text:
User talk:Jorge Stolfi/Archive 1

Hi there
Hi there. Welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for your contributions on digital imaging. If you want, drop us a note at New user log to introduce yourself.

If you need editing help, visit How does one edit a page. For format questions, visit our manual of style. You can use the Show preview button before you save, to make sure your edits do what you intended.

You can sign your name on talk pages by using " " for your username and " ~ " for your username and a timestamp.

Some time when you're bored, you can read through our policies and guidelines. If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.

If you have any other questions about the project then check out Help or add a question to the Village pump. You can also drop me a question on my talk page.

Happy editing, Isomorphic 04:18, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Guibas and Stolfi
Hi, are you the Stolfi who wrote articles with Guibas? Mikkalai 19:59, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Alberto Santos-Dumont
Hi Jorge. Regarding the Alberto Santos-Dumont claim -- "the first craft in the world to take off from the ground with its own landing gear and on its own power"-- Richard Pearse had already done that a couple of years earlier. Moriori 23:13, Apr 2, 2004 (UTC)

Greetings. Again, my thanks for your fine job editing the Santos-Dumont article.(I sent an email earlier.) I hope that we can at last move past the "who flew first" issue. It overshadows so much of what SD accomplished. It would be truly ironic if it overshadowed his entry in wikipedia as well. Best regards, Blimpguy 23:59, 2 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Agouti, et al
Please don't remove links to nonexistant articles. It would be a royal pain to have to find all the places that should link to an article without those dead links. - UtherSRG 13:13, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Check out Agouti, Common Agouti and Agouti (genus), etc. - UtherSRG 14:39, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * And you're right... they are a mess. *grins* - UtherSRG 14:53, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Snake oil
JS, I've reverted your change as there was no duplicate link, and have restored the other wording change you made. Please check to see if I missed anything.

I've noticed your interest and position, and hope that you can find your way clear to contributing (if you're interested) to the assorted crypto articles. For instance, the Colossus article may be of interest, as also might be Shannon on his proof of the unbreakability of the one-time pad algorithm. There are two pointer pages to crypto, List of cryto topics and Topics in crypto, which may help with the navigation. Alternatively, what links here at cryptography is likely to be helpful as well. Note that cryptography itself is in the midst of some large changes; see the page history and the Talk page.

In any case, nice to interact with you. ww 17:11, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * See also my reply at Talk:Snake oil. ww

Mitra/Mithra/Mithras/Mithraeum
I probably shouldn't have been sticking my knife into the bull today too. Its good to separate Mithra from Mithras: the division is between Zoroastrian Mithra and Hellenistic-Roman Mithras. I've described the Hellenistic icons that the Romans continued to use, so "Mithras" is improved. Wetman 22:20, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

--- Well and succinctly improved opening at Hittite by the way. Wetman 03:19, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

---
 * Regarding your question on whether Phanes is linked with the Persian Mitras or the Roman Mithras the current scholarly opinion seems to be that mitras wasn't the basis for Mithras, although given the Roman tactic of Syncretism it's possibly that they borrowed elements of him for their miThras - the Roman version is the one that makes him linked with the 'world egg', and certainly the persian version isn't linked with the sun (because of the Persian Ahura Mazda).  Mithras is depicted emergng from the world egg on the University of Newcastle website link title [i've duplicated this info for causal users at the page "Phanes"]. Pydos 10:08, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Hurrians
Just wanted to say hi to another Hurrian enthusiast it seems. There is a little slander about be on the wiki pages stemming from someone whose vendetta against me is evident but I really am not that bad just tend to edit first and add references later. Happy Editing!!Zestauferov 14:47, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC) By the way given the suspect nature of ancient near eastern chronologies, you might consider avoiding the replacement of solid anchors like the names of contemporaries etc. with one of the several possible dates which have been suggested for such peoples. Generally speaking there are High Middle and Low chronological dates for near-eastyern chronologies, the middle is chosen not for accuracy but because it is simply in the middle. All the best Zestauferov 15:36, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC) Date uncertainty has not changed in the past 50 years no matter what any of us would like to believe. To give a fixed date to the layman is nothing less than deliberately misguiding (regardless of the good intention) the layman. Any dates put into an article should either be ranged to show the uncertainty(high date to low date), or at least accompanierd with a solid anchor wherever possible. except for that your contributions so far are an excellent addition to wiki, but be careful of creating too many short entries, there are stub advocates like myself and there are those people who are on a seek & delete campaign with regards to the more stublike articles. You will always have my support in these circumstances. All the best Zestauferov 02:24, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC) Centuries Zestauferov 02:50, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC) Excellent work on the Habiru page by the way. Zestauferov 02:51, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hittites
Appologies for removing that comment. I moved it around a bit and then thought that it was just repetative and so removed it all together. I am very happy you set up the biblical Hittites page, and I am all in favour of distinguishing between biblical peoples and historical peoples. Sure the bible has some useful info about past-times, but I prefer to get the archaeology straight first before applying the bible. Don't be too upset :-) Zestauferov 19:00, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Transcaucasian Iberians
Hi Jeorge, I must say you are doing an excellent job trying to clear up the mess which has crept over topics related to this area. However unless something cvan be done about nationalism I am afraid that it might occupy much of your time in edit wars, which is why I had to give up trying to write on such topics. You have my support anyway. Keep up the good work. Zestauferov 05:42, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You must be getting quite irate with Lev now, I tried to reason with him many a time, my last post to him was quite cordial i think, but I gave up in the end. You are a stronger man than I. All the best Zestauferov 03:21, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Levzur is incorrigible, I'm afraid. I plan to ban his proxies as he uses them to force him to either edit under his username or not at all. -- ChrisO 17:28, 7 May 2004 (UTC)

Levzur
Hi Jorge,

I've requested arbitration regarding Levzur's conduct on Zviad Gamsakhurdia and now Nino Burjanadze but hadn't realised that he's also caused problems elsewhere. I'm becoming increasingly convinced that he's an inveterate edit warrior and nationalist crank. I've put a page of evidence up at User:Levzur/Evidence - if you wish to add any comments about your own experiences you're very welcome to do so. -- ChrisO 16:59, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Wikicode
Hi! I noticed you've contributed to computer science articles. I've started a project on WikiProject Computing to propose a standard pseudocode for use throughout the Wikipedia that I call wikicode. Please join the WikiProject (no commitment required) and please participate in the discussion about wikicode. Thanks!

Derrick Coetzee 16:50, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Revert wars
Quit reverting my stuff just because you don't understand it. For an example of the use of environment in a programming language, see Closure (computer science). This is a perfect example of a use where "non-local" variables are part of a function's environment. This page is linked from scope. --ssd 07:40, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
 * For the benefit of other readers, I did NOT engage in a "revert war". I reverted the environment article ONCE because Ssd had added two technical phrases which, in may view, made the definitions more confusing. Sdd re-reverted the article but fixed one of the problem items. I deleted the second problem phrase and explained why. Apparently Ssd did not undertand my objection and reverted again. Jorge Stolfi 14:01, 23 May 2004 (UTC)
 * For the record, you reverted two different changes on the same article. The first time, all I did was rearrange the sentence to put the subject first and removed an incorrect word you didn't understand.  The second time, you reverted something just because you didn't understand it, and didn't bother to follow the link I was trying to add. --ssd 20:48, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

 * To put this a little more nicely and a little less heatedly, your question in talk:environment was a very good one, and one that should be covered in any comprehensive programming languages course. Your example (or perhaps a more complicated one) and my explanation should already be in one of the scope articles or in something talking about local vs. heirarchal scope or something like that.  (If it is not, we should look for a good place to put it.)  If you want to argue that local variables are part of the environment, while I think that is a bit silly, I won't argue with it, as it is more redundant than wrong.  (That's more like the difference between a subset and a proper subset.)

 * More to the point, the environment of a programming unit (function, statement, whatever) is what is in scope. scope disambiguates environment in this sense.

 * I don't mind you asking questions about stuff I add you don't understand--that points to need for clarification. But please don't delete it outright without trying to fix it or understand it. --ssd 21:22, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

 * (yet another point here...) I have noticed a dangerous trend in wikipedia.  When there is wrong material in an article, someone comes by and thinks to themself "this is wrong" and rather than fix it, they add to the statement to try to make it right.  I am as guilty as anyone on this.  When you criticized my attempt at fixing environment variables, it forced me to rethink the whole dfn from scratch and delete the wrongness and replace it with something better rather than just add to the wrongness. --ssd 21:28, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

Empire of Brazil
Good job sectioning the Empire of Brazil article! 172 10:48, 23 May 2004 (UTC)

Portuguese language
Jorge, pus o artigo Portuguese language como featured article candidate depois que você alterou o inglês do artigo e o tornou mais suave, linear e cheio de qualidade. Ficou tão bom que tive que o por como "candidato" :). Gostei também do seu trabalho em Portuguese alphabet e o linkei ao da língua Portuguesa, por estar tão bom e isento, nunca pensei que tivesse algo assim na wikipedia. Se bem que se tenha enganado da forma como nós pronunciámos "óptimo", "acção", etc. Só em raros casos é que há diferenças, também não pronunciámos a maioria desses sons. Devido à forma isenta com que trata as coisas, o que acho um pouco raro num brasileiro (desculpe), gostava que desse uma olhada em Portuguese Creole e o altere como achar por bem. Dê uma opinião sobre a existência ou não de crioulos portugueses no Brasil, e o que era afinal a Língua Geral. Esperando o seu contributo. Um abraço do outro lado do Atlântico --Pedro 00:22, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

Adminship
I would like to nominate you for adminship. Please let me know on my talk page if you would accept the nomination. --"D ICK " C HENEY 05:13, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

You have been nominated for adminship and your acceptance (or refusal) of that nomination is needed. Cheers, —No-One Jones 08:25, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Skull and crossbones
Thank you for placing a fiercer looking crossbones on the skull and crossbones page. That crossbones looks more like a poison skull and crossbones than the Jolly Roger. The Jolly Roger looks more like a pirate skull and crossbones. User:216.68.189.162

Nomination to Featured Article
Just an encouraging word: enjoyed your contributions to the Voynich Manuscript page. I just recently nominated the revised version to Featured article candidates. -- Smerdis of Tlön 16:49, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Scientific American article
It was with great pleasure that i noticed a WP name in the copy of the Scientific American that came today. --Jerzy(t) 21:21, 2004 Jun 12 (UTC)

What, no complimentary copies for cited scholars?

Glad you could find it so soon; i subscribe, and my impression was that retailers lag most of a month behind subscribers!

Another interesting aspect of this is how long it took me to realize that i probably read that article close to first because i was in the middle of Quicksilver when the issue arrived. What a treat to have them bouncing off each other in my brain. --Jerzy(t) 05:08, 2004 Jul 2 (UTC)

Polyglot oral tongue
Hi. I noticed that you truncated the introductory paragraph of this subsection, removing the title of Levitov's book. This transformed the next two paragraphs about the Endura rite and the Cathari into non-sequiturs. Please read more carefully before you edit. — Clarknova 19:59, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Article on luigi
not that I really care about luigi either, but all 30 of the articles linking to luigi have to do with the Mario Brothers game, so it makes more sense to have the article on his character at "Luigi" than at "Luigi Mario". The information on the name Luigi is not linked to a single time, so why does it get priority?

Staple gun
Well, I would say that your valiant effort has worked. I will go vote now to keep that. Nice work. Cheers. Burgundavia 08:56, Jun 19, 2004 (UTC)

Mithras
Hi! Just to let you know, the little bits of research I was doing while editing the article actually led me to believe that the origin of both name and god are quite a quagmire, and that there is in fact no consensus among scholars. If you have sources that state otherwise, of course... :) Thanks! --Puffy jacket 02:02, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The Wall
Hello, Jorge. I saw the part that mentions something about Serra do Mar being known as "The Wall" on the city of São Paulo article. At the time it just sounded strange to me, but when you removed it, I remembered something. I live in São Paulo (Brazilian, yes), and something just hit me. "A Muralha". Sounds familiar? =P

I think that's what the guy meant with that comment. Not sure if it should stay there or not. I'm not going to edit that. I'll leave the decision to you.

Be well. – Mackeriv 16:54, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Habiru
Thanks so much for all your work on Habiru -- I was just looking over the history page trying to figure out who'd done all that wonderful work, and your name seems to be the most prominant. Great job! Ben 18:19, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

logistic function
Hello. I agree with you that logistic function is a better title than logistic curve. But click on what links here on that page, and you will find that a bunch of links need fixing as a result of your move. I've fixed some double redirects (double redirects don't work), but there is more to do. Can you help with this? Michael Hardy 15:13, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Phoenicia
Hi Jorge, long time! Wetman & I have been gathering info on the Phoenician Talk page to try and sort out the political mess which has built up there. I remembered the excellent job you did with Hittites, etc., and I was wondering if you might be able to Join in on the Phoenician page too? The other reason I am asking is because I thought perhaps you might be able to look at the article more neutrally, since I am aware that I too have a political perspective in that I believe there is a chance that some of them were the Israelite tribe of Dan. Please drop in on the talk page if you have some time to help out. All the best. Zestauferov 08:53, 14 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Edit attribution
Hi Jorge. Edits from your IP have now been reattributed to your username. Regards  — Kate Turner | Talk 04:32, 2004 Sep 5 (UTC)

Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
 * Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
 * Multi-Licensing Guide
 * Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the " " template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

 * Option 1
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR
 * Option 2
 * I agree to multi-license all my contributions to any U.S. state, county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace " " with "  ". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. – Ram-Man (comment) (talk)  13:42, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)

Hurrian article and Avestan language/script
I notice you edited the Hurrian article quite a bit - it was recently changed to add Avestan as a script - the anon who did it mostly left vandalism but I don't know if this is vandalism or a legitimate inclusion - do you know? User talk:Andris Trödel| talk 16:49, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I agree with what you said about List of Common Symbols. --Jontsang 12:19, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

Image:Ph-animals-jaburu-1.jpg
Hi, Can you upload the image Image:Ph-animals-jaburu-1.jpg to ? It would be useful because it can be used in other wiki-projects as well. Thanks --Uwe Gille 17:15, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Lots of edits, not an admin
Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. It looks like you've left, but if you come back and are at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list, although there is certainly no guarantee anyone will ever look at it. I've marked you on this list as "inactve". Feel free to update this as well. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) July 3, 2005 18:02 (UTC)

Paper mulberry
Please look there Talk:Mulberry. :] Yug 5 July 2005 16:51 (UTC)

Al- Razi
Hello Jorge, Since you were one of the first to have edited al-Razi, you probably will be happy to know that I have taken it upon me to do a major copy-editing on the page Al-Razi. Indeed it needed it. So far I have almost finished 8 pages out of the 14. It will take at least another month to finalize it. Some of the literature is difficult to trace and/or translate. Probably have to go to the 'Koninklijke Bibliotheek' here in the Netherlands, and I might have to leave that till much later. I have just joined as an user/participant of this fabulous site. Warm greetings and so long. CHITRANI 16:36, 9 September 2005 (UTC)09 Sep.2005 18.30 (GMT +1)

G - tilde
You're welcome!.

But the g with tilde appears perfectly on my Mozilla Firefox. MS-IE is troublesome with other kinds of script, with Devanagari it's awful......

Joao de Deus
I noticed that you changed the name from John of God to Joao de Deus. There is a Portuguese writer called João de Deus and there is a Spanish saint called John of God. I checked out these names on Wikipedia before I decided on John of God. I debated that name for ages and after seeing that in English he is always known as John of God, I chose that name. You attached a message for cleanup. What would you suggest?Vogensen 19:07, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Dr. Fritz
I am not happy with the "hypothetical German surgeon". Couldn't we just call him a spirit or what followers consider to be a spirit. I eliminated the dates referring to birth or death since there is no proof that he actually lived.Vogensen 22:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Abusive use of internal links
I noticed that in your cleanup of the Zé Arigó article you made links to such words as doctor, nurse, apron, operating room, and every date that appears. Is this Wikipedia policy? It seems abusive to me and non-productive. If we make links to every common word that has an article then we will end up having our articles filled with links. An article theoretically could have only links. Surely we must have links only to articles of interest for the topic, or am I wrong? Vogensen 14:41, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't understand how internal links can be "abusive". They are simply tools for visitors and need not be applied. True, the typography can look cluttered, but a user has the option of controlling how Wikipedia pages are rendered if they really care all that much. Maybe it's a matter of personal taste, but it should be a matter of Wikipedia policy... I'm for maximal wikification. Myron 18:18, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Jabiru bird and Khaba
Thanks for pointing out my mistake that the jabiru bird entry I had been linking to was in fact pointing to a South American bird. I did some more digging and it turns out that your guess that it was a Saddle-billed stork that was being referenced was correct (I removed the speculation in the Khaba article on it being a Sacred Ibis). But note that there must be an Egyptian equivalent for "Jabiru" -- perhaps the South American bird was named after the African one?

A couple of Egyptological articles that reference a "jabiru" bird, specifically to the hieroglyphic sign being used:
 * extract from AEgyptian-L listserv
 * Royal Festivals in the Late Predynastic Period and the First Dynasty, which also mentions the common name and its Binomial name: "Ephippiorhynchus senegalensis"

Will make a small addition to the Saddle-billed Stork page with regard to this. You may wish to do the same for the Jabiru bird article. Cheers! Captmondo 04:27, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thousands separator
Hi Jorge,

I used a nonbreaking space to separate thousands in the population figures because that is the SI standard. The comma is used for a decimal point in many countries, including some English speaking countries such as South Africa. Could you replace the spaces, unless you find a Wikipedia policy to the contrary?

Thanks, kwami 08:54, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Need your help with Article on Grande River
I wrote a brief article on the Grande River (Rio Grande in Portuguese) and someone re-directed it to Rio Grande (Paraná). This is confusing since the name of the river in English is Grande not Rio Grande. You can look at the Britannica or at Encarta and both have Grande River. It is Rio Grande if we are doing the Portuguese section. And the river is certainly not in the state of Paraná as the name in parentheses implies. Who do we talk to to explain the problem? Vogensen 13:50, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

AfD Belizean Kriole language
You know you could put the entire article of Belizean Creole into Belizean Kriol language and redirect from there, right? Sorry if you already knew this. - Rudykog 02:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
 * You used the move button or copy/pasted it? Was the article deleted before you moved? What you said about the copy/paste thing was right and I was wrong, I didn't notice that, I had assumed it was simply a type of merge since there was no article and it was just a blank page and there would be no harm done. - Rudykog 05:01, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

How come?
How come you've got such a wide range of interesting, quality articles? Are you really one single person, or actually a Brazilian collective of off-beat swots? Suspicious.--shtove 00:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Piggies
I rv'd Pig (disambiguation). I believe this is the proper format, for a dis page. Thanks SirIsaacBrock 16:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Ryunosuke Akutagawa
Hi. Thanks for the tip (re/ moving rather than copying). Initially, I tried to "Move this page" but since there was already a page at the new name (a redirect), I couldn't. So I did everything a non-admin could do. ;-) Sorry about that edit history. --Ds13 02:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Technical business
Hi Jorge. I read some of your comments at talk:function (mathematics). I did not research well-enough the issue to give a qualified opinion about the discussion there, but I have a general remark however.

The rule of thumb is that one should not try to make things too complicated, at least in the openning paragraphs. More precisely, the introduction must be as acesssible as possible (without being silly, of course). More complicated content can go down the text. Some more information is avaiable at Make technical articles accessible.

Again, this is a rule of thumb. I don't quite know what position to take on function (mathematics), but I thought I would give you my general perspective on things. You can reply here if you have any comments. Cheers, Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:54, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Class binary relations
The formal distinction between sets and classes arises in your examples: the membership and subset relations are proper classes, unless they are restricted to specific sets and their power sets. So the remark is needed from the outset. Randall Holmes 17:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I removed the class reference I added to function (mathematics) (where I agree that it is a technicality). The set/class distinction is important in the relation context though (precisely because of equality, membership and subset taken as general relations). I'll try writing a subsection. Randall Holmes 18:11, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

See what you think of my sets/classes section. Randall Holmes 18:25, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Sets and classes
I think that our respective edits (which we entered within seconds of each other, I think) are complementary. Your brief warning about the membership/subset example above is expanded by my fuller account below. Randall Holmes 19:52, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

 * I didn't realize that you had edited the sets and classes section itself. Some of your modifications have been further modified:  for example, it isn't necessarily true that assuming the the equality relation is a set leads to inconsistency (the equality and inclusion relations and the universal set (though not the membership relation) are all sets in the set theory NFU, but I don't want to say that here...)  But I think that we are converging on something sensible.  Randall Holmes 20:04, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Function
I hope you enjoyed your vacation.

I think the reason that your editing of the function article drew more fire than your many other edits is that it is a gateway article. That is, it is an article likely to be read by many people who don't know math, and it should be an article they can read. You are apparently repelled by writing aimed at the level necessary to convey the idea of a function to a non-mathematician, but that is the level at which articles such as this one must be aimed. I can write "real" mathematics, too, where that is appropriate.

I hope the response to my request for outside opinions has convinced you that the wiki style requires avoiding technicalities in the introductory paragraphs. When you return, the article will be much changed, no doubt. Please, if you want to change it, do so a little at a time, and wait for discussion.

Rick Norwood 20:33, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Jorge, let me first take this opportunity to thank you for your thesis work on Oriented Projective Geometry, which I continue to enjoy citing. Though I post to Wikipedia anonymously, we know a number people in common, including Leo. Like you, I am trained to respect rigor in mathematics, including careful definitions.

That said, my time around the mathematics pages here at Wikipedia has uncovered a regular pattern of tension in how to begin an article. Often the tension is misunderstood and unstated, and revert wars ensue. One side wants to begin with a precise definition; the other side wants to begin with more casual introductory material. Typically the body of the article sees little of the controversy, and often languishes unrefined as the intro is rewritten again and again.

It's a pity to waste creative energy fighting over an issue that has already been decided. The Manual of Style (mathematics) comes down firmly on the side of a casual start, not a formal one.

However, this is not a license for sloppy writing and bad definitions. A reader should clearly perceive the difference between the informal and formal statements, and the formal statements should be precise and correct, even if not accessible to a general audience. Personally, I find the informal material challenging to write well, but gratifying when it succeeds. I hope you'll give it a try. --KSmrqT 01:56, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Moving Kaffir
I wish you had discussed this before going ahead and unilaterally moving it. It is a misnomer to call it the "South Africa Kaffir people". dewet|™ 13:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

 * OK, I see what you've been doing, and its a good move towards straightening out the whole mess. What I'd suggest is merging everything from South Africa Kaffir people into the "South Africa" section of Kaffir (ethnic slur).  I think that the complete use in the South African context can be contained in the "ethnic slur" category.  dewet|™ 09:21, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Frustration
Hours of dedicated editing thrown away by brash and unsophisticated editors? It is a tragedy, and after suffering too much indignity of that sort myself I decided to mostly confine my edits to talk pages. Talk contributions persist where others can read them, and on occasion I have eventually won enough support to move a version to the article page, replacing poor writing. Wikipedia's quality control mechanisms are still inadequate, and I'm unwilling to waste my time producing material that will never be seen. My strategem is not ideal, but you might want to see if it works for you. --KSmrqT 00:57, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Video clip?
The anon user left similar messages on about 15 pages. They seem to be related to pages people have edited, have the same message template, the web site does not seem to exist, the page would be an active server page. Not sure if it was spam or something more sinister, but "assumed good faith" anf pointed out to the anon that copyright would make it unlikely we could use the "clip". Rich  Farmbrough. 12:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

Pyrometric Cone
As a working potter, I would ask you to trust me on this one. Pyrometric cones are based both on reaching temperature and the time/duration of temperature. If you ramp the temp up rapidly to, for example 2350 degrees F, and drop the temp immediately, the cone will not have time to change and deform. They do not "melt" so much as change chemically to a more fluid glaze/glassine substance. There is a web site on the Pyrometric cone article which might have information on this process. I'm reverting back to my version. Let me know if you have further objections. WBardwin 06:14, 29 January 2006 (UTC)

Layout standards
I really don't recommend that you mess around with layout standards. There's very little to gain from being inconsistent to other articles and you're bound to get reverted sooner or later again. I advise you to just trust the standard and concentrate on prose instead.

Peter Isotalo 16:07, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, which articles are you referring to? Jorge Stolfi 21:51, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

 * I was refering to Portuguese language and the native name. The smaller the details, the more of a source of conflict they tend to be.
 * Peter Isotalo 11:00, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

See the talk page. Jorge Stolfi 19:58, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Kafir Discussion
In case you haven't noticed, I have added several comments to Talk:Kafir (Islam). joturner 05:37, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Native American name controversy
Please comment on Talk:Native American name controversy regarding your recent changes to that article. I've posted my concerns there, where other current maintainers of that page (which I created, but do not actively maintain these days) can discuss the changes with you. -Harmil 12:10, 31 January 2006 (UTC)

Hispania
Hi There! don't u think the new images are too bright? and last but not least, thanks for ur help! Jfreyre
 * lol you are right the old version was too dark (my bad), but the new ones are too bright, maybe we'll have to fix them and decrease the bright/constrast atributes Jfreyre

 * Well hell no.. I mainly use win XP as my OS and maybe you are right about the different aproach of standart gamma across plattaforms, but in matter of facts I think my monitor its too bright.

 * The readability of those images is another point and as You said the constrast ratio between the text and the background wasn't the best one, and It was a poor choise of my own, mainly 'cause i made those image with paint and powerpoint(!!) (I didn't have another image editor at that time) and I had to draw the boundaries by hand... as you can see I was working with my nails LOL... so what do you think? we can set the gamma value at a midle point between those image and set a better background for the text or you can try to upload those image with the .png format and then we'll have to delete the first images

 * and finally May you watch my others images and give me a feedback? I would appreciated Jfreyre

Eis, cadê, etc.
It's funny that you mentioned these "few grammatically peculiar words such as eis ("here is"), cadê ("where is"), tomara ("let's hope"), oxalá ("let's hope that")". There is a recent paper on them: "Bute falar de predicadores rígidos!", in "Actas do XX Encontro Nacional da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística" (2004). Velho 19:48, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Infinitive
Let's have this discussion at the proper talk page. Velho 16:50, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

Almost time for Hermetic Alchemy
I've nearly finished the work I need to do on the Hermeticism, filling things in for the primary draft. So, I'll be able to start the Hermetic Alchemy article very soon.

KV 19:17, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Also, I see us coming into conflict again, in the future, psychic surgery, which you created, is a term also used in Reiki for what some have started calling "aura cleansing" for PR. It's not too different, other than it's used to remove mental things, not physical things such as bones....... though these mental things are objectified by the patient for removal.

KV 19:31, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

You replied: ''As fas as I can tell, the "psychic surgeries" of Reiki and of the Filipino/Brazilian surgeons have nothing in common except the name and the use of hands. If that is the case, it doesn't make sense to discuss both in the same article. The only issue is how the articles should be named.''

 * Well, we probably have to make a disambiguation page still :) But Reiki won't be coming until I get all the Hermeticism stuff fixed up.  I've learned not to spread myself too thin.

 * KV 06:08, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Gaita Galega
Olá Jorge; quem alterou aquelas ligações para outros idiomas na página galician gaita fui eu, por um motivo simples: todas aquelas ligações referem-se a artigos genéricos sobre gaita-de-fole, e em inglês já há um artigo assim: bagpipe. Assim, deixei apenas as ligações correspondentes diretamente à gaita galega, que por enquanto só há em português e galego, para além do inglês. Fiz isso na intenção de melhorar o artigo, deixando-o mais preciso. Aguardo resposta. Tonyjeff 19:56, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Jorge, eu percebo seu ponto. Mas da mesma forma que um artigo não precisa ser necessariamente 1:1, o oposto também não. Geralmente, fazem-se ligações do tipo como a que está lá quando não há artigos diretamente relacionados. No caso, há. A função de ligar artigos genéricos sobre gaita-de-fole é mais relevante a Bagpipe. Imagino que você se considere o dono desse artigo, mas perceba que a Wiki é um trabalho de contribuição plural. A mesma situação com a página galega do artigo, a qual também apresentava dezenas de ligações para artigos genéricos, e atualizaram apenas para os artigos correspondentes. E o fato de eu não ter na minha página pessoal um quadradinho aferindo-me colaborador da língua inglesa não me exime de colaborar com a Wiki inglesa. Essa é uma questão de lógica.

Por outro lado, tirar de bagpipes a entrada sobre gaita galega é uma bobagem, pois listam-se ali vários modelos de forma genérica, apresentando-se ligações para artigos específicos de cada modelo, a serem espandidos. Não há por que acreditar que o artigo sobre gaita galega ficaria pior sem aquela lista de ligações. O que deve ser feito, isso sim, é melhor a qualidade do texto e abordar outros aspectos. Tonyjeff 23:18, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Sahaptian
The group already has its own language page (Sahaptian languages). The article I wrote is about the group of tribes that speak the language. I'm reverting your change. --Primetime 02:14, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I think I will read it. Where is that policy? The reason I'm asking is because other, more respected encyclopedias list the Sarahaptin under "Sahaptin" (including Encyclopaedia Britannica and Encyclopedia Americana). Also please provide evidence to support your claim of there being both a Sarahaptian language group and a single Sarahaptan language. Also, in case you can't tell, I'm becoming irritated by your stalking of my edits. --Primetime 02:28, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Nothing is wrong with the page. It says, "Sahaptian is a group of languages". You said, "Sahaptin language is just ONE of the languages in the Sahaptian family". However, there is no such thing as a Sahaptian language family. Sahaptian is a language group. Also, if you don't find that policy, I'll move the entry because "Sahaptian peoples" is not an intuitive search term. --Primetime 02:48, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm willing to leave the "Sahaptin people" article where it is now if you leave me alone from now on. As for the unicode templates, I have decided to restore them because anything that makes Wikipedia easier to read (rather than edit) makes it better. --Primetime 03:47, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia in Tetum

 * Help building a Wikipedia in Tetum, the national language of East Timor. Give your contribution to the improvement of its test page -- Regards, 195.23.53.121 11:37, 15 February 2006 (UTC) Manuel de Sousa

Please check your WP:NA entry
Greetings, editor! Your name appears on List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct: Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BD2412 T 03:54, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
 * 2) If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
 * 3) Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Spoiler warning
You recently removed the spoiler warning from Rashomon. It is generally Wikipedia convention to insert them in articles about films, books, or games where spoilers exist. Yes, I sympathize with you view ("What does one expect in a section called plot?") but please don't remove them as they have become a de facto Wikipedia convention. savidan(talk) (e@) 18:03, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

David Morgan-Mar
The languages created by David Morgan-Mar are not very notable and unless they are included in his biography they are good candidates for deletion. Cheers, —Ruud 18:05, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

P.S. You may also be interested in WikiProject Computer science. —Ruud 18:05, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

 * I have listed these articles on Afd (see Articles for deletion/David Morgan-Mar). Your input is kindly requested. Cheers, —Ruud 22:10, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Cocoliche
Re: your removals. You were correct IMHO, yet: isn't it important to point out that the evolution and the very name of cocoliche were tied to the interplay between immigrants and the criollo/gaucho stock? Actually, the lifeline of cocoliche was comic theater (all the way till Dario Vittori). elpincha 11:14, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

Root page
Please see root page for explanation of backlink--Light current 07:17, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

Kriol
Hi. I added those articles to the "North American English" category because I saw that Tobagonian Creole English, Bajan, and others were already there. They should either all be in or all be out and - as you seem to be saying - perhaps the Creoles don't belong there. Bolivian Unicyclist 13:38, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

Latin America Demographics
Can you please cite that study you are using? It will help clear up a lot of ambiguity in the Demographics section. Thanks! --BWD(talk) 17:20, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Miscelânia línguística
Jorge, vc sugeriu que o artigo Asturian language seja fundido com Mirandese language. ?!?! A que respeito?

 * O asturiano e o mirandês podem ser vistos como uma língua tal como o português e o galego e tal como o espanhol e o ladino.
 * Na minha opinião deveriam chamar-se leonês e pronto e a UNESCO começar a pensar em proteger as línguas contra interesses e divisionismos políticos ou nacionalistas. Mas é a minha opinião, logo acho inaceitavel querer fundir o artigo asturiano com o mirandes. nem há discussão possível, mas queria saber os seus motivos que não os meteu, simplesmente meteu aquilo lá e pronto.

 * O Mirandes e o Asturiano até legalmente são coisas diferentes. Mesmo que seja discutivel que sejam a mesma língua. É um caso muito parecido com o galego e o português.

 * No artigo Portuguese language tb misturou alhos com bogalhos, a relação do Português com o Galego não é a mesma que com o espanhol, e o Ladino é parte do castelhano. Nem percebo porque lhe quer dar tanto destaque, sendo uma língua menor e desconhecida e sem importancia para o artigo.
 * O Galego não está a meio entre o Português e o Espanhol, isso é o portunhol. O galego é muito mais proximo ao português. Não estou a afirmar que aquilo é ou não português, mas deve ser tratado de forma correcta, especial e neutra. No Galego não há "la, el, etc" é "a, o, etc".

Já vi que não gosta das árvores linguisticas, tal como no artigo dos crioulos de origem portuguesa.

 * Na Peninsula Iberica ha apenas duas grandes linguas: português e espanhol, o restante são linguas minoritarias, por muito respeito que mereça o Catalão e todas as outras.

esta é a estrutura: West Iberian (9)
 * Asturo-Leonese (2)
 * Asturian [ast] (Spain)
 * Miranda do Douro [mwl] (Portugal)
 * Castilian (4)
 * Extremaduran [ext] (Spain)
 * Ladino [lad] (Israel)
 * Spanish [spa] (Spain)
 * Spanish, Loreto-Ucayali [spq] (Peru)
 * Portuguese-Galician (3)
 * Fala [fax] (Spain)
 * Galician [glg] (Spain)
 * Portuguese [por] (Portugal)

e é esta estrutura que deve seguir essa parte do artigo da wikipédia. -Pedro 15:16, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
 * pois, é como lhe disse e já vi casos aqui na wipédia parecidos. As línguas são instrumentos políticos. Não creio que seja esse o caso do Mirandês e do Asturiano. O problema destas línguas é terem sido interpretadas como dialectos durante muito tempo, mesmo que tenham sido entendidas como diferentes do português e espanhol, eram línguas sem prestígio. O português é diferente, é uma língua regulada, muito forte, com uma literatura muito rica, com muita história, tem um grande chicote que dá na boca das pessoas ao falar e nos dedos ao escrever chamada educação e escola. Tendo no máximo os tais sotaques ou dialectos, o que acontece a todas as línguas com mais de 1 milhão de falantes, mas todos achamos graça e não são um problema significativo de comunicação escrita ou falada.

 * Estas línguas não tinham exército, não tinham escolas, não se escreviam, e pouco ou nada têm de grandes obras literárias. Sem nenhum chicote, têm diferenças muito grandes na escrita e já significativas na fala que dificulta a compreensão escrita e falada e a uniformização. Nâo há o entendimento no senso comum de que falam a mesma língua. Não sou nenhum entendido da matéria, mas quem estuda o mirandês garante que é diferente com base em fracos argumentos, mas não há nenhuma língua culta a nível histórico que diga que eles não têm razão. É um ponto de partida diferente do português, que já veio como uma entidade única que se foi espalhando por diferentes geeografias e ganhando caracter local (os sotaques). Neste caso são línguas faladas em geografias diferentes sem um ponto de partida comum. Já estou a entrar em filosofia. Bom, não sei. Mas julgo que devam continuar separados, nem que se mude para Mirandese (linguistics) e Asturian (linguistics) por forma a não fazer julgamentos. -Pedro 18:12, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Mirandês Vs. Asturiano

 * Convém não confundir dialectos de línguas (comum sotaque) e dialectos (línguas não escritas e sem prestígio) - são coisas diferentes. Muitos destes últimos dialectos são hoje reconhecidos como línguas, e a palavra dialectos ficou um pouco suja, talvez. Acho que existem cerca de 6000 linguas no mundo, logo teremos que ter um artigo com essas 6000. O caso do Mirandês e do Asturiano é já serem línguas escritas e até ambas são projegidas, reconhecidas como línguas, e distintas, mesmo que seja debatível serem ou não línguas diferentes. A escrita do mirandês é muito diferente do asturiano, não só pelos nh/ñ lh/ll o/u, mas também por sons distintos, que até aceito podem ser vistos como apenas dialectais.

 * è muito mais debativel a existencia de páginas sobre dialectos nacionalizados e politizados como o caso do português do Brasil e do inglês dos EUA do que a existencia de um artigo de uma língua que até pode ser debativel ser língua autoctone em relação a dialectos vizinhos. Mas não são casos iguais a esses! De forma alguma, o Mirandês não é um dialecto do Asturiano, nem o outro do primeiro. É uma relação Português-Galego como disse antes - acasos da história. Os asturianos não levaram nenhuma língua para Miranda do Douro, nem o contrário.

 * Não me parece de forma alguma que o Galego e o Portugues sejam mais diferentes que o Asturiano e Mirandês, parece-me mais o contrário. Mas não posso falar cientificamente. Logo é melhor dizer que são mais ou menos a mesma coisa. O Ethnologue tb colocou o galego como um dialecto do português e deu uma entrada para o galego, com o mirandês fez o mesmo, tem entrada própria e é classificado como dialecto.

Português comparado

 * Pois, realmente o espanhol é a melhor comparação que se pode fazer. Esse tal de limão galego que se põe na caipirinha não é a lima? ou é um limão mesmo?
 * O Galego e o ladino. Vivências diferentes, eu quando escrevo em inglês é mesmo mais para ingleses do que para norte-americanos. O Galego, de facto, não é uma língua muito famosa, apesar de até em Portugal termos TV em galego na TV cabo e antes até por via hertziana. Mas o ladino muito menos. A unica vez que falei do ladino foi com uma amiga espanhola linguísta formada em línguas hispânicas. Ela é que me falou dessa língua, quando falavamos de crioulos. Foi a primeira vez que ouvi falar do ladino. Obvio que já tinha ouvido falar dos judeus portugueses e do que fizeram á volta do mundo e até li e vi coisas curiosas. Realmente foi muito triste. E, sei que devido à perseguição primeiro em Espanha, (que fez com que os espanhois viessem para cá) e depois em Portugal, fez com que os judeus hispano-portugueses formassem uma unica comunidade. E, sabendo que muitas destas pessoas ainda nutrem caarinho pela sua terra natal, mesmo depois de terem sido expulsos e viverem á gerações fora, é especial mesmo.
 * Mas o ladino como língua não é relevante, o Ethnologue colocou a língua até como um dialecto do Espanhol e devem ter bons motivos para isso. E, pelo que me disseram está mais relacionado com o espanhol que propriamente com o portugu~es mesmo que tenha palavrinhas que pareçam portugues. Deve ser mais uma fala na fronteira entre a língua e o dialecto.
 * A importancia é relativa. Nem sempre os numeros contam. Tanto que o Mirandês é oficial e o Asturiano não. E, o Mirandês em Portugal nem é relevante, o crioulo, o chinês, o russo e o ucraniano são certamente línguas mais faladas. Mas o Mirandês é mais importante que essas línguas. Apesar do chines e o russo se calhar até conseguirem ser mais importantes, mais ouvidas e mais usadas.

Árvores
Gostei da sua explicação. Não posso falar do Aragones porque nem conheço a língua (isso ainda existe mesmo?), Mas uma relação Espanhol-Ladino-Português-Galego-Mirandês-Asturiano, consegue-se facilmente dividir em três ramos tal e qual o ethnologue e nao me parece no minimo arbitário. Ve-se logo pelo "a/o" do Português e do galego, do "El/La" do Espanhol/Ladino e do "L/La" Mirandês/Asturiano.

 * Estive agora a ler um breve texto em Ladino http://www.aki-yerushalayim.co.il/anl/ e que surpresa, encaixa bem no espanhol! parece-me mesmo um dialecto espanhol e como é obvio não tive dificuldade nenhuma em entender.

Ora repare: En su primera sesion, en Novembre 1977, el Konsejo de la ANL eskojo al Sr Aaron Koen al posto de direktor, i a las sigientes personas komo miembros del' komite exekutivo.

isto é espanhol quase a 100% escrito numa espécie de "internetês". Estou cada vez mais em desacordo em o ladino ter uma sub-secção no artigo sobre o português.

O próprio artigo do ladino diz: Ladino is a Romance language, derived mainly from Old Castilian (Spanish) and Hebrew. e nem sei até que ponto esta frase é neutra.

Aliás aquilo escrito daquela maneira sem ser à espanhol, parece-me um crime e um absurdo.

Abraço. --Pedro 16:35, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Medial capitals
I wish Wikipedia had rep so I could neg you for deleting my byautiful article. Is it lost forever lost now or is there any way (Google cache?) for me to find what I wrote and save it on my computer? ZephyrAnycon 22:41, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Wiki:pt
Olá Jorge Stolfi,

Eu reparei que está a contribuir em artigos relacionados com a lusofonia e gostaria de convidá-lo para participar na Wikipédia em português, actualmente temos mais de 135 mil artigos. Sua ajuda será muito bem vinda.

Se por acaso tiver algum problema ou dúvida deixe uma mensagem na minha página de discussão.

Continue com esse bom trabalho,

Rei-artur 22:43, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Eyes requested
I have just completed a major editing pass through Plücker coordinates, almost completely rewriting the article. Since I cited your Stanford dissertation in the References, I thought perhaps I could tempt you to check to see if I've said anything painfully awkward or wrong, or omitted anything vital. It could probably use at least one picture, in the "Geometric intuition" section. Thanks in advance for any time you can spare. --KSmrqT 11:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Long talk page
Greetings! Your talk page is getting a bit long in the tooth - please consider archiving your talk page (or ask me and I'll archive it for you). Cheers! BD2412 T 00:00, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Name change vote
Hi, there is a vote on changing the name of the article "Vietnamese alphabet" to "quốc ngữ". As one of the principal contributors to the article, I thought you might want to have a say. DHN 21:55, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

History of the Konkan
I see that you have renamed (or rather redirected) the above page, which I had originated, to History of Konkan. This is wrong, as the country is always known as "the Konkan" in English.

Curiosity about how you did the references in Affine arithmetic
Hello Jorge. I noticed interesting stuff in the hidden text of Affine arithmetic and I imagine you must be the author. Such a comment is < !--fig-sto-96-imp-->. Did you make these from a bibliographic package of some kind? I'm thinking of how to improve referencing generally in WP, and I'm looking around for new ideas. EdJohnston 16:59, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Oriented projective geometry
I see you know something about Oriented projective geometry. I've just created a stub on the topic which you might like to have a look over, and kick into shape. --Salix alba (talk) 00:01, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Jorge has not edited since March '06. I just sent him an email to see if he is available to respond to our questions. EdJohnston 01:37, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Mardijker people
I am looking for citations to add to the article on the Mardijker people, but have been unable to find any mention of them in the Oxford English Dictionary, Encyclopedia Britannica, The Encyclopedia of the Peoples of the World, or the Worldmark Encyclopedia of Cultures and Daily Life. There is one partial citation in the text, (Taylor, 1983: 47), but no indication of what work it references. Do you remember what books this is from, or could you refer me to other sources on the Mardijker? Seashunt 22:50, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Image:Raffael_068_crop.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Raffael_068_crop.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. MECU ≈ talk 00:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jorge Stolfi/Archive 1


text:
Counter-Enlightenment

The Counter-Enlightenment refers to a loose collection of intellectual stances that arose during the European Enlightenment in opposition to its mainstream attitudes and ideals. The Counter-Enlightenment is generally seen to have continued from the 18th century into the early 19th century, especially with the rise of Romanticism. Its thinkers did not necessarily agree to a set of counter-doctrines but instead each challenged specific elements of Enlightenment thinking, such as the belief in progress, the rationality of all humans, liberal democracy, and the increasing secularisation of society.

Scholars differ on who is to be included among the major figures of the Counter-Enlightenment. In Italy, Giambattista Vico criticised the spread of reductionism and the Cartesian method which he saw as castrating the arts and humanities of the Renaissance. Decades later, Joseph de Maistre in Sardinia and Edmund Burke in Britain both criticised Enlightenment ideas for leading to the violence and tyranny of the French Revolution. The ideas of Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Johann Georg Hamann were also significant to the rise of the Counter-Enlightenment with French and German Romanticism respectively.

In the late 20th century, the concept of the Counter-Enlightenment was popularised by pro-Enlightenment historian Isaiah Berlin as a tradition of relativist, anti-rationalist, vitalist, and organic thinkers stemming largely from Hamann and subsequent German Romantics. While Berlin is largely credited with having refined and promoted the concept, the first known use of the term in English occurred in 1949 and there were several earlier uses of it across other European languages, including by German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche.

Early usage
Despite criticism of the Enlightenment being a widely discussed topic in twentieth- and twenty-first century thought, the term 'Counter-Enlightenment' was slow to enter general usage. It was first mentioned briefly in English in William Barrett's 1949 article "Art, Aristocracy and Reason" in Partisan Review. He used the term again in his 1958 book on existentialism, Irrational Man; however, his comment on Enlightenment criticism was very limited. In Germany, the expression "Gegen-Aufklärung" has a longer history. It was probably coined by Friedrich Nietzsche in "Nachgelassene Fragmente" in 1877.

Lewis White Beck used this term in his Early German Philosophy (1969), a book about Counter-Enlightenment in Germany. Beck claims that there is a counter-movement arising in Germany in reaction to Frederick II's secular authoritarian state. On the other hand, Johann Georg Hamann and his fellow philosophers believe that a more organic conception of social and political life, a more vitalistic view of nature, and an appreciation for beauty and the spiritual life of man have been neglected by the eighteenth century.

Isaiah Berlin
Isaiah Berlin established this term's place in the history of ideas. He used it to refer to a movement that arose primarily in late 18th- and early 19th-century Germany against the rationalism, universalism and empiricism that are commonly associated with the Enlightenment. Berlin's essay "The Counter-Enlightenment" was first published in 1973, and later reprinted in a collection of his works, Against the Current, in 1981. The term has been more widely used since.

Berlin argues that, while there were opponents of the Enlightenment outside of Germany (e.g. Joseph de Maistre) and before the 1770s (e.g. Giambattista Vico), Counter-Enlightenment thought did not take hold until the Germans 'rebelled against the dead hand of France in the realms of culture, art and philosophy, and avenged themselves by launching the great counter-attack against the Enlightenment.' This German reaction to the imperialistic universalism of the French Enlightenment and Revolution, which had been forced on them first by the francophile Frederick II of Prussia, then by the armies of Revolutionary France and finally by Napoleon, was crucial to the shift of consciousness that occurred in Europe at this time, leading eventually to Romanticism. The consequence of this revolt against the Enlightenment was pluralism. The opponents to the Enlightenment played a more crucial role than its proponents, some of whom were monists, whose political, intellectual and ideological offspring have been terreur and totalitarianism.

Darrin McMahon
In his book Enemies of the Enlightenment (2001), historian Darrin McMahon extends the Counter-Enlightenment back to pre-Revolutionary France and down to the level of 'Grub Street'. McMahon focuses on the early opponents to the Enlightenment in France, unearthing a long-forgotten 'Grub Street' literature in the late 18th and early 19th centuries aimed at the philosophes. He delves into the obscure world of the 'low Counter-Enlightenment' that attacked the encyclopédistes and fought to prevent the dissemination of Enlightenment ideas in the second half of the century. Many people from earlier times attacked the Enlightenment for undermining religion and the social and political order. It later became a major theme of conservative criticism of the Enlightenment. After the French Revolution, it appeared to vindicate the warnings of the anti-philosophes in the decades prior to 1789.

Graeme Garrard

Cardiff University professor Graeme Garrard claims that historian William R. Everdell was the first to situate Rousseau as the "founder of the Counter-Enlightenment" in his 1971 dissertation and in his 1987 book, Christian Apologetics in France, 1730–1790: The Roots of Romantic Religion. In his 1996 article, "the Origin of the Counter-Enlightenment: Rousseau and the New Religion of Sincerity", in the American Political Science Review (Vol. 90, No. 2), Arthur M. Melzer corroborates Everdell's view in placing the origin of the Counter-Enlightenment in the religious writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau, further showing Rousseau as the man who fired the first shot in the war between the Enlightenment and its opponents. Graeme Garrard follows Melzer in his "Rousseau's Counter-Enlightenment" (2003). This contradicts Berlin's depiction of Rousseau as a philosophe (albeit an erratic one) who shared the basic beliefs of his Enlightenment contemporaries. But similar to McMahon, Garrard traces the beginning of Counter-Enlightenment thought back to France and prior to the German Sturm und Drang movement of the 1770s. Garrard's book Counter-Enlightenments (2006) broadens the term even further, arguing against Berlin that there was no single 'movement' called 'The Counter-Enlightenment'. Rather, there have been many Counter-Enlightenments, from the middle of the 18th century to the 20th century among critical theorists, postmodernists and feminists. The Enlightenment has opponents on all points of its ideological compass, from the far left to the far right, and all points in between. Each of the Enlightenment's challengers depicted it as they saw it or wanted others to see it, resulting in a vast range of portraits, many of which are not only different but incompatible.

James Schmidt
The idea of Counter-Enlightenment has evolved in the following years. The historian James Schmidt questioned the idea of 'Enlightenment' and therefore of the existence of a movement opposing it. As the conception of 'Enlightenment' has become more complex and difficult to maintain, so has the idea of the 'Counter-Enlightenment'. Advances in Enlightenment scholarship in the last quarter-century have challenged the stereotypical view of the 18th century as an 'Age of Reason', leading Schmidt to speculate on whether the Enlightenment might not actually be a creation of its opponents, but the other way round. The fact that the term 'Enlightenment' was first used in 1894 in English to refer to a historical period supports the argument that it was a late construction projected back onto the 18th century.

The French Revolution

By the mid-1790s, the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution fueled a major reaction against the Enlightenment. Many leaders of the French Revolution and their supporters made Voltaire and Rousseau, as well as Marquis de Condorcet's ideas of reason, progress, anti-clericalism, and emancipation central themes to their movement. It led to an unavoidable backlash to the Enlightenment as there were people opposed to the revolution. Many counter-revolutionary writers, such as Edmund Burke, Joseph de Maistre and Augustin Barruel, asserted an intrinsic link between the Enlightenment and the Revolution. They blamed the Enlightenment for undermining traditional beliefs that sustained the ancien regime. As the Revolution became increasingly bloody, the idea of 'Enlightenment' was discredited, too. Hence, the French Revolution and its aftermath have contributed to the development of Counter-Enlightenment thought.

Edmund Burke was among the first of the Revolution's opponents to relate the philosophes to the instability in France in the 1790s. His Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790) identifies the Enlightenment as the principal cause of the French revolution. In Burke's opinion, the philosophes provided the revolutionary leaders with the theories on which their political schemes were based.

Augustin Barruel's Counter-Enlightenment ideas were well developed before the revolution. He worked as an editor for the anti-philosophes literary journal, L'Année Littéraire. Barruel argues in his Memoirs Illustrating the History of Jacobinism (1797) that the Revolution was the consequence of a conspiracy of philosophes and freemasons.

In Considerations on France (1797), Joseph de Maistre interprets the Revolution as divine punishment for the sins of the Enlightenment. According to him, "the revolutionary storm is an overwhelming force of nature unleashed on Europe by God that mocked human pretensions."

Romanticism
In the 1770s, the "Sturm und Drang" movement started in Germany. It questioned some key assumptions and implications of the Aufklärung and the term "Romanticism" was first coined. Many early Romantic writers such as Chateaubriand, Friedrich von Hardenberg (Novalis) and Samuel Taylor Coleridge inherited the Counter-Revolutionary antipathy towards the philosophes. All three directly blamed the philosophes in France and the Aufklärer in Germany for devaluing beauty, spirit and history in favour of a view of man as a soulless machine and a view of the universe as a meaningless, disenchanted void lacking richness and beauty. One particular concern to early Romantic writers was the allegedly anti-religious nature of the Enlightenment since the philosophes and Aufklärer were generally deists, opposed to revealed religion. Some historians, such as Hamann, nevertheless contend that this view of the Enlightenment as an age hostile to religion is common ground between these Romantic writers and many of their conservative Counter-Revolutionary predecessors. However, not many have commented on the Enlightenment, except for Chateaubriand, Novalis, and Coleridge, since the term itself did not exist at the time and most of their contemporaries ignored it.

The historian Jacques Barzun argues that Romanticism has its roots in the Enlightenment. It was not anti-rational, but rather balanced rationality against the competing claims of intuition and the sense of justice. This view is expressed in Goya's Sleep of Reason, in which the nightmarish owl offers the dozing social critic of Los Caprichos a piece of drawing chalk. Even the rational critic is inspired by irrational dream-content under the gaze of the sharp-eyed lynx. Marshall Brown makes much the same argument as Barzun in Romanticism and Enlightenment, questioning the stark opposition between these two periods.

By the middle of the 19th century, the memory of the French Revolution was fading and so was the influence of Romanticism. In this optimistic age of science and industry, there were few critics of the Enlightenment, and few explicit defenders. Friedrich Nietzsche is a notable and highly influential exception. After an initial defence of the Enlightenment in his so-called "middle period" (late 1870s to early 1880s), Nietzsche turned vehemently against it.

Totalitarianism
After World War II, the Enlightenment re-emerged as a key organizing concept in social and political thought and the history of ideas. The Counter-Enlightenment literature blaming the 18th-century trust in reason for 20th-century totalitarianism also resurged along with it. The locus classicus of this view is Max Horkheimer and Theodor Adorno's Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947), which traces the degeneration of the general concept of enlightenment from ancient Greece (epitomized by the cunning "bourgeois" hero Odysseus) to 20th-century fascism.

The authors take "enlightenment" as their target including its 18th-century form – which we now call "The Enlightenment". They claim it is epitomized by the Marquis de Sade. However, there were philosophers rejecting Adorno and Horkheimer's claim that Sade's moral skepticism is actually coherent, or that it reflects Enlightenment thought.

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

title: Counter-Enlightenment


text:
Carl Strandlund

Carl Strandlund (5 March 1899 – 26 December 1974) was a Swedish-born American inventor and entrepreneur.

Background
Carl Gunnar Strandlund was born in Sundsvall in Västernorrland County, Sweden. Strandlund came to the United States at the age of four and grew up in Moline, Illinois. As a young man, he took correspondence school classes in engineering. His grandfather had been an engineer in Sweden. His father worked in the United States for John Deere.

Career
Strandlund held over 150 farm implement patents through his work as a production engineer at the Minneapolis-Moline tractor company, including the creation of rubber tires for tractors. He later served as president of the Oliver Farm Equipment Company.

He was hired by the Chicago Vitreous Enamel Product Company to transform the factory for defense production. Strandlund invented manufacturing techniques to build non-warping metal plates for tanks during World War II, created air conditioning systems for movie theaters, and invented a wallpaper-removing machine. The company rewarded him with a promotion to vice president and general manager in September 1943.

Strandlund was most noted for inventing and promoting the Lustron house (built of porcelain-enameled steel panels - ) to help address the housing shortage after World War II. 2498 homes were built 1948–1950 at a large assembly plant in Columbus, Ohio, through financing from the Reconstruction Finance Corporation. The Lustron plant assembly line was some 9 miles long and the plant consumed more power than the rest of the entire city of Columbus. Mismanagement, politics, and corruption were blamed for the downfall of Lustron, which shut down amid foreclosure and bankruptcy in 1953. As of 2004, the majority of the 2,498 Lustron homes built were still standing. Fifty Lustrons have been placed on the National Register of Historic Places.

In a September 12, 1982, Minneapolis Tribune article, Strandlund's widow Clara related how Strandlund reacted to the closure of Lustron: "He was physically and mentally destroyed," she said. "Everything we had went. They took everything but our home." He died in Edina, a suburb of Minneapolis, at the age of 75. Strandlund is interred next to his wife Clara at Lakewood Cemetery, Minneapolis, MN.

title: Carl Strandlund


text:
Charles Berry

Charles Berry may refer to:
 * Charles Berry (minister) (1783–1877), English Unitarian and schoolteacher
 * Charles H. Berry (1823–1900), Minnesota Attorney General and politician
 * Charles Albert Berry (1852–1899), English nonconformist divine
 * Charlie Berry (second baseman) (1860–1940), American second baseman in Major League Baseball
 * Charlie Berry (1902–1972), baseball catcher and umpire, football player, and official
 * Charles J. Berry (1923–1945), US Marine and Medal of Honor recipient
 * Chuck Berry (1926–2017), American musician
 * Charles Berry (economist) (1930–2007), American economist
 * Charles Roland Berry (born 1957), American composer
 * Charles A. Berry (1923–2020), physician of NASA
 * Charles W. Berry (1871–1941), American physician, soldier, and New York City Comptroller
 * Chuck Berry (politician) (born 1950), member of the Colorado House of Representatives

title: Charles Berry


text:
Slave states and free states

In the United States before 1865, a slave state was a state in which slavery and the internal or domestic slave trade were legal, while a free state was one in which they were prohibited. Between 1812 and 1850, it was considered by the slave states to be politically imperative that the number of free states not exceed the number of slave states, so new states were admitted in slave–free pairs. There were, nonetheless, some slaves in most free states up to the 1840 census, and the Fugitive Slave Clause of the U.S. Constitution, as implemented by the Fugitive Slave Act of 1793 and the Fugitive Slave Act of 1850, provided that a slave did not become free by entering a free state and must be returned to his or her owner.

Slavery, in what would become the United States, was established as part of European colonization. By the 18th century, slavery was legal throughout the Thirteen Colonies, after which rebel colonies started to abolish the practice. Pennsylvania abolished slavery in 1780, and about half of the states had abolished slavery by the end of the Revolutionary War or in the first decades of the new country, although this did not always mean that existing slaves became free. Vermont — having declared its independence from Britain in 1777 and thus not being one of the Thirteen Colonies — banned slavery in the same year, before being admitted as a state in 1791.

Slavery was a divisive issue in the United States. It was a major issue during the writing of the U.S. Constitution in 1787, the subject of political crises in the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Compromise of 1850 and was the primary cause of the American Civil War in 1861. Just before the Civil War, there were 19 free states and 15 slave states. The most recent free state, Kansas, had entered the Union after its own years-long bloody fight over slavery. During the war, slavery was abolished in some of the slave states, and the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, ratified in December 1865, finally abolished slavery throughout the United States.

Early history

Slavery was established as a legal institution in each of the Thirteen Colonies, starting from 1619 onwards with the arrival of "twenty and odd" enslaved Africans in Virginia. Although indigenous peoples were also sold into slavery, the vast majority of the enslaved population consisted of Africans brought to the Americas via the Atlantic slave trade. Due to a lower prevalence of tropical diseases and better treatment, the enslaved population in the colonies had a higher life expectancy than in the West Indies and South America, leading to a rapid increase in population in the decades prior to the American Revolution. Organized political and social movements to end slavery began in the mid-18th century. The sentiments of the American Revolution and the promise of equality evoked by the Declaration of Independence stood in contrast to the status of most black people, either free or enslaved, in the colonies. Despite this, thousands of black Americans fought for the Patriot cause for a combination of reasons. Thousands also joined the British, encouraged by offers of freedom such as the Philipsburg Proclamation.

In the 1770s, enslaved black people throughout New England began sending petitions to northern legislatures demanding freedom. Five Northern states adopted policies to at least gradually abolish slavery: Pennsylvania in 1780, New Hampshire and Massachusetts in 1783, and Connecticut and Rhode Island in 1784. The Republic of Vermont had limited slavery in 1777, while it was still independent before it joined the United States as the 14th state in 1791. These state jurisdictions thus enacted the first abolition laws in the Atlantic World. By 1804 (including New York (1799) and New Jersey (1804)), all of the Northern states had abolished slavery or set measures in place to gradually abolish it, although there were still hundreds of ex-slaves working without pay as indentured servants in Northern states as late as the 1840 census (see Slavery in the United States).

In the South, Kentucky was created as a slave state from Virginia (1792), and Tennessee was created as a slave state from North Carolina (1796). By 1804, before the creation of new states from the federal western territories, the number of slave and free states was eight each. By the time of Missouri Compromise of 1820, the dividing line between the slave and free states was called the Mason-Dixon line (between Maryland and Pennsylvania), with its westward extension being the Ohio River.

The 1787 Constitutional Convention debated slavery, and for a time slavery was a major impediment to passage of the new constitution. As a compromise, slavery was acknowledged but never mentioned explicitly in the Constitution. The Fugitive Slave Clause, Article 4, section 2, clause 3, for example, refers to a "Person held to Service or Labour." In addition, Article 1, section 9, clause 1 of the Constitution prohibited Congress from abolishing the importation of slaves, but in a compromise, the prohibition could be lifted by Congress in 20 years, and slaves were referred to as "Persons." The Act Prohibiting Importation of Slaves passed easily in 1807 and took effect on January 1, 1808. However, the ban on importation spurred an expansion in the domestic slave trade, which remained legal until slavery was banned entirely in 1865 by the 13th Amendment. In the late 1850s an unsuccessful campaign was launched by several southern states to resume the international slave trade, to restock their slave populations, but this met with strong opposition. However, there was a large natural increase in the slave population throughout the late 18th and 19th centuries, while some illegal smuggling of African slaves continued via Spanish Cuba.

One of the other compromises of the Constitution was the creation of the Three-Fifths Clause by which slave states acquired increased representation in the House of Representatives and Electoral College equivalent to 60 percent of their disenfranchised slave populations. Slave states had wanted 100 percent of their slaves to be counted, whereas Northern states argued that none should be.

New territories
The Northwest Ordinance of 1787, passed just before the U.S. Constitution was ratified, had prohibited slavery in the federal Northwest Territory. The southern boundary of the territory was the Ohio River, which was regarded as a westward extension of the Mason-Dixon line. The territory was generally settled by New Englanders and American Revolutionary War veterans granted land there. The 6 states created from the territory were all free states: Ohio (1803), Indiana (1816), Illinois (1818), Michigan (1837), Wisconsin (1848), and Minnesota (1858).

By 1815, the momentum for antislavery reform appeared to run out of steam, with half the states having already abolished slavery (Northeast), prohibited it from the start (Midwest), or committed to eliminating it, and half committed to continuing the institution indefinitely (South).

The potential for political conflict over slavery at the federal level made politicians concerned about the balance of power in the Senate, where each state was represented by two senators. With an equal number of slave states and free states, the Senate was equally divided on issues important to the South. As the population of the free states began to outstrip the population of the slave states, leading to control of the House of Representatives by free states, the Senate became the preoccupation of slave-state politicians interested in maintaining a congressional veto over federal policy with regard to slavery and other issues important to the South. As a result of this preoccupation, slave states and free states were often admitted into the Union in opposite pairs to maintain the existing Senate balance between slave and free states.

Missouri Compromise
Controversy over whether Missouri should be admitted as a slave state resulted in the Missouri Compromise of 1821, which specified that territory acquired in the Louisiana Purchase north of latitude 36° 30', which described most of Missouri's southern border, would, except for Missouri, become free states, and territory south of that line would become slave states. As part of the compromise, Maine, on August 19, 1821, was admitted as a free state.

Texas and the Mexican Cession
The admission of Texas (1845) and the acquisition of the vast new Mexican Cession territories (1848), after the Mexican–American War, created further north–south conflict. Although the settled portion of Texas was an area rich in cotton plantations and dependent on slave labor, the territory acquired in the Mountain West did not seem hospitable to cotton or slavery.

As part of the Compromise of 1850, California was admitted as a free state without a slave state being admitted; California's admission also meant there would be no slave state on the Pacific coast. To avoid creating a free state majority in the Senate, California agreed to send one pro-slavery and one anti-slavery senator to Congress.

Last battles
The difficulty of identifying territory that could be organized into additional slave states stalled the process of opening the western territories to settlement. Slave-state politicians made efforts to annex Cuba (see: Lopez Expedition and Ostend Manifesto, 1852) and Nicaragua (see: Filibuster War, 1856–57), with intentions to create new slave states. Parts of Northern Mexico were also coveted, with Senator Albert Brown declaring "I want Tamaulipas, Potosi, and one or two other Mexican States; and I want them all for the same reason – for the plantation and spreading of slavery".

Kansas
In 1854, the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was superseded by the Kansas–Nebraska Act, which allowed white male settlers in the new territories to determine, by vote (popular sovereignty), whether they would allow slavery within each territory. The result was that pro- and anti-slavery elements flooded into Kansas with the goal of voting slavery up or down, leading to bloody fighting. An effort was initiated to organize Kansas for admission as a slave state, paired with Minnesota, but the admission of Kansas as a slave state was blocked because its proposed pro-slavery constitution (the Lecompton Constitution) had not been approved in an honest election. Anti-slavery proponents during the "Bleeding Kansas" period of the later 1850s were called Free-Staters and Free-Soilers, and fought against pro-slavery Border Ruffians from Missouri. The animosity escalated throughout the 1850s, culminating in numerous skirmishes and devastation on both sides of the question. Nevertheless, the North prevented Kansas Territory from becoming a slave state, and when Southern members of Congress departed en masse in early 1861, Kansas was immediately admitted to the Union as a free state.

When the admission of Minnesota proceeded unimpeded in 1858, the balance in the Senate ended; this was compounded by the subsequent admission of Oregon as a free state in 1859.

Slave and free state pairs
The following table shows the balance between slave and free states that began in 1812. The Statehood columns provide the year the state either ratified the U.S. Constitution or was admitted to the Union. The date ranges in the Abolition column for Free States indicate when gradual abolition laws were adopted and when slavery finally ended, except for states where slavery was outlawed in a specific year.

From 1812 through 1850, maintaining the balance of free and slave state votes in the Senate was considered of paramount importance if the Union were to be preserved, and states were typically admitted in pairs:

California was admitted as a free state in 1850 without an accompanying slave state, though certain concessions were made to the slave states as part of the Compromise of 1850. Three more free states were admitted in the final years before the Civil War, disrupting the balance that the slave states had tried to maintain.

Civil War
The American Civil War (1861–1865) disrupted and eventually ended slavery. Eleven slave states joined the Confederacy, while the border states of Delaware, Maryland, Kentucky, and Missouri – all slave states – remained in the Union, although Kentucky and Missouri also had competing Confederate state governments. In 1863 western Virginia, much of which had remained loyal to the Union, was admitted as the new state of West Virginia with a commitment to gradual emancipation. The following year Nevada, a free state in the West, was also admitted.

West Virginia
During the Civil War, a Unionist government in Wheeling, Virginia, presented a statehood bill to Congress to create a new state from 48 counties in western Virginia. The new state would eventually incorporate 50 counties. The issue of slavery in the new state delayed approval of the bill. In the Senate Charles Sumner objected to the admission of a new slave state, while Benjamin Wade defended statehood as long as a gradual emancipation clause would be included in the new state constitution. Two senators represented the Unionist Virginia government, John S. Carlile and Waitman T. Willey. Senator Carlile objected that Congress had no right to impose emancipation on West Virginia, while Willey proposed a compromise amendment to the state constitution for gradual abolition. Sumner attempted to add his own amendment to the bill, which was defeated, and the statehood bill passed both houses of Congress with the addition of what became known as the Willey Amendment. President Lincoln signed the bill on December 31, 1862. Voters in western Virginia approved the Willey Amendment on March 26, 1863.

President Lincoln had issued the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1, 1863, which exempted from emancipation the border states (four slave states loyal to the Union) as well as some territories occupied by Union forces within Confederate states. Two additional counties were added to West Virginia in late 1863, Berkeley and Jefferson. The slaves in Berkeley were also under exemption but not those in Jefferson County. As of the census of 1860, the 49 exempted counties held some 6000 slaves over 21 years of age who would not have been emancipated, about 40% of the total slave population. The terms of the Willey Amendment only freed children, at birth or as they came of age, and prohibited the importation of slaves. West Virginia became the 35th state on June 20, 1863, and the last slave state admitted to the Union. Eighteen months later, the West Virginia legislature completely abolished slavery, and also ratified the 13th Amendment on February 3, 1865.

Washington D.C.
In the District of Columbia, formed with land from two slave states, Maryland and Virginia, the trade was abolished by the Compromise of 1850. So as to avoid losing the profitable slave trading businesses in Alexandria (one was Franklin and Armfield), Alexandria County, D.C., requested that it be returned to Virginia, where the slave trade was legal; this took place in 1847. Slavery in the District of Columbia remained legal until 1862, when Southern members of Congress resigned, enabling those remaining to pass the ban, which abolitionists had been seeking for decades.

Utah Territory
Although it did not become a state until 1896, as an organized territory, Utah legalized slavery under the 1852 territorial Act in Relation to Service and similar Act for the Relief of Indian Slaves and Prisoners.

Brigham Young and his group of Mormon pioneers had arrived in Utah in 1847, during the Mexican–American War, when Utah Territory was Mexican territory. They ignored the Mexican ban on slavery. They viewed slavery as consistent with the Mormon view on Black people.

On June 19, 1862, fulfilling a part of his 1860 campaign platform, President Lincoln signed the law ending slavery in Utah Territory and all other territories.

California
While California's state constitution outlawed slavery, the 1850 Act for the Government and Protection of Indians allowed the indenture of Native Californians. This law provided for "apprenticing" or indenturing Indian children to Whites, and also punished "vagrant" Indians by "hiring" them out to the highest bidder at a public auction if the Indian could not provide sufficient bond or bail. White settlers took 10,000 to 27,000 California Native Americans as forced laborers, including 4,000 to 7,000 children. In April 1863, after the declaration of the Emancipation Proclamation, the California legislature abolished all forms of legal indenture and apprenticeship for Native Americans.

End of slavery
At the start of the Civil War, there were 34 states in the United States, 15 of which were slave states. Eleven of these slave states, after conventions devoted to the topic, issued declarations of secession from the United States, created the Confederate States of America, and were represented in the Confederate Congress. The slave states that stayed in the Union – Maryland, Missouri, Delaware, and Kentucky (called border states) – retained their representatives in the U.S. Congress. By the time the Emancipation Proclamation was issued in 1863, Tennessee was already under Union control. Accordingly, the Proclamation applied only in the 10 remaining Confederate states. During the war, abolition of slavery was required by President Abraham Lincoln for readmission of Confederate states.

The U.S. Congress, after the departure of the powerful Southern contingent in 1861, was generally abolitionist: In a plan endorsed by Abraham Lincoln, slavery in the District of Columbia, which the Southern contingent had protected, was abolished in 1862.

In Southern states, freedom for slaves typically followed the Union army's gaining control of an area. The Emancipation Proclamation declared all enslaved people in areas then under Confederate control free, but, in practice, freedom required either slaves reaching Union lines or Union forces reaching their area. As Union forces advanced from January 1, 1863, to June 19, 1865, slaves were freed.

West Virginia did not abolish slavery in its first proposed constitution of 1861, though it did ban the importation of slaves. In 1863, voters approved the Willey Amendment, which provided for gradual abolition of slavery, with the last enslaved people scheduled to be freed in 1884. On February 3, 1865, the state legislature approved immediate abolition.

The Restored Government of Virginia – the Unionist government that governed the limited territory then under Union control that had not left to form West Virginia – voted to end slavery at a constitutional convention on March 10, 1864. Arkansas, part of which came under Union control by 1864, adopted an anti-slavery constitution on March 16, 1864. Louisiana – much of which had been under Union control since 1862 – abolished slavery through a new state constitution approved by voters September 5, 1864. The border states of Maryland (November 1, 1864) and Missouri (January 11, 1865) abolished slavery before the war's end. The Union-occupied state of Tennessee abolished slavery by popular vote on a constitutional amendment that took effect February 22, 1865.

However, slavery legally persisted in Delaware, Kentucky, and (to a very limited extent, due to a trade ban but continued gradual abolition) New Jersey, until the Thirteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution abolished slavery throughout the United States, except as punishment for a crime, on December 18, 1865, ending the distinction between slave and free states. As such, slavery in the United States technically existed longer in the North than in the South.

title: Slave states and free states


text:
Batch production

Batch production is a method of manufacturing where the products are made as specified groups or amounts, within a time frame. A batch can go through a series of steps in a large manufacturing process to make the final desired product. Batch production is used for many types of manufacturing that may need smaller amounts of production at a time to ensure specific quality standards or changes in the process. This is opposed to large mass production or continuous production methods, where the product or process does not need to be checked or changed as frequently or periodically.

Characteristics
In the manufacturing batch production process, the machines are in chronological order directly related to the manufacturing process. The batch production method is also used so any temporary changes or modifications can be made to the product if necessary during the manufacturing process. For example, if a product needed a sudden change in material or details changed, it can be done in between batches. As opposed to assembly production or mass production where such changes cannot be easily made. The time between batches is called cycle time. Each batch may be assigned a lot number.

Advantages
Because batch production involves small batches, it is good for quality control. For example, if there is a mistake in the process, it can be fixed without as much loss compared to mass production. This can also save money by taking less risk for newer plans and products etc. As a result, this allows batch manufacturing to be changed or modified depending on company needs. In certain cases, batch production may require less expensive equipment, thus reducing the capital cost required to set up this type of system.

Disadvantages
There can be downtime between individual batches. Or if the product is constantly changing or being modified throughout the process, this also can cost downtime. Other disadvantages are that smaller batches need more planning, scheduling and control over the process and collecting data. Because of these factors, items made using batch production may have higher unit cost and take more time compared to continuous production.

title: Batch production


text:
Talk:Al-Mutawakkil

Untitled
Some of the things added to the page were copied word for word from http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/caliphdecree.html despite the copyright. The only difference being that the order was changed. This is why I removed these lines. DigiBullet 04:33, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

The decree of al-Mutawakkil, dated 850, is being reported by al-Tabari (d. 923), and the translation by N. Stillman, as quoted in a more recent work is posted at the website mentioned by DigiBullet, which is credited among External links in the entry. Stillman's translation can be abbreviated and partly paraphrased, because the ninth-century original is available at the website. This is why I have restored this historically useful material. Wetman 10:27, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I just added some material from al-Tabari, mentioning in the edit summary I was listing him in the bibliography, but I think omitting to say I was adding this material from him. Peace. Gallador 17:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Al-Mutawakkil. 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/20040430132818/http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/caliphdecree.html to http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/History/caliphdecree.html

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) 19:54, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Al-Mutawakkil