly discovered lands. The Tordesillas line was eventually settled at 370 leagues (2,193 kilometers, 1,362 statute miles, or 1,184 nautical miles) west of Cape Verde. This is shown in the copies of Spain's Padron Real made by Diogo Ribeiro in 1527 and 1529. São Miguel Island (25.5°W) in the Azores was still used for the same reason as late as 1594 by Christopher Saxton, although by then it had been shown that the zero magnetic declination line did not follow a line of longitude.

In 1541, Mercator produced his famous 41 cm terrestrial globe and drew his prime meridian precisely through Fuerteventura (14°1'W) in the Canaries. His later maps used the Azores, following the magnetic hypothesis. But by the time that Ortelius produced the first modern atlas in 1570, other islands such as Cape Verde were coming into use. In his atlas longitudes were counted from 0° to 360°, not 180°W to 180°E as is usual today. This practice was followed by navigators well into the 18th century. In 1634, Cardinal Richelieu used the westernmost island of the Canaries, El Hierro, 19° 55' west of Paris, as the choice of meridian. The geographer Delisle decided to round this off to 20°, so that it simply became the meridian of Paris disguised.

In the early 18th century the battle was on to improve the determination of longitude at sea, leading to the development of the marine chronometer by John Harrison. But it was the development of accurate star charts, principally by the first British Astronomer Royal, John Flamsteed between 1680 and 1719 and disseminated by his successor Edmund Halley, that enabled navigators to use the lunar method of determining longitude more accurately using the octant developed by Thomas Godfrey and John Hadley.

In the 18th century most countries in Europe adapted their own prime meridian, usually through their capital, hence in France the Paris meridian was prime, in Prussia it was the Berlin meridian, in Denmark the Copenhagen meridian, and in United Kingdom the Greenwich meridian.

Between 1765 and 1811, Nevil Maskelyne published 49 issues of the Nautical Almanac based on the meridian of the Royal Observatory, Greenwich. "Maskelyne's tables not only made the lunar method practicable, they also made the Greenwich meridian the universal reference point. Even the French translations of the Nautical Almanac retained Maskelyne's calculations from Greenwich – in spite of the fact that every other table in the Connaissance des Temps considered the Paris meridian as the prime."

In 1884, at the International Meridian Conference in Washington, D.C., 22 countries voted to adopt the Greenwich meridian as the prime meridian of the world. The French argued for a neutral line, mentioning the Azores and the Bering Strait, but eventually abstained and continued to use the Paris meridian until 1911.

The current international standard Prime Meridian is the IERS Reference Meridian. The International Hydrographic Organization adopted an early version of the IRM in 1983 for all nautical charts. It was adopted for air navigation by the International Civil Aviation Organization on 3 March 1989.

International prime meridian
Since 1984, the international standard for the Earth's prime meridian is the IERS Reference Meridian. Between 1884 and 1984, the meridian of Greenwich was the world standard. These meridians are physically very close to each other.

Prime meridian at Greenwich

In October 1884 the Greenwich Meridian was selected by delegates (forty-one delegates representing twenty-five nations) to the International Meridian Conference held in Washington, D.C., United States to be the common zero of longitude and standard of time reckoning throughout the world.

The position of the historic prime meridian, based at the Royal Observatory, Greenwich, was established by Sir George Airy in 1851. It was defined by the location of the Airy Transit Circle ever since the first observation he took with it. Prior to that, it was defined by a succession of earlier transit instruments, the first of which was acquired by the second Astronomer Royal, Edmond Halley in 1721. It was set up in the extreme north-west corner of the Observatory between Flamsteed House and the Western Summer House. This spot, now subsumed into Flamsteed House, is roughly 43 metres (47 yards) to the west of the Airy Transit Circle, a distance equivalent to roughly 2 seconds of longitude. It was Airy's transit circle that was adopted in principle (with French delegates, who pressed for adoption of the Paris meridian abstaining) as the Prime Meridian of the world at the 1884 International Meridian Conference.

All of these Greenwich meridians were located via an astronomic observation from the surface of the Earth, oriented via a plumb line along the direction of gravity at the surface. This astronomic Greenwich meridian was disseminated around the world, first via the lunar distance method, then by chronometers carried on ships, then via telegraph lines carried by submarine communications cables, then via radio time signals. One remote longitude ultimately based on the Greenwich meridian using these methods was that of the North American Datum 1927 or NAD27, an ellipsoid whose surface best matches mean sea level under the United States.

IERS Reference Meridian
Beginning in 1973 the International Time Bureau and later the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service changed from reliance on optical instruments like the Airy Transit Circle to techniques such as lunar laser ranging, satellite laser ranging, and very-long-baseline interferometry. The new techniques resulted in the IERS Reference Meridian, the plane of which passes through the centre of mass of the Earth. This differs from the plane established by the Airy transit, which is affected by vertical deflection (the local vertical is affected by influences such as nearby mountains). The change from relying on the local vertical to using a meridian based on the centre of the Earth caused the modern prime meridian to be 5.3 east of the astronomic Greenwich prime meridian through the Airy Transit Circle. At the latitude of Greenwich, this amounts to 102 metres (112 yards). This was officially accepted by the Bureau International de l'Heure (BIH) in 1984 via its BTS84 (BIH Terrestrial System) that later became WGS84 (World Geodetic System 1984) and the various International Terrestrial Reference Frames (ITRFs).

Due to the movement of Earth's tectonic plates, the line of 0° longitude along the surface of the Earth has slowly moved toward the west from this shifted position by a few centimetres (inches); that is, towards the Airy Transit Circle (or the Airy Transit Circle has moved toward the east, depending on your point of view) since 1984 (or the 1960s). With the introduction of satellite technology, it became possible to create a more accurate and detailed global map. With these advances there also arose the necessity to define a reference meridian that, whilst being derived from the Airy Transit Circle, would also take into account the effects of plate movement and variations in the way that the Earth was spinning. As a result, the IERS Reference Meridian was established and is commonly used to denote the Earth's prime meridian (0° longitude) by the International Earth Rotation and Reference Systems Service, which defines and maintains the link between longitude and time. Based on observations to satellites and celestial compact radio sources (quasars) from various coordinated stations around the globe, Airy's transit circle drifts northeast about 2.5 centimetres (1 inch) per year relative to this Earth-centred 0° longitude.

It is also the reference meridian of the Global Positioning System operated by the United States Department of Defense, and of WGS84 and its two formal versions, the ideal International Terrestrial Reference System (ITRS) and its realization, the International Terrestrial Reference Frame (ITRF). A current convention on the Earth uses the line of longitude 180° opposite the IRM as the basis for the International Date Line.

List of places
On Earth, starting at the North Pole and heading south to the South Pole, the IERS Reference Meridian (as of 2016) passes through:

Prime meridian on other celestial bodies
As on the Earth, prime meridians must be arbitrarily defined. Often a landmark such as a crater is used; other times a prime meridian is defined by reference to another celestial object, or by magnetic fields. The prime meridians of the following planetographic systems have been defined:

 * Two different heliographic coordinate systems are used on the Sun. The first is the Carrington heliographic coordinate system. In this system, the prime meridian passes through the center of the solar disk as seen from the Earth on 9 November 1853, which is when the English astronomer Richard Christopher Carrington started his observations of sunspots. The second is the Stonyhurst heliographic coordinates system, originated at Stonyhurst Observatory in Lancashire, England.
 * In 1975 the prime meridian of Mercury was defined to be 20° east of the crater Hun Kal. This meridian was chosen because it runs through the point on Mercury's equator where the average temperature is highest (due to the planet's rotation and orbit, the sun briefly retrogrades at noon at this point during perihelion, giving it more sunlight).
 * Defined in 1992, the prime meridian of Venus passes through the central peak in the crater Ariadne, chosen arbitrarily.
 * The prime meridian of the Moon lies directly in the middle of the face of the Moon visible from Earth and passes near the crater Bruce.
 * The prime meridian of Mars was established in 1971 and passes through the center of the crater Airy-0, although it is fixed by the longitude of the Viking 1 lander, which is defined to be 47.95137°W.
 * The prime meridian on Ceres runs through the Kait crater, which was arbitrarily chosen because it is near the equator (about 2° south).
 * The prime meridian on 4 Vesta is 4 degrees east of the crater Claudia, chosen because it is sharply defined.
 * Jupiter has several coordinate systems because its cloud tops—the only part of the planet visible from space—rotate at different rates depending on latitude. It is unknown whether Jupiter has any internal solid surface that would enable a more Earth-like coordinate system. System I and System II coordinates are based on atmospheric rotation, and System III coordinates use Jupiter's magnetic field. The prime meridians of Jupiter's four Galilean moons were established in 1979.
 * Europa's prime meridian is defined such that the crater Cilix is at 182° W. The 0° longitude runs through the middle of the face that is always turned towards Jupiter.
 * Io's prime meridian, like that of Earth's moon, is defined so that it runs through the middle of the face that is always turned towards Jupiter (the near side, known as the subjovian hemisphere).
 * Ganymede's prime meridian is defined such that the crater Anat is at 128° W, and the 0° longitude runs through the middle of the subjovian hemisphere.
 * Callisto's prime meridian is defined such that the crater Saga is at 326° W.
 * Titan is the largest moon of Saturn and, like the Earth's moon, always has the same face towards Saturn, and so the middle of that face is 0 longitude.
 * Like Jupiter, Neptune is a gas giant, so any surface is obscured by clouds. The prime meridian of its largest moon, Triton, was established in 1991.
 * Pluto's prime meridian is defined as the meridian passing through the center of the face that is always towards Charon, its largest moon, as the two are tidally locked to each other. Charon's prime meridian is similarly defined as the meridian always facing directly toward Pluto.

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

title: Prime meridian


text:
William Wilberforce

William Wilberforce (24 August 1759 – 29 July 1833) was a British politician, a philanthropist, and a leader of the movement to abolish the slave trade. A native of Kingston upon Hull, Yorkshire, he began his political career in 1780, and became an independent Member of Parliament (MP) for Yorkshire (1784–1812). In 1785, he underwent a conversion experience and became an Evangelical Anglican, which resulted in major changes to his lifestyle and a lifelong concern for reform.

In 1787, Wilberforce came into contact with Thomas Clarkson and a group of activists against the slave trade, including Granville Sharp, Hannah More and Charles Middleton. They persuaded Wilberforce to take on the cause of abolition, and he became a leading English abolitionist. He headed the parliamentary campaign against the British slave trade for 20 years until the passage of the Slave Trade Act of 1807.

Wilberforce was convinced of the importance of religion, morality and education. He championed causes and campaigns such as the Society for the Suppression of Vice, British missionary work in India, the creation of a free colony in Sierra Leone, the foundation of the Church Mission Society and the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals. His underlying conservatism led him to support politically and socially repressive legislation, and resulted in criticism that he was ignoring injustices at home while campaigning for the enslaved abroad.

In later years, Wilberforce supported the campaign for the complete abolition of slavery and continued his involvement after 1826, when he resigned from Parliament because of his failing health. That campaign led to the Slavery Abolition Act 1833, which abolished slavery in most of the British Empire. Wilberforce died just three days after hearing that the passage of the Act through Parliament was assured. He was buried in Westminster Abbey, close to his friend William Pitt the Younger.

Early life and education
Wilberforce was born in Hull, in Yorkshire, England, on 24 August 1759. He was the only son of Robert Wilberforce (1728–1768), a wealthy merchant, and his wife, Elizabeth Bird (1730–1798). His grandfather, William (1690–1774), had made the family fortune in the maritime trade with Baltic countries. He was twice elected mayor of Hull.

Wilberforce was a small, sickly and delicate child with poor eyesight. In 1767, he began attending Hull Grammar School, which at the time was headed by Joseph Milner, who would become a lifelong friend. Wilberforce profited from the supportive atmosphere at the school, until his father died in 1768. With his mother struggling to cope, the nine-year-old Wilberforce was sent to a prosperous uncle and aunt with houses in both St James's Place, London, and Wimbledon. He attended an "indifferent" boarding school in Putney for two years and spent his holidays in Wimbledon, where he grew extremely fond of his relatives. He became interested in evangelical Christianity due to his relatives' influence, especially that of his aunt Hannah, sister of the wealthy merchant John Thornton, a philanthropist and a supporter of the leading Methodist preacher George Whitefield.

Wilberforce's staunchly Church of England mother and grandfather, alarmed at these nonconformist influences and at his leanings towards evangelicalism, brought the 12-year-old boy back to Hull in 1771. Wilberforce was heartbroken at being separated from his aunt and uncle. His family opposed a return to Hull Grammar School because the headmaster had become a Methodist, and Wilberforce continued his education at Pocklington School from 1771 to 1776. Influenced by Methodist scruples, he initially resisted Hull's lively social life, but, as his religious fervour diminished, he embraced theatre-going, attended balls, and played cards.

In October 1776, at the age of seventeen, Wilberforce went up to St John's College, Cambridge. The deaths of his grandfather and uncle, in 1774 and 1777 respectively, had left him independently wealthy and as a result he had little inclination or need to apply himself to serious study. Instead he immersed himself in the social round of student life and pursued a hedonistic lifestyle, enjoying cards, gambling and late-night drinking sessions – although he found the excesses of some of his fellow students distasteful. Witty, generous and an excellent conversationalist, Wilberforce was a popular figure. He made many friends, including the more studious future Prime Minister William Pitt. Despite his lifestyle and lack of interest in studying, he managed to pass his examinations and was awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1781 and a Master of Arts degree in 1788.

Early parliamentary career
Wilberforce began to consider a political career while still at university and during the winter of 1779–1780, he and Pitt frequently watched House of Commons debates from the gallery. Pitt, already set on a political career, encouraged Wilberforce to join him in obtaining a parliamentary seat. In September 1780, at the age of 21 and while still a student, Wilberforce was elected Member of Parliament for Kingston upon Hull, spending over £8,000, as was the custom of the time, to ensure he received the necessary votes. Free from financial pressures, Wilberforce sat as an independent, resolving to be "no party man." Criticised at times for inconsistency, he supported both Tory and Whig governments according to his conscience, working closely with the party in power, and voting on specific measures according to their merits.

Wilberforce attended Parliament regularly, but he also maintained a lively social life, becoming an habitué of gentlemen's gambling clubs such as Goostree's and Boodle's in Pall Mall, London. The writer and socialite Madame de Staël described him as the "wittiest man in England" and, according to Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, the Prince of Wales said that he would go anywhere to hear Wilberforce sing. Wilberforce used his speaking voice to great effect in political speeches; the diarist and author James Boswell witnessed Wilberforce's eloquence in the House of Commons and noted, "I saw what seemed a mere shrimp mount upon the table; but as I listened, he grew, and grew, until the shrimp became a whale."

During the frequent government changes of 1781–1784, Wilberforce supported his friend Pitt in parliamentary debates. In autumn 1783, Pitt, Wilberforce and Edward Eliot travelled to France for a six-week holiday together. After a difficult start in Rheims, where their presence aroused police suspicion that they were English spies, they visited Paris, meeting Benjamin Franklin, General Lafayette, Marie Antoinette and Louis XVI, and joined the French court at Fontainebleau.

Pitt became Prime Minister in December 1783, with Wilberforce a key supporter of his minority government. Despite their close friendship, there is no record that Pitt offered Wilberforce a ministerial position in this or future governments. This may have been due to Wilberforce's wish to remain an independent MP. Alternatively, Wilberforce's frequent tardiness and disorganisation, as well as his chronic eye problems that at times made reading impossible, may have convinced Pitt that he was not ministerial material. When Parliament was dissolved in the spring of 1784, Wilberforce decided to stand as a candidate for the county of Yorkshire in the 1784 general election. On 6 April, he was returned as MP for Yorkshire at the age of twenty-four.

Conversion
In October 1784, Wilberforce embarked upon a tour of Europe with his mother, sister and Isaac Milner, the younger brother of his former headmaster. They visited the French Riviera and had dinners, played cards, and gambled. In February 1785, Wilberforce returned to London temporarily, to support Pitt's proposals for parliamentary reforms. He rejoined the party in Genoa, Italy, and they continued their tour to Switzerland. Milner accompanied Wilberforce to England, and on the journey they read "The Rise and Progress of Religion in the Soul" by Philip Doddridge, a leading early 18th-century English nonconformist.

Wilberforce's spiritual journey is thought to have changed course at this time. He started to rise early to read the Bible and pray and kept a private journal. He underwent an evangelical conversion, regretting his past life and resolving to commit his future life and work to the service of God. His conversion changed some of his habits, but not his nature: he remained outwardly cheerful, interested and respectful, tactfully urging others towards his new faith. Inwardly, he became self-critical, harshly judging his spirituality, use of time, vanity, self-control and relationships with others.

At the time, religious enthusiasm was generally regarded as a social transgression and was stigmatised in polite society. Evangelicals in the upper classes were exposed to contempt and ridicule, and Wilberforce's conversion led him to question whether he should remain in public life. He sought guidance from John Newton, a leading evangelical Anglican clergyman of the day and Rector of St Mary Woolnoth. Both counselled him to remain in politics, and he resolved to do so "with increased diligence and conscientiousness". His political views were informed by his faith and by his desire to promote Christianity and Christian ethics in private and public life. His views were often deeply conservative, opposed to radical changes in a God-given political and social order, and focused on issues such as the observance of the Sabbath and the eradication of immorality through education and reform. He was often distrusted by progressive voices because of his conservatism, and regarded with suspicion by many Tories who saw evangelicals as radicals who wanted to the overthrow of church and state.

In 1786, Wilberforce leased a house in Old Palace Yard, Westminster, in order to be near Parliament. He began using his parliamentary position to advocate reform by introducing a Registration Bill, proposing limited changes to parliamentary election procedures. In response to the need for bodies for dissection by surgeons, he brought forward a bill to extend the measure permitting the dissection after execution of criminals such as rapists, arsonists, burglars and violent robbers. The bill also advocated the reduction of sentences for women convicted of treason, a crime that at the time included a husband's murder. The House of Commons passed both bills, but they were defeated in the House of Lords.

Initial decision
The British initially became involved in the slave trade during the 16th century. By 1783, the triangular route that took British-made goods to Africa to buy slaves, transported the enslaved to the West Indies, and then brought slave-grown products such as sugar, tobacco, and cotton to Britain, represented about 80 percent of Great Britain's foreign income. British ships dominated the slave trade, supplying French, Spanish, Dutch, Portuguese and British colonies, and in peak years carried forty thousand enslaved men, women and children across the Atlantic in the horrific conditions of the middle passage. Of the estimated 11 million Africans transported into slavery, about 1.4 million died during the voyage.

The British campaign to abolish the slave trade is generally considered to have begun in the 1780s with the establishment of the Quakers' anti-slavery committees, and their presentation to Parliament of the first slave trade petition in 1783. The same year, Wilberforce, while dining with his Cambridge friend Gerard Edwards, met Rev. James Ramsay, a ship's surgeon who had become a clergyman and medical supervisor on the island of St Christopher (later St Kitts). Ramsay was horrified by the conditions endured by the enslaved peoples, both at sea and on the plantations and returned to England and joined abolitionist movements. Wilberforce did not follow up on his meeting with Ramsay, but three years later, inspired by his new faith, Wilberforce became interested in humanitarian reform. In November 1786, he received a letter from Sir Charles Middleton that re-opened his interest in the slave trade. Middleton suggested that Wilberforce bring forward the abolition of the slave trade in Parliament. Wilberforce responded that he "felt the great importance of the subject, and thought himself unequal to the task allotted to him, but yet would not positively decline it". He began to read widely on the subject and met with a group of abolitionists called the Testonites at Middleton's home in the early winter of 1786–1787.

In early 1787, Thomas Clarkson met with Wilberforce for the first time at Old Palace Yard and brought a copy of his essay on the subject. Clarkson visited Wilberforce weekly, bringing first-hand evidence he had obtained about the slave trade. The Quakers, already working for abolition, recognised the need for influence within Parliament, and urged Clarkson to secure a commitment from Wilberforce to bring forward the case for abolition in the House of Commons. It was arranged that Bennet Langton, a Lincolnshire landowner and mutual acquaintance of Wilberforce and Clarkson, would organise a dinner party on 13 March 1787 to ask Wilberforce formally to lead the parliamentary campaign. By the end of the evening, Wilberforce had agreed in general terms that he would bring forward the abolition of the slave trade in Parliament, "provided that no person more proper could be found".

The same spring, on 12 May 1787, the still hesitant Wilberforce held a conversation with William Pitt and the future Prime Minister William Grenville as they sat under a large oak tree on Pitt's estate in Kent. Under what came to be known as the "Wilberforce Oak" at Holwood House, Pitt challenged his friend to give notice of a motion concerning the slave trade before another parliamentarian did. Wilberforce's response is not recorded, but he later declared this was when he decided to bring forward the motion.

Early parliamentary action
Wilberforce had planned to introduce a motion giving notice that he would bring forward a bill for the Abolition of the Slave Trade during the 1789 parliamentary session. However, in January 1788, he was taken ill with a probable stress-related condition, now thought to be ulcerative colitis. It was several months before he was able to resume work, and he spent time convalescing at Bath and Cambridge. His regular bouts of gastrointestinal illnesses precipitated the use of moderate quantities of opium, which proved effective in alleviating his condition, and which he continued to use for the rest of his life. In Wilberforce's absence, Pitt, who had long been supportive of abolition, introduced the preparatory motion himself, and ordered a Privy Council investigation into the slave trade, followed by a House of Commons review.

With the publication of the Privy Council report in April 1789 and following months of planning, Wilberforce commenced his parliamentary campaign. On 12 May 1789, he made his first major speech on the subject of abolition in the House of Commons, in which he reasoned that the trade was morally reprehensible and an issue of natural justice. Drawing on Thomas Clarkson's mass of evidence, he described in detail the appalling conditions in which enslaved people travelled from Africa in the middle passage and argued that abolishing the trade would also bring an improvement to the conditions of existing slaves in the West Indies. He moved twelve resolutions condemning the slave trade, but did not refer to the abolition of slavery itself, instead dwelling on the potential for reproduction in the existing slave population should the trade be abolished. With several parliamentarians signalling support for the bill, the opponents of abolition delayed the vote by proposing that the House of Commons hear its own evidence; Wilberforce, in a decision that has been criticised for prolonging the slave trade, reluctantly agreed. The hearings were not completed by the end of the parliamentary session and were deferred until the following year. In the meantime, Wilberforce and Clarkson tried unsuccessfully to take advantage of the egalitarian atmosphere of the French Revolution to press for France's abolition of the trade. In January 1790, Wilberforce succeeded in speeding up the hearings by gaining approval for a smaller parliamentary select committee to consider the vast quantity of evidence which had been accumulated. Wilberforce's house in Old Palace Yard became a centre for the abolitionists' campaign and the location for many strategy meetings. Petitioners for other causes also besieged him there.

Interrupted by a general election in June 1790, the committee finished hearing witnesses and in April 1791, with a closely reasoned four-hour speech, Wilberforce introduced the first parliamentary bill to abolish the slave trade. After two evenings of debate, the bill was easily defeated by 163 votes to 88, as the political climate having swung in a conservative direction after the French Revolution and in reaction to an increase in radicalism and to slave revolts in the French West Indies.

A protracted parliamentary campaign to abolish slavery continued, and Wilberforce remained committed to this cause despite frustration and hostility. He was supported by fellow members of the Clapham Sect, among whom was his best friend and cousin Henry Thornton. Wilberforce accepted an invitation to share a house with Henry Thornton in 1792, moving into his own home after Thornton's marriage in 1796. Wilberforce, the Clapham Sect and others were anxious to demonstrate that Africans, and particularly freed slaves, had human and economic abilities beyond the slave trade and capable of sustaining a well-ordered society, trade and cultivation. Inspired in part by the utopian vision of Granville Sharp, they became involved in the establishment in 1792 of a free colony in Sierra Leone with black settlers from Britain, Nova Scotia and Jamaica, as well as native Africans and some whites. They formed the Sierra Leone Company, with Wilberforce subscribing liberally to the project in money and time.

On 2 April 1792, Wilberforce brought another bill calling for abolition of the slave trade. Henry Dundas, as Home Secretary, proposed a compromise solution of gradual abolition of the trade over several years. This was passed by 230 to 85 votes, but Wilberforce believed that it was little more than a clever ploy to ensure that total abolition would be delayed indefinitely.

War with France
On 26 February 1793, another vote to abolish the slave trade was narrowly defeated by eight votes. The outbreak of war with France the same month prevented further consideration of the issue, as politicians concentrated on the national crisis and the threat of invasion. The same year, and again in 1794, Wilberforce unsuccessfully brought before Parliament a bill to outlaw British ships from supplying enslaved people to foreign colonies. He voiced his concern about the war and urged Pitt and his government to make greater efforts to end hostilities. Growing more alarmed, on 31 December 1794, Wilberforce moved that the government seek a peaceful resolution with France, a stance that created a temporary breach in his long friendship with Pitt.

Abolition continued to be associated in the public consciousness with the French Revolution and with British radical groups, resulting in a decline in public support. Despite this, Wilberforce continued to introduce abolition bills throughout the 1790s.

The early years of the 19th century saw an increased public interest in abolition. In June 1804, Wilberforce's bill to abolish the slave trade successfully passed all its stages through the House of Commons. However, it was too late in the parliamentary session for it to complete its passage through the House of Lords. On its reintroduction during the 1805 session, it was defeated, with even the usually sympathetic Pitt failing to support it. On this occasion and throughout the campaign, abolition was held back by Wilberforce's trusting, even credulous nature, and his deferential attitude towards those in power. He found it difficult to believe that men of rank would not do what he perceived to be the right thing, and was reluctant to confront them when they did not.

Final phase of the campaign
Following Pitt's death in January 1806, Wilberforce increased his collaboration with the Whigs, especially the abolitionists. He gave general support to the Grenville–Fox administration, which brought more abolitionists into the cabinet; Wilberforce and Charles Fox led the campaign in the House of Commons.

A radical change of tactics, which involved the introduction of a bill to ban British citizens from aiding or participating in the slave trade to the French colonies, was suggested by the maritime lawyer James Stephen. A bill was introduced and approved by the cabinet, and Wilberforce and other abolitionists maintained a self-imposed silence, so as not to draw any attention to the effect of the bill. The approach was successful and the Foreign Slave Trade Bill received royal assent on 23 May 1806. Wilberforce and Clarkson collected a large volume of evidence against the slave trade over the previous two decades, and Wilberforce spent the latter part of 1806 writing A Letter on the Abolition of the Slave Trade, which was a comprehensive restatement of the abolitionists' case.

Wilberforce was re-elected as an MP for Yorkshire in the 1806 United Kingdom general election, after which he returned to finishing and publishing his Letter, a 400-page book which formed the basis for the final phase of the campaign. Lord Grenville, the Prime Minister, successfully introduced an Abolition Bill in the House of Lords first, then Charles Grey moved for a second reading in the Commons on 23 February 1807. As tributes were made to Wilberforce, whose face streamed with tears, the bill was carried by 283 votes to 16. Excited supporters suggested taking advantage of the large majority to seek the abolition of slavery itself, but Wilberforce made it clear that total emancipation was not the immediate goal.

Personal life
In his youth, William Wilberforce showed little interest in women, but when he was in his late thirties his friend Thomas Babington recommended 25-year-old Barbara Ann Spooner (1771–1847) as a potential bride. Wilberforce met her two days later on 15 April 1797, and was immediately smitten; following an eight-day whirlwind romance, he proposed. Despite the urgings of friends to slow down, the couple married at the Church of St Swithin in Bath, Somerset, on 30 May 1797. They were devoted to each other, and Barbara was very attentive and supportive to Wilberforce in his increasing ill health, though she showed little interest in his political activities. They had six children in fewer than ten years: William (born 1798), Barbara (born 1799), Elizabeth (born 1801), Robert (born 1802), Samuel (born 1805) and Henry (born 1807). Wilberforce was an indulgent and adoring father who revelled in his time at home and at play with his children.

Political and social reform
Wilberforce was highly conservative on many political and social issues. He advocated change in society through Christianity and improvement in morals, education and religion, fearing and opposing radical causes and revolution. The radical writer William Cobbett was among those who attacked what they saw as Wilberforce's hypocrisy in campaigning for better working conditions for enslaved people while British workers lived in terrible conditions at home. Critics noted Wilberforce's support of the suspension of habeas corpus in 1795 and his votes for Pitt's "Gagging Bills", which banned meetings of more than 50 people, allowing speakers to be arrested and imposing harsh penalties on those who attacked the constitution. Wilberforce was opposed to giving workers' rights to organise into unions, in 1799 speaking in favour of the Combination Act, which suppressed trade union activity throughout Britain, and calling unions "a general disease in our society". He also opposed an enquiry into the 1819 Peterloo Massacre in which eleven protesters were killed at a political rally demanding reform. Concerned about "bad men who wished to produce anarchy and confusion", he approved of the government's Six Acts, which further limited public meetings and seditious writings. Wilberforce's actions led the essayist William Hazlitt to condemn him as one "who preaches vital Christianity to untutored savages, and tolerates its worst abuses in civilised states."

Wilberforce's views of women and religion were also conservative. He disapproved of women anti-slavery activists such as Elizabeth Heyrick, who organised women's abolitionist groups in the 1820s, protesting: "[F]or ladies to meet, to publish, to go from house to house stirring up petitions—these appear to me proceedings unsuited to the female character as delineated in Scripture." Wilberforce initially strongly opposed bills for Catholic emancipation, which would have allowed Catholics to become MPs, hold public office and serve in the army, although by 1813, he had changed his views and spoke in favour of a similar bill.

Wilberforce advocated legislation to improve the working conditions for chimney-sweeps and textile workers, engaged in prison reform, and supported campaigns to restrict capital punishment and the severe punishments meted out under the Game laws. He recognised the importance of education in alleviating poverty, and when Hannah More and her sister established Sunday schools for the poor in Somerset and the Mendips, he provided financial and moral support as they faced opposition from landowners and Anglican clergy. From the late 1780s onward, Wilberforce campaigned for limited parliamentary reform, such as the abolition of rotten boroughs and the redistribution of Commons seats to growing towns and cities, though by 1832, he feared that such measures went too far. With others, Wilberforce founded the world's first animal welfare organisation, the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (later the Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals). He was also opposed to duelling, which he described as the "disgrace of a Christian society" and was appalled when his friend Pitt engaged in a duel with George Tierney in 1798, particularly as it occurred on a Sunday, the Christian day of rest.

Wilberforce was generous with his time and money, believing that those with wealth had a duty to give a significant portion of their income to the needy. Yearly, he gave away thousands of pounds, much of it to clergymen to distribute in their parishes. He paid off the debts of others, supported education and missions, and in a year of food shortages, gave to charity more than his own yearly income. He was exceptionally hospitable, and could not bear to sack any of his servants. As a result, his home was full of old and incompetent servants kept on in charity. Although he was often months behind in his correspondence, Wilberforce responded to numerous requests for advice or for help in obtaining professorships, military promotions and livings for clergymen, or for the reprieve of death sentences.

Evangelical Christianity
A supporter of the evangelical wing of the Church of England, Wilberforce believed that the revitalisation of the church and individual Christian observance would lead to a harmonious, moral society. He sought to elevate the status of religion in public and private life, making piety fashionable in both the upper- and middle-classes of society. To this end, in April 1797, Wilberforce published A Practical View of the Prevailing Religious System of Professed Christians in the Higher and Middle Classes of This Country Contrasted With Real Christianity, on which he had been working since 1793. This was an exposition of New Testament doctrine and teachings and a call for a revival of Christianity, as a response to the moral decline of the nation, illustrating his own testimony and the views which inspired him. The book was influential and a best-seller; 7,500 copies were sold within six months, and it was translated into several languages.

Wilberforce fostered and supported missionary activity in Britain and abroad, and was involved with other members of the Clapham Sect in various evangelical and charitable organisations. He was a founding member of the Church Missionary Society (since renamed the Church Mission Society) and an early vice-president of the London Society for promoting Christianity among the Jews (later the Church's Ministry Among Jewish People). Horrified by the lack of Christian evangelism in India, Wilberforce used the 1793 renewal of the British East India Company's charter to propose the addition of clauses requiring the company to provide teachers and chaplains and to commit to the "religious improvement" of Indians. The plan was unsuccessful due to lobbying by the directors of the company, who feared that their commercial interests would be damaged. Wilberforce tried again in 1813 when the charter next came up for renewal. Using petitions, meetings, lobbying and letter writing, he successfully campaigned for changes to the charter. Speaking in favour of the Charter Act 1813, he criticised the East India Company and their rule in India for its hypocrisy and racial prejudice, while also condemning aspects of Hinduism including the caste system, infanticide, polygamy and suttee.

Moral reform
Greatly concerned by what he perceived to be the degeneracy of British society, Wilberforce was active in matters of moral reform, lobbying against "the torrent of profaneness that every day makes more rapid advances", and considered this issue and the abolition of the slave trade as equally important goals. At the suggestion of Wilberforce and Bishop Porteus, King George III was requested by the Archbishop of Canterbury to issue in 1787 A Proclamation for the Encouragement of Piety and Virtue, as a remedy for the rising tide of immorality. The proclamation commanded the prosecution of those guilty of "excessive drinking, blasphemy, profane swearing and cursing, lewdness, profanation of the Lord's Day, and other dissolute, immoral, or disorderly practices". Greeted largely with public indifference, Wilberforce sought to increase its impact by mobilising public figures to the cause, and by founding the Society for the Suppression of Vice. This and other societies in which Wilberforce was a prime mover, mustered support for the prosecution of those who had been charged with violating relevant laws, including brothel keepers, distributors of pornographic material, and those who did not respect the Sabbath.

The writer and clergyman Sydney Smith criticised Wilberforce for being more interested in the sins of the poor than those of the rich, and suggested that a better name would be the "Society for suppressing the vices of persons whose income does not exceed £500 per annum". Wilberforce's attempts to legislate against adultery and Sunday newspapers were also in vain; his involvement and leadership in other, less punitive, approaches were more successful in the long-term, however. By the end of his life, British morals, manners, and sense of social responsibility had increased, paving the way for future changes in societal conventions and attitudes during the Victorian era.

Emancipation of enslaved Africans
Wilberforce worked with the members of the African Institution to ensure the enforcement of the abolition of the slave trade and to promote abolitionist negotiations with other countries. In particular, the United States had abolished the slave trade after 1808 and Wilberforce lobbied the American government to enforce its own mandated prohibition more strongly. The same year, Wilberforce moved his family from Clapham to a sizeable mansion with a large garden in Kensington Gore, closer to the Houses of Parliament. In worsening health by 1812, Wilberforce resigned his Yorkshire seat, and became MP for the rotten borough of Bramber in Sussex, a seat with little or no constituency obligations, thus allowing him more time for his family and the causes that interested him. From 1816, Wilberforce introduced a series of bills which would require the compulsory registration of enslaved people, together with details of their country of origin, permitting the illegal importation of foreign slaves to be detected. Later in the same year he began to publicly denounce slavery itself, though he did not demand immediate emancipation, believing incremental change to be more effective in achieving abolition.

In 1820, after a period of poor health and with his eyesight failing, Wilberforce further limited public activities, although he became embroiled in unsuccessful mediation attempts between King George IV, and his estranged wife Caroline of Brunswick, who had sought her rights as queen of the realm. Wilberforce still hoped "to lay a foundation for some future measures for the emancipation of the poor slaves". Aware that the cause would need younger men to continue the work, in 1821 he asked MP Thomas Fowell Buxton to take over leadership of the campaign in the Commons. As the 1820s continued, Wilberforce increasingly became more of a figurehead for the abolitionist movement, although he continued to appear at anti-slavery meetings, welcoming visitors, and maintaining a busy correspondence on the subject.

In 1823 Wilberforce's 56-page "Appeal to the Religion, Justice and Humanity of the Inhabitants of the British Empire in Behalf of the Negro Slaves in the West Indies" was published. The treatise stated that total emancipation was morally and ethically required and that slavery was a national crime which must be ended by parliamentary legislation to gradually abolish slavery. Members of Parliament did not agree, and government opposition in March 1823 stymied Wilberforce's call for abolition. On 15 May 1823, Buxton moved another resolution in Parliament for gradual emancipation. Subsequent debates followed on 16 March and 11 June 1824 in which Wilberforce made his last speeches in the House of Commons, and which again saw the emancipationists outmanoeuvred by the government.

Last years
Wilberforce's health was continuing to fail, and he suffered further illnesses in 1824 and 1825. With his family concerned that his life was endangered, he declined a peerage and resigned his seat in Parliament, leaving the campaign to others.

In 1826, Wilberforce moved from his large house in Kensington Gore to Hendon Park, a more modest property in the countryside of Mill Hill, north of London, where he was joined by his son William and family. William had attempted a series of educational and career paths, and a venture into farming in 1830 led to huge losses, which his father repaid in full, despite offers from others to assist. This left Wilberforce with little income, and he was obliged to let his home and spend the rest of his life visiting family members and friends. He continued his support for the anti-slavery cause, including attending and chairing meetings of the Anti-Slavery Society. Wilberforce approved of the 1830 election victory of the more progressive Whigs, though he was concerned about the implications of their Reform Bill which proposed the redistribution of parliamentary seats towards newer towns and cities and an extension of the franchise.

In 1833, Wilberforce's health declined further and he suffered a severe attack of influenza from which he never fully recovered. He made a final anti-slavery speech in April 1833 at a public meeting in Maidstone, Kent. The following month, the Whig government introduced the Bill for the Abolition of Slavery, formally saluting Wilberforce in the process. On 26 July 1833, Wilberforce heard of government concessions that guaranteed the passing of the Bill for the Abolition of Slavery. The following day he grew much weaker, and he died early on the morning of 29 July at his cousin's house in Cadogan Place, London.

Funeral
Wilberforce had left instructions that he be buried with his sister and daughter at St Mary's Church, Stoke Newington, just north of London. However, the leading members of both Houses of Parliament urged that he be honoured with a burial in Westminster Abbey. The family agreed and, on 3 August 1833, Wilberforce was buried in the north transept, close to his friend William Pitt. The funeral was attended by many Members of Parliament, as well as by members of the public. The pallbearers included the Duke of Gloucester, the Lord Chancellor Henry Brougham, and the Speaker of the House of Commons Charles Manners-Sutton. While tributes were paid and Wilberforce was laid to rest, both Houses of Parliament suspended their business as a mark of respect.

Legacy
Five years after his death, sons Robert and Samuel Wilberforce published a five-volume biography about their father, and subsequently a collection of his letters in 1840. The biography was controversial in that the authors emphasised Wilberforce's role in the abolition movement and played down the important work of Thomas Clarkson. Clarkson wrote a book refuting their version of events, and the sons eventually made a half-hearted private apology to him and removed the offending passages in a revision of their biography. For more than a century, Wilberforce's role in the campaign dominated the historical record. Later historians have noted the warm and highly productive relationship between Clarkson and Wilberforce, and have termed it one of history's great partnerships: without both the parliamentary leadership supplied by Wilberforce and the research and public mobilisation organised by Clarkson, abolition could not have been achieved.

As his sons had desired and planned, Wilberforce has long been viewed as a Christian hero, a statesman-saint held up as a role model for putting his faith into action. Contemporary evangelical and conservative movements in North America appropriate his name and example in their activism. The strategies of Wilberforce and other abolitionists are invoked by anti-abortion activists, who controversially equate the abolition of slavery with ending abortion.

Wilberforce has also been described as a humanitarian reformer who contributed to reshaping the political and social attitudes of the time by promoting concepts of social responsibility and action. In the 1940s, the role of Wilberforce and the Clapham Sect in abolition was downplayed by historian Eric Williams, who argued that abolition was motivated not by humanitarianism but by economics, as the West Indian sugar industry was in decline. Williams's approach strongly influenced historians for much of the latter part of the 20th century. More recent historians have noted that the sugar industry was still making large profits at the time of the abolition of the slave trade, and this has led to a renewed interest in Wilberforce and the evangelicals, as well as a recognition of the anti-slavery movement as a prototype for subsequent humanitarian campaigns.

Memorials
Wilberforce's life and work have been commemorated in the United Kingdom and elsewhere. In Westminster Abbey, a seated statue of Wilberforce by Samuel Joseph was erected in 1840, bearing an epitaph praising his Christian character and his long labour to abolish the slave trade and slavery.

In Wilberforce's hometown of Hull, a public subscription in 1834 funded the Wilberforce Monument, a 31 m Greek Doric column topped by a statue of Wilberforce, which stands in the grounds of Hull College near Queen's Gardens. Wilberforce Memorial School for the Blind in York was established in 1833 in his honour. Wilberforce's birthplace was acquired by the city corporation in 1903 and, following renovation, Wilberforce House in Hull was opened as Britain's first slavery museum. In 2006, the University of Hull established the Wilberforce Institute for the study of Slavery and Emancipation in a building beside Wilberforce House.

Various churches within the Anglican Communion commemorate Wilberforce in their liturgical calendars, and Wilberforce University in Ohio, United States, founded in 1856, is named after him. The university was the first owned by African-American people, and is an historically black college. In Ontario, Canada, the Wilberforce Colony was founded by black reformers, and inhabited by freed slaves from the United States.

Amazing Grace, a film about Wilberforce and the struggle against the slave trade, was released in 2007 to coincide with the 200th anniversary of Parliament's anti-slave trade legislation.

title: William Wilberforce


text:
Wikipedia:Editing bug reports

'''This is an archive only of bug reports from Phase II of the Wikipedia software (used before June 20, 2002). Please see Bug reports for instructions on adding bug reports for the current system.'''

 * sometimes a protected page still says "edit this page" when you first view it.

 * This is probably because you followed a redirect to get to it: the redirect isn't protected. --mav

Edit replaced entire text of a Talk page 2/26/02

I just attempted to edit the Talk page on the article, Masculism. It brought me to a blank screen in which I wrote my comment. I previewed it, and hit the save button. I didn't think anything of the fact that there was nothing else except my text shown, until afterwards. Mine was the only comment remaining. Rgamble

Editing is not atomic
2002-06-02 I enter a new article and hit the Save button. It times out. I hit Save again. It comes up with an edit conflict in which the existing article is empty and what I tried to enter is full. This indicates that the timestamp is updated before the article. I then copy the text to the top text box and hit Save again; this time it has an edit conflict in which the existing text and the text I am trying to enter are identical. -phma

More on this bug: I looked at Family (biology) and noticed that "genuses" should be "genera". So I fixed it. Just as I hit the button, I noticed that "taxonomic" was misspelled, so I hit edit again. It gave me "genuses", and when I changed "taxanomic" to "taxonomic" and hit save, I got an edit conflict with the "genera" version. -phma

Mysterious edit conflicts
14 Feb I add the name Georgi Konstantinovich Zhukov to Major figures of World War Two on the World_War_II page, hit save and scroll down to check it is there, it isn't, I hit refresh and I get a edit conflict.

 * See the bug below. The above is probably a dupe.

While I was working on the Complete list of encyclopedia topics pages, I was getting mysterious edit conflicts. I believe that this was due to the enormous size of the pages and Wikipedia's extremely sluggish response time; I would hit "save", and then wait half an hour(!) for the page to finally refresh. It would indicate an edit conflict, but my changes would be saved anyway. Perhaps the software was timing out and retrying the same edit after it had already gone through? Bryan Derksen, Friday, April 19, 2002
 * Yeah, that sounds likely to me. The solution is simple: get other people to stop using Wikipedia so there's less strain on the system for the rest of us. :) Brion VIBBER, Friday, April 19, 2002

STATUS: WAITING ON VARIOUS PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENTS

"Go back to edit some more" doesn't work

 * 9 Nov - I cannot simply hit the back button in my browser, after I have saved a page, and make another change to the page. I do that all the time in UseModWiki, but I can't do it on PediaWiki because I get into an edit conflict with myself.
 * Now you can, but after "back", you'll have to hit "reload" to correct the timestamp embedded in the HTML of the editing page. --Magnus Manske
 * This is still a problem. I still get into edit conflicts w/myself. And the timestamp should come from the serverside (e.g. the script), not the browserside (i.e. the HTML).
 * This is still a major bug. --The Cunctator

Clicking on link in Recent changes takes me to edit box for that link

2/19/02 6:27 ish PST. Clicked on Boleslav II Smialy in Recent Changes to see what Mr. Parker had done with the article. Got the edit box for the article, which contained a redirect to an appropriately titled page. Tried to save it as I found it, got an edit conflict. Repeatedly tried to remove what "I" had added to the lower box, and then save, got continued edit conflicts., Finally just backed out. User:JHK
 * Is this kind of thing still going on, or has it been resolved? Brion VIBBER, Friday, April 19, 2002

STATUS: UNKNOWN

Three tildes in preview

In preview the three tilde symbols (~) are not replaced with the user name. -- Jan Hidders

Three tildes shouldn't be replaced in pre, nowiki

The ~ is not uncommon in ASCII art such as in Stimulated emission, and should be left intact inside pre and nowiki areas. Brion VIBBER 2002/03/12
 * Fixed it. Will now be replaced on preview, and is left unchanged in nowiki and pre tags. --Magnus Manske, Sunday, April 14, 2002

STATUS : Solved in CVS - Konqueror 2.1.1 with KDE 2.1.2 cannot render any edit/add page. 2002-1-1

The text area for the body of the article is displayed correctly; however, the "summary" text field is rendered ""inside"" and over the article body text area. Also, nothing that would normally appear under the article body text area does not render at all.
 * That's the fault of Konqueror; tried to scroll down? I get that sometimes with the "Search" button, and scrolling down usually fixes it. Also, reduce the number of lines of the edit box in your user preferences. --Magnus Manske

Impossible to edit some pages

(2002/03/16) I cannot seem to add anything to Feature requests. It refuses to allow any editing and returns an error beep. I can edit this and other pages. Vignaux
 * What browser are you using? Excactly when do you get the "error beep"? I can edit Feature requests just fine. AxelBoldt

 * Microsoft Internet Explorer (mac) 5.1.3(3905) on a Mac Cube. I get the beep whenever I try and insert a character, such as a return, into the editing window. It is still happening. Despite that, I can modify this window OK Vignaux
 * Vignaux, are you still having problems editing the feature requests page under the current software revision? Brion VIBBER 2002/03/27

 * (2002/03/28) Yes, I have just tried with Explorer and the problem has developed on this page now! But I have now switched to using Netscape 6.2.1 and it can edit this page at least. Vignaux
 * Huh. I'd consider it an IE bug, then, I don't know what's triggering it. Try contacting Microsoft support if you dare... (shudder) Brion VIBBER, Thursday, March 28, 2002

I have tried numerous times to edit this page with Mozilla/Galeon and it doesn't submit, it just sits there, so there is some problem with that browser. It might be the size of the page, as I edit other pages without problems. This is submitted with NS4.77. Seindal
 * This appears to be a bug in Mozilla that appeared circa 0.9.9 (?), please file a bug report at bugzilla. Brion VIBBER, Thursday, March 28, 2002

All of the above "cannot edit" bugs could be due to the fact that our edit page contains broken HTML. Click on "Edit this page", then on "Validate this page" and you'll see what I mean. AxelBoldt, Thursday, March 28, 2002
 * I thought of that, but I doubt it. First, I'd expect the problem to happen with *all* pages, since the broken HTML is on *all* edit pages. Second, any problem caused thereby would be likely to be with rendering, not with submitting the form. Unfortunately I can't reproduce the problem on my test server, with or without fixing the HTML. I've submitted fixes to CVS (though I'm leaving the WRAP in, it should cause no problems); try it again when Jimbo installs it... Brion VIBBER
 * Further, I tried saving the form from the live site, fixing the HTML so it validates, and submitting from the fixed version. Still doesn't work with Mozilla 0.9.9. So no, it's not the HTML bugs. For the time being, I just edit long pages with Konqueror... --BV
 * (2002/03/29) I am now editing this page in Opera. It still does not work in Explorer. I validated the page as suggested and there is an error on line 34, col 50. More to the point, I noticed that the editing window text is truncated in Explorer at the following place (the last word is cut off in the middle):

''Each page should have a separator between the article and the bottom navbar. Currently, the article is flowing right into the navbar, which is very difficult to read. There appears to be neat separati''
 * Is that any help? Vignaux
 * Well, you cut off a chunk of this page, too. :( (Now restored.) I've uploaded a copy of the feature request edit page with the HTML errors fixed -- try it at [[media:wik3.html]] Same problem? Brion VIBBER, Thursday, March 28, 2002
 * I am terribly sorry about that. I am sure I cancelled after attempting to edit. Yes, same problem with Explorer; the editing panel is truncated at :Oh, and another thing,. Vignaux
 * I still cannot edit this page with Mac Explorer though I can with Opera (as I am doing now). The symptom is the same: just a beep if I try and enter a character. I can edit other, smaller, pages. Vignaux (2002/04/15)
 * The page was truncated again -- I think I like IE's beep better than Opera's delete-large-swaths-of-text method. Exactly what versions of Opera and IE, and what version of Mac OS are you using? Brion VIBBER, Sunday, April 14, 2002

Today I tried to edit the article on Georges Méliès, and when the editing screen came up, it was a blank "Describe the new page here" page, for "Georges M*li*s". (I had this problem with Netscape Communicator, but I did not have this problem with Internet Explorer.) There must be some problem with recognizing accented letters in page titles. Joel Schlosberg, Thursday, April 4, 2002
 * Does this link work correctly? If so, the problem should vanish with the next wiki software upgrade. Brion VIBBER, Saturday, April 6, 2002

Another page that I can't edit for some reason: Log talk:Page Deletions. When I try, I get "cannot edit this page!" The log talk page hasn't been created before, perhaps that has something to do with this? Bryan Derksen, Friday, April 19, 2002
 * The software doesn't currently consider "Log:" and "Log talk:" to be valid namespaces, so it refuses to let you edit pages there. This is presumably intentional, so that the logs can't be tampered with. (I mean, they're *logs*, right?) However, "Log talk:" could be useful. Magnus, what do you think? Brion VIBBER, Friday, April 19, 2002

When I try to edit particularly long pages - ie. 'Feature Requests' and 'bug reports' (before it was broken up into subpages) Netscape 4.7 will NOT allow me to insert any text - it beeps at me once and ignores anything I type on the keyboard. I assume that the page is too long for the buffer or something similar and when it happens I have to use the page back button to exit without altering the page. It's annoying because I can't add text to those pages, but hardly life-threatening KJ Mon 13 May 2002

Editing on not current version
2002/04/12 - while editing second-order desire, I normally started form the recent changes page that linked a version of 03:43, but when I had the page edited, I casually went to that page's history and I realised that there was another version (03:51), later than the one I had modified, that was not the one linked in recent changes and which text was not in the editbox. Probably, the database had a delay (half an hour?) in recording the latest version (03:51), even if my version was immediately recorded at 04:20. --Gianfranco
 * Most likely, the 3:51 change occurred after you loaded RecentChanges and before you loaded the edit page -- your 4:20 change includes everything from the 3:51 change, so it was definitely the 3:51 version that you modified, not the 3:43 version. When exactly did you load the RecentChanges page? Brion VIBBER, Friday, April 12, 2002
 * The main fact is that I certainly opened the RecentChanges page and the edit page after 03:51, because I modified the article in no more than 10 minutes, let's say a quarter of an hour for all the process - certainly it wasn't half an hour. Ordinarily, the 03:51 edit should have already been recorded when I opened (really, refreshed) the RecentChanges page.
 * In the 03:51 version, you can see a link to stereotype (first paragraph after the numbered list) that I had never seen until I realised of this version and opened it: for sure it wasn't in the editbox' text, I would have edited that text too. So, actually, I edited the 03:43 version at least a quarter of an hour after the other user had edited the 03:51 version.
 * Moreover, if you look at the diff for last version (mine), there is no evidence of that link, that disappears after the previous diff page (03:51 from 03:43).
 * I can only add that that both 03:43 and 03:51 versions are from the same author; could this fact having interfered? --Gianfranco

 * There is no possible way that the changes between the 3:43 and 3:51 versions would have been preserved in the 4:20 version (which they were) unless the 4:20 version was edited from the 3:51 version. Unless, that is, you yourself typed those paragraphs exactly as did the previous author, and somehow avoided getting an edit conflict screen. I guarantee you the 3:51 version was in the editbox when you edited it; there is no other reasonable explanation for your saved version including text that did not exist prior to the 3:51 version. The link you cite (to stereotypes) is indeed not in the 3:43 version, but *is* in the 3:51 version and *is* in the 4:20 version which you saved. Therefore it *was* in the editbox when you edited it. This cannot be denied, though you may not have noticed or read the paragraph in question. You edited the 3:51 version, not the 3:43 version.

 * That out of the way, the remaining question is that of the 3:43 edit being listed when you loaded RecentChanges. If, indeed, you did refresh RecentChanges after the 3:51 edit but saw only the 3:43 edit listed, that would be an unusual and unexpected occurence; my first thought was that, perhaps you simply had 'hide minor edits' enabled in your preferences, however this ought not to affect this case, as neither edit was marked as a minor edit. (If you do have that option enabled, let me know and I'll double-check the code...) So we have three possibilities:

 * 1) Time flies when you're having fun (you spent more time editing that article than you think, and you simply hit RecentChanges before 3:51 and "edit" after 3:51)
 * 2) The 3:51 edit was actually saved after 3:51 and after you hit RecentChanges (but before you hit "edit"), and its timestamp is somehow incorrect
 * 3) There is a malfunction in 'hide minor edits' that caused it to ignore a non-minor edit (if you have 'hide minor edits' enabled)
 * At least, that's all I can think of for now. Brion VIBBER, Tuesday, April 16, 2002

 * Well, it seems quite a strange fact that now the three versions and the page's history work well: when I wrote the previous reply, the previous versions and the final article (04:20) were exactly as I described, while now this link (stereotypes) is in the article. I read minor edits too, they are not hidden, so this shouldn't be the reason. And I would be quite sure about editing time, I remember I made it very quickly (perhaps less than 10 minutes), while usually it takes me more - in the average - due to language; also, I had no "Edit conflict" notice. I can on my side guarantee that I only read the 03:43 v. while editing, and I confirm you the situation was as described. :-)
 * Just to see if I could help somehow, I asked my technician too (he knew the program in a prior version), and he suggests me also, as a possibility, some notes that I transmit in case they could help:

 * 1) The MySql database could have temporarily cached (on server) the 03:43 version and output this, perhaps due to a queue or a timeout, then my input was "virtually" on the 03:51 v. even if I was served and shown the 03:43 content; but input should have been evaluated as "differential", in the sense that the database should be collecting the differences from previous version, rather than replacing the whole content (if this is how it works). In this case, as the paragraph that includes the link was not modified, no input was given about it and the served page included the cached text with the modified paragraphs only (not the paragraph with the link because not in cache and not modified). The "diff" function might have reflected this if it is operated (and content is created) on the fly - in the sense that there is no permanent record or previous cache of differences among versions in the directory - and in fact now it works correctly, as well.
 * 2) For some reason, the 03:43 version could have been sorted by subject, as the first in alphabetical order, instead of by date order, if alphabetical is the default setting; the record should have then been "without a sorting instruction" for a while. This however would not explain why the final article now includes the link and it didn't before, unless the paragraphs are not singularly checked for the "diff" function, as above, and still needs a temporary caching to have happened (maybe due to partial or corrupted packets of data sent by other user - or a partial timeout in sending?).
 * Hoping we can discover what happened, let me thank you for your attention :-) --Gianfranco - Wednesday, April 17, 2002

 * (1) isn't possible, because the database doesn't merge edits, it replaces the whole text. The 3:51 text was in your edit box, there is no other possibility about that whatsoever. That doesn't mean it was there when you read the page _before_ clicking the edit link, though. (2) isn't possible, because only the most recent edit is in the cur table which is queried by the RecentChanges list; an older edit could only show up in the list if the cur table hadn't been updated yet when the query was made (or if 'hide minor edits' is on, in which case it also queries the old table which contains previous revisions). Brion VIBBER, Wednesday, April 17, 2002

 * The 03:51 text was not in my edit box, and the famous link was not in the previous versions. For some time this 03:51 version wasn't visible. --Gianfranco - Saturday, April 20, 2002

 * Are you sure? I believe you just didn't notice the added sentence when you were editing. Whether 3:51 was visible in various other places or not, it must have been in your edit box, because every change from 3:43 to 3:51 is also in the 4:20 text that you submitted. Brion VIBBER, Friday, April 19, 2002

-

Editing new pages

When I follow a link to a new page, instead of being greeted with the edit box, I get a page that appears to already exist, with the text "Describe the new page here.". I know what to do -- click on "Edit this page" -- but this is doubtless quite confusing to newbies. I think that we should either go back to the old system or make the default text explain the new system instead of the old one. -- Toby Bartels 2002/05/15

 * Correction: This only works incorrectly when following a link to a nonexistent talk page. So it's a namespace bug. -- Toby Bartels, Thursday, May 23, 2002

Redirects creating Protected Pages

I've been transfering user information to user pages using a redirect, but now it creates a protected page and won't let me add any information to it. I'm not sure whether it's the redirect command at fault, or the user: command or the combination, but it's paralysed the transfer of user info out of the mainspace. ~ KJ 17th May 2002

 * I just redirected User:Chris Markides (while logged in) and User:Stephen Rapley (while not logged in) and had no problem with either. Could you try leaving one of these bad redirects in place for a bit so I can examine it? Brion VIBBER, Friday, May 17, 2002

I think the redirect only work if you leave a space between the "REDIRECT" and the link you're redirecting to. This wasn't the case before, was it? jheijmans

 * That's the first thing I checked (since that recently came up), but Karen's redirects included a space. They look just fine, and identical to the ones I put in that worked. So I'm a bit stumped for now... Brion VIBBER

 * Wait, wait... Karen, does the problem look the same as from this redirect page: Devangari alphabet? (That is, it takes you to a page entitled "#REDIRECT Devanagari" or similar, *with* the "#REDIRECT" and brackets in the title?) The redirect there looks fine, with a space and everything; I suspect an endline character weirdness or something... Possible fix now in CVS. Brion VIBBER, Friday, May 17, 2002

Weirdness after editing a Talk page

After I save an edited Talk page (and only then - not when I look at one), there's this error message on top:

Warning: Supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /home/wiki-newest/work-http/wikiPage.php on line 215

Warning: Supplied argument is not a valid MySQL result resource in /home/wiki-newest/work-http/wikiPage.php on line 219

The page itself looks fine if you leave and then look at it again (I didn't try what might happen if I immediately reloaded the page.) I only noticed this happening as of today. -- Marj Tiefert, Friday, May 17, 2002

 * This happens whenever you save a new page for the first time; it does seem to be new (within the last few days). I'm not quite sure what's wrong, but it looks to be related to the bit that checks for pages that link to the new page and clears their cache. It's mostly harmless; it just means that links to newly created pages might continue to look like nonexistent links for a while. I'll try to fix it... Brion VIBBER, Friday, May 17, 2002

 * Got it; coupla one-character typos in the code. Sigh. Brion VIBBER, Monday, May 20, 2002

STATUS: FIXED IN CVS as of 2002-05-20

No minor edits possible
When editing some pages (including this one), I cannot use the "minor edit" checkbox anymore, while it was there when I created a new page. May, 23, 2002, jheijmans

 * I had the same problem several hours ago -- however before saving I looked up and instead of seeing my user name on the login panel I saw my IP address. But when I saved, the save was logged as being created by my user name. Everything is OK now. --maveric149

 * This is a symptom of the same long-suffering(-causing) cookie path problem that makes http://www.wikipedia.com/ not appear as logged in. (Users who aren't logged in can't make minor edits, so the check box is missing from the edit page.) A fix for this is in the development version; once it's installed, you can log out and log back in to fix your login cookie. In the meantime, you can manually fix your cookie. (If you're using Netscape or Mozilla this is easy; I don't know about Internet Explorer or Opera or other browsers...) First, close your browser so it doesn't write over your changes. Now, edit the cookies file (cookies, cookies.txt, or some freaky collection of a million files as in IE) and find the cookies for www.wikipedia.com named WikiUserID, WikiLoggedIn, and (if you checked the 'save password' box) WikiUserPassword. There should be a "/wiki/" in the list of cookie goodness for each of these; change it to "/". Save, close, open up your browser again, everything should work.

 * If you're not brave enough to mess with your cookies, just hit the "preview" button before actually saving; it'll come up with you logged in still, and you can check the minor edit box there. Brion VIBBER, Thursday, May 23, 2002

 * This isn't much of a solution. Basically, it means that the only times I can use the "minor edit" box are (a) when I'm creating a completely new article and (b) when I do a preview first. In other words, it only appears on the two occasions when I am least likely to want it. user:Deb

 * Did you skip the part where I explained that the problem is already fixed (for the future) in the development version, and that you can fix it yourself to work properly NOW by editing your cookies? If you're neither patient nor willing to tinker yourself, well I'm very sorry, but there's not much I can do about it. --Brion VIBBER, Monday, May 27, 2002

 * FWIW, I edited my cookies and the problem is still there. I'll have to take a closer look (at the files on my computer, that is — the programme code is your end). But in the meantime, I'd like to strongly suggest that one always press  before pressing , no matter how minor the edit — better safe than sorry. Given that, you just need to get into the habit of marking your edit as minor towards the end of the editing process rather than towards the beginning. (Also a good idea, since I've noticed that sometimes minor edits end up not being so minor once I'm through with them!) — Toby Bartels, Tuesday, May 28, 2002

 * Thank you for your helpful responses, gents. I had understood the "explanation" above to mean that, if one logged off and then logged on again, the problem should be resolved - evidently it meant something else.  I also didn't realise that the words, "some freaky collection of a million files" were designed to enable me to find the cookies in order to edit them.  Bravery doesn't come into it.

Deb Tues, May 28, 2002

I want to edit it and it answers back
Whoever did this had some skills and nothing better to do with them. I edited "Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back". After that, I try to edit it a second time, and instead of the text, I find a smart-ass reply in the editing box. I didn't try to edit it again, I was too pissed off. I don't know if it would do the same think to you, try it out yourselves.

Wednesday, February 11th, 2004

title: Wikipedia:Editing bug reports