text:
Pharnaces II of Pontus

Pharnaces II of Pontus (Φαρνάκης; about 97–47 BC) was the king of the Bosporan Kingdom and Kingdom of Pontus until his death. He was a monarch of Persian and Greek ancestry. He was the youngest child born to King Mithridates VI of Pontus from his first wife, his sister Queen Laodice. He was born and raised in the Kingdom of Pontus and was the namesake of his late double great grandfather Pharnaces I of Pontus. After his father was defeated by the Romans in the Third Mithridatic War (73–63 BC) and died in 63 BC, the Romans annexed the western part of Pontus, merged it with the former Kingdom of Bithynia and formed the Roman province of Bithynia and Pontus. The eastern part of Pontus remained under the rule of Pharnaces as a client kingdom until his death.

Rebellion against his father
Pharnaces II was raised as his father's successor and treated with distinction. However, little is known of his youth from ancient writers and find him first mentioned after Mithridates VI was defeated by the Roman general Pompey during the Third Mithridatic War. Cassius Dio and Florus wrote that Mithridates planned to attack Italy by crossing Scythia and the River Danube, according to the former, or through Thrace, Macedonia and the rest of Greece, according to the latter. Appian also wrote about a planned invasion of Italy, but did not mention any routes. The scale of the expedition put many of his soldiers off. Castor of Phanagoria and his city rebelled. Many of the castles he had occupied on the eastern shores of the Black sea also rebelled. This was followed by a rebellion by Pharnaces. Appian wrote that Pharnaces conspired against his father. The conspirators were captured and tortured. However, Mithridates was persuaded to spare Pharnaces. The latter feared his father's anger and knew that Mithridates’ soldiers were not keen on the expedition. He went to Roman deserters who were encamped near Mithridates to highlight the dangers of the expedition and to encourage them to desert his father. He sent other people to do the same in other camps. In the morning there was an uprising. Mithridates fled and Pharnaces was proclaimed king by the troops. Mithridates sent messengers to ask his son for permission to withdraw safely. When they did not return, he tried to poison himself. However, it did not have an effect on him because he was used to taking small portions of poison as a protection against poisoners. Thus, he got an officer to kill him. Pharnaces sent his body to Pompey together with an emissary who offered submission and hostages. Pharnaces asked to be allowed to rule his father's kingdom or the Cimmerian Bosporus. Pompey named him a friend and ally of the Romans. He gave him the Cimmerian Bosporus except for Phanagoria, which was to be independent as a reward for having been the first to rebel against Mithridates.

Cassius Dio also gave an account of the rebellion of Pharnaces. He wrote that as Mithridates' position became weaker, some of his associates became disaffected and some of the soldiers mutinied. Mithridates suppressed this before it caused troubles and punished some people, including some of his sons, just of the basis of suspicions. Pharnaces was afraid of his father and plotted against him. He also hoped to receive his kingdom from the Romans if he defected. Mithridates sent some guards to arrest him, but he won them over. He then marched against his father who was in Panticapaeum. Mithridates sent some soldiers ahead to confront him, but these were also won over. Panticapaeum surrendered to Pharnaces and he had his father put to death. Mithridates took some poison, but this did not kill him as he was used to take large doses of poison as an antidote. He was weakened and did not manage to take his life. He died fighting some men who had reached him. Pharnaces had his body embalmed and sent it to Pompey as proof that he had killed him. He also offered him his surrender. Pompey granted Pharnaces the kingdom of Bosporus and ‘enrolled him as a friend and ally’ of Rome.

In contrast with Appian and Cassius Dio, Festus wrote that "Pompey imposed a king, Aristarchus, on the [Cimmerian] Bosphorians and Colchians."

Appian wrote that Pharnaces besieged Phanagoria and the towns neighboring the Bosporus. Short of food, the Phanagoreans had to come out and fight. They were defeated. Pharnaces did not harm them. He made friends with them, took hostages, and left. According to Appian, this was not long before he made his attacks in Anatolia.

Invasions in Anatolia and defeat of Gnaeus Domitius Calvinus
In 49 BC, a civil war (Caesar's Civil War) broke out between Gaius Julius Caesar and the Roman senate whose forces were led by Pompey. Caesar defeated Pompey in Greece in 47 BC, went to Egypt and was besieged in Alexandria of Egypt. Pharnaces took advantage of this to invade part of Anatolia.

Cassius Dio wrote that Pharnaces seized Colchis easily. He took advantage of the absence of Deiotarus, the king of Galatia and Lesser Armenia, to seize Lesser Armenia, part of Cappadocia, and some cities in the Roman province of Bithynia and Pontus which had formerly been part of the Kingdom of Pontus and had been assigned to the Bithynia district of that province. Caesar, who still had trouble in Egypt, sent Gnaeus Domitius Calvinus to take charge of the Roman legions in Roman province of Asia. Domitius added the forces of Deiotarus and Ariobarzanes III, the king of Cappadocia, to his forces. He advanced towards Pharnaces, who had seized Nicopolis, a city in Lesser Armenia. Pharnaces sent envoys to negotiate an armistice. Domitius rejected this, attacked, was defeated and withdrew back to Asia. Pharnaces then conquered the rest of Pontus. He seized the city of Amisus in Pontus, plundered it and killed all its men of military age. He next advanced towards Bithynia and the Roman province of Asia, but stopped because he learnt that Asander, whom he had left in charge back home in the Cimmerian Bosporus had revolted.

Plutarch wrote that Pharnaces defeated Domitius, who withdrew from Pontus. He then occupied Bithynia and Cappadocia. After that he set his eyes on Lesser Armenia. He incited the princes and tetrarchs of that territory to revolt. In his book on the Civil Wars, Appian only mentioned that Pharnaces seized the city of Amisus in Pontus, sold its inhabitants into slavery and made the boys eunuchs. However, in his book on the Mithridatic Wars, he wrote that Pharnaces seized Sinope in Pontus and wanted to also take Amisus (further east in Pontus) and that it was for this reason that he made war on Domitius. However, the rebellion of Asander drew him away from Roman Asia. Florus only mentioned Cappadocia and wrote that Pharnaces relied on Roman internal feuds rather that his valour to invade it.

Cicero wrote that Deiotarus also supported Domitius financially and sent him money to Ephesus. He sent him money a third time by auctioning some of his property to raise it.

The Alexandrine War gives more details about the interactions between Domitius and Pharnaces. King Deiotarus went to see to Calvinus to beg him not to allow Lesser Armenia or Cappadocia, to be overrun by Pharnaces, otherwise he could not pay the money he had promised to Caesar. Domitius considered this money to be indispensable for the military expenses and felt that it would be shameful if the kingdoms of the Roman allies and friends were to be seized by Pharnaces. Thus, he sent envoys to Pharnaces to ask him to withdraw from Armenia and Cappadocia, believing that this would have greater impact than advancing on him with an army. He had sent two legions to Caesar for his war in Alexandria. He had at his disposal only one Roman legion, the 36th, and two legions provided by Deiotarus which were equipped and trained the Roman way. He had 1000 cavalry and received the same number of cavalry from Ariobarzanes II. A lieutenant was sent to Cilicia to gather auxiliary troops. A legion was also raised hastily and in an improvised manner in Pontus. These forces assembled at Comana on Pontus.

Pharnaces sent a reply in which he said that he had withdrawn from Cappadocia but had recovered Lesser Armenia which was his inheritance from his father and that, regarding this, he would wait for Caesar's reply and comply with what he decided. Domitius thought that he had withdrawn from Cappadocia out of necessity rather than his free will because he heard about the two legions sent to Caesar and thought that if they advanced towards Armenia, he could defend it better if he stayed in Lesser Armenia. Domitius insisted that Pharnaces should withdraw from Lesser Armenia, too, and marched towards Armenia through a wooded ridge which formed the border between Cappadocia and Armenia and extended into Lesser Armenia. This was higher ground in which he could not be attacked. He could also get supplies from Cappadocia from here. Pharnaces sent several embassies for peace talks, which were rejected. Domitius encamped near Nicopolis in Lesser Armenia. There was a narrow defile nearby. Pharnaces set up an ambush with selected infantrymen and all his cavalry. He got the local farmers to graze their cattle at various points in the gorge so that Domitius would not suspect an ambush and to encourage his troops to scatter to plunder the cattle. He also kept sending envoys for further deceit. However, this resulted in Domitius staying in his camp. Pharnaces was worried that his ambush might be discovered and recalled his troops to camp.

Domitius set off for Nicopolis and encamped by the town. Pharnaces lined up for battle, but Domitius did not take this up and completed the fortification of his camp. Pharnaces intercepted dispatches from Caesar to Domitius and learnt that the latter was still in difficulty in Alexandria and was asking Domitius to send him reinforcements and to advance closer to Alexandria via Syria. Pharnaces thought that Domitius was about to withdraw. He dug two trenches on the path which would be easier to do battle. He placed his infantry between the trenches and the cavalry, which far outnumbered the Roman cavalry, on the flanks, outside the trenches. Domitius thought that it would not be safe to withdraw. He lined up for battle near his camp, posting the legions of Deioratus in the centre, the 36th on the right and the one from Pontus in a narrow line supported by the remaining cohorts.

In the battle the 36th attacked the enemy cavalry successfully and advanced close to the city walls, crossed the trench and attacked the enemy rear. The Pontic legion tried to go cross the trench to attack the enemy's exposed flank. However, while crossing, it was pinned down and overwhelmed. The legions of Deiotarus hardly offered any resistance. Pharnaces, having won in the centre and the right turned on the 36th and surrounded it. This legion formed a circle and, while fighting, it withdrew to a hill, losing only 250 men. Domitius retreated to Asia via Cappadocia. Pharnaces occupied Pontus, took many towns by storm, plundered the property of Roman and Pontic citizens and meted out harsh punishments on the youth. He boasted that he had recovered the kingdom of his father and thought that Caesar would be defeated in Alexandria.

Defeat by Gaius Julius Caesar
Cassius Dio wrote that after escaping the siege of Alexandria and defeating Ptolemy XIII of Egypt, Caesar rushed to Armenia. Pharnaces, who was heading north to deal with the rebellion of Asander, turned back to meet Caesar. He was worried about the speed with which he was advancing. He sent envoys to Caesar to see if he could make terms with him, reminding him that he had never cooperated with Pompey. He hoped for a truce and that Caesar would proceed to deal with urgent matters in Italy and Africa, after which he could resume his war. Caesar suspected this and treated two embassies well, so that Pharnaces would hope for peace and he could attack him by surprise. However, he reproached Pharnaces when a third embassy arrived. On the same day he engaged in battle. There was confusion caused by the cavalry and scythe-bearing chariots of the enemy, but then Caesar won.

According to Plutarch, Caesar learned about the defeat of Domitius by Pharnaces and that Pharnaces was taking advantage of this to occupy Bithynia and Cappadocia and hoped to gain Lesser Armenia by instigating revolts by the local princes and tetrarchs when he left Egypt and was crossing Asia. Caesar advanced against him with three legions. He defeated Pharnaces in the Battle of Zela (see Battle of Zela (47 BC)), annihilated his army and drove him out of Pontus. Suetonius wrote that Caesar proceeded via Syria and defeated Pharnaces “in a single battle within five days after his arrival and four hours after getting sight of him.” Frontinus wrote that Caesar drew up his battle line on a hill. This made victory easy as his men could throw darts at the enemy and put them to flight quickly. Appian wrote that when Caesar was within 200 stades (c. 3 km, 1.9 miles), Pharnaces sent envoys to negotiate peace. They brought a golden crown and offered him Pharnaces’ daughter in marriage. Caesar walked in front of his army and talked to the envoys until he reached the camp of Pharnaces. He then said, "Why should I not take instant vengeance on this parricide?" He jumped on his horse and started the battle, killing many of the enemy, even though he had only 100 cavalry.

Plutarch and Appian wrote that Caesar wrote the word ‘veni, vidi vici’. These are usually translated as ‘I came, I saw, I conquered.’ Plutarch said that Caesar wrote these words to announce “the swiftness and fierceness of this battle to one of his friends at Rome, Amantius” Florus remarked that Caesar crushed Pharnaces “like a thunderbolt which in one and the same moment has come, has struck and has departed. Caesar's boast was no vain one when he said that the enemy was defeated before he was seen.” Appian wrote that Caesar “exclaimed, "O fortunate Pompey, who was considered and named the Great for warring against such men as these in the time of Mithridates, the father of this man." Suetonius wrote that after this victory Caesar often remarked “on Pompey's good luck in gaining his principal fame as a general by victories over such feeble foemen.”

Caesar then sailed to Syria. There he received news of political trouble in Rome. His presence in Rome was urgent. Caesar wanted to quickly sort out affairs in Syria, Cilicia and Asia and deal with Pharnaces first. He visited the more important states in Syria to settle local disputes. He then sailed to Cilicia and summoned all the states of the province and settled local affairs. In Cappadocia he prevented disputes between Ariobarzanes II of Cappadocia and his brother Ariarathes by giving the latter part of Lesser Armenia as a vassal of the former. In Galatia, close to the border with Pontus, he ordered Deiotarus to provide a Galatian legion. This was a modest and inexperienced force. Besides this legion Caesar had the veteran 6th legion he had brought from Alexandria, which had lost many men in previous combats and was reduced to 1,000 men, and two legions which had fought with Domitius.

Caesar received envoys from Pharnaces who asked him not to start hostilities and said that Pharnaces would obey his instructions. Caesar replied that he would be fair if Pharnaces kept his promise and ordered him to withdraw from Pontus and make restitutions to Rome's allies and Roman citizens. He would accept his gifts (Pharnaces had sent him a golden crown) only after he had done what he was asked. Pharnaces promised to comply and, hoping that Caesar would trust him as he had to return to Rome in a hurry, he asked for a later date for his withdrawal and proposed agreements as a delaying tactic. Caesar understood this and decided to act swiftly and catch him by surprise.

Pharnaces was encamped near Zela, in Pontus, which was in a plain. Around the town there many hills and valleys. A very high hill, three miles from the town, was linked to it by paths on higher ground. Pharnaces had repaired the rampart of the camp his father had built when he posted his forces there during the Third Mithridatic War. Caesar encamped five miles away. He ordered his men to collect material for a rampant. The following night he left his camp with all his troops and occupied a spot nearer the enemy camp which was the place where Pharnaces’ father defeated a Roman army. This caught the enemy by surprise. Caesar got slaves to bring the material for the rampart, which the soldiers begun to build.

Pharnaces lined up all his forces in front of Caesar's camp, on the opposite side of the valley. In order not to delay the construction work, Caesar drew up only his first line in front of it. Pharnaces began to march down the steep ravine which was unsuitable for military action. He then placed his force in battle array and climbed the steep hillside. His foolhardiness was unexpected and caught Caesar unprepared. He recalled his men from their work and formed a battle line. They panicked because they were not in regular formation. Pharnaces' scythed chariots threw the men into confusion. However, the chariots were quickly overwhelmed by a mass of missiles. Then the enemy infantry engaged, and heavy fighting started. The 6th legion on the right wing pushed the enemy back down the slope. So did, but more slowly, the left wing and the centre. The uneven ground made this easier. Many of the enemy were trampled over by falling comrades and many were killed. The Romans seized the enemy camp and the entire force was killed or captured. Pharnaces escaped. This victory filled Caesar 'with incredible delight' because he brought a very serious war to an end quickly, won an easy victory and resolved a very difficult situation.

Death
After his defeat, Pharnaces fled to Sinope with 1,000 cavalry. Caesar, who was too busy to follow him, sent Domitius after him. Pharnaces surrendered Sinope. Domitius agreed to let him leave with his cavalrymen, but killed his horses. Pharnaces sailed to the Cimmerian Bosporus, intending to recover it from Asander. He collected a force of Scythians and Sarmatians, and captured Theodosia and Panticapaeum. In response, Asander attacked and defeated Pharnaces. He was defeated because he was short of horses and his men were not used to fighting on foot. Pharnaces was killed in this battle. Strabo wrote that Asander then took possession of the Bosporus. In response, Julius Caesar gave a tetrarchy in Galatia and the title of king to Mithridates of Pergamon. This Mithridates became Mithridates I of the Bosporus. Caesar also allowed him to wage war against Asander and conquer the Cimmerian Bosporus because he had shown cruelty to his friend Pharnaces.

Pharnaces II was fifty years old at his death and had been the king of the Cimmerian Bosporus fifteen years.

Coinage
Gold and silver coins have survived from his reign dating from 55 BC to 50 BC. An example displays a portrait of Pharnaces II on the obverse. On the reverse, it displays Apollo semi-draped, seated on a lion-footed throne, holding a laurel branch over a tripod. Apollo's left elbow is resting on a cithara at his side. On top and between Apollo is inscribed his royal title in Greek: ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΝ ΜΕΓΑΛΟΥ ΦΑΡΝΑΚΟΥ, which means of King of Kings Pharnaces the Great.

Marriage, issue and succession
In the early 1st century BC Mithridates VI made an alliance with the Sarmatian tribes, and, probably through this alliance, Pharnaces (possibly sometime after 77 BC) married an unnamed Sarmatian noblewoman. She may have been a princess, a relative of a ruling Sarmatian monarch or an influential aristocrat of some stature. His Sarmatian wife bore Pharnaces a son, Darius, a daughter, Dynamis, and a son, Arsaces. The names that Pharnaces II gave his children are a representation of his Persian and Greek heritage and ancestry. His sons were made Pontic kings for a time after his death, by Roman triumvir Mark Antony. His daughter and her family succeeded him as ruling monarchs of the Bosporan Kingdom. Pharnaces II through his daughter would have further descendants ruling the Bosporan Kingdom.

Pharnaces II in opera
The 18th-century librettist Antonio Maria Lucchini crafted a libretto based on incidents from the life of Pharnaces II that was originally set by Antonio Vivaldi in 1727 under the title Farnace. Based on the number of revivals of it that were staged, it must be counted as one of Vivaldi's most successful operas. A few later composers also set Lucchini's libretto, among them Josef Mysliveček, with Farnace of 1767. Pharnaces II also appears in Mitridate by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.

title: Pharnaces II of Pontus


text:
Eye candy

Eye Candy may refer to:
 * Eye Candy (album), an album by Mis-Teeq, 2003
 * Eye Candy (TV series), a 2015 TV show on MTV starring Victoria Justice
 * "Eye Candy" (Happy Tree Friends), a web episode in the animated series Happy Tree Friends
 * Eye Candy, a band fronted by Shonna Tucker

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

title: Eye candy


text:
Talk:Saint Andrews, New Brunswick

Untitled
As a native New Brunswicker, I can assure you hardly anyone talks about parishes or even knows they exist. The article for the town should be located here, and I'm not even sure if the parish should even have an article. Kirjtc2 21:06, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * lol, so true. Yvesnimmo 17:45, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I would have to agree with Kirjtc2. Parishes are only mentioned within some genealogical/historical research circles and not relatively know by residents. I, for one, would like to see more information in this article beyond that of the town's connection to William Van Horne and Ministers Island (almost each paragraph makes mention of it!) --Jason Gaudet (talk) 17:30, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm cleaning this up as we speak. Sorry for the 16-year delay. --Cornellier (talk) 22:58, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Wrong spelling
Whoever moved the page here was apparently confused by the St. Andrews by the Sea website; the town's official site spells it in the legal way, Saint Andrews.

Climate Data
I see there is climate data cited from climate-data.org. Generally speaking this information is interpolated from nearby stations and general models and as such is suboptimal. There is a NOAA station just across the bay in Robbinston, Maine. Here is the weatherbox.

I have taken it from their page and just added a metric first flag. I'll leave it to you to decide if you want to use this instead 138.51.73.51 (talk) 16:13, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Saint Andrews, New Brunswick


text:
Isaac Bickerstaff

Isaac Bickerstaff Esq was a pseudonym used by Jonathan Swift as part of a hoax to predict the death of then-famous Almanac-maker and astrologer John Partridge.

"All Fools' Day" (1 April, now known as April Fools' Day) was Swift's favourite holiday, and he often used this day to aim his satirical wit at non-believers in an attempt to "make sin and folly bleed". Disgruntled by Partridge's sarcastic attack about the "infallible Church" written in his 1708 issue of Merlinus Almanac, Swift projected three letters and a eulogy as an elaborate plan to "predict" Partridge's "infallible death" on 29 March, the anniversary of the famous 1652 "Black Monday" eclipse, widely seen as discrediting to astrology.

The first of the three letters, Predictions for the Year 1708, published in January 1708, predicts, among other things, the death of Partridge by a "raging fever". In the second letter, The Accomplishment of the First of Mr. Bickerstaff's Predictions, published in March 1708, Swift writes not as Bickerstaff but as a "man employed in the Revenue", and "confirms" the imaginary Bickerstaff's prediction. To accompany The Accomplishments, Swift also published an elegy for Partridge in which, typical of Swift's satire, he blames not only Partridge, but those who purchase the Almanacs as well:

The hoax gained immense popularity, and plagued Partridge to the true end of his life. Mourners, believing him dead, often kept him awake at night by crying outside his window. Accounts of an undertaker arriving at his house to arrange drapes for the mourning, an elegy being printed and even a gravestone being carved, culminate in Partridge publishing a letter in hopes of having the last word and proclaiming (and reclaiming) himself as living. In 1709 Swift, writing as Bickerstaff for the last time, published A Vindication of Isaac Bickerstaff, in which he abandoned any real attempt to maintain the hoax but disputed Partridge's public letter, saying, "There were sure no man alive ever to writ such damned stuff as this." He went on sarcastically to reason that "Death is defined by all Philosophers [as a] Separation of the Soul and Body. Now it is certain, that the poor Woman, who has best Reason to know [Partridge's wife], has gone about for some time to every Alley in the Neighbourhood, and swore to the Gossips, that Her Husband had neither Life nor Soul in Him."

Later influence
Later in 1709, Richard Steele bolstered the release of his new paper The Tatler by naming the fictitious Isaac Bickerstaff Esq. as editor. The Tatler had occasional contributions from Swift, although largely written by Steele and Joseph Addison.

Benjamin Franklin based the persona of "Poor Richard", the author of Poor Richard's Almanack, on Swift's Bickerstaff character.

In Jules Verne's 1895 novel Propeller Island, the governor of the titular island is named Cyrus Bikerstaff, in tribute to Swift's character.

H. P. Lovecraft used the pseudonym "Isaac Bickerstaffe [sic], Jr." in 1914 for a series of letters to the editor of The Providence Evening News, refuting the predictions of an astrologer the paper published.

The Canadian caricaturist Don Evans (born Toronto, 1936) published in 1975–85 three volumes of cartoons under the pseudonym Isaac Bickerstaff. He lives in Orillia, Ontario, where he is active in local politics. Personal archives including 300 drawings are at the University of Calgary.

In the novel The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society (2008) and its eponymous 2018 film adaptation, the lead character, author Juliet Ashton, writes under the pen name Izzy Bickerstaff.

Adam J. Smith and Jo Waugh of The Conversation and Patricia Casey, writing for the Irish Independent, have suggested that fictional Twitter user Titania McGrath, created by comedian and Spiked columnist Andrew Doyle, was influenced by Bickerstaff.

title: Isaac Bickerstaff


text:
John Partridge (astrologer)

John Partridge (1644 – c. 1714) was an English astrologer, the author and publisher of a number of astrological almanacs and books.

Life
Partridge was born 18 January 1644 (OS) in East Sheen, Surrey, and died in either 1714 or 1715.

Although starting out in life humbly enough (he was working as a shoemaker in Covent Garden around 1680), Partridge managed to teach himself enough Latin, Greek, Hebrew and astrology to enroll at Leyden University, Holland. He graduated in Medicine and by 1682 was styling himself "Physician to his Majesty". Although he was one of the sworn physicians of the court, he apparently never attended nor received any salary.

Partridge undertook to himself the task of reforming astrology. His program for reform involved eliminating the elements derived for the medieval Arabic tradition in favour of a return to Ptolemy.

Partridge was strongly identified with the Whig faction in seventeenth-century English politics. He was forced into exile in the Dutch Republic during the reign of James II. The reign was also marked by Partridge's feud with his former astrological mentor John Gadbury, who converted to Catholicism. This quarrel spread into a feud with George Parker.

Swift hoax
In the 1708 edition of the Merlinus Almanac, Partridge sarcastically referred to the Church of England as the "infallible Church". This drew the attention of satirist and Church of Ireland cleric Jonathan Swift. Playing on Partridge's own (generally inaccurate) yearly predictions of deaths of notable individuals, Swift, writing under the pseudonym Isaac Bickerstaff, predicted in a letter published in January 1708 that Partridge himself would die an "infallible death" on 29 March that year. On that date, Swift published another letter (purportedly by a "man employed in the Revenue") confirming Partridge's death. The letter was reprinted by other writers and publishers along with its brilliant accompanying eulogy:

Here five foot deep lyes on his back A cobbler, starmonger, and quack… Who to the stars in pure good-will, Does to his best look upward still. Weep all you customers that use His pills, his almanacks or shoes.

When Partridge published a letter proclaiming that he had not in fact died, Swift announced that his letter was false, as "they were sure no man alive ever to writ such damned stuff as this." Partridge's intense unpopularity among Church supporters, those whose deaths he had falsely predicted, anti-Whigs, and those who felt his "astrology" was in reality quackery kept the hoax going long after Swift finally dispensed with it. Partridge reportedly suffered from the effects of the hoax for the rest of his life.

Books

 * Partridge's advice to the Protestants of England, 1678
 * Mikropanastron, or, An astrological vade mecum briefly teaching the whole art of astrology, 1679. Facsimile reprint, 2005.
 * A textbook of traditional horary, electional and natal astrology. The book included several sets of aphorisms including the famous Centiloquium, the 100 sayings attributed to Ptolemy.

 * Mercurius coelestis, being an almanack for the year of the world's redemption, 1682..., 1682
 * ''Merlinus redivivus, being an almanack for the year of our redemption, 1684...', 1684
 * Opus Reformatum: Treatise of Astrology in which The Common Errors of that Art are Modestly Exposed and Rejected, 1693. Reprinted, Kessinger Publishing, 2004. ISBN 0-7661-8471-4

title: John Partridge (astrologer)


text:
Télesphore-Damien Bouchard

Télesphore-Damien Bouchard (December 20, 1881 – November 13, 1962) was a politician in Quebec, Canada.

Born in Saint-Hyacinthe, Quebec, he was the mayor of the municipality from 1917 to 1930 and from 1932 to 1944 and president of the Federation of Canadian Municipalities in 1918. He also founded the Union des municipalités de la province du Québec (Federation of municipalities in the province of Quebec) in 1919. He served as Liberal leader of the Opposition in the Legislative Assembly of Quebec from 1936 to 1939, after Liberal leader Adélard Godbout lost the 1936 election and also narrowly lost his own seat. Bouchard served as opposition leader while Godbout remained leader of the Liberal Party.

After the Liberals returned to power in the 1939 election, he served in Godbout's cabinet. Resigned in 1944 when he was appointed to the Senate, where he remained until his death. Overall, he was the MLA for the district of Saint-Hyacinthe from 1912 to 1919 and from 1923 to 1944.

A leading campaigner for public ownership of electric utilities, he became first president of Hydro-Québec in April 1944. Two months later he was fired by Premier Godbout, after Bouchard made a series of anticlerical statements.

Biography

 * GUTTMAN, Frank Myron, The Devil from Saint-Hyacinthe: Senator Télesphore-Damien Bouchard, A Tragic Hero, iUniverse Books, New York, 2007, 405 p.

title: Télesphore-Damien Bouchard


text:
Positive economics

Positive economics (as opposed to normative economics) is the part of economics that deals with positive statements. Positive economics, was originated from positivism and got introduced to economics by John Stuart Mill in his book Auguste Comte and Positivism in 1860's, reflecting upon Comte's positivism. Then, it was developed by John Neville Keynes in the 1890's and it became popular economical thought by elaborations of Lionel Robbins in the 1930s. In essence, positive economics studies what is rather than what ought to be. While economics can be filled with subjective statements such as value and allocation, it is vital to distinguish that what be is not objectively permanent or desirable.

Positive economics focuses on the description, quantification and explanation of economic phenomena. It deals with empirical facts as well as cause-and-effect behavioral relationships and emphasizes that economic theories must be consistent with existing observations and produce testable, precise predictions about the phenomena under question. Positive economics as a science concerns analysis of economic behavior to determine what is true. Examples of positive economic statements are "the unemployment rate in France is higher than that in the United States," or  “an increase in government spending would lower the unemployment rate.” Either of these is potentially falsifiable and may be contradicted by evidence. Positive economics as such avoids economic value judgments. For example, a positive economic theory might describe how money supply growth affects inflation, but it does not provide any instruction on what policy ought to be followed. Positive economics is based on facts which can or cannot be approved. It provides an "objective" system of generalisations. However, due to economics being directly related with human beings, achieving objectivity can be hard. On the other hand, normative economics is based on judgments which they are either good or bad. For example, “Government spending should be increased” is a normative statement.

Definitions
The scientific or positive aspects of economics were emphasized by many 20th century economists in order to show that economic theories could answer questions with the same scientific methodology as the physical sciences.

John Neville Keynes's The Scope and Method of Political Economy defined positive economics as the science of "what is" as compared to normative economics, the study of "what ought to be". Keynes was not the first person to make these distinction between positive and normative economics but his definitions have become the standard in economics teaching.

Lionel Robbins's 1932 book An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science stated that economics should take as its subject matter attempts by individuals to achieve ends with limited resources. Given that any end was "dependent on scarce means", it should not take a point of view on which ends should or should not be pursued. It is believed that Robbins was instrumental in promoting the fact-value distinction in economics and insisting that ethical or value judgments should not be a part of the discipline, however Robbins' views on this subject were not entirely clear.

Paul Samuelson's Foundations of Economic Analysis (1947) lays out the standard of operationally meaningful theorems through positive economics. Positive economics is commonly deemed necessary for the ranking of economic policies or outcomes as to acceptability.

Milton Friedman, in an influential 1953 essay, elaborated on the distinctions between positive and normative economics. He defined the aim of positive economics as developing theories that give “valid and meaningful” predictions which are precise, testable and in accordance with the available empirical evidence. To do this, economists must create a model that simplifies reality.

Friedman also emphasized that positive and normative economics could never be entirely separated because of their relationship with economic policy. Disagreements about economic policy are primarily due to an inability to agree about the likely consequences of a piece of legislation. As economics developed, Friedman believed that it would become increasingly possible to derive undisputed results about positive economic statements and that this would help to make clear judgments about the best ways to achieve normative goals such as minimum wage legislature.

However. as positive economics continuously progressed, economist' that believe in normative concept tended to disconnect from their positive beliefs.

Philosophy
According to Friedman, the ultimate goal of a positive science is to develop a "theory" or "hypothesis" that makes meaningful predictions of a phenomenon that is not yet examined. Friedman states that sometimes it is a ""language" that designed to promote "systematic and organised methods of reasoning" and in part, "It is a body of substantive hypotheses designed to abstract essential features of complex reality."

In Uskali Mäki's book "The Methodology of Positive Economics : Reflections on the Milton Friedman Legacy", he suggests that the theory of positive economics consists of "complex intermixture of two elements".

The methodological basis for positive/normative distinctions is rooted in the fact-value distinction in philosophy. The principal proponents of such distinctions originate with David Hume and G. E. Moore. Hume defined a 'matter of fact' as something that could be directly perceived with one of the five senses. However, current positivist science now poses facts that cannot be verified in this manner. John Stuart Mill made use of Hume's fact-value distinction to define the science and art of economics in A System of Logic.

The logical basis of such a relation as a dichotomy has been disputed in philosophical literature. Such debates are reflected in discussion of positive science.

Criticism
Since its inception as a discipline, economics has been criticized for failing to adequately separate its scientific and non-scientific aspects.

Critics such as Gunnar Myrdal (1954) and proponents of Feminist Economics such as Julie A. Nelson, Geoff Schneider and Jean Shackelford, and Diana Strassmann dispute the idea that economics can be completely neutral and agenda-free.

Nelson argues that many of the current failings of economics are a result of it not being objective enough. Rather than being value-free, many of its perspectives on "subject, model, method and pedagogy" are bound up in a "masculine-gendered" approach.

Schnedier and Shackelford in Ten Principles of Feminist Economics take issue with the definition of economics as a value-free, positive science. They propose that values play a role in all levels of economic analysis and that the types of questions that economists choose to investigate are influenced by ideological systems. For example, the statement "A country's standard of living depends on its ability to produce goods and services" relies on the ideologically-motivated assumption that GDP per capita is the most useful indicator of standard of living.

Hilary Putnam has also criticized the very foundation of the positive/normative dichotomy from a linguistic perspective, arguing that it is not possible to separate "value judgments from statements of facts".

Moreover, Lewis Hill critiques positive economics in his work "A Critique of Positive Economics". According to Hill, there are two important aspects of positive economics: Denial of normative value and economic epistemology. Hill criticizes the methodology of positive economics. There is lack of ethical considerations as positive economics targets to be value-neutral.

title: Positive economics


text:
Talk:C syntax

Evaluation order
The last paragraph 'Evaluation order and Lazy evaluation' is almost completely wrong! Its author should read comp.lang.c FAQ list section 3, especially answer to question 3.5. Constructions like  do NOT invoke undefined behaviour. The writer is confusing C's short circuit evaluation to lazy evaluation which is a completely different thing. --193.143.83.252 17:36, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * Agree completely. That section was completely incorrect.  I tried to fix it. Kevin Saff 14:16, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Your version is much better than the original! I just added one sequence point to the list. 193.143.83.252

vfd
This article was proposed for deletion January 2005. The discussion is archived at Votes for deletion/C syntax. Joyous 22:46, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)

Standard library != C Syntax
The standard library (for which none of the header file names have been provided I might add) has nothing to do with the syntax of C. C can be used with other libraries or none at all; its syntax is independent of them. The translation of command-line arguments is the job of the linker and again has nothing to do with C syntax.

And then I find myself guilty of the same offense, so take what I said with a grain of salt.—Kbolino 05:41, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)

India Education Program course assignment
This article was the subject of an educational assignment supported by Wikipedia Ambassadors through the India Education Program.

The above message was substituted from by PrimeBOT (talk) on 19:55, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:C syntax


text:
Small multiple

A small multiple (sometimes called trellis chart, lattice chart, grid chart, or panel chart) is a series of similar graphs or charts using the same scale and axes, allowing them to be easily compared. It uses multiple views to show different partitions of a dataset. The term was popularized by Edward Tufte.

According to Tufte,

"At the heart of quantitative reasoning is a single question: Compared to what? Small multiple designs, multivariate and data bountiful, answer directly by visually enforcing comparisons of changes, of the differences among objects, of the scope of alternatives. For a wide range of problems in data presentation, small multiples are the best design solution."

Modern example
In the example, the departmental salary expense is charted by month with a dashed line indicating the average for each department. The scales on each panel are different to emphasize the relative change over time compared to the range. Standardizing the scales could provide insight into comparisons in magnitude between the different departments. Two independent Y axes may be utilized when presenting data with different numeric scales in each panel.

Historical examples
Some of the earliest known examples of this type of visualization include the photographic series Horse In Motion by Eadweard Muybridge, around 1886, and Francis Amasa Walker's chart of citizen's occupations in census year 1870 appearing in the Statistical Atlas of the United States.

Muybridge's work not only proved for the first time that all four of a horse's hooves left the ground during gallop (see upper central plates), but it also broke new ground in terms of artistic expression and became foundational to the development of the motion picture. Muybridge went on to produce many more examples of small multiples showing animal locomotion through the medium of stop-motion photography, including boys playing leapfrog and a bison cantering.

Sketched graphic examples can be found in Francis Amasa Walker's charts appearing in the 1870 Statistical Atlas of the United States. Superintendent of the US Census at the time of its creation, Walker was determined to modernize the Census collection and analysis methods and used the Atlas to present the final data set using unprecedented visual forms, including many beautiful examples of small multiples.

Adjacent is a chart showing the population broken down by occupation, including a count of those attending school, according to the 1870 Census. This graphic is innovative in its use of both a treemap display and a latticed layout of small multiples. Additional examples appearing in the Atlas include side-by-side geographic maps showing the changes in population over time, as well as tiled mosaic charts showing population demographic breakdowns, and diverging bar graphs showing deaths broken down by age and gender, tiled by state.

Thematic maps
Small multiples are a popular technique in cartographic design for multivariate mapping. As with the small multiple chart, each panel uses the same underlying two-dimensional space, but in this case that is a geographic space. Typically, the variables being mapped are of a similar type, such as types of agricultural products, so that the same strategy of map symbol can be used on each panel, enabling rapid comparison between the maps.

Another common use of small multiples is to show change in spatial patterns over time, as an alternative to an animated map. Several tests of the effectiveness of each method have generally concluded that they have distinct advantages, with animation being better for seeing trends, especially movement, and small multiples being better for making comparisons between times.

title: Small multiple


text:
Talk:Flaunch

Good illustration. --Daniel C. Boyer 21:16, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Poor article
Its a bad one. Requires the pictures to be on the right, for the text to be on the left. Also, this is a stub.

title: Talk:Flaunch


text:
London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine

The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine (LSHTM) is a public research university in Bloomsbury, central London, and a member institution of the University of London that specialises in public health and tropical medicine.

The institution was founded in 1899 by Sir Patrick Manson, after a donation from the Indian Parsi philanthropist B. D. Petit. Since its foundation it has become one of the most highly placed institutions in global rankings in the fields of public health and infectious diseases.

The annual income of the institution for 2021–22 was £262.0 million, of which £175.3 million was from research grants and contracts, with expenditures totalling £291.6 million during the same period. The university has one of the largest endowment per student in the United Kingdom.

Origins (1899–1913)
The school was founded on October 2, 1899, by Sir Patrick Manson as the London School of Tropical Medicine after the Parsi philanthropist Bomanjee Dinshaw Petit made a donation of £6,666.

It was initially located at the Albert Dock Seamen's Hospital in the London Docklands. Just prior to this teaching in tropical medicine had been commenced in 1899 at the Extramural school at Edinburgh and even earlier at London's Livingstone College founded in 1893. Before giving lectures at St George's Hospital, London, in 1895, Livingstone College afforded Manson his first opportunity to teach courses in tropical medicine. Manson's early career was as a physician in the Far East. On his return to London, he was appointed Medical Advisor to the Colonial Office. He strongly believed that physicians should be trained in tropical medicine to treat British colonial administrators and others working throughout Britain's tropical empire. He also encouraged and mentored Ronald Ross during this period to uncover the correct etiology of malaria, which Ross subsequently discovered in 1897, winning the Nobel Prize for his efforts. The original school was established as part of the Seamen's Hospital Society.

In 1902, the benefactor Petit wrote the following about the institution in a letter to Sir Francis Lovell (Dean of the school), quoted in The Times. "This institution, whilst according ample scope to students of diseases that well nigh devastate the East, will be the means of bringing the Western and Eastern minds together to afford help to the suffering East, and thus cementing that union of hearts."

Among the school's early achievements were discoveries by George Carmichael Low, who proved filariasis is spread by mosquito bites, and Aldo Castellani, who discovered trypanosomes in the cerebral fluid of those affected by sleeping sickness. Experiments were also conducted by the school's faculty which provided proof that mosquitoes act as the vector in the spread of malaria.

World Wars (1914–1945)
During World War I, many of the faculty were conscripted into the army where they often continued to treat or research tropical diseases with the aim of protecting the health of the troops fighting in the Middle Eastern and African campaigns. Meanwhile, enough faculty remained at the school to continue its operations, although enrollment drastically fell during the war. The remaining faculty contributed to the war effort nonetheless by becoming increasingly involved in treating soldiers with dysentery, malaria, and other tropical diseases after their return from overseas. On the night of January 19, 1917, a TNT explosion from a nearby munition depot damaged the school and hospital, further complicating the school's operations. The school's wartime contributions were acknowledged on October 10, 1917, by a surprise visit from King George V and in 1918 by a visit from Queen Mary, Prince Edward, and Princess Mary.

As a result of the war, the school expected an increase in the amount of patients with tropical diseases and so a resolution was proposed to move the school to Central London to improve upon the school's isolated location. Consequently, the school moved, together with the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, to Endsleigh Gardens in central London, taking over a former hotel which had been used as a hospital for officers during the First World War. The building was officially opened by George VI, then Duke of York, on 11 November 1920. In 1921 the Athlone Committee recommended the creation of an institute of state medicine, which built on a proposal by the Rockefeller Foundation to develop a London-based institution that would lead the world in the promotion of public health and tropical medicine. This enlarged school, now named the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, was granted its Royal Charter in 1924. The school moved to the current building in 1929.

The school remained at its location in London during World War II despite the risk of bombings and an offer for accommodation by Queens' College, Cambridge. The number of students and staff fell as a result of the war, with some staff being called upon for military service. After 1941 and continuing until the end of the war, regular instruction ceased and the school instead started providing short courses in tropical medicine to nurses and doctors of the Allied Forces. On 10 May 1941, a bomb struck the building and caused a fire which was only put out the following morning due to a lack of firemen. Only four people were present at the time and remained unharmed, however, around a sixth of the building was damaged, with particularly the side facing Malet Street sustaining extensive damage. Although the damage was only fully repaired seven years later, teaching of short courses resumed the Monday after the bombing.

Post-war period (1946–1960)
The healthcare environment changed in the wake of the war, both nationally and internationally, with the establishment of the National Health Service and the World Health Organization. The Chief Medical Officer and former Dean of LSHTM, Sir Wilson Jameson, played a critical role in the establishment of both.

LSHTM served a crucial role in reshaping scientific research and public health in the post-war period. Sir Austin Bradford Hill, a professor of Medical Statistics at the school, was the statistician on the Medical Research Council Streptomycin in Tuberculosis Trials Committee and their 1948 study evaluating the use of streptomycin in treating tuberculosis, which is generally accepted as the first randomized controlled trial to have been conducted. Two years later Bradford Hill and Sir Richard Doll, a member of the MRC Statistical Research Unit based at LSHTM, were the first to demonstrate the association between cigarette smoking and lung cancer. They also set up the well-known British Doctors Study to provide evidence for a causal relationship. In 1951, alumnus Max Theiler was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine "for his discoveries concerning yellow fever and how to combat it". George Macdonald, professor of tropical hygiene and director of the Ross Institute at LSHTM, was the first to propose the basic reproduction number ($R_0$) in his 1952 study of malaria, which remains a key statistic in the study of infectious diseases to this day. The following year, alumnus Jerry Morris was the first to establish the role of physical exercise in preventing heart disease. Richard Doll established the connection between asbestos and lung cancer in 1955, while two Readers at the school established the connection between air pollution and respiratory diseases in 1958.

End of the 20th century (1961–1999)
The university went through various changes during the latter part of the 20th century. In 1962 it acquired its first electronic computer in a collaboration with Birkbeck College, while a year later it built insectaries in its vault with financial support from the Wellcome Trust. Due to the school's need for work with live insects, the insectaries were thought to have housed the largest mosquito farm in the world. In the meantime the school closed its library and expanded the Keppel Street building to increase research and teaching space. Once completed in 1967, the modernised parts were officially opened by Princess Alexandra. In the final years of the millennium, the school launched its first distance learning programmes to an initial enrollment of 149 students for the 1998/1999 cohort.

The faculty of the school continued to make significant contributions to scientific research and public health. This included further work by Austin Bradford Hill, who postulated the Bradford Hill criteria in 1965 to determine causality. The criteria have since been widely used in public health research. LSHTM also started the long-running Whitehall Study in 1967 which found significant social inequalities in health in the 18,000 participants from the UK Civil Service. The Black Report published in 1980, for which alumnus Jerry Morris was one of the contributors, found similar inequalities. In 1972, the first case of lassa fever in the U.K. was diagnosed at the school. The school's faculty were also involved in research projects to advance understanding and prevention of various infectious diseases around this time, such as the Karongo Prevention Study in Malawi. Professors at the university developed the sisterhood method in 1989, thereby increasing the accuracy of maternal mortality data from low-income countries and developing a method which is still recommended by the WHO to this day. The National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles was launched by the school in 1990 and is still being run with partners at University College London.

Modern era (2000–present)
The school went through various expansions in 2004, 2009, 2010, 2017, and 2018 to accommodate the school's rapid growth. The expansion in 2010 was the first time the university expanded outside of its Keppel Street location to Tavistock Place. The new location was originally intended as a joint project with UCL, however, the project was eventually amended and scaled down when UCL pulled out of the project. Tavistock Place was further expanded in 2017 with an additional research facility. Moreover, the MRC Unit The Gambia and the MRC Uganda Research Unit officially joined the university in 2018. These transfers were part of the MRC's long-term programme of transferring Units into a host University in order to bring strategic benefits to both parties.

In 2004, professor Liam Smeeth was unable to find any association between the MMR vaccine and autism, thereby providing proof against the fraudulent Lancet MMR autism paper by Andrew Wakefield. In subsequent years, professor Joy Lawn led various studies and publications on neonatal deaths, including the 2011 and 2016 The Lancet Stillbirth Series. In 2016, various LSHTM researchers contributed to the understanding of the 2015–16 Zika virus epidemic. A year later, alumnus Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus became the Director-General of the World Health Organization.

An independent review published in 2021 concluded there is evidence of structural racism at LSHTM. The findings included that staff of colour are less likely to be promoted, more likely to be on short-term contracts, and that leadership has been too slow to act on issues of colonialism and racism. The school's Director apologised to those who have been affected and stated the school is committed to address the issues. The school's Council commissioned the review in the wake of the 2020 Black Lives Matter protests.

Response to the 2014 Ebola epidemic
When the World Health Organization declared that the Western African Ebola virus epidemic was a public health emergency of international concern in August 2014, LSHTM coordinated various response efforts. More than 500 academic and professional services staff volunteered to respond, with many volunteers deployed via Save the Children, Public Health England, Médecins Sans Frontières and the WHO. LSHTM continued to pay the salary of anyone who volunteered to work on Ebola care and control in Guinea, Liberia and Sierra Leone, or backfill posts in WHO offices. Staff and students carried out mathematical modelling and other research to support Ebola response planning. Experts, including LSHTM faculty, established an Ebola Response Anthropology Platform to help health workers develop culturally sensitive interventions and developed free online education programmes to combat the spread of the disease. Researchers, including researchers from LSHTM, carried out accelerated clinical trials in the field, including the EBOVAC Ebola vaccine trials which is still ongoing. LSHTM was part of an independent panel advising on major reforms targeted at prevention of future global outbreaks and now runs the UK Public Health Rapid Support Team in partnership with Public Health England, funded by the UK Government. Former LSHTM Director Peter Piot was named among 'the Ebola fighters' as Time Person of the Year and LSHTM itself also won various awards for its response.

Campus
The school moved to its present location near the intersection of Gower Street and Keppel Street in 1929. A competition to design a new school building to be sited in Gower Street, was held involving five architects, all experienced in laboratory design and construction. This was won in 1925 by Morley Horder and Verner O. Rees who located the main entrance in Keppel Street. The foundation stone was laid in 1926 by Neville Chamberlain, then Minister of Health, and the completed building was opened in 1929 by the Prince of Wales, later to become Edward VIII. The purchase of the site and the cost of a new building was made possible through a gift of $2m from the Rockefeller Foundation.

Although the building's façade has remained largely unchanged, the interior has gone through various renovations. The first renovation was completed in 1951 to restore bomb damage sustained during World War II, with the subsequent decades seeing further building work to add and redevelop floors. In 2004 a new seven-storey building within the school's north courtyard was opened by Desmond Tutu, while the Princess Royal opened a new five-storey building in the south of the courtyard in 2009.

The school also has a secondary site on Tavistock Place to the east since 2010.

Governance
The school's sole governing body under its Royal Charter is the council. It has sole management control and supervision of the institution, though it delegates some of its functions to its committees and some operational powers to the Director of the school. The Council meets four times a year and has a diverse membership, with various independent members as well as elected staff members and a membership for the Director of the school. The current chair is Don Robert, who is also the Chairman of the London Stock Exchange Group.

The school is an exempt charity and as such is regulated by the Office for Students.

Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health
The Faculty of Epidemiology and Population Health aims to develop and use its research expertise ranging from clinical trials, statistical analysis, genetic epidemiology, large-scale observational studies and field trials through to the design and evaluation of clinical and public health interventions in low, middle and high-income countries. It has around 300 academic staff and 150 research students who work in more than 20 countries on topics ranging from infectious to chronic diseases. It runs various master's degree programmes and short courses, while LSHTM's Clinical Trials Unit is also run under this faculty.

Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases
The Faculty of Infectious and Tropical Diseases (ITD) was formed in August 1997 and encompasses all of the laboratory-based research in the school as well as that on the clinical and epidemiological aspects of infectious and tropical diseases. The Faculty is organised into three large departments and has over 500 members of staff. The range of disciplines represented in the faculty is very broad and inter-disciplinary research is a feature of much of its activity.

The spectrum of diseases studied is wide and there are major research groups working on topics which include:

 * HIV/AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases
 * malaria and other vector borne diseases
 * tuberculosis
 * vaccine development and evaluation
 * vector biology and disease control

There is close interaction between scientists in different research teams. The Faculty has overseas links which provide a basis for field studies and international collaborations in developed and developing countries. Funding for research in the Faculty comes from around 45 funding organisations and agencies.

Faculty of Public Health and Policy
The Faculty of Public Health and Policy aims to improve global health through research, teaching and the provision of advice in the areas of health policy, health systems and services, and individual, social and environmental influences on health. Interests and activities embrace the health needs of people living in countries at all levels of development. The school has the largest numbers of research active staff in the areas of epidemiology, public health and health services research in the UK. The Faculty of Public Health and Policy has over 250 members of staff, including epidemiologists, public health physicians, economists, policy analysts, anthropologists, sociologists, historians, psychologists, statisticians and mathematicians. The Faculty's research programmes, with an annual spend of over £7m, focus on public health problems of importance both globally and in the UK, and build on an extensive network of collaborations.

The research programmes exploit multidisciplinary and multi-method approaches, generate new knowledge for specific contexts and test transferability to different settings, and engage with policymakers and providers of health care to ensure research is relevant and translated into practice.

The Faculty hosts School Centres in the areas of History in Public Health, Research on Drugs and Health Behaviours, Spatial Analysis in Public Health, Global Change and Health, Health of Societies in Transition (ECOHOST), and Gender Violence and Health. In addition, staff participate in Centres based in other departments, notably the Malaria Centre and the Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Disease.

Logo

The seal of LSHTM is based on a coin from the archeological site Selinus, Sicily struck in 466 BC. It was designed by the sculptor and medallist Allan Gairdner Wyon. It shows two Greek gods associated with health – Apollo, the god of prophecy, music and medicine, and his sister Artemis, goddess of hunting and chastity, and comforter of women in childbirth – in a horse-drawn chariot. Artemis is driving while her brother the great archer is shooting arrows. The fruitful date palm was added to indicate the tropical activities of the school but also has a close connection with Apollo and Artemis: when their mother Leto gave birth to them on the island of Delos, miraculously a palm sprang up to give her shade in childbirth.

Asclepius, Apollo's son, was the god of ancient Greek medicine, and was frequently shown holding a staff entwined with a snake. Snakes were used in this healing cult to lick the affected part of the patient. Significantly Asclepius' five daughters were Hygeia (the goddess of healthiness), Panacea (the healer of all ailments), Iaso (recuperation from illness); Aceso (the healing process); and Aegle (radiant good health). Asclepius' staff with a snake coiled round it (known as a symbol of the medical professions) was placed at the base of the seal to emphasise the medical interests of the school. The seal was redesigned in 1990 by Russell Sewell Design Associates, and is retained today within the current LSHTM logo.

Admissions
Admissions data from LSHTM can be obtained through Freedom of Information requests. The school's admissions are competitive, with an offer rate of 60.3% and a yield of 40.1% in 2020/2021. The rates vary by program, with the most recent year showing the MSc Medical Statistics having the lowest offer rate at 49.2% and MSc Control of Infectious Diseases having the highest yield at 55.1%.

Research

With over £180 million in research funding per year, the school engages in a multitude of research activities in over 100 countries. It is home to four World Health Organization Collaborating Centres and participates in many research groups and projects around the world. The school is currently home to the following research centres:
 * Antimicrobial Resistance Centre
 * Centre for Epidemic Preparedness and Response (CEPR)
 * Centre for Evaluation
 * Centre for Excellence in Learning and Teaching
 * Centre for Global Chronic Conditions
 * Centre for Global Mental Health
 * Centre for History in Public Health
 * Centre for Maternal Adolescent Reproductive & Child Health (MARCH)
 * Centre for Statistical Methodology
 * Centre for the Mathematical Modelling of Infectious Diseases (CMMID)
 * Centre on Climate Change and Planetary Health
 * Global Health Economics Centre
 * Health in Humanitarian Crises Centre
 * Malaria Centre
 * TB Centre
 * The Applied Genomics Centre
 * Vaccine Centre

LSHTM submitted a total of 314 staff across 2 units of assessment to the 2014 Research Excellence Framework (REF) assessment. In the REF results 42% of the school's submitted research was classified as world-leading (4*), 37% as internationally excellent (3*), 20% as internationally recognised (2*) and 1% as nationally recognised (1*), giving an overall GPA of 3.20. In rankings produced by Times Higher Education based upon the REF results LSHTM was ranked 10th overall for GPA and 46th on research power (which is based on publication volume). In the 2008 exercise, LSHTM ranked 3rd overall for GPA and 59th on research power.

Degrees
All three Faculties offer a wide range of MSc courses and Research Degrees leading to a University of London degree of DrPH, MPhil and PhD. The school also offers a Joint PhD Programme for Global Health in partnership with Nagasaki University. Courses are delivered both face-to-face in London and via distance learning in collaboration with the University of London International Programmes. The school also offers access to both free and paid short courses, as well as three Professional Diplomas and an executive programme. Currently, the university does not offer any undergraduate degrees and is therefore one of the few postgraduate-only institutions around the world.

Rankings
Due to the absence of undergraduate degrees, LSHTM is not included in the overall university rankings of QS and Times Higher Education, although some subject-specific rankings are available.

In the 2023 ARWU Ranking for the subject of Public Health, LSHTM ranked 3rd globally behind only Harvard University and Johns Hopkins University.

For the 2024–2025 US News Best Global Universities Rankings, LSHTM ranked 2nd in Public, Environmental and Occupational Health, 4th in Infectious Diseases, and 15th in the world for Social Sciences and Public Health. The school also ranked 93th in the world for clinical medicine and 34th for cardiovascular systems, 21st for immunology and 59th for microbiology, contributing to an overall ranking of 121st in the world, 42nd in Europe and 12th in the UK.

In the 2015 CWTS Leiden Ranking, the LSHTM ranked as the top university in Europe for research impact in all fields, ahead of Oxford and Cambridge. The school was also ranked 6th overall in the world for impact based on the top 1% of published papers in all fields, after MIT, Harvard, Caltech, Stanford and Berkeley, 3rd in the world for biomedical and health sciences, after only MIT and Caltech, and 5th in the world overall for collaborative research. By 2021 the school ranked 27th.

Awards
The LSHTM won the 2009 Gates Award for Global Health established by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and received $1 million in prize money. The award recognises organisations that have made an outstanding contribution to improving global health. In 2016, LSHTM won the University of the Year award from Times Higher Education for its response to the Ebola epidemic in West Africa in 2014 and 2015. It won the Queen's Anniversary Prize in 2017 for the same reason and won another Queen's Anniversary Prize in 2021 for its work on COVID-19 and pandemic preparedness.

Donald Reid Medal
The Donald Reid Medal is awarded triennially by the LSHTM in recognition of distinguished contributions to epidemiology.

George Macdonald Medal

The George Macdonald Medal is awarded triennially together with Royal Society of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene to recognise outstanding contributions to tropical hygiene.

Affiliations and partnerships
LSHTM's international profile has led to extensive collaboration with institutions around the world, including in many low- and middle-income countries. From 2014 to 2018, 78% of its publications had been written with an international partner and 65% were written with collaborators over 5,000 kilometers removed from London. International collaborators were most often based in Europe, North America, or Africa. The school is also a member of various global health networks.

The school has various official partner institutions including Nagasaki University, National University of Singapore, Public Health Foundation of India, Sichuan University, Fiocruz, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, KU Leuven, and various African research institutes. LSHTM also jointly runs the UK Public Health Rapid Support Team with Public Health England and closely collaborates with various U.K. universities like the University of Oxford, the University of Cambridge, and Imperial College London.

Moreover, it offers a Professional Diploma in Tropical Medicine & Hygiene through a collaboration with Kilimanjaro Christian Medical University College, Makerere University, University of Washington, and Johns Hopkins University. It also offers joint master's programmes in Health Policy, Planning and Financing with the London School of Economics, Global Mental Health with King's College London, and One Health as well as Veterinary Epidemiology with the Royal Veterinary College.

The LSHTM also has partnerships with corporate entities. These include Johnson & Johnson, GlaxoSmithKline, Reckitt, Médecins Sans Frontières, and the International Committee of the Red Cross.


text:
Normative economics

Normative economics (as opposed to positive economics) is the part of economics that deals with normative statements. It focuses on the idea of fairness and what the outcome of the economy or goals of public policy ought to be.

Economists commonly prefer to distinguish normative economics ("what ought to be" in economic matters) from positive economics ("what is"). Many normative (value) judgments, however, are held conditionally, to be given up if facts or knowledge of facts changes, so that a change of values may be purely scientific. On the other hand, welfare economist Amartya Sen distinguishes basic (normative) judgements, which do not depend on such knowledge, from nonbasic judgments, which do. He said, "no judgments are demonstrably basic" while some value judgments may be shown to be nonbasic.

Positive and normative economics are often synthesized in the style of practical idealism. In this discipline, sometimes called the "art of economics", positive economics is utilized as a practical tool for achieving normative objectives, which often involve policy changes or

An example of a normative economic statement is as follows:

 * The price of milk should be $6 a gallon to give dairy farmers a higher living standard and to save the family farm.

This is a normative statement, because it reflects value judgments. This specific statement makes the judgment that farmers deserve a higher living standard and that family farms ought to be saved.

Normative economics predicates itself upon maximizing both an agents social and political utility, recognized as "aggregating interests".

Subfields of normative economics include social choice theory, cooperative game theory, and mechanism design.

Some earlier technical problems posed in welfare economics and the theory of justice in applied fields such as resource allocation, public policy, social indicators, and inequality and poverty measurement.

title: Normative economics


text:
Dorfan

Dorfan was an American toy company based in Newark, New Jersey from 1924 to 1934.

Their production lines specialized in O gauge and Wide gauge toy trains.

History
Bringing years of previous toy making experience, Milton and Julius Forcheimer, two immigrant cousins from Nuremberg, Germany, whose family was involved in the production of Fandor trains founded Dorfan in 1924. The Fandor brand name is an amalgam of Fannie & Dora (who were the mothers of Milton & Julius). When Milton & Julius immigrated to America, they reversed the names Dora & Fannie to create the Dorfan name. A Fandor engineer, John C. Koerber, helped to get Dorfan started (McKenney 1993; Dorfan, pp. 165–166).

Dorfan entered into a well developed American market for electric trains. A market dominated by Ives, Lionel and American Flyer. But it entered at a most opportune time, the American market was in an upswing. Dorfan gained considerable market share through promotion, innovation and manufacture. Dorfan gained enough ground to be included among the "Big Four" of American prewar model train manufacturers (McKenney, Greenberg 1993; Dorfan, pp. 5–6,163–165).

Dorfan produced detailed tinplate rolling stock with diecast power units. Dorfan was the first U.S. train manufacturer to use die casting in its manufacturing process. They had developed an alloy train body that would withstand a fall to a concrete floor without breaking. Dorfan was also the first to have "Distance Remote Control", a reversing unit without a fixed sequence. Dorfan is also noted as one of the first to have passenger figures visible in coach windows. However, being the pioneer of something at times has its disadvantages. Dorfan's alloys suffered from impurities, which weakened the metal and caused the trains to disintegrate over time, an early victim of zinc pest. Dorfan replaced the damaged parts, but at great expense. Dorfan was also unique in its approach of building model trains that could be easily disassembled and reassembled, encouraging its customers to take the trains apart and learn how they worked (McKenney, 1993; Dorfan, pp. 166–167).

At its peak, Dorfan had about 150 employees, but the Great Depression crippled the company and was not able to recover. It ended production in 1934, although old inventory was sold at least until 1936 (McKenney 1993; Dorfan, pp. 165–166).

Because of the inevitable deterioration of the engine castings, limited numbers of Dorfan trains survive today, making them among the highly sought after models by collectors.

Some of the Dorfan tooling was later used by Unique Art to make its tinplate trains in the early 1950s (McKenney, 1993; Dorfan, pp. 166).

title: Dorfan


text:
Gravity Probe A

Gravity Probe A (GP-A) was a space-based experiment to test the equivalence principle, a feature of Einstein's theory of relativity. It was performed jointly by the Smithsonian Astrophysical Observatory and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The experiment sent a hydrogen maser—a highly accurate frequency standard—into space to measure with high precision the rate at which time passes in a weaker gravitational field. Masses cause distortions in spacetime, which leads to the effects of length contraction and time dilation, both predicted results of Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity. Because of the bending of spacetime, an observer on Earth (in a lower gravitational potential) should measure a slower rate at which time passes than an observer that is higher in altitude (at higher gravitational potential). This effect is known as gravitational time dilation.

The experiment was a test of a major consequence of Einstein's general relativity, the equivalence principle. The equivalence principle states that a reference frame in a uniform gravitational field is indistinguishable from a reference frame that is under uniform acceleration. Further, the equivalence principle predicts that phenomenon of different time flow rates, present in a uniformly accelerating reference frame, will also be present in a stationary reference frame that is in a uniform gravitational field.

The probe was launched on June 18, 1976 from the NASA-Wallops Flight Center in Wallops Island, Virginia. The probe was carried via a Scout rocket, and attained a height of 10000 km, while remaining in space for 1 hour and 55 minutes, as intended. It returned to Earth by splashing down into the Atlantic Ocean.

Background
The objective of the Gravity Probe A experiment was to test the validity of the equivalence principle. The equivalence principle is a key component of Albert Einstein's theory of general relativity, and states that the laws of physics are the same in an accelerating reference frame as they are in a reference frame that is acted upon by a uniform gravitational field.

Equivalence principle
The equivalence principle can be understood by comparing a rocket ship in two scenarios. First, imagine a rocket ship that is at rest on the Earth's surface; objects dropped within the rocket ship will fall towards the floor with an acceleration of $22 W$. Now, imagine a distant rocket ship that has escaped Earth's gravitational field and is accelerating at a constant $9.8 m/s2$ due to thrust from its rockets; objects in the rocket ship that are unconstrained will move towards the floor with an acceleration of $9.8 m/s2$. This example shows one way that a uniformly accelerating reference frame is indistinguishable from a gravitational reference frame.

Furthermore, the equivalence principle postulates that phenomena that are caused by inertial effects will also be present due to gravitational effects. Consider a beam of light that is shined horizontally across a rocket ship, which is accelerating. According to a non-accelerating observer outside the rocket ship, the floor of the rocket ship accelerates towards the light beam. Therefore, the light beam does not seem to travel on a horizontal path according to the inside observer, rather the light ray appears to bend toward the floor. This is an example of an inertial effect that causes light to bend. The equivalence principle states that this inertial phenomenon will occur in a gravitational reference frame as well. Indeed, the phenomenon of gravitational lensing states that matter can bend light, and this phenomenon has been observed by the Hubble Space Telescope, and other experiments.

Time dilation
Time dilation refers to the expansion or contraction in the rate at which time passes, and was the subject of the Gravity Probe A experiment. Under Einstein's theory of general relativity, matter distorts the surrounding spacetime. This distortion causes time to pass more slowly in the vicinity of a massive object, compared to the rate experienced by a distant observer. The Schwarzschild metric, surrounding a spherically symmetric gravitating body, has a smaller coefficient at $$dt^2$$ closer to the body, which means slower rate of time flow there.

There is a similar idea of time dilation occurrence in Einstein's theory of special relativity (which involves neither gravity nor the idea of curved spacetime). Such time dilation appears in the Rindler coordinates, attached to a uniformly accelerating particle in a flat spacetime. Such a particle would observe time passing faster on the side it is accelerating towards and more slowly on the opposite side. From this apparent variance in time, Einstein inferred that change in velocity affects the relativity of simultaneity for the particle. Einstein's equivalence principle generalizes this analogy, stating that an accelerating reference frame is locally indistinguishable from an inertial reference frame with a gravity force acting upon it. In this way, the Gravity Probe A was a test of the equivalence principle, matching the observations in the inertial reference frame (of special relativity) of the Earth's surface affected by gravity, with the predictions of special relativity for the same frame treated as being accelerating upwards with respect to free fall reference, which can thought of being inertial and gravity-less.

Experimental setup
The $9.8 m/s2$ Gravity Probe A spacecraft housed an atomic hydrogen maser system. Maser is an acronym for microwave amplification by stimulated emission of radiation, and is similar to a laser, as it produces coherent electromagnetic waves in the microwave region of the electromagnetic spectrum. A hydrogen maser produces a very accurate signal (1.42 billion cycles per second), which is highly stable—to one part in a quadrillion. This is equivalent to a clock that drifts by less than two seconds every 100 million years. A microwave signal derived from the maser frequency was transmitted to the ground throughout the mission. The one-way signal received from the rocket was relativistically Doppler shifted due to the speed of the rocket and in addition was gravitationally Doppler blue-shifted by a minute amount.

In addition to the hydrogen maser carried by the rocket, another hydrogen maser on the ground was used as a source for continuous transmission of a microwave signal to the rocket. A microwave transponder carried on the rocket returned the signal to the Earth. On the way up, the signal received by the rocket was Doppler shifted due to the speed of the rocket and was gravitationally red-shifted by a minute amount. The transponder signal received on the ground was Doppler shifted due to the speed of the rocket and was gravitationally blue-shifted by the same amount that it was red-shifted on the way up. Since the gravitational Doppler shift of the signals on the way up always exactly cancelled the gravitational Doppler shift on its way down, the two way Doppler shift of the signal received on the ground depended only on the speed of the rocket.

In a microwave frequency mixer, one-half of the two-way Doppler shift from the transponded ground maser signal was subtracted from the Doppler shift of the space maser. In this way, the Doppler shift due to the spacecraft's motion was completely cancelled out, leaving only the gravitational component of the Doppler shift.

The probe was launched nearly vertically upward to cause a large change in the gravitational potential, reaching a height of 10,000 km. At this height, general relativity predicted a clock should run 4.5 parts in faster than one on the Earth, or about one second every 73 years. The maser oscillations represented the ticks of a clock, and by measuring the frequency of the maser as it changed elevation, the effects of gravitational time dilation were detected.

Results
The goal of the experiment was to measure the rate at which time passes in a higher gravitational potential, so to test this the maser in the probe was compared to a similar maser that remained on Earth. Before the two clock rates could be compared, the Doppler shift was subtracted from the clock rate measured by the maser that was sent into space, to correct for the relative motion between the observers on Earth and the motion of the probe. The two clock rates were then compared and further compared against the theoretical predictions of how the two clock rates should differ. The stability of the maser permitted measurement of changes in the rate of the maser of 1 part in for a 100-second measurement.

The experiment was thus able to test the equivalence principle. Gravity Probe A confirmed the prediction that deeper in the gravity well, the flow of time is slower, and the observed effects matched the predicted effects to an accuracy of about 70 parts per million.

title: Gravity Probe A


text:
George Carlyle Marler

George Carlyle Marler, (September 14, 1901 – April 10, 1981) was a politician, notary and philatelist in Quebec, Canada.

Education
Born in Montreal, Quebec, Marler studied at Selwyn House School, Bishop's College School, Royal Naval College of Canada and McGill University, where he earned a bachelor of civil law degree.

City Councillor
Marler served as city councillor from 1940 to 1947 and as Deputy Chairman of Montreal Executive Committee in Montreal.

Member of the legislature
Marler successfully ran as a Liberal candidate in the provincial district of Westmount–Saint-Georges in a by-election held on March 23, 1942. He was re-elected in the 1944, 1948 and 1952 elections.

Leader of the Opposition
In the 1948 election, Liberal Leader Adélard Godbout lost re-election in the district of L'Islet. Marler took over as Leader of the Official Opposition. Godbout resigned as Liberal Leader on July 22, 1949. At the 1950 Quebec Liberal Party leadership convention, Marler declined nomination, and Georges-Émile Lapalme became the new party leader on May 20, 1950. However, Lapalme failed to win a seat in the legislature in the 1952 election, so Marler continued as Leader of the Opposition until Lapalme won a by-election in 1953.

Member of the Federal Cabinet
Marler resigned from the legislature on June 30, 1954, and was appointed to the federal cabinet of Louis Saint-Laurent as minister of transport. Later that year he won a by-election and became the Member of Pariliament for the federal district of Saint-Antoine—Westmount. He was re-elected in the 1957, but was defeated in 1958.

Legislative Councillor
Marler was appointed Minister without Portfolio in the Cabinet of Jean Lesage in October 1960. A month later, he was appointed to the Legislative Council of Quebec.

Death
Marler died on April 10, 1981, in Montreal.

Books

 * The Edward VII issue of Canada : a detailed study / by George C. Marler. -- [Ottawa] : National Postal Museum, c1975.
 * The law of real property : Quebec / by William de Montmollin Marler ; completed and arranged by George C. Marler ; with a foreword by P.B. Mignault. -- Toronto : Burroughs, 1932.
 * Canada, the admiral issue, 1911-1925 / by George C. Marler. -- Toronto : Unitrade Press, 1980.
 * Canada : notes on the 1911-1925 issue. -- State College, Pa : American Philatelic Society, 1949.
 * Booklets of the admiral stamps of 1911 to 1925 / by George C. Marler ; editor R.J. Woolley. -- [Canada? : s.n., 1970?] ([Thornhill [Ont.] : J.F. Webb]).

Archives
There is a George Carlyle Marler fonds at Library and Archives Canada.

title: George Carlyle Marler


text:
Talk:Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria

Requested move 11 May 2022

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: no consensus. Editors supported various alternatives titles, including the current one, with no consensus for any of them. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 13:40, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria → Archduke Franz Ferdinand – Isn't he the only Archduke Franz Ferdinand? Jishiboka1 (talk) 05:07, 11 May 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. ASUKITE  14:13, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Support move to Franz Ferdinand per WP:SOVEREIGN. BilledMammal (talk) 09:31, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * So this depends on if 'Archduke Franz Ferdinand' or 'Franz Ferdinand' is the common name per WP:SOVEREIGN point 2—blindlynx 14:04, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Ngrams may be of use here. "Franz Ferdinand" will always get more hits than "Archduke Franz Ferdinand" since the former is a proper substring of the latter. The linked query shows what percentage of occurrences of "Franz Ferdinand" are immediately preceded by "Archduke". For most years this hovers around 50%. Data after 2003 or so may be polluted by references to the band. Colin M (talk) 17:22, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Alternative Franz Ferdinand, Archduke of Austria, since "Archduke" and "Austria" are disambiguatory information, they should follow the name -- 65.92.246.142 (talk) 11:45, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That specific style seems to refer to people who were the rulers of the Archduchy of Austria, of which Franz Ferdinand was not. 67.173.23.66 (talk) 22:35, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Support per nominator. KevinNov3 (talk) 12:48, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: WikiProject Austria has been notified of this discussion. ASUKITE  14:14, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Relisting comment - relisted because I see 3 viable options, the nom Archduke Franz Ferdinand and one supporter, Franz Ferdinand and Franz Ferdinand, Archduke of Austria. Per WP:OTHEROPTIONS, a closer is able to choose, but it still seems a bit close at the moment. ASUKITE 14:16, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I cannot see a problem that this move would solve, and whereas the current title evokes an immediate recollection of who we are talking about, plain "Franz Ferdinand" could be anyone. Could possibly be the goldfish who lived in our hall from the late fifties. Imaginatorium (talk) 05:23, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Ferdinand in Canton, China on Monday, 24 July, 1893
Photo of his visit to Canton. https://hpcbristol.net/visual/Hv40-43 222.152.178.243 (talk) 07:49, 21 March 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Fall 2023 HIST 401
— Assignment last updated by WingstopRanchFan (talk) 02:36, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 10 December 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. you are completely correct; withdrawing. (closed by non-admin page mover) House Blaster talk 13:45, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria → Franz Ferdinand – WP:SOVEREIGN says that Article titles are not normally prefixed with "King", "Queen", "Emperor" or equivalent and Only use a territorial designation (e.g. country) when disambiguation is needed. House Blaster talk 01:32, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose - At the very least without mentioning the country, he's better known as Archduke Franz Ferdinand. GoodDay (talk) 08:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment There is no need to mention the country for disambiguation reasons. The title of the Archduke was used exclusively by members of the House of Habsburg, and always in reference to the Archduchy of Austria. Dimadick (talk) 20:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. He's not a sovereign, so WP:SOVEREIGN doesn't apply. The relevant naming convention is Naming conventions (royalty and nobility). Current title meets policy criteria at Article titles. DrKay (talk) 08:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per prior posters.2601:249:9301:D570:186:3FF3:D362:9FD1 (talk) 02:54, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose per all those opposing, the Archduke was not a sovereign. Richiepip (talk) 04:38, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 June 2024
Please add the category Category:Heirs presumptive. 98.228.137.44 (talk) 21:26, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Done.Dimadick (talk) 11:23, 9 June 2024 (UTC)


text:
Philipp Jakob Cretzschmar

Philipp Jakob Cretzschmar (11 June 1786 – 4 May 1845) was a German physician and natural scientist.

Cretzschmar was born at Sulzbach and studied medicine at the University of Würzburg. He taught anatomy and zoology at the Senckenberg Medical Institute of Frankfurt.

Cretzschmar was the founder and second director of the Senckenberg Natural History Society in 1817. One of the founding members of the society was Eduard Rüppell, and the two men collaborated in publishing the results of Rüppell's explorations in Africa. The Atlas zu der Reise im nördlichen Afrika ("Atlas of Rüppell's Travels in Northern Africa"; 1826–31)  included an ornithological section by Cretzschmar describing around thirty new species, including Meyer's parrot, Nubian bustard, Goliath heron, streaked scrub warbler and Cretzschmar's bunting. In the field of mammalogy, he is the binomial author of the scimitar-horned oryx and Soemmerring's gazelle.

The "Cretzschmar-Medaille" is an award offered by the Senckenberg foundation for outstanding work in natural sciences.

title: Philipp Jakob Cretzschmar