text:
Cultivar

A cultivar is a kind of cultivated plant that people have selected for desired traits and which retains those traits when propagated. Methods used to propagate cultivars include division, root and stem cuttings, offsets, grafting, tissue culture, or carefully controlled seed production. Most cultivars arise from deliberate human manipulation, but some originate from wild plants that have distinctive characteristics. Cultivar names are chosen according to rules of the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (ICNCP), and not all cultivated plants qualify as cultivars. Horticulturists generally believe the word cultivar was coined as a term meaning "cultivated variety".

Popular ornamental plants like roses, camellias, daffodils, rhododendrons, and azaleas are commonly cultivars produced by breeding and selection or as sports, for floral colour or size, plant form, or other desirable characteristics. Similarly, the world's agricultural food crops are almost exclusively cultivars that have been selected for characters such as improved yield, flavour, and resistance to disease, and very few wild plants are now used as food sources. Trees used in forestry are also special selections grown for their enhanced quality and yield of timber.

Cultivars form a major part of Liberty Hyde Bailey's broader group, the cultigen, which is defined as a plant whose origin or selection is primarily due to intentional human activity. A cultivar is not the same as a botanical variety, which is a taxonomic rank below subspecies, and there are differences in the rules for creating and using the names of botanical varieties and cultivars. In recent times, the naming of cultivars has been complicated by the use of statutory patents for plants and recognition of plant breeders' rights.

The International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV – Union internationale pour la protection des obtentions végétales) offers legal protection of plant cultivars to persons or organisations that introduce new cultivars to commerce. UPOV requires that a cultivar be "distinct", "uniform", and "stable". To be "distinct", it must have characters that easily distinguish it from any other known cultivar. To be "uniform" and "stable", the cultivar must retain these characters in repeated propagation.

The naming of cultivars is an important aspect of cultivated plant taxonomy, and the correct naming of a cultivar is prescribed by the Rules and Recommendations of the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (ICNCP, commonly denominated the Cultivated Plant Code). A cultivar is given a cultivar name, which consists of the scientific Latin botanical name followed by a cultivar epithet. The cultivar epithet is usually in a vernacular language.

Etymology

The word cultivar originated from the need to distinguish between wild plants and those with characteristics that arose in cultivation, presently denominated cultigens. This distinction dates to the Greek philosopher Theophrastus (370–285 BC), the "Father of Botany", who was keenly aware of this difference. Botanical historian Alan Morton noted that Theophrastus in his Historia Plantarum (Enquiry into Plants) "had an inkling of the limits of culturally induced (phenotypic) changes and of the importance of genetic constitution" (Historia Plantarum, Book 3, 2, 2 and Causa Plantarum, Book 1, 9, 3).

The International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants uses as its starting point for modern botanical nomenclature the Latin names in Linnaeus' (1707–1778) Species Plantarum (tenth edition) and Genera Plantarum (fifth edition). In Species Plantarum, Linnaeus enumerated all plants known to him, either directly or from his extensive reading. He recognised the rank of varietas (botanical "variety", a rank below that of species and subspecies) and he indicated these varieties with letters of the Greek alphabet, such as α, β, and λ, before the varietal name, rather than using the abbreviation "var." as is the present convention. Most of the varieties that Linnaeus enumerated were of "garden" origin rather than being wild plants.

In time the need to distinguish between wild plants and those with variations that had been cultivated increased. In the nineteenth century many "garden-derived" plants were given horticultural names, sometimes in Latin and sometimes in a vernacular language. From circa the 1900s, cultivated plants in Europe were recognised in the Scandinavian, Germanic, and Slavic literature as stamm or sorte, but these words could not be used internationally because, by international agreement, any new denominations had to be in Latin. In the twentieth century an improved international nomenclature was proposed for cultivated plants.

Liberty Hyde Bailey of Cornell University in New York, United States created the word cultivar in 1923 when he wrote that: "The cultigen is a species, or its equivalent, that has appeared under domestication – the plant is cultigenous. I now propose another name, cultivar, for a botanical variety, or for a race subordinate to species, that has originated under cultivation; it is not necessarily, however, referable to a recognized botanical species. It is essentially the equivalent of the botanical variety except in respect to its origin." In that essay, Bailey used only the rank of species for the cultigen, but it was obvious to him that many domesticated plants were more like botanical varieties than species, and that realization appears to have motivated the suggestion of the new category of cultivar.

Bailey created the word cultivar. It is generally assumed to be a blend of cultivated and variety but Bailey never explicitly stated the etymology and it has been suggested that the word is actually a blend of cultigen and variety. The neologism cultivar was promoted as "euphonious" and "free from ambiguity". The first Cultivated Plant Code of 1953 subsequently commended its use, and by 1960 it had achieved common international acceptance.

Cultigens

The words cultigen and cultivar may be confused with each other. A cultigen is any plant that is deliberately selected for or altered in cultivation, as opposed to an indigen; the Cultivated Plant Code states that cultigens are "maintained as recognisable entities solely by continued propagation". Cultigens can have names at any of many taxonomic ranks, including those of grex, species, cultivar group, variety, form, and cultivar; and they may be plants that have been altered in cultivation, including by genetic modification, but have not been formally denominated. A cultigen or a component of a cultigen can be accepted as a cultivar if it is recognisable and has stable characters. Therefore, all cultivars are cultigens, because they are cultivated, but not all cultigens are cultivars, because some cultigens have not been formally distinguished and named as cultivars.

Formal definition
The Cultivated Plant Code notes that the word cultivar is used in two different senses: first, as a "classification category" the cultivar is defined in Article 2 of the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants (2009, 8th edition) as follows: The basic category of cultivated plants whose nomenclature is governed by this Code is the cultivar. There are two other classification categories for cultigens, the grex and the group. The Code then defines a cultivar as a "taxonomic unit within the classification category of cultivar". This is the sense of cultivar that is most generally understood and which is used as a general definition.

"A cultivar is an assemblage of plants that (a) has been selected for a particular character or combination of characters, (b) is distinct, uniform and stable in those characters, and (c) when propagated by appropriate means, retains those characters."

Different kinds
Which plants are chosen to be named as cultivars is simply a matter of convenience as the category was created to serve the practical needs of horticulture, agriculture, and forestry.

Members of a particular cultivar are not necessarily genetically identical. The Cultivated Plant Code emphasizes that different cultivated plants may be accepted as different cultivars, even if they have the same genome, while cultivated plants with different genomes may be regarded as the same cultivar. The production of cultivars generally entails considerable human involvement although in a few cases it may be as little as simply selecting variation from plants growing in the wild (whether by collecting growing tissue to propagate from or by gathering seed).

Cultivars generally occur as ornamentals and food crops: Malus 'Granny Smith' and Malus 'Red Delicious' are cultivars of apples propagated by cuttings or grafting, Lactuca 'Red Sails' and Lactuca 'Great Lakes' are lettuce cultivars propagated by seeds. Named cultivars of Hosta and Hemerocallis plants are cultivars produced by micropropagation or division.

Clones
Cultivars that are produced asexually are genetically identical and known as clones; this includes plants propagated by division, layering, cuttings, grafts, and budding. The propagating material may be taken from a particular part of the plant, such as a lateral branch, or from a particular phase of the life cycle, such as a juvenile leaf, or from aberrant growth as occurs with witch's broom. Plants whose distinctive characters are derived from the presence of an intracellular organism may also form a cultivar provided the characters are reproduced reliably from generation to generation. Plants of the same chimera (which have mutant tissues close to normal tissue) or graft-chimeras (which have vegetative tissue from different kinds of plants and which originate by grafting) may also constitute a cultivar.

Seed-produced
Some cultivars "come true from seed", retaining their distinguishing characteristics when grown from seed. Such plants are termed a "variety", "selection", or "strain" but these are ambiguous and confusing words that are best avoided. In general, asexually propagated cultivars grown from seeds produce highly variable seedling plants, and should not be labelled with, or sold under, the parent cultivar's name.

Seed-raised cultivars may be produced by uncontrolled pollination when characteristics that are distinct, uniform and stable are passed from parents to progeny. Some are produced as "lines" that are produced by repeated self-fertilization or inbreeding or "multilines" that are made up of several closely related lines. Sometimes they are F1 hybrids which are the result of a deliberate repeatable single cross between two pure lines. A few F2 hybrid seed cultivars also exist, such as Achillea 'Summer Berries'.

Some cultivars are agamospermous plants, which retain their genetic composition and characteristics under reproduction. Occasionally cultivars are raised from seed of a specially selected provenance – for example the seed may be taken from plants that are resistant to a particular disease.

Genetically modified
Genetically modified plants with characteristics resulting from the deliberate implantation of genetic material from a different germplasm may form a cultivar. However, the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants notes, "In practice such an assemblage is often marketed from one or more lines or multilines that have been genetically modified. These lines or multilines often remain in a constant state of development which makes the naming of such an assemblage as a cultivar a futile exercise." However, retired transgenic varieties such as the fish tomato, which are no longer being developed, do not run into this obstacle and can be given a cultivar name.

Cultivars may be selected because of a change in the ploidy level of a plant which may produce more desirable characteristics.

Cultivar names
Every unique cultivar has a unique name within its denomination class (which is almost always the genus). Names of cultivars are regulated by the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants, and may be registered with an International Cultivar Registration Authority (ICRA). There are sometimes separate registration authorities for different plant types such as roses and camellias. In addition, cultivars may be associated with commercial marketing names referred to in the Cultivated Plant Code as "trade designations" (see below).

Presenting in text
A cultivar name consists of a botanical name (of a genus, species, infraspecific taxon, interspecific hybrid or intergeneric hybrid) followed by a cultivar epithet. The cultivar epithet is enclosed by single quotes; it should not be italicized if the botanical name is italicized; and each of the words within the epithet is capitalized (with some permitted exceptions such as conjunctions). It is permissible to place a cultivar epithet after a common name provided the common name is botanically unambiguous. Cultivar epithets published before 1 January 1959 were often given a Latin form and can be readily confused with the specific epithets in botanical names; after that date, newly coined cultivar epithets must be in a modern vernacular language to distinguish them from botanical epithets.

For example, the full cultivar name of the King Edward potato is Solanum tuberosum 'King Edward'. 'King Edward' is the cultivar epithet, which, according to the Rules of the Cultivated Plant Code, is bounded by single quotation marks. For patented or trademarked plant product lines developed from a given cultivar, the commercial product name is typically indicated by the symbols "TM" or "®", or is presented in capital letters with no quotation marks, following the cultivar name, as in the following example, where "Bloomerang" is the commercial name and 'Penda' is the cultivar epithet: Syringa 'Penda' BLOOMERANG.

 * Examples of correct text presentation:
 * Cryptomeria japonica 'Elegans'
 * Chamaecyparis lawsoniana 'Aureomarginata' (pre-1959 name, Latin in form)
 * Chamaecyparis lawsoniana 'Golden Wonder' (post-1959 name, English language)
 * Pinus densiflora 'Akebono' (post-1959 name, Japanese language)
 * Apple 'Sundown'

 * Some incorrect text presentation examples:
 * Cryptomeria japonica "Elegans" (double quotes are unacceptable)
 * Berberis thunbergii cv. 'Crimson Pygmy' (this once-common usage is now unacceptable, as it is no longer correct to use "cv." in this context; Berberis thunbergii 'Crimson Pygmy' is correct)
 * Rosa cv. 'Peace' (this is now incorrect for two reasons: firstly, the use of "cv."; secondly, "Peace" is a trade designation or "selling name" for the cultivar R. 'Madame A. Meilland' and should therefore be printed in a different typeface from the rest of the name, without quote marks, for example: Rosa )

Although "cv." has not been permitted by the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants since the 1995 edition, it is still widely used and recommended by other authorities.

Group names
Where several very similar cultivars exist they can be associated into a Group (formerly Cultivar-group). As Group names are used with cultivar names it is necessary to understand their way of presentation. Group names are presented in normal type and the first letter of each word capitalised as for cultivars, but they are not placed in single quotes. When used in a name, the first letter of the word "Group" is itself capitalized.

Presenting in text

 * Brassica oleracea Capitata Group (the group of cultivars including all typical cabbages)
 * Brassica oleracea Botrytis Group (the group of cultivars including all typical cauliflowers)
 * Hydrangea macrophylla Groupe Hortensia (in French) = Hydrangea macrophylla Hortensia Group (in English)
 * Where cited with a cultivar name the group should be enclosed in parentheses, as follows:
 * Hydrangea macrophylla (Hortensia Group) 'Ayesha'

Legal protection of cultivars and their names
Since the 1990s there has been an increasing use of legal protection for newly produced cultivars. Plant breeders expect legal protection for the cultivars they produce. According to proponents of such protections, if other growers can immediately propagate and sell these cultivars as soon as they come on the market, the breeder's benefit is largely lost. Legal protection for cultivars is obtained through the use of Plant breeders' rights and plant Patents but the specific legislation and procedures needed to take advantage of this protection vary from country to country.

Controversial use of legal protection for cultivars
The use of legal protection for cultivars can be controversial, particularly for food crops that are staples in developing countries, or for plants selected from the wild and propagated for sale without any additional breeding work; some people consider this practice unethical.

Trade designations and selling names
The formal scientific name of a cultivar, like Solanum tuberosum 'King Edward', is a way of uniquely designating a particular kind of plant. This scientific name is in the public domain and cannot be legally protected. Plant retailers wish to maximize their share of the market and one way of doing this is to replace the Latin scientific names on plant labels in retail outlets with appealing marketing names that are easy to use, pronounce, and remember. Marketing names lie outside the scope of the Cultivated Plant Code which refers to them as "trade designations". If a retailer or wholesaler has the sole legal rights to a marketing name then that may offer a sales advantage. Plants protected by plant breeders' rights (PBR) may have a "true" cultivar name – the recognized scientific name in the public domain – and a "commercial synonym" – an additional marketing name that is legally protected. An example would be Rosa = 'Poulmax', in which Rosa is the genus,  is the trade designation, and 'Poulmax' is scientific cultivar name.

Because a name that is attractive in one language may have less appeal in another country, a plant may be given different selling names from country to country. Quoting the original cultivar name allows the correct identification of cultivars around the world.

The main body coordinating plant breeders' rights is the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (Union internationale pour la protection des obtentions végétales, UPOV) and this organization maintains a database of new cultivars protected by PBR in all countries.

International Cultivar Registration Authorities
An International Cultivar Registration Authority (ICRA) is a voluntary, non-statutory organization appointed by the Commission for Nomenclature and Cultivar Registration of the International Society of Horticultural Science. ICRAs are generally formed by societies and institutions specializing in particular plant genera such as Dahlia or Rhododendron and are currently located in Europe, North America, China, India, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Puerto Rico.

Each ICRA produces an annual report and its reappointment is considered every four years. The main task is to maintain a register of the names within the group of interest and where possible this is published and placed in the public domain. One major aim is to prevent the duplication of cultivar and Group epithets within a genus, as well as ensuring that names are in accord with the latest edition of the Cultivated Plant Code. In this way, over the last 50 years or so, ICRAs have contributed to the stability of cultivated plant nomenclature. In recent times many ICRAs have also recorded trade designations and trademarks used in labelling plant material, to avoid confusion with established names.

New names and other relevant data are collected by and submitted to the ICRA and in most cases there is no cost. The ICRA then checks each new epithet to ensure that it has not been used before and that it conforms with the Cultivated Plant Code. Each ICRA also ensures that new names are formally established (i.e. published in hard copy, with a description in a dated publication). They record details about the plant, such as parentage, the names of those concerned with its development and introduction, and a basic description highlighting its distinctive characters. ICRAs are not responsible for assessing the distinctiveness of the plant in question. Most ICRAs can be contacted electronically and many maintain web sites for an up-to-date listing.

title: Cultivar


text:
Talk:Hectare

Purpose of Hectare (Explanation Section)
The article suggests that the hectare is used in place of the square meter where it 'would be cumbersome and unnecessarily precise' to do so (added here). But surely units could be given as 270,000 sq m. rather than 27ha which is equally precise and not particularly cumbersome. My view, on the basis of no hard facts at all is that the hectare is a historical hangover used predominantly in countries which transitioned from the imperial acre to the quasi-metric hectare. But I could of course be totally wrong? orizon 03:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

 * It's fully metric, just not SI. Jɪmp 05:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Canadian usage
Google search shows (1) that both "hectare" and "acre" are widely used in Canada, (2) "hectare" is slightly more common, (3) "hectare" is almost universally preferred in official (government) publications and widely preferred in journalism and education, (4) "acre" is widely used in commercial contexts, notably real estate. Avt tor 23:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

 * While mkevlar's comment saying only hectares are official is probably true, I (in western Canada) have never once seen a piece of real estate advertised in hectares, and I think Avt tor's original statement is essentially correct. I don't think it's for any nostalgic reason - acres are much smaller, making it sound as if you're getting more land. (Similarly, stores here advertise their meat prices by the pound, even though it's weighed in kilograms - because the kilogram price sounds like more than double.) TooManyFingers (talk) 16:17, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Not true! I am a Canadian who uses hectares every day in the measurement of urban parks. Officially no one used acres. mkevlar 30 January 2016 (UTC)

BIPM SI 8th ed
BIPM have moved on. The 8th edition of SI has brought the hectare in from the cold and includes it in a group of units that are accepted for use with SI. (Table 6). The article text as it stands reflects some of the 7th edition, has been edited several times and reads awkwardly. I intend to update the article to reflect the current standing of hectare in SI by BIPM. Bleakcomb (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Last word
Square kilometers, as in square miles, are too large for such close resolution tasks in the needs of daily life, and square meters or square yards or feet too large.

Is it possible that the last word of the first paragraph should have been 'small'?

Muddyork (talk) 05:23, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Merge from Decare
Please see Talk:Decare. ANDROS1337  22:30, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

 * I have proposed merging the articles are, decare and centiare into this article. The articles decare and centiare are so short that they should be merged into other articles, while the history of the are and hectare (which I am currently writing) are so tightly intertwinned that merging the two makes sense.  I propose that this article should be the "host" article as the hectare is the most widely used of the four units of measurement. Martinvl (talk) 13:05, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

 * I have not seen any comments on the merge proposal, so I am going ahead. It will be done gradually over the next few days.  Martinvl (talk) 16:23, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Removed some weak sentences.
Areas less than one hectare are often expressed in square metres, and areas 10,000 ha and above in square kilometres. The number of significant figures is often limited to four digits. Several people have had a go at these sentences and they don't seem to be improving. The often is weak and borders on a weasel word. It is the equivalent of it often rains, which is quite true but very vague. And the reverse of the limits given is often true as well - areas less than one hectare and greater than 10,000 ha are often expressed in hectares. The problem is probably that the sentence is just POV. By the way here are some examples of hectares in use (even millions of hectares). and --Bleakcomb (talk) 09:48, 26 November 2008 (UTC)

When did the Metric System become Law in the UK
As one of the first year entry to college undertaking Building Construction we were amougst the first students to be educated under the METRIC ACT for the UK. We were told that this Act was past into law in 1972.

I do not have a copy of this law now, so many years on, but I know I had one and all my working life in Building Design within the Civil Service we used the METRIC SYSTEM.

So what's this talk about it coming into effect as late as 1995. This country has been metricated since 1972.

For verification see METRIC ACT 1972.

John McNamara —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.157.226.86 (talk) 10:29, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

 * It became law under EU directive 80/181/EEC to use hectares and square kilometres for all “commercial, public health, public administration and public health” purposes in 1986 with the proviso that acres could be used for “purposes of land registration”. This meaning of “commercial purposes” was that if I advertised land at £x per unit area, I had to use hectares, but if I advertised a piece of land of area Y, I could express it in acres.

 * On 1-Jan-2010 the law changed – the scope of the directive was widened by the removal of text which limited the purposes. The meaning of the new directive has yet to be clarified by the courts.  On the same day the acre ceased to be legal for purpose of land registration (in practice the Land Registry Office had stopped using the acre a number of years previously).
 * See European units of measurement directives. Martinvl (talk) 11:02, 29 March 2010 (UTC).

Removal of "citation needed flag" (16-Nov-2010)
I removed the Tomna form the list of synonyms for the decare as it is defined as being about 1124 square metres (see Maltese units of measurement. References for the other units of measure appear in the relevant Wikipedia articles.  Martinvl (talk) 13:24, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

 * Thanks Martinv1 for your good faith efforts to make Wikipedia better. Actually however, Wikipedia policy does call for any substantive claim in all articles to be verifiably sourced per WP:V; this is one of the very few core wiki-policies.  "Wikipedia itself is not considered an adequate source":  see the section Wikipedia and sources that mirror or use it in the WP:V policy.  The lone exception, where sources are not required, is disambiguation pages.

 * It is probably true that we need not cite every detail about any particular usage of hectare-related measurement units, but if a claim is made about the usage of some unit in this country or that (which is an assertion), then a citation should be provided that will source such claims. A very acceptable alternative is to make fewer claims in this particular article and leave the detail to be claimed, and then only sourced, in the article that covers the linked measurement.

 * It is no problem with me for a little more time to pass so this can be sorted out before deleting the unsourced claims, but the citation needed tags should stay until the sources are provided. Cheers.  N2e (talk) 15:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

 * By the way, thanks Martinvl for adding the citations which help support the claims for Norway and Bulgaria! Wikipedia gets better all the time, little by little.  N2e (talk) 15:27, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Misleading image
The image http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Hectare.png illustrates that one are is equal to 10m^2 and that a hectare is equal to 100m^2, when in fact an are is 100m^2 and a hectare, as the article states, is 10000m^2. I think the person who produced the image does not understand what m^2 means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.204.141 (talk) 00:46, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

I get the feeling that there is a confusion between when something is x square metres and when something is x metres squared. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.204.141 (talk) 01:41, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

 * On the contrary - since one are has an area of 100m^2, it can be made up of 100 squares, each on 1m^2. These squares can be laid out in a larger square, that has sides of 10m. Martinvl (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 07:41, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

(Same guy from before). My bad —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.38.204.141 (talk) 10:23, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Size comparisons from redirected article
I don’t know how useful this information is or how best (if at all) to incorporate it into this article, but this list was at before it redirected to here. To help compare orders of magnitude of different areas, areas between 1 hectare (10,000 m²) and 10 hectares (0.1 km²) are listed below.

—Frungi (talk) 04:27, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Areas smaller than 1 hectare
 * 1 hectare is equal to:
 * 1 E+4 m² or 10,000 m²
 * 100 m × 100 m
 * 100 ares
 * 108,000 square feet
 * 2.47 acres
 * 1.2126 hectares -- Plaza Mayor of Madrid
 * 1.35 hectares -- Piazza del Popolo, Rome
 * 2.3 hectares -- Red Square, Moscow
 * 2.68 hectares—area of the RMS Queen Mary 2's passenger decks
 * 3.2 hectares -- Palace of Westminster
 * 3.76 hectares -- Castelmoron-d'Albret, the smallest commune of France
 * 4 hectares -- Fort Severn, the first campus of the US Naval Academy
 * 4.5 hectares -- Wenceslas Square, Prague
 * 5.5 hectares—base of the Great Pyramid of Giza
 * 5.7 hectares -- Plaza de la Constitución, Mexico City
 * 6 $2/3$ hectares—1 Chinese qǐng
 * 8.055 hectares -- Charles Square, Prague
 * 8.4 hectares -- Place de la Concorde, Paris
 * Areas larger than 10 hectares

File:Comparison_land_area_units.svg
Referring to Martinvl's reversion of the graphic on the right on the grounds of "Doesn't add anything to the article apart from overload the graphics", I beg to differ that it helps the reader to compare the unit with other units of area. I agree that there are perhaps already too many pictures on the page, but I think some of them are less useful, e.g. the Statue of Liberty one. Does anyone have any opinion on this? Thanks, cmɢʟee୯ ͡° ̮د ͡° ੭ 19:05, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

 * My screen is 1920 pixels wide. I set Wikipedia in a floating window and reduced the screen to 960 pixels.  The new image overran the bottom of the section into the section "Visualising a hectare" and blocked out part of the image of the pitch sizes in the subsection "International rugby field".  It is unacceptable to position images where they interfere with other images.

 * While the image itself is a genuine attempt to incorporate all areas up to one hectare in a single presentation, the author has been over-ambitious - Unless I blow it up, the image does not tell me whether a square yard is larger, smaller or the same as a square metre. Furthermore the square yard and sqiare metre are so small compared with the hectare, all that the image tells me is that the hectare is much larger than these smaller areas.

 * When you present an image you have about three seconds to catch the reader's attention. In the case of this image, the reader will ask himself "What is this?".  The very small text does not draw people's attention.

 * In short, the amount of information contained in the image is poorly presented and the way in which it distorted the exiting article by overflowing detracted even more from it. Martinvl (talk) 19:52, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

What does an hectare measure in "practical" terms ?
Although a good article, I could not find here an answer to my question: how is a piece of land REALLY measured in hectares? What I mean is that all the examples you give are "flat"; what would be appreciated is an example of a non-flat surface: what happens there? Is an "hectare" of flat land equal in terrain size to an "hectare" of slopped land or not? A.R. (alainr345) If it's not clear, for an example of what I mean, I could find this sentence on a website which seems to point to the answer being "No, it would be different in terrain size", but that applies to the term Acre: "The acre is not a measure of surface area on the actual surface of the earth, but on an imaginary, hill-less, standardized ellipsoid. That result comes from using only strictly horizontal dimensions in calculating acreage." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.151.119.119 (talk) 22:56, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

 * The definition of the are and hectare are strictly in terms of square meters on a plane. I don't believe that the application of these measures to the legal measurement of actual land is in scope for this article, as the issues are the same whether the unit is the square meter, the hectare, the acre, the square mile, etc. I'm not sure where this issue belongs -- perhaps surveying or geodesy? --Macrakis (talk) 15:02, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Hectare. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20091001100650/http://www.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter4/table6.html to http://www.bipm.org/en/si/si_brochure/chapter4/table6.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101022061357/http://www.bnr.bg/sites/en/Economy/Pages/0510Marketofagriculturalland.aspx to http://www.bnr.bg/sites/en/Economy/Pages/0510Marketofagriculturalland.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:50, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Hectare. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130515190933/http://www.agrifoodconsulting.com/ACI/uploaded_files/project_report/project_46_364535920.pdf to http://www.agrifoodconsulting.com/ACI/uploaded_files/project_report/project_46_364535920.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 20:55, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

The view from Google calculator
As of May 2018, Google calculator recognizes "ha" in calculations with explicit units, but does not recognize ha with any metric prefix (e.g. k, M). This article doesn't seem to indicate that metric prefixes are accepted with ha, either. Coincidence, or French conspiracy? — MaxEnt 20:51, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * 1 ha = 1 hectare = 1 hect(o)-are. Get it? Komischn (talk) 17:15, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Why no examples?
Today, User:DeFacto made a number of edits to this content page, the first of which deleted practically all examples with the mention "Removed illustrated examples per WP:NOTTEXTBOOK". Well, under WP:NOTTEXTBOOK I find, among others, the following sentence:
 * Some kinds of examples, specifically those intended to inform rather than to instruct, may be appropriate for inclusion in a Wikipedia article.

IMHO, the above-mentioned deletion went too far, removing many examples meant more to inform than to instruct. I'm reminded of the sentence which Pierre Larousse wrote on the half-title page of his dictionary: Un dictionnaire sans exemples est un squelette ("A dictionary without examples is a skeleton"). — Tonymec (talk) 11:25, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * IMHO they dominated the article and were excessive. Perhaps one would be ok, but I'm not sure even that is necessary as using a unit of area to measure area is not a very challenging concept to grasp. -- DeFacto (talk). 11:42, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I notice you left only the example mentioning Trafalgar Square, and removed, among others, the Statue of Liberty and the athletics field. Wasn't that, shall we say, a little anglo-centric? I'd give long odds that the Statue of Liberty is better known to the average American than Trafalgar Square, and OTOH, the athletics field is a more international example, IMHO more appropriate for an encyclopædia addressed de facto not only at native anglophones, but at people having a certain minimum mastery of English anywhere in the world. — Tonymec (talk) 20:46, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

First legal definition of the metric system of units
The History section of the article cites a source which contains the text of the law from 1795 (in French). That law from 1795 explicitly extended the deadline for the usage of the system of units to become mandatory, which was given by the decree from 1 August 1793. Therefore the first legal definition was in 1793. But most units defined on the 1795 law differ from what was defined on the 1793 decree, particularly on pages 6 and 7.

Notably, the meter was already the key unit, so it was a metric system, but the names of several other units were different and while the are was defined as a unit of area, it was defined as 10000 m², or 100 larger, but there was an inconsistence in the conversion factor to square feets which would effectively divide it by a factor of 100.

Is the 1793 system considered to be a different system or already the metric system, but later modified? Does any one knows more about the subject or has another source which comments on the differences? And lacking that, is it still possible, or relevant to mention any of this? Nativeblue (talk) 23:15, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

The Too many photos tag on the article
While some deletionist editors have a problem with "too many photos" in this article, I can't see any problem, because, according to me, there are no too many photos here, and the border between "enough" and "too many" is vague, subjective and arbitrary. All those "too many photos" help many readers, including me, to understand the comparison between different units of area, so please, do not delete photos just because of phobia of "too many" (too many photos, too many planets in the Solar System, too many chemical reactions, too many examples, too many clarify tags, too many sections, too many list entries, too many table rows, too many tables, too many information, ...), truncating the important information on Wikipedia. Bernardirfan (talk) 15:57, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

 * I agree that the tag is not warranted. There is no sandwiching, and the number of photos and illustrations is not excessive. Indefatigable (talk) 17:05, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Not only are images useful to understand this kind of subject, IMHO in this case there are certainly not too many of them; I would even say that there might be too few pictures to illustrate the subject at hand, but opinions vary. I'm going to remove that tag — if someone puts it back the three of us might have to find someone having the authority to arbitrate. — Tonymec (talk) 04:50, 4 October 2023 (UTC)

Unicode
The symbol ㏊ redirects to this article. Can someone add a paragraph about the Unicode usage please?

Simon de Danser (talk) 11:53, 8 October 2023 (UTC)

 * The character ㏊ (U+33CA SQUARE HA) is part of the block U+3300 – U+33FF "CJK Compatibility", in subsection U+3399 – U+33DF "Squared Latin abbreviations". IIUC those characters are meant to represent Latin abbreviations as wide-CJK glyphs to be used in CJK text. See page https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U3300.pdf for details. — Tonymec (talk) 01:25, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

 * Done --Macrakis (talk) 11:02, 24 November 2023 (UTC)

Decimilliare
I added a non-metric approximation for the decimilliare; its use of two prefixes is confusing. TooManyFingers (talk) 16:03, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Hectare


text:
User talk:Alireza Hashemi

Welcome from me too. Thanks for picking up David Suzuki. -- Alan Peakall 17:59 Jan 22, 2003 (UTC)

Hello. I moved the text you put in Chess Records to World Records In Chess. I did this because most of the other pages that linked to "Chess Records" were refering to the record label. Thanks for the good article; I hope the new title makes things clearer. -- Infrogmation 06:58 Feb 15, 2003 (UTC)

Hello, welcome, I hope you enjoy yourself here. -- Zoe

Hi Alireza. Sorry about the duplication of effort, I didn't bother to check the other spelling possibilites of Ferdowsi. Anyway, before you put a redirect, one of the operators had already broken up my article into two parts, one was the original under "Ferdowsi" and then he moved most of the article under Shahnameh. I will put links to the Shahnameh page in your Ferdosi page. I would like to coordinate with you so that we can make some changes to the "Ferdosi" page later if it's OK with you. Regareds, --Keyvan

"The wikipedia farsi page is fa.wikipedia.com, seeing that it ended with .com I decided to contact the list Intlwiki-L and tell them that someone needs to convert it. Yet, I do not seem to have found anyone who I could contact Please reply on my discussion page"

The person who makes normaly the upgrades from the old usemod .com wikipedias to the FaseIII .org wikipedias is Brion VIBBER. But he is working on a new conversion script to convert all remaining usemod .com wikipedias. see here There are more Wikipedias waiting for the conversion. While you are waiting you can make a translation of the language configuration script. m:Locales_for_the_Wikipedia_Software but best use the files from sourceforge.net You can make local version of the Wikipedia logo. You can start writing some pages for you wikipedia. Offline, in the .com version of your wikipedia or on meta-wikipedia. You can move it when your new wikipedia is up.--Giskart

French Discussion Page: Discussion Utilisateur:Alireza Hashemi

Nice job on the Hafiz piece! I see it's getting you started on Farid ud-Din Attar too. Just one question though. Do you think Hafez would be a better title than Hafiz? Danny

Yes! However, I suppose it can be easily resolved by redirection. I will be working on Attar some other day, I have a lot of unfinished school work.

 * Alireza: I saw your article on Hafiz.  Thanks for your work.  I don't know of any Attar from Shiraz, but of course the famous Attar, who is a favourite of mine, is from Neishapour.  I wrote an article on him, but feel free to change it or enhance it as you please.     --Keyvan   09:21 Apr 1, 2003 (UTC)

Alireza: I checked out the new List of Iranians that you mentioned on my page. I will try to write articles on some of them but I would like to point out that the pre-Median entries in that list are not Iranian. In fact, the Elamites and the Babylonians were semitic cultures and even the names in that list do not have Iranian origins. While it's true that today in Iran we have the Elam province and it goes back to the time of the Elamites, academically speaking, the original Elamites are not considered a part of Iran's own history. The reason some of the ancient inscriptions from the Achanemids era, in addition to Old Persian, are in Babylonian and Elami (Shushi/Susian) languages is because at that time, these langages were still important languages of the region. I suggest we take those entries out of that list. --Keyvan  02:46 Apr 5, 2003 (UTC)

Concerning Copyright infrigement (letter from traveladventures)

Permission

Quote: Dear Alireza,

thanks for your email. as long as you indicate the copyright issue (and hopefully also link or refer to www.traveladventures.org as the source of the picture(s), you are free to use as many pictures as you need.

good luck regards boris

On vrijdag, apr 4, 2003, at 21:33 Europe/Amsterdam

(Testing) Alireza Hashemi 02:44 Apr 19, 2003 (UTC)

- Is "Attar of Shiraz" mentioned in Hafez different from Attar of Neishapour? The current link ( Attar ) points to Attar of Neishapour, but in the Attar article, there's no mentioning of Shiraz City at all. It even says there that the birth and death place of Attar of Neishapour is, well, Neishapour. Is Neishapour an old name for Shiraz? --Menchi 21:43 23 Jul 2003 (UTC)

Hi Alireza. I've just moved User:Alireza Hashemi's Request Page to User:Alireza Hashemi/Request Page, because if you wish to create pages that are related to you, you should make them as subpages under your user name, like above. Thanks, and keep contributing :) Dysprosia 23:54, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Invitation
I fraternally invite you to add your name, to join the new community Wikipedians/Quebec. Thanks and welcome! Je vous invite fraternellement à ajouter votre nom, à vous joindre à la nouvelle communauté Wikipedians/Quebec. Merci et bienvenue! --Liberlogos 04:26, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You may vote at this link
Requests for adminship/refdoc

Wikimedia Canada
Hi there! I'd like to invite you to explore Wikimedia Canada, and create a list of people interested in forming a local chapter for our nation. A local chapter will help promote and improve the organization, within our great nation. We'd also like to encourage everyone to suggest projects for our national chapter to participate in. Hope to see you there! -- user:zanimum

 * I thought you might be interested in this.Endorse if you agree with the case. --ManiF 15:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Iranian Wikipedians' Notice Board (WatchDog)
Please bookmark this page, for daily updates on the status of the Iran-related articles. Read notices posted by others or add your own notice by updating "Urgent view". --ManiF 15:56, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Help

 * Please know it is extremely important that you go to the following page and sign your comments; of course, do so only if you agree that the user in question is abuses his editing privileges. It is very important that you please go to the following page and help me combat anti-Iranianism made by one particular user who is doing possible sneaky vandalism, yet certainly disruptiveness on most Persian related articles due to political and Zionist reasons, which have no place in an encyclopedia.The link that suports banning this user who is namely user Aucaman is here, and also Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-03-02 Persian people. Also, it is very important that you do not respond to any of the comments in that page, since we have chosen user Zmmz to be the spokes person who is representing us, give all your comments to him here, and he will submit it for you. It is important that we have one voice there.

 * It is extremely crucial that we as a cohesive group of editors, keep an eyes on the following articles, so that users like Aucaman, D, User:Heja helweda, and User:Zora who constantly inserts comments into the following articles like, Iranian are Arabs, Al Khwarizmi was an Arab, Rumi was not Persian, and Iran meaning, Land of Aryans actually comes from Nazi, Germany. So, please be active, and whenever possible check on the following articles;

 * Also, please go to this page, and vote for limiting the editing privileges of these users who vandalize all articles relating to Iran and Persia.

1. Iranian people article. We also need a lot of help on the Persian people, Iranian people, Persian Empire, and the Al Khwarizmi, Al Biruni

2. Persian people

3. Persian Empire

4. Al Khwarizmi

5. Al Biruni

6. Rumi

7. Angel

8. Parsi

9. Knight

10. Khuzestan

11. Safavids

12. Richard Nelson Frye, who is the Guardian of Persian history.

 * Finally, Please bookmark this page, for daily updates on the status of the Iran-related articles. Read notices posted by others or add your own notice by updating "Urgent view".

Please remember not write too much texts; rather, be short, to the point, civil, polite towards others, and above all factual. ThanksZmmz 04:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks
Regarding this edit and others: Please do not make personal attacks on other people. Wikipedia has a policy against personal attacks. In some cases, users who engage in personal attacks may be blocked from editing by admins or banned by the arbitration committee. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Please resolve disputes appropriately. Thank you. --InShaneee 21:05, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Please vote !
Dear Alireza, please see the following page:

Thanks. --Sina Kardar14:19, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

User:Diyako is trying to make an alternative ficticious definition of Newroz
User:Diyako has created an article on a Turkic-Nowruz without mention of its Iranian history and roots. Soon we will here Nowruz has nothing to do with Iran too. His article is Nevruz. This should be merged or edited properly. He has gone on the Turkish discussions to promote it.

Here is what user:Diyako has written;

Nevruz is the spring festival among Turkic-speaking nations, from Turkey to Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan etc. It is very similar to the Iranian festival of Norouz.

According to Turkish legends Nevruz dates back to era of Gökturks.

Th user Diyako is definnityl anti-Iranian and has an anti-Iranian agenda.

Nevruz is not very similar to the Irnian festival of Norouz it is Norouz!

He has claimed the Kurdish flag has nothing to do with Iran and is a crime to fly in Iran. The Kurdish flag is based on the Iranian flag it is even in the memories of the founders of the Mehbad Republic who wanted to showcase their Aryan and Mede heritage. Back then Kurds only had a oral history about their only know ancestors the Mede and Mede heritage, before other ancestors were accepted. The Sun is also very significant element of ancient Iranian and Zorasatrianism. Diyako is misleading everyone. Go to Kurdistan 20 years ago let alone 50 they will say we are Aryans and our own blood relatives are the Persians. The Kurdish flag is not banned in Iran and is based on Iranian colours. This user also claims the Iranians are only a lingustic group after he saw that the tide was against him that Kurds are in definition an Iranian people so he worked to undermine the definition of Iranian people and even Persians with user:Acuman.

69.196.139.250 21:31, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Iranian Azerbaijan
Hi there,

I just wanted to let you know that user, khoikhoi (MOD) keeps including the very offensive term, "south azerbaijan" on the Iranian Azerbaijan page. We should not let him post this propoganda and false information. That term has no place in an encycolpedia article. It is not relevent to the content. What a few seperatists call that region should not be shown here. If we dont stop this, people will start including the "a#abian gulf" as an alternate name on the Persian gulf page.

KhodahafesDariush4444 04:21, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

When are we Going to See Proof that Azaris are Genetically Turkic
Please keep an eye on Azari and the talk:Azari. I have started the following in the discussion.

It has been ages since these citations have not been verified. Verification is needed. If not delete the material. the amount of time granted has been generious. The Azaris Iranian background has been verified through various scientific and academic sources, but the Turkic claim has not. The only think that has been verified is the Turkic langauge. 72.57.230.179

Please vote
Please vote this page -- MehranVB talk 19:31, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for Hafez!
Hi Mr. Alireza Hashemi, Thank you so much for the excellent article on Hafez you initiated. I just added Meher Baba to the people that were influenced by Hafez's poetry. Keep up the good work and ... Don't Worry, Be Happy! PS I wrote an 8-page article on Meher Baba for the Dutch (nl) Wikipedia and co-wrote the English one with User:Cott12. Cheers for now, Frank Landsman 08:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC) (Frank)

Two Articles in need of your attention
There are two entries at Wikipedia, which have falsely created -- they are Turco-Persian and Turko-Persian Tradition. Both entries are factitious. I have requested the entries to be deleted. My reasons are:
 * The term Turko-Persian Tradition (or Turco-Persian) does not exists academically and it is a factitious entry! Check the Encyclopaedia Iranica to confirm -- The correct name for that culture is the Persianate culture not the "Turko-Persian". Turkophones (mostly of mixed race and Persianized in culture) only spoke in Turkic dialects and were in the military. That is not enough participation in creating and forming the culture to deserve the name "Turko-Persian Tradition" – This is misinformation. All the elements in that area, which have to do with tradition and culture, were drawn from the Iranian culture (Persian, Kurdish, Azari, Baluchi, Tajik, Luri, Gilaki, Talishi, Mazandarani, etc.), and the Islamic faith, not much Turkic elements (like shamanism, yurts etc.) were incorporated in. That is what makes the name "Turko-Persian" an imaginary one and therefore the entry should be deleted.

Any contributions would greatly appreciated. Bā Sepās Surena 02:14, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

(If you have time) Please vote in the survey on this proposed move
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Valiyat-e_faqih_%28book_by_Khomeini%29#Survey

Valiyat-e faqih (book by Khomeini) → Hokumat-e Islami : Valiyat-e faqih (book by Khomeini)

--Leroy65X 15:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Survey vote request
Please vote in survey over whether to include text in History of the the Islamic Republic of Iran

Text and dispute is at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran&diff=274961453&oldid=274952179

Arguements
found in edit summary and at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:History_of_the_Islamic_Republic_of_Iran#Deletion_by_KneeJuan

Thank you --BoogaLouie (talk) 19:32, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

July 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Manchester City F.C. has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Alansohn (talk) 03:00, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

You're invited!
Hello, Alireza Hashemi,

You are invited meet with your fellow Wikipedians by attending the Montréal meetup scheduled on Sunday, June 27, 2010; between 1500 - 1700 to be held at the Comité Social Centre Sud (CSCS), located at 1710 Beaudry, in Montréal. You can sign up at the meetup page.

The meetup is happening in concurrence with RoCoCo 2010, a free, bilingual, weekend unconference including many people involved with Wikis both within the Wikipedia/Wikimedia Community and abroad. You do not need to attend the conference to sign up for the Wikimeetup, but you are certainly welcome! Bastique ☎ call me!

(PS: Please share this with those you know who might not be on the delivery list, i.e. Users in Montreal/Quebec) Delivered by SoxBot (talk) 00:41, 8 June 2010 (UTC)

Science Party of Canada
I have proposed this article for speedy deletion. The article indicates that this party exists only as a disucssion board. It would be appropriate to reinstate this article if it actually organizaes and is registered by Elections Canada, but not until then. Ground Zero | t 23:06, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

Asian 10,000 Challenge invite
Hi. The WikiProject Asia/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland The 10,000 Challenge and WikiProject Africa/The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like South East Asia, Japan/China or India etc, much like The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. At some stage we hope to run some contests to benefit Asian content, a destubathon perhaps, aimed at reducing the stub count would be a good place to start, based on the current WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon which has produced near 200 articles in just three days. If you would like to see this happening for Asia, and see potential in this attracting more interest and editors for the country/countries you work on please sign up and being contributing to the challenge! This is a way we can target every country of Asia, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant! Thank you. -- Ser Amantio di Nicolao Che dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 01:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:Alireza Hashemi


text:
Bahamasair

Bahamasair Holdings Limited (stylised: bahamasaır) is an airline headquartered in Nassau. It is the national airline of The Bahamas and operates scheduled services to 32 domestic and regional destinations in the Caribbean and the United States from its base at Lynden Pindling International Airport.

Early years
Bahamasair was established by the Bahamas Government and started operations on 17 June 1973 by acquiring the routes of Flamingo Airlines and the operations and routes of Out Island Airways (OIA). During the early 1970s, both Flamingo Airlines and Out Island Airways were operating scheduled passenger services, Flamingo with British Aircraft Corporation BAC One-Eleven jets, Lockheed L-188 Electra turboprops and Convair 340 and Douglas DC-3 prop aircraft while Out Island was operating Fairchild Hiller FH-227 and de Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter turboprops. Out Island later operated the BAC One-Eleven jet as well.

The first Bahamasair flight was to Andros Island and the second to Freeport, Grand Bahama. The Bahamas Government purchased 51% of OIA and became the majority shareholder and part owner, then renamed the airline Bahamasair. The other owners were Edward Albury, Gil Hensler and Sherlock Hackley who had 49%. After a few years the Government had purchased the shares of Gil Hensler and Sherlock Hackley. The only Bahamian owner of OIA still maintaining some shares was Edward Albury.

Bahamasair initially encountered operating difficulties, including poor maintenance facilities, economic conditions and company structure. Those factors brought public distrust as a consequential added problem. However, jet airliners started to arrive in the shape of new BAC One-Eleven twin jets including the stretched series 500 model, followed by one brand new Boeing 737-200, and in 1973, it opened its first service to the US, from Nassau to Tampa, Florida.

Also in 1973, the government's vision of several airlines discontinuing service to Nassau became a reality, when US carrier Pan American World Airways as well as other airlines decided to stop operating to the Bahamas. This enabled Bahamasair to capture a substantial part of the Bahamas scheduled air transport market.

Through the rest of the 1970s, Bahamasair kept adding flights to other cities in Florida and, domestically, the presence of the airline also grew rapidly. According to the February 1, 1976 Official Airline Guide (OAG), interisland flights were operated with Fairchild Hiller FH-227 and STOL capable de Havilland Canada DHC-6 Twin Otter turboprops and also with one Douglas DC-3 prop aircraft. This same OAG also lists four daily round trip flights between Nassau and Freeport operated by Bahamasair with BAC One-Eleven twin jets.

1980s
During the early 1980s, Bahamasair unsuccessfully tried to expand to the Northeast United States, opening flights to Philadelphia, Washington, D.C., and Newark, New Jersey. But in 1989, the airline's directors decided that those routes were not profitable and eliminated them from the airline's schedule. Also in 1989, the first of two Boeing 727-200s came into the fleet. That was also the year that a new livery and workers' uniform were introduced. The Boeing 727s, however, could not be kept in service long because of political favors and interference, thereby causing the company to lose vast sums of money in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

1990s
In 1991, de Havilland Canada Dash 8 turboprop aircraft were purchased to replace the whole jet fleet and the Boeing 737-200s were taken out of service. According to the September 15, 1994 Official Airline Guide (OAG), most flights were being operated with Dash 8 turboprops although Short 360 turboprops and Cessna 402 prop aircraft were being operated in scheduled service as well. The Dash 8 was being flown on all scheduled services between the Bahamas and Florida at this time according to this OAG. In 1997, the Boeing 737s returned to service because key routes warranted the cargo and passenger carrying capabilities offered by these jetliners. The 737-200 was deployed to Fort Lauderdale, Miami and Orlando as well as one domestic route, being Nassau-Freeport.

Development since the 2000s
In November 2011, the government discussed plans to replace the Bahamasair Boeing 737-200s with more fuel efficient and cost effective aircraft. However, it was said that pre-owned Boeing 737-500s may serve as a replacement for the then current jet fleet. In 2012, Bahamasair confirmed it would be taking delivery of two Boeing 737-500s with a 120-passenger all-economy class layout. The first aircraft was delivered on 30 March 2012 and put into service in April 2012. The second 737-500 was delivered on 21 June 2012. Bahamasair retired its last two Boeing 737-200s in September 2012 and received a third Boeing 737-500 in March 2014.

In May 2015, it was reported that the loss-making airline was in a phase of restructuring to gain profitability as advised by the government. This included new union agreements as well as a planned renewal of the ageing fleet. Shortly after, Bahamasair ordered five new ATR 42 and ATR 72 aircraft to replace all of its Bombardier Dash 8s.

The airline took delivery of the first ATR 72–600 on 27 November 2015.

Current fleet
As of December 2023, the Bahamasair fleet consists of the following aircraft:

Accidents and incidents
As of 2024, Bahamasair has not suffered a fatal accident since its founding in 1973. However, three aircraft have been lost in non-fatal accidents and a weather event:

 * On 14 March 2017, an ATR 72-600 sustained substantial damage after being struck by a violent tornado at Nassau-Lynden Pindling International Airport, Bahamas. The left hand main landing gear collapsed.
 * On 20 April 2007, a Bombardier Dash 8-300 suffered a failure of the left main gear while landing at Governor's Harbour Airport, causing the aircraft to skid on the runway until coming to a halt. The aircraft was damaged beyond repair and written off. None of the 48 passengers and 3 crew members were harmed.
 * On 12 October 1998, a Hawker Siddeley HS 748 was damaged beyond repair by Hurricane Mitch while resting on the apron in Nassau.
 * On 31 July 1978, a Fairchild Hiller FH-227 impacted the runway of Chub Cay International Airport seconds after take-off with its gear already retracted. It skidded on the runway and came to a halt, but was damaged beyond repair. There were no fatalities.

title: Bahamasair


text:
Talk:Localization

Archives
archive 1

The most common meaning
Why would someone remove the most common meaning of localization? Is it better to have obscure meaning of words in an encyclopedia? Bensaccount 17:19, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * I would also suspect that the most common meaning of localisation is when the economy is "local". In that sense localisation is the opposite to globalisation, where the economy is "global". --Mats33 (talk) 12:07, 16 October 2010 (UTC) ntouma 7mir wllah

Merger proposal
I propose merging "L10n" into this page. That page has too little info and is part of the info on this "Localization" page. Mistakefinder (talk) 22:01, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * DoneFgnievinski (talk) 18:19, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Localization


text:
José Roman (boxer)

José "King" Roman (born December 17, 1946) is a Puerto Rican former boxer who was Puerto Rico's first world heavyweight championship challenger. He is known as "Joe King Roman." He holds notable victories over Manuel Ramos and ex-Light Heavyweight champion Vicente Rondon.

Pro career
In Roman's early career, he achieved mixed results. He defeated people like Jack O'Halloran and Chuck Wepner but lost to Jack Bodell. After the Bodell loss, Roman had a win-streak, defeating O'Halloran once again and besting Manuel Ramos. He lost to Robie Harris but put together a streak of wins before fighting George Foreman.

Foreman Fight
In late August 1973, he travelled to Tokyo, Japan, to challenge world Heavyweight champion George Foreman, losing by a knockout in the first round on September 1. Roman's corner protested that Foreman hit him while Roman was down, although no action was taken on this complaint. Photos exist that seem to corroborate Roman's corner's version of events. Even though he lost, he made history by becoming the first Puerto Rican to challenge for the world's Heavyweight championship. The only fellow Puerto Ricans to challenge for the heavyweight championship are Ossie Ocasio, Fres Oquendo and John Ruiz, who later became the first Latino to hold a version of the heavyweight championship.

Afterwards
Roman held a win over former WBA world Light Heavyweight champion Vicente Rondon just after the Foreman fight, his first win afterwards. In 1975 he lost to Mike Quarry and later in the year he began a series of losses. He lost seven times, notably losing to Jimmy Young. Roman was defeated by Boone Kirkman afterwards, in 1977, but never achieved a notable fight afterwards, having a mixed record.

Retirement
Roman retired in 1981 with a record of 54 wins, 27 losses and 4 draws, with 27 knockout wins. He used to work at a Sweetbay Supermarket in Tampa, Florida. Ossie Ocasio and Fres Oquendo also challenged for the world's heavyweight championship, both are also from Puerto Rico. Ruiz was born in the USA of Puerto Rican ancestry.

Personal
He has a daughter, Selina, who is an artist. There is a mural in Tampa Bay that depicts him and dr. Ferdie Pacheco, a well-known television boxing pundit.

title: José Roman (boxer)


text:
Talk:Armed Forces of the Argentine Republic

Untitled
Does anyone else think that the military dictatorship should be mentioned on this page? It does seem relevant to an article called Military of Argentina. Two16 09:23 Jan 11, 2003 (UTC)

1980s transition to democracy
I just undid a revision here. Although Argentina was clearly well-defeated in the war, the tone of the change was neither encyclopedic nor neutral - more of a cheering section, so back it went.--MartinezMD (talk) 02:56, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Operacion 90
Is this someone trying to be sarcastic? A "large-scale" military maneuver consisting of only 10 soldiers? If no one corrects it, I will delete "large scale" since it is inconsistent without an explanation (perhaps the rest of the operation was large?).--MartinezMD (talk) 06:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

History and the military
I've just reverted on history of the military. Large changes such as blanking an entire paragraph are to be discussed in this talk page first. Besides, an article about the military in Argentina that overlooks the history of coups d'état of this country is clearly lacking... especially considering that the main occupation of the Argentine military between 1955 and 1983 (with the exception of Malvinas, of course) has been precisely producing one coup after another. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 01:41, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Foreign Relations
Much of the info recently added to this article would be more than welcome by the poor Foreign relations of Argentina.Mariano (t/c) 13:27, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

The "French connexion"
We cant have more than half of the article about this, also this subject is in Argentine Army too. I suggest move all that to a separate article a left here a short footnote Jor70 03:12, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

the Falklands war 1982
why is there no mention at all of this conflict and its effects on the Argentine military after the collapse of the dictatorship(military)

- Why do you think? The most notable Argentine operation omitted completely... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.71.189.67 (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

 * Why would an invasion of another country "bolster its dwindling legitimacy"? Popularity maybe, but not legitimacy. However attacks on stronger countries usually end badly for those hoping to improve their popularity by an act of aggression.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.197.15.138 (talk) 01:24, 11 February 2012 (UTC)

Argentine Marine Corps (COIM) is not a "Branch of Service" of the Argentinian Military.
As stated in the current wikiarticle about the argentinian marine corps:
 * "The Argentine Marine Corps, in Spanish Infantería de Marina Armada Republica Argentina, or IMARA, The Naval Infantry of the Argentine Armada, also Commando of the Infantry of Marina of Argentine Navy, (COIM), is one of the four operational commands of the Navy."

Hence, unless there is documented evidence to support keeping it as a "branch of service", I propose to remove the link to the "Argentine Marine Corps" from that list. Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 09:29, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Please also note, in the "Introduction" and the "Structure" section of this article the Marine Corps is not among the Armed Forces (responsible to Defence Ministry) or the Security Forces (responsible to Interior Ministry). Hence there is no reason to consider it a separate, independent service branch. Regards, DPdH (talk) 09:44, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Why the "History" section is focused only in the period post-WW2?
Albeit what's written in this section seems to be adequate (haven't yet checked relevant sourcing/referencing), I found a bit strange that nothing is said about the period before 1965 (which for the Army and Navy begins in the 1810's). Am I wrong, or this seems a bit biased? Can anyone please help improving this section? I don't have documented references handy to do it myself. Thanks & Regards, DPdH (talk) 09:57, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Contradiction?
As user Mesoso2 pointed out, there is an apparent contradiction that might be caused by edition. Up to my knowledge, the PNA and the GN ("para-military" branches) are under control of the Interior Ministry, and the Army, Navy and Air Force are controlled by the Defence Ministry. Time provided, will research a bit using the official websites of the Argentinean forces and will try to resolve this contradiction. Thanks & regards, DPdH (talk) 03:11, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, but I just don't see what the contradiction here would be. Both the Argentine Naval Prefecture and the Argentine National Gendarmerie, as paramilitary forces, are fully capable of performing military duties, are (expected to be) assigned to the Ministry of Defence in case a war occurs and their function, organisation and training are similar to those of professional military forces. That's why they are, and have always been, considered part of Argentina's National Defence System. Perhaps you can point out what exactly the supposed contradiction here is. Until then though, I'll proceed to remove the contradiction note, as it has been a while since it was added there. If you have any objections, please provide us with a reasonable and clear explanation for adding it back. Thank you in advance. —Aucun effort n'est trop grand 01:26, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
 * HI, I didn't nave too much time to research on this, so it's still in my "to-do" list. A quick look to the law regulating the formation and opeation of the Argentine National Gendarmerie (pls see in the official ANG website: Ley 19349, unfortunately in spanish only) seems to indicate that ANG is still under the Argentine Army command. As this law is quite old (1971 - there was a De Facto government at that time, headed by General Lanusse) maybe the situation is not strictly that, need to check more in detail. The ANG now reports not to the Interior Ministry, but to the Justice, Security and Human Rights Ministry(see official website ), so maybe this also needs to be updated in the article. Anyway, let's leave this "contradiction issue" as it's now, for the time being.
 * By the way, there are no citations supporting your assertions. Maybe you (or somebody else) could kindly provide them?
 * Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 04:24, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

 * Argentina's 1994 national constitution and subsequent laws prohibit the Argentine Army, as well as other branches of the Argentine Armed Forces, from participating in internal security affairs. That fact alone should be enough to tell that the 1971 law you mentioned is quite clearly no longer in effect, or at least not completely. Besides, although the information regarding the current dependence of the gendarmerie on either the interior or security ministries should be naturally updated, that's not really a contradiction of any sort. For citations supporting my assertions, please see Argentina's laws for regulating interior security, national defence and navigation, as well the official websites for both the Argentine National Gendarmerie and the Argentine Naval Prefecture. Cheers. —Aucun effort n'est trop grand 18:16, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Why only "Army" images?
I wonder why in an article about "all" the Argentine Armed Forces, only images from one of them (the Argentine Army) have been used to illiustrate it. IMHO, some pictures of elements of the other armed forces (Argentine Air Force, Argentine Navy, etc.) should be included, to make the article more "balanced". Kind regards, DPdH (talk) 22:09, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

 * Because no one has submitted them. You are free to add pictures from the other service branches but they have to be free/public domain photographs.--MartinezMD (talk) 23:59, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 one external links on Armed Forces of the Argentine Republic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added tag to http://www.lahistoriapensada.com.ar/index.php?id=61
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070423134408/http://www.jef3op.ejercito.mil.ar:80/website/Departamentos/oomp/paginas/UNFICYP.htm to http://www.jef3op.ejercito.mil.ar/website/Departamentos/oomp/paginas/UNFICYP.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090907233708/http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unficyp/facts.html to http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unficyp/facts.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070612064149/http://www.ejercito.cl/presencia_internacional/pop_mision_chipre.htm to http://www.ejercito.cl/presencia_internacional/pop_mision_chipre.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070218113513/http://www.exercito.gov.br:80/04Maoami/missaopaz/unficyp/indice.htm to http://www.exercito.gov.br/04Maoami/missaopaz/unficyp/indice.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100805064150/http://www.faa.mil.ar:80/misiones/chipre.html to http://www.faa.mil.ar/misiones/chipre.html
 * Added tag to http://www.ign.gov.ar/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070517091519/http://www.iifa.mil.ar:80/ to http://www.iifa.mil.ar/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090310164446/http://www.jef3op.ejercito.mil.ar/website/Departamentos/oomp/kfor/galeria.htm to http://www.jef3op.ejercito.mil.ar/website/Departamentos/oomp/kfor/galeria.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:46, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Armed Forces of the Argentine Republic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090324234723/http://www.jgm.gov.ar/Paginas/MemoriaDetallada05/04_Ministerio_Defensa/04_Ministerio_Defensa.pdf to http://www.jgm.gov.ar/Paginas/MemoriaDetallada05/04_Ministerio_Defensa/04_Ministerio_Defensa.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.ign.gov.ar/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070517091519/http://www.iifa.mil.ar/ to http://www.iifa.mil.ar/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:06, 9 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Armed Forces of the Argentine Republic. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060501014635/http://www.fuerzas-armadas.mil.ar/caecopaz/index.htm to http://www.fuerzas-armadas.mil.ar/caecopaz/index.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Subsection about future invasion of the Falkland Islands??
Hi, should we include a subsection about the Argentine's military preparation to reinvade the Falkland Islands? I believe that Argentina will make a second attempt when they feel they have enough forces to win! IQ125 (talk) 18:00, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

The prefectura and the Gendarmería aren’t Armed forces
These two forces are under the security ministry, no under the defence ministry, and in this article all the data is about the defence ministry Hehex2020 (talk) 20:40, 8 August 2020 (UTC)

 * The article says they are under the security ministry and you're simply wrong, the article doesn't say this is about the defence ministry.  As noted in the article:

there are two security forces, controlled by the Ministry of Security, which can be mobilized in occasion of an armed conflict: the National Gendarmerie, a gendarmerie used to guard borders and places of strategic importance; and the Naval Prefecture, a coast guard used to protect internal major rivers and maritime territory. (emphasis added)

Both organisations were mobilised for the Falklands War.

According to Argentine National Gendarmerie:

According to the Argentine Constitution, the armed forces cannot intervene in internal civil conflicts, so the Gendarmerie is subordinate to the Interior Ministry. It is defined as a civilian "security force of a military nature". It maintains a functional relationship with the Ministry of Defense, as part of both the National Defense System and the Interior Security System. It therefore maintains capabilities arising from the demands required by joint military planning with the armed forces. (emphasis added)

Similarly according to Argentine Naval Prefecture:

According to the Argentine Constitution, the Armed Forces of the Argentine Republic cannot intervene in internal civil conflicts, so the Prefecture is defined as a civilian "security force of a military nature". It maintains a functional relationship with the Ministry of Defense, as part of both the National Defense System and the Interior Security System. It therefore maintains capabilities arising from the demands required by joint military planning with the armed forces.

So both are acknowledged as contributing to the defense of Argentina in time of war. WCM email 00:25, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

 * So is needless put information about the ministry of security because in this article are information about the defence ministry. Hehex2020 (talk) 13:04, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

 * I disagree Hehex2020. I think WCM is correct. If the force has the mandate for national defense, it should be part of the article. In the US, the Coast Guard has a similar mandate, civilian duties in times of peace and military duties during times of war, which is included in the article Armed Forces of the United States as an example. MartinezMD (talk) 15:13, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Are similar, but for the Argentine government the gendarmería and the prefectura aren’t armed forces despite they can be mobilised during a war. For example there aren’t considered armed forces for the Spanish wikipedia article about this topic and there aren’t part of the joint staff. Hehex2020 (talk) 18:52, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

 * and both demonstrate they are armed forces.  As already cited they are similar to the USCG, which is listed in the equivalent American article. WCM email

But the argentine government doesn't recognise it as armed forces. they are police force which can be mobilised during a conflict Hehex2020 (talk) 12:10, 10 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Which is precisely what the articles says, you appear incable of absorbing basic facts. WCM email 12:33, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

 * They have the potential to be a part of the armed forces, similar to reserves. As long as the article is clear about it, they should be included for that reason. MartinezMD (talk) 14:47, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

I am don’t saying that these two forces can’t be used as armed forces but for the government they aren’t armed forces. I the case of put them as armed forces is needy to put information about the security ministry Hehex2020 (talk) 19:56, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

 * Apparently the Argentine law says that legally they can be. Not necessarily that they are. I would imagine it would take war or a specific event that requires activating them as a designated national armed force. If further clarification is needed about the ministries in the article, add it. I think the comparison to the US Coast Guard is quite similar. It usually operates under the department (ministry) of Homeland Security, but during times of war command can be transferred to the Department of the Navy. MartinezMD (talk) 20:45, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

okey, I think you are correct Hehex2020 (talk) 21:28, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

 * Look at this example United States Armed Forces, USCG is analogous to the Argentine National Gendarmerie and the Argentine Naval Prefecture. We already explain in the text they are part of the Minstry of Security, the addition to the infobox is not appropriate.  I've given you an example, have a look at it and stop being so damn confrontational. WCM email 16:03, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

 * I don't see him as confrontational. Why don't you make an edit that will be satisfactory? MartinezMD (talk) 16:08, 11 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, irritation creeping in from another article. He is editing along nationalist lines, whilst accusing other of nationalism. e.g.  WCM email 16:22, 11 August 2020 (UTC)

Is need to put that the prefectura and the gendarmería are armed forces only during a conflict also in the infobox, because a lot of people only read the infobox, also according to the Argentinan government this two forces aren’t armed forces all time. Hehex2020 (talk) 14:21, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

 * FYI ignoring you repeating the same point ad nauseun does not equate to consensus. WCM email 16:25, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

I don’t know why Are you so anger because I put an “only during conflict” Hehex2020 (talk) 16:53, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Angry* Hehex2020 (talk) 16:54, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
 * You might wish to look up Psychological projection, I am not angry. I reverted you because your edit made no sense.  You are becoming a Time sink, I keep having to fix the mess you leave behind. WCM email 17:03, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Does that addition bother you so much? Is little Hehex2020 (talk) 17:08, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

 * Grettins. Mi name is Malvinero10 and I am from Argentina (I iniciated in es-wiki). Well, actually, the National Gendarmerie and the Naval Prefecture are part of the National Defence System, according to the National Defence Law (number 23.554), created in April 1988:

Article 9th: The members of the National Defence System are:
 * a) Nation President
 * b) National Defence Council
 * c) National Congress
 * d) Ministry of Defence
 * e) Joint Staff (es:Estado Mayor Conjunto de las Fuerzas Armadas (Argentina))
 * f) Army, Navy and Air Force
 * g) National Gendarmerie and Naval Prefecture in in the terms prescribed by this Law.

Article 31th: As members of the National Defence System, the Argentine Naval Prefecture and the National Gendarmerie, will develop in their respectives organic structures, the human and material resources nedeed by the [...] control and surveillance of the fronteers, territorial waters of the Nation and custody of strategic objetives, and the compliance of the others functions emergent in this law and others legal provisions that apply.

The National Gendarmerie and the Argentine Naval Prefecture will depend organic and functionally of the Ministry of Defence, without prejudice to which, the time of war, its human and material resources or part of them, may be assigned to the respective strategic operational commands and territorial commands, as derived from the corresponding planning.

 * I am not sure yet.--Malvinero10 (talk) 02:58, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Title
The current title is incorrect. The Argentine Armed Forces has not a official name (Fuerzas Armadas de la Repúblcia Argentina do not exists). The only name in the country laws is “Armed Forces” (Fuerzas Armadas). So, I propose move this article to Argentine Armed Forces.--Malvinero10 (talk) 03:02, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

 * I am not particularly bothered either way but the convention here is to disambiguate Armed Forces (seeing as every country in the world has Armed Forces). Hence Armed Forces of the Argentine Republic. WCM email 09:31, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

 * The Argentine Nation Constitution says four times Fuerzas Armadas not saying the nationality.
 * The National Defence Law says 23 times Fuerzas Armadas, again, not saying the nationality.
 * To disambiguate, I propose Argentine Armed Forces (not Armed Forces of Argentina, in es-wiki we determinated that is incorrect.--Malvinero10 (talk) 17:45, 18 August 2020 (UTC)


text:
British Free Corps

The British Free Corps (abbr. BFC; Britisches Freikorps) was a unit of the Waffen-SS of Nazi Germany during World War II, made up of British and Dominion prisoners of war who had been recruited by Germany. The unit was originally known as the Legion of St George. Research by British historian Adrian Weale has identified 54 men who belonged to this unit at one time or another, some for only a few days. At no time did it reach more than 27 men in strength.

Formation
The idea for the British Free Corps came from John Amery, a British fascist, son of the serving British Secretary of State for India, Leo Amery. John Amery travelled to Berlin in October 1942, and proposed to the Germans the formation of a British volunteer force to help fight the Bolsheviks. The British volunteer force was to be modelled after the Légion des volontaires français contre le bolchévisme (Legion of French Volunteers against Bolshevism), a French collaborationist force fighting with the German Wehrmacht. In addition to touting the idea of a British volunteer force, Amery actively tried to recruit Britons. He made a series of pro-German propaganda radio broadcasts, appealing to his fellow countrymen to join the war on communism.

The first recruits to the Corps came from a group of prisoners of war (POWs) at a 'holiday camp' set up by the Germans in Genshagen, a suburb of Berlin, in August 1943. In November 1943, they were moved to a requisitioned café in the Pankow district of Berlin. Recruits also came from an interrogation camp at Luckenwalde in late 1943. The Corps became a military unit on 1 January 1944, under the name 'The British Free Corps'. In the first week of February 1944, the BFC moved to the St Michaeli Kloster in Hildesheim, a small town near Hanover. Uniforms were issued on 20 April 1944 (Hitler's 55th birthday). On 11 October 1944, the Corps was moved to the Waffen-SS Pioneer school in Dresden, to start military training for service on the Eastern Front. On 24 February 1945, they travelled from Dresden to Berlin, where they stayed in a requisitioned school on the Schönhauser Allee. On 8 March 1945, they were moved to the village of Niemegk, a few miles to the south-west of Berlin.

Recruiting for the Free Corps was done in German POW camps. In 1944, leaflets were distributed to the POWs, and the unit was mentioned in Camp, the official POW newspaper published in Berlin. The unit was promoted "as a thoroughly volunteer unit, conceived and created by British subjects from all parts of the Empire who have taken up arms and pledged their lives in the common European struggle against Soviet Russia".

The attempted recruitment of POWs was done amid German fear of the Soviets; the Germans were "victims of their own propaganda" and thought that their enemies were as worried about the Soviets as they were. In one Dutch camp, cigarettes, fruit, and other items were lavished on the POWs while they listened to Nazi propaganda officers who described the good that the Germans were doing in Europe, then asked the men to join in fighting the real enemy, the Soviets.

Commanders
The BFC did not have a "commander" per se as it was the intention of the SS to appoint a British commander when a suitable British officer came forward. However, three German Waffen-SS officers acted as the Verbindungsoffizier ("liaison officer") between the SS-Hauptamt Amtsgruppe D/3, which was responsible for the unit and the British volunteers, and in practice they acted as the unit commander for disciplinary purposes at least. These were:

 * SS-Hauptsturmführer Hans Werner Roepke: September 1943 – November 1944
 * SS-Obersturmführer Dr Walter Kühlich: November 1944 – April 1945
 * SS-Hauptsturmführer Dr Alexander Dolezalek: April 1945

A number of sources mention the involvement of Brigadier Leonard Parrington, a British Army officer captured by the Germans in Greece in 1941. This was based on a misunderstanding by some of the British volunteers after Parrington in the summer of 1943 had visited the POW "holiday camp" at Genshagen, in the southern suburbs of Berlin, as representative of the Senior British POW, Major General Victor Fortune. Parrington had told the assembled prisoners that he "knew the purpose of the camp" and the BFC volunteers who were there took this to mean that he approved of the unit. In reality, Parrington had accepted Genshagen at face value as a rest centre for POWs.

Members
Leading members of the Corps included Thomas Haller Cooper (although he was actually an Unterscharführer in the Waffen-SS proper ), Roy Courlander, Edwin Barnard Martin, Frank McLardy, Alfred Minchin and John Wilson – these men "later became known among the renegades as the 'Big Six', although this was a notional elite whose membership shifted periodically as members fell into, and out of, favour."

In 2002, it was claimed that Robert Chipchase, an Australian, was by then the last surviving member of the British Free Corps. He commented that he had changed his mind about joining and refused to sign the enlistment papers, spending the rest of the war in a punishment camp.

Preparation for active service
In March 1945, a BFC detachment was deployed with the 11th SS Volunteer Panzergrenadier Division Nordland under Brigadeführer Joachim Ziegler, which was composed largely of Scandinavian volunteers and attached to the III (Germanic) SS Panzer Corps under Obergruppenführer Felix Steiner. They were first sent from Stettin to the division's headquarters at Angermünde. "From there they were sent to join the divisional armoured reconnaissance battalion (11. SS-Panzer-Aufklärunsabteilung) located in Grüssow [on the island of Usedom]. The battalion commander was Sturmbannführer Rudolf Saalbach ... [The BFC were allocated] to the 3rd Company, under the command of the Swedish Obersturmführer Hans-Gösta Pehrson." The BFC contingent was commanded by SS-Scharführer (squad leader) Douglas Mardon, who used the alias "Hodge". Richard W. Landwehr Jr. states "The Britons were sent to a company in the detachment that was situated in the small village of Schoenburg near the west bank of the Oder River".

On 16 April 1945, the Corps was moved to Templin, where they were to join the transport company of Steiner's HQ staff (Kraftfahrstaffel StabSteiner). When the Nordland Division left for Berlin, 'the transport company followed Steiner's Headquarters to Neustrelitz and the BFC went with it.' On 29 April, Steiner decided 'to break contact with the Russians and order his forces to head west into Anglo-American captivity.' Thomas Haller Cooper and Fred Croft, the last two members of the Corps, surrendered on 2 May to the 121st Infantry Regiment (United States) in Schwerin, and were placed in the loose custody of the GHQ Liaison Regiment (known as Phantom).

Courts-martial
Newspapers of the period give details of the court-martial of several Commonwealth soldiers involved in the Corps. One Canadian captive, Private Edwin Barnard Martin, said he joined the Corps "to wreck it". He designed the flag and banner used by the Corps, and admitted to being one of the original six or seven members of the Corps during his trial. He was given a travel warrant and a railway pass which allowed him to move around Germany without a guard. He was found guilty of two charges of aiding the enemy while a prisoner of war.

New Zealand soldier Roy Courlander claimed at his court-martial that he joined the Corps for similar reasons, to gather intelligence on the Germans, to foster a revolution behind the German lines, or to sabotage the unit if the revolution failed.

John Amery was sentenced to death in November 1945 for high treason, and hanged on 19 December 1945.

In popular culture

 * The film Joy Division (2006) portrays a member of the BFC, Sergeant Harry Stone, among the German troops and refugees fleeing the Red Army advance into Germany. In the film it is the aggressive Stone who appears to be the only convinced Nazi remaining among the Hitler Youth with whom he is grouped. He is seen attempting to recruit British POWs before the column is attacked by Soviet aircraft.
 * Jack Higgins' novel The Eagle Has Landed portrays a BFC officer named Harvey Preston, who is patterned on Douglas Berneville-Claye. He is attached to the Fallschirmjäger unit which attempts to kidnap Winston Churchill. A convinced Nazi and petty criminal, Preston is viewed with disgust by all members of the German unit.
 * On TV, the British Free Corps was a subject for "The Hide", the final episode of series 6 of the British TV series Foyle's War, in which a British POW who had joined the BFC was tried for treason in Great Britain once he returned home, after surviving the firebombing of Dresden.

title: British Free Corps