text:
Centreboard

A centreboard or centerboard (US) is a retractable hull appendage which pivots out of a slot in the hull of a sailboat, known as a centreboard trunk (UK) or centerboard case (US). The retractability allows the centreboard to be raised to operate in shallow waters, to move the centre of lateral resistance (offsetting changes to the sailplan that move the centre of effort aft), to reduce drag when the full area of the centreboard is not needed, or when removing the boat from the water, as when trailering. A centreboard which consists of solely a pivoting metal plate is called a centerplate. A daggerboard is similar but slides vertically rather than pivoting.

The analog in a scow is a bilgeboard: these are fitted in pairs and used one at a time.

History
Lt. John Schank (c. 1740 – 6 February 1823) was an officer of the British Royal Navy and is credited with the invention of the centerboard. Schank, however, gave credit for the idea to British Brigadier General Earl Percy.

Purpose
A centreboard (often called a lifting foil in a modern racing dinghy) is used to provide lift to counter the lateral force from the sails. This is required for sailboats to move in directions other than downwind, since the force of the sail is never closer than 45 degrees to the apparent wind. Since most sailboats are symmetric along their axis of motion, when sailing upright, the lateral force can come from either side, which means that centreboards must use symmetric foil shapes so they will operate with equal efficiency on either tack. The more a yacht heels the more asymmetric its hull shape becomes.

The centerboard, daggerboard or bilgeboard can be used as a recovery platform upon which to stand, providing increased leverage, in the event the dinghy overturns via a capsize or turtle.

How it works
The efficiency of a centreboard improves with increasing aspect ratio. A long narrow centreboard produces less drag than a short, wide one for a given amount of lift, resulting in a faster boat that can point closer into the wind. A fore and aft, pivoting centreboard can also be used to move the centre of lateral resistance aft to match a change in sail plan, such as furling or dropping the jib. A retracting centreboard is more complex than a fixed keel, and most take up space inside the hull of the boat that could otherwise be used for passenger accommodation. Other types feature a casing under the boat, which does not take up space but instead has the problem of increased drag. For this reason, it is not uncommon to find boats with a combination of shallow keel and centreboard (e.g. Randmeer). The keel provides the housing for the centreboard, moving it out of the hull, but adds only a small amount of draft to the boat. The centreboard can then be lowered in deeper waters to increase the amount of lift. Ballast is usually provided in the keel, keeping the centreboard lighter and easier to handle.

Centreboards are often ballasted in keelboats and called "lifting keels" because like keels they are centred under the hull, although unlike keels, they are retractable. Ballasted centreboards are generally not locked in place when lowered; the mass of the ballast keeps them down. This also provides a measure of safety should the boat run aground—the force of impact will push the foil back into the centreboard trunk, rather than breaking it, as might happen if the board were locked in place. The mass of a ballasted foil means that a system of pulleys may be required to allow the sailor to lift the foil, and a method of latching the board in the upward position is needed. A centreboard differs from a ballast keel in that centreboards do not contribute to the stability of the vessel; their purpose is to provide lateral resistance. In small sailing dinghies it is rare to find a ballasted centreboard.

On larger sailing vessels, a similar design is sometimes incorporated to facilitate better navigation in shallow water than a fixed keel would allow. In these situations the appendage is generally referred to as a "lifting keel" (which is usually pivoted but occasionally retracted like a daggerboard) or a "swing keel".

In such installations on offshore vessels, the keel should ideally be lockable in any position, so that it does not fall back into the keel well if the vessel is inverted.

When the craft is moving, the centreboard acts as a lifting foil.

title: Centreboard


text:
Unteruhldingen

Unteruhldingen is a small village, part of the town of Uhldingen-Mühlhofen, on the northwestern shore of Lake Constance, Germany. It is home to the Pfahlbauten, an open-air museum displaying reconstructions of Neolithic and Bronze Age pile dwellings. The buildings are idealized reconstructions from between the 1922 and 1941, which were designed based on archeological digs of the Wasserburg Buchau at Federsee. After 1945 the museum was led by the controversial but knowledgeable archeologist Hans Reinerth, one of the leading Nazi archaeologists of Amt Rosenberg. This museum has been expanded since to incorporate modern research.

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

title: Unteruhldingen


text:
Peninsular Ranges

The Peninsular Ranges (also called the Lower California province ) are a group of mountain ranges that stretch 1500 km from Southern California to the southern tip of the Baja California peninsula; they are part of the North American Pacific Coast Ranges, which run along the Pacific Coast from Alaska to Mexico. Elevations range from 500 to 10,834 ft.

Geography
The Peninsular Ranges include the Santa Ana Mountains, Temescal Mountains, and other mountains and ranges of the Perris Block, San Jacinto Mountains, and Laguna Mountains of southern California continuing from north to south with the Sierra de Juárez, Sierra de San Pedro Mártir, Sierra de San Borja, Sierra de San Francisco, Sierra de la Giganta, and Sierra de la Laguna in Baja California. Palomar Mountain, home to Palomar Observatory, is in the Peninsular Ranges in San Diego County, as are Viejas Mountain and the San Ysidro Mountains. The Peninsular Ranges run predominantly north-south, unlike the Transverse Ranges to their north, which mostly run east-west.

Geology
Rocks in the ranges are dominated by Mesozoic granitic rocks, derived from the same massive batholith which forms the core of the Sierra Nevada Mountains in California. They are part of a geologic province known as the Salinian Block which broke off the North American Plate as the San Andreas Fault and Gulf of California came into being.

Between this set of ranges and the Transverse Ranges is the complex Malibu Coast—Santa Monica—Hollywood fault, which exists as the border between these two mostly geologically unitary provinces.

Nearctic
Most of the Peninsular Ranges are in the Nearctic realm. Several terrestrial ecoregions cover portions of the Peninsular Ranges. On the western side of the northern portion of the ranges, the California montane chaparral and woodlands sub-ecoregion of the California chaparral and woodlands ecoregion covers southern California and northern Baja California. On the western side of the southern portion of the ranges, the Baja California desert ecoregion covers the southern portion of the Peninsular Ranges in Baja California and Baja California Sur. On the eastern side of the northern ranges, the Sonoran Desert ecoregion covers southeastern California and northeastern Baja California as far south as the town of Loreto, Baja California Sur. On the eastern side of the Laguna Mountains in San Diego County, the Anza-Borrego Desert State Park is known for its springtime profusion of Colorado Desert (Sonoran) wildflowers. On the eastern (Gulf of California) side of the southern portion of the ranges, the Gulf of California xeric scrub ecoregion covers the range in Baja California Sur.

The higher portions of the Peninsular Ranges, especially the west-facing slopes, are home to coniferous and mixed evergreen forests. Cleveland National Forest covers much of the higher Southern California Peninsular Ranges. The vegetation includes oak woodlands and forests of Jeffrey pine (Pinus jeffreyi) and Coulter pine (Pinus coulteri). The Sierra Juarez and San Pedro Martir pine-oak forests cover upper slopes of Sierra Juarez and San Pedro Martir ranges in Baja California. These isolated forests, predominantly tamarack pine (Pinus contorta subsp. murrayana), sugar pine (Pinus lambertiana), Parry pinyon (Pinus quadrifolia), white fir (Abies concolor), California incense cedar (Calocedrus decurrens), and junipers. Oak species include coast live oak (Quercus agrifolia), Engelmann oak (Quercus engelmannii), canyon live oak (Quercus chrysolepis), and Baja oak (Quercus peninsularis). These higher portions of the Peninsular Ranges harbor many rare and endemic species.

Neotropic
Southern Baja California Sur is part of the Neotropical realm. The southern end of the Baja California Peninsula, including the Sierra de la Laguna Peninsular Range, was, like the rest of the peninsula, originally part of the Mexican mainland. It was sheared off the mainland, becoming at one time an island, and evolved in relative isolation from the northern part of the peninsula and ranges. Its flora and fauna share many affinities with southern Mexico and Central America. It includes three distinct ecoregions, the Sierra de la Laguna dry forests, Sierra de la Laguna pine-oak forests, and San Lucan xeric scrub.

title: Peninsular Ranges


text:
Laser (dinghy)

The Laser is a class of single-handed, one-design sailing dinghies using a common hull design with three interchangeable rigs of different sail areas, appropriate to a given combination of wind strength and crew weight. Ian Bruce and Bruce Kirby designed the Laser in 1970 with an emphasis on simplicity and performance.

The Laser is a widely produced class of dinghies. As of 2018, there were more than 215,000 boats worldwide. It is an international class with sailors in 120 countries, and an Olympic class since 1996. Its wide acceptance is attributable to its robust construction, simple rig and ease of sailing that offer competitive racing due to tight class association controls which eliminate differences in hull, sails, and equipment.

The International Laser Class Association (ILCA) defines the specifications and competition rules for the boat, which is officially referred to as the ILCA Dinghy, due to a trademark dispute.

Production

The Laser is manufactured by different companies in different regions. They include LaserPerformance in Europe and the Americas, Performance Sailcraft Australia in Oceania, and Performance Sailcraft Japan in Asia. In 2019, the Laser's status as an Olympic class was reviewed, and retained on the condition that the class complied with the Olympic equipment manufacturers (OEM) policy, allowing any suitably qualified manufacturer to supply boats and class equipment on a Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) basis. The move would potentially see a significant increase in the number of Laser producers.

Design
The boat's design began in 1969 with a phone call between Canadians Bruce Kirby and Ian Bruce. While discussing the possibility of a car-topped dinghy (a boat small enough to be carried on a roof rack of a typical car) for a line of camping equipment, Bruce Kirby sketched what would be known as "the million dollar doodle". The plans stayed with Kirby until 1970 when One Design and Offshore Yachtsman magazine held a regatta for boats under $1000, called "America's Teacup". Hans Fogh made the sail and helmed the prototype in the regatta. After a few sail modifications, the Laser easily won its class. The prototype was originally named the "Weekender"; the sail held the letters TGIF, a common American abbreviation for "Thank God it's Friday". In December 1970 Dave Balfour, a McGill engineering student, suggested the name Laser and contributed the Laser sail insignia. The Laser sailboat was officially unveiled at the New York Boat Show in 1971 where many purchase orders were placed.

Bruce and Kirby agreed to put the boat into production with Bruce manufacturing the craft and Kirby receiving royalties on each unit. As world-wide demand grew, they realized that regional licensing the manufacturing would deliver boats more economically than exporting them from Canada.

The Laser hull accommodates interchangeable rigs with different sail areas. This allows for a wide range of sailors to sail and compete in a range of wind conditions despite the Laser's small ideal crew weight range for a given rig. Three rigs are recognised by the International Laser Association: original Laser Standard with a sail area of 7.06 m²; the Laser Radial with a sail area of 5.76 m²; and the Laser 4.7 with a sail area of 4.7 m².

The Laser's hull is constructed from fibreglass. The deck has a foam layer underneath for strength and buoyancy. The daggerboard is removable for storage and transport. The dinghy is manufactured by independent companies under licence in different parts of the world, including Performance Sailcraft Australia (Oceania) and Performance Sailcraft Japan.

As a one-design class of sailboat, all Lasers are built to the same specifications specified in the Laser Construction Manual. The association carries out inspections on manufacturers to ensure that boats are being made to the correct design. These factory specifications are the measurement of boats in a traditional sense. Sailors are prohibited from making any changes to the hull, sail, and spars unless specifically and positively permitted by the rules and are only allowed to use original parts. At regattas, boats are not measured, but rather inspected to ensure conformity with the rules.

The Laser hull is 4.19 m long, with a waterline length of 3.96 m. The hull weight is 59 kg, which makes the boat light enough to lift onto a car-top rack.

The various sizes of Laser are all cat-rigged. The Laser Standard sail has a sail area of 7.06 m2.

The Laser is designed to be sailed single-handed although class rules permit two sailors.

Variants
Lasers can be rigged with a variety of rigs. Three of these rigs, the Standard, Radial and 4.7 are recognised by the International Laser Association, while other rigs have also been developed by third parties and are also available.

Laser Standard

The Laser Standard, or ILCA 7, is the original Laser rig. It has been sailed as the Olympic men's singlehanded dinghy since the 1996 Atlanta Olympics.The Standard Laser uses a Portsmouth Yardstick of 1101for racing involving other classes. US Sailing sets its North American yardstick at DPN = 91.1.

Laser Radial
In Europe the smaller Laser Radial, or ILCA 6, has surpassed the original Laser Standard sail in popularity and replaced the Europe Dinghy as the Women's Singlehanded Dinghy for the 2008 Olympics. The Radial uses the same hull and fittings as the Laser Standard, but has a smaller sail (5.8 m2) than the Standard with a different cut, and has a shorter lower mast section. Optimal weight for this rig is 121 to 159 lb. The Laser Radial rig has a UK Portsmouth Yardstick number of 1150. Its DPN is 96.7.

Laser 4.7
A smaller sail plan for the Laser, the Laser 4.7 or ILCA 4, was developed about a decade after the Laser Radial. The sail area was reduced by 35% from the Standard (from 7 to 4.7 m2) with a shorter, pre-bent bottom mast section, allowing even lighter sailors to sail it. The same formula as the Radial is kept. The hull is the same as the Standard and Radial. The optimal weight for this rig is 110 –, thus becoming an ideal boat for young sailors moving from the Optimist/RS Tera who are still too light for a normal Laser. The Laser 4.7 rig has a UK Portsmouth Yardstick number of 1210. Its DPN is 95.4.

Operational history
The Laser is raced worldwide from club levels to international and Olympic competitions.

Laser world championships are held in all three rigs and across junior, open, and masters age groups. In total in 2019, the Laser class association awarded 11 world championships. Places for world championships are limited due to high demand and are allotted to countries on the basis of the number of paid association members in each country.

In the Olympics, men race in Laser Standards and women race in Laser Radials.

Class association
The ILCA governs boat specifications and competition. The class association operates on four levels: the world level; a regional level based around continents; a district level based around states in the USA and Australia, and nations elsewhere; and at a local fleet level. The association plays a major role in ensuring conformity to Laser class rules worldwide.

Litigation
Bruce Kirby withdrew the license he had issued to LaserPerformance and later filed a lawsuit against LaserPerformance and Farzad Rastegar on March 4, 2013, claiming non-payment of design royalties. Kirby also claims that the LaserPerformance boats have had issues with quality and parts availability. Kirby required the International Sailing Federation on March 25, 2013, to ask the International Laser Class Association to stop issuing ISAF license plaques to LaserPerformance (Europe) Limited, claiming that LaserPerformance were no longer a licensed builder. Instead ISAF and the ILCA issued a new plaque design, and changed the class rules so that a builder no longer needed to be licensed by Bruce Kirby.

Bruce Kirby Inc. has licensed the sailboat design under the new class name, "Kirby Torch", grandfathering Lasers bearing the "Bruce Kirby" plaque into the new class. On August 12, 2016, Bruce Kirby's claims were dismissed by the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut.

In 2019 the ILCA moved against Laser Performance (the UK licensed builder which also owned the trademark on the Laser name) and withdrew its right to build officially measured boats. The ILCA has chosen the new name of "ILCA Dinghy" for the boat.

In 2020, the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut found boat builder Quarter Moon (QMI) and LaserPerformance (Europe) Limited (LPE) liable for a sum of $6,857,736, payable to Kirby.

Similar boats

 * Impulse (dinghy)
 * RS Aero
 * Phantom (dinghy)

title: Laser (dinghy)


text:
Talk:Classful network

Loopback
I'm pretty sure 127.0.0.1 is the normal loopback address. Any ideas on resolving this? --217.204.169.167 15:56, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)#

You are correct: 127.0.0.1 is the normal loopback address. However, it's the lowest usable address in the classful 127.0.0.0/8 loopback network which is reserved for local loopback, assuming the old rules of not using the all-zeros address (which requirement has been relaxed for CIDR). So both statements are valid. -- The Anome 16:02, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'm afraid of Americans
Don't be, it is the American Government you need to worry about.[Anonymous] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.19.199.6 (talk • contribs)

 * I suggest you become a bit more familiar with the history of the Internet. In point of fact, the military proper had relatively little to do with the original development of the ARPANET and Internet, but provided funding to academic research organizations, including European and Asian organizations. I suggest you look at the rules at which IP addresses were originally allocated, and the present roles of the continental Regional Internet Registries, such as RIPE-NCC, APNIC, LACNIC, AfriNIC, and yes, ARIN. You seem to have an idea that there is some American organization that can give and take IP addresses away. It's not. Certain companies and universities, involved in research early on, did get large blocks. Some, such as Stanford University, returned their original large space, but at their own initiative. One of the reasons the allocation was wasteful is a point of this article: classful addressing is inefficient, but that's how initial allocations were made. Techniques such as Network Address Translation didn't exist for the ARPANET.

 * There are perfectly valid technical reasons to have blocks of registered addresses that are not accessible in the public Internet, such as for international telecommunications and financial organizations that are sufficiently large to need a block they can allocate to new members, without fear of duplication.

 * Classless Inter-Domain Routing (CIDR) enormously increased address allocation efficiency. In any event, whether or not organizations give up IPv4 address space, there are good reasons to go, systematically, to IPv6 addressing. The obsolescence of the IPv4 address space is not merely a matter of exhaustion, but of issues such as aggregation. Hcberkowitz 22:44, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I have to chime in regards to the 2007 reference to ipv6. It's 2011 and we don't have anymore IPV6 now than we did in June 25 2007. I also don't understand how ip numbers that aren't accessable by the internet are useful to banks and other sectors. Bank of America has 5 or so million and I would entertain anyone to explain the need for that. Is someone going to say all the atms need an ip or 2? I also don't know how accurate the statement saying "nat wasn't around" is. While the term nat may not have been around the technology needed for deployment would of been no harder back then so im sure they did have it to some regard.

We might have large numbers of ipv6 being assigned to isps and organizations but none of it is being used in a production setting. I have it with hurricane electric and their ipv6 won't talk to level3's. What good is ipv6 when it won't talk to it's neighbor? All the hype and money he.net invested in getting ipv6 out there apparently didn't also go to their peering relationships to make sure their ipv6 was of any use outside of their network. Woods01 (talk) 22:07, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

My workplace purchased a block of ipv6 a few years back now, and we show no signs of using it any time soon. This is 10 years after the last comment about not using it in a production setting.--Sombodystolemyname (talk) 00:48, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

 * Suggesting that some orgs should give up addresses is not the same as saying that IPv6 is a bad idea. If the exhaustion of addresses is occuring more rapidly than IPv6 testing and deployment, then adjusting some of the wildly inefficient allocations seems like a natural way to bridge the gap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.87.16.4 (talk) 10:43, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Lead
Normally I'd just do a little gnoming on this, but I'm not sure I understand the subject sufficiently to be certain I'm not mistaken... "defined a different size or type (unicast or multicast) of the network."

Shouldn't "the" be removed from that sentence, or else the "defined a different size or type" be changed to "defined the size or type"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dr.queso (talk • contribs) 04:21, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree the wording of the lead was somewhat confusing, and I have reworded it. Part of that was to change the tense from "defined" to "defines" because although classful networks are no longer used on the Internet, and indeed are probably extremely rare if not non-existent, there is nothing to stop someone setting up a classful network, so strictly past tense is clumsy and inaccurate. Johnuniq (talk) 07:20, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Why does Cisco still care?
As I study for my CCNA exam, after many years of doing this sort of stuff, I am repeatedly bumping on the fact that Cisco Certifications still care about classful addressing, and I just can NOT figure out why. Sure, it's an interesting historical note, but WHY do they insist on you learning about it? It seems a worthwhile note to add here, if anyone has any clue. Jbsegal (talk) 17:50, 27 September 2020 (UTC)

I agree - I use it absolutely never in my job.--Sombodystolemyname (talk) 00:44, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

It's also required knowledge in CompTIA's Network+ exam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.147.234.117 (talk) 22:02, 28 January 2022 (UTC)

ARPANET network number
the most significant eight bits of the 32-bit IPv4 address was the network number field

As a consequence of this architecture, the address space supported only a low number (254) of independent networks.

If I have eight bits in the network number field, I'd expect to get 256 possible networks out of that. Were there two special network numbers that couldn't be assigned to networks? Similar to the network ID and broadcast address in the host part of IPv4? Mb720 (talk) 00:34, 16 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Classful network


text:
Scheunenviertel

(German: "Barn Quarter") is a neighborhood of Mitte in the centre of Berlin. It is situated to the north of the medieval Altberlin area, east of the Rosenthaler Straße and Hackescher Markt.

Until the Second World War it was regarded as a slum district and had a substantial Jewish population with a high proportion of migrants from Eastern Europe.

History
The name derives from several barns erected here outside the city walls in 1672 by order of Elector Frederick William of Brandenburg. The barns were used to store hay for use at a large cattle market at nearby Alexanderplatz. In 1737 King Frederick William I of Prussia required Berlin Jews to settle here.

Prior to World War I, the Berlin City Council (Magistrat) redeveloped parts of the area. Since then the core of the neighborhood is the triangular Rosa-Luxemburg-Platz, former Bülowplatz, where on 9 August 1931 the Communist and later Stasi Executive Erich Mielke shot two police officers. Mielke fled to Moscow shortly afterwards and did not face trial for the murders until 1992.

Since German reunification the Scheunenviertel, together with the neighbouring Spandauer Vorstadt, has become a fashionable district popular with younger people.

Note that Scheunenviertel is often mistakenly used as a synonym for Berlin's Jewish quarter. Jewish cultural and commercial life was, however, centered on the neighboring Spandauer Vorstadt, where the New Synagogue and other Jewish establishments are located. The Nazis had applied the term Scheunenviertel to both of the neighborhoods in order to damage the Jewish neighborhood of Spandauer Vorstadt's reputation.

Sights

 * Volksbühne theatre at Rosa-Luxemburg-Platz by Oskar Kaufmann and Franz Metzner, 1914
 * Karl-Liebknecht-Haus, 1912, former seat of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Germany (Kommunistische Partei Deutschlands), now headquarters of The Left party (Die Linke)
 * "Babylon" Cinema by Hans Poelzig, 1929, a location of the annual Berlin International Film Festival
 * Old Garrison Cemetery (Alter Garnisonsfriedhof), dedicated about 1706, burial site of lieutenant general Ludwig Adolf Wilhelm von Lützow (1782–1834), writer Friedrich de la Motte Fouqué (1777–1843), field marshal Karl Friedrich von dem Knesebeck (1768–1848) and theologian Emil Frommel (1828–96).
 * Museum of Otto Weidt's Workshop. Located in the workshop of Otto Weidt, who, as owner of the workshop, employed deaf and blind Jews during World War II. His employees were protected from deportation thanks to him. He provided them with forged IDs and hid Jewish families in his studio. The atelier, where historical documents and letters are on display, is open to visitors.

title: Scheunenviertel


text:
Talk:X86

{{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis | archiveprefix=Talk:X86/Archives/ | format=Y | age=2160 | minkeepthreads=2 | archivenow= {{resolved|,{{Resolved|,{{done}},{{Done}} }} {{Lowercase title}} {{archive box| {{ Yearly archive list }}|bot=ClueBot III|age=90}}
 * root  = Talk:X86/Archives/
 * prefix =

Bad colors for processor registers
The overview of the processor registers uses bad colors, that are not clear enough for color vision deficiency. Actually, the first few colors look like they come straight from a color vision test.

Also the organization is not intuitive. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.219.179.13 (talk) 16:09, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Nintendo Switch is NOT x86
It's clearly specified in the article page, whoever wrote that opinion clearly has some reading disability or is practicing his/her skills on NewSpeak when he/she applies for INGSOC. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 190.87.162.72 (talk) 19:15, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
 * To which opinion are you referring? If you're referring to
 * As of 2021, most desktop computers, laptops and game consoles (with the exception of the Nintendo Switch ) sold are based on the x86 architecture,
 * then it explicitly notes that the switch isn't x86, complete with a reference demonstrating that. If you're referring to the claim as a whole, there's a call for a citation on that. Guy Harris (talk) 21:24, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:X86


text:
The Masterplan (album)

The Masterplan is a compilation album by English rock band Oasis. It was released on 2 November 1998 by Creation Records, the band's final release through the label. It comprises B-sides which never made it onto an album up to that point. Originally intended for release only in areas such as the United States and Japan, where the tracks were previously only available on expensive European-import singles, The Masterplan reached number 2 in the UK, where it initially went platinum, and number 51 in the United States. However, it did reach the Top 20 in various charts around the world, going on to sell 3 million copies. It has since been certified triple platinum in the UK. Four songs from the album appear on the 2006 compilation album Stop the Clocks.

Reception
The Masterplan received mixed reviews from music critics on release. Reviewing in Rolling Stone, Barney Hoskyns criticised the collection as containing unimaginative songs, save for "Half the World Away" and "Headshrinker". Similarly, Matt Diehl of Entertainment Weekly considered the compilation "struttingly inconsistent", further criticising the band's consistent use of Beatles influences. On the other hand, Robert Hilburn in the Los Angeles Times was more favourable, writing: "virtually all the tunes on The Masterplan are appealing enough to have deserved a spot on one of Oasis' regular albums, and the best rank with the group's finest moments." James Oldham in NME expressed similar sentiments, finding that many of the collection's B-sides were better than the A-sides they were supporting. He continues that the collection further showcases the group's influences, overall considering it the band's "third best album". Reviewing the compilation in 2000, Michael Sandlin of Pitchfork gave the album an unfavourable review. He found that while some tracks, naming "Fade Away" and "Headshrinker" were better than some of their studio album tracks, the collection overall contained outtakes that were overall forgettable, stating "some outtakes are initially scrapped for good reason".

Retrospectively, The Masterplan has received positive reviews, with many considering it one of Oasis' finest. In 2008, Spin magazine's David Marchese praised The Masterplan as a "greatest hits" collection, featuring "swirling epics, pop-rock confections, [and] headbutt hard rockers". Writing for AllMusic, Stephen Thomas Erlewine gave immense praise to The Masterplan, stating: "Apart from the sludgy instrumental 'The Swamp Song', there isn't a weak track here, and the brilliant moments are essential not only for Oasis fans, but any casual follower of Britpop or post-grunge rock & roll." On the eve of the collection's 20th anniversary in 2018, Ian King of Stereogum also praised The Masterplan. While he likewise found "The Swamp Song" the collection's weak point, he wrote that the collection features many of the band's best songs. As the band would feature personnel changes following its release, King considers the compilation "the last refuge of the band's dreaming, climbing past; Manchester, Britpop, and all". In 2017, Henry Yates of NME ranked The Masterplan as Oasis' third best album, writing, "by the time this compilation arrived in '98, it came laced with forehead-slapping frustration that Noel didn't hold [these tracks] for a great third album."

Legacy
In 2023, The Masterplan marked its 25th anniversary with a reissue, peaking at #2 on the UK Albums Chart. Later in 2023, two songs from the album, "The Masterplan" and "Going Nowhere," were re-recorded by Noel Gallagher's High Flying Birds at Abbey Road.

Personnel

 * Liam Gallagher – lead vocals (1, 2, 5, 7-9, 11-13), tambourine
 * Noel Gallagher – lead guitar, acoustic guitar, backing vocals, lead vocals (1, 3, 4, 10, 14), bass (4, 6, 14) drums (10), strings and horn arrangements (4, 14)
 * Paul "Bonehead" Arthurs – rhythm guitar, acoustic guitar, keyboards (2, 3, 8-11, 14), accordion (11)
 * Paul "Guigsy" McGuigan – bass (1, 2, 5, 7-9, 11-13)
 * Alan "Whitey" White – drums, percussion (2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 14)
 * Tony McCarroll – drums (1, 5, 7, 8, 11, 13)

Additional personnel
 * Mike Rowe – keyboards (4, 12)
 * Paul Weller – harmonica, lead guitar (6)
 * Nick Ingman – strings and horn arrangements (4, 14)
 * Owen Morris - bass (10), production

title: The Masterplan (album)


text:
Talk:Swarthmore College

List of alumni in main article
Re this edit summary: use of the number of interwiki links as a yardstick for notability is not unheard of on Wikipedia (it's sometimes used on requested moves and was used on year/date articles), it works almost all of the time, and the system has been completely workable on this article for the last three years. (Also see my previous ramblings on this topic). I've added references to each alumnus listed here along with their graduation date; in many cases the references were taken from the respective Wikipedia articles. I couldn't verify the graduation year of Justin Hall (who has only five interlanguage links) so I thought it might be a good idea to tighten the criteria further, and decided on a reasonable cut-off of 25 names on the list (which can be handily achieved by restricting the list to twelve interwiki links or more). Yes, it's a bit arbitrary, but at least it's measurable (unlike making arguments about which people are or are not necessary on the article). Quick disclaimer here: my personal favourite on the list, Peter Schickele is on thirteen interwiki links ... if we tightened the criteria even further (to twenty, say), we'd lose him, but that's a small price to pay. There's a comprehensive list at List of Swarthmore College people anyway. Graham 87 06:52, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I've brought this up with the higher education project (there's also this relevant project guide). This topic was also brought up at Talk:List of Swarthmore College people, but I think discussion is best here. Graham 87 07:15, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, if we tighten the selection criteria much more, we'd lose Hawaii Governor Josh Green (14 interwiki links); I think state governors are inherently notable for this sort of list (especially when not from the home state of the university) and he's particularly relevant right now). I can quickly tell how many interlanguage links a page has because I have compact language links turned off and my screen reader tells me how many items there are in a list. Graham 87 07:36, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 * , collegiate and university articles here are famously subject to bloat and puffery. You'll have no argument from me on reducing the number of alumni highlighted on the main page, nor certainly on the larger List of Swarthmore College people, which is also bloated. A first rule on that page certainly ought to be that only persons with separate Wikipedia articles ought to be listed.
 * But here... We've been reverting each other, but we're essentially on the same side.  I likewise want to reduce the headcount of alumni on the main article.  Your novel application of ascertaining how many interwiki (~foreign language wikis) each biographical article has is simply a specious fact that has no bearing on actual notability.  (If I sought to determine notability of a Japanese samurai, I would look to the Japanese Wikipedia, NOT to the English Wiki.  Sally Ride or James Michener are notable regardless if the Czech, or Japanese or Bantu wikipedias pick them up.)  Even if this criteria was previously used, it has fallen into disuse as method of determining notability. A far better process would be to determine, by category of professional life, which titles, awards, accomplishments or other bar must be met for each profession.  This is more fair.  Publish those criteria on the Talk Page, and then assess each alumnus on the main page (or on the separate and larger List of Swarthmore College People) against those criteria. Jax MN (talk) 19:34, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, but we'd need standardised criteria like that on every article about a college/university with a similarly long history ... which goes way beyond this page ... and I'd be concerned about the subjectivity of such criteria. Since there are so many people to choose from here, we need some kind of fairly aggressive way to prune who is and is not listed. International prominence seems like a good place to start (especially because Swarthmore attracts many people from outside its local area and even outside the US) and, apart from winners of things like Nobel Prizes (which are already listed separately), a reasonable first-order approximation of that is the number of interwiki links a page has. I know it's a blunt instrument which has occasionally been gamed in the past but it's one of the most easily measurable ones we have. (One way to find out the number of interwiki links a page has, besides the one mentioned above, is by going to its Wikidata item). As for your Japanese samurai example, if I were checking the Japanese Wikipedia and found one that seemed to be very notable indeed, I would have very grave suspicions about its article's verasity if it had few or no interwiki links. Such things are tracked at Special:MostInterwikis; while for these purposes it's almost useless (being crowded out by many non-biographical articles), this randomly selected part of the list contains [[Robert De Niro and Toshiro Mifune, who are obviously extremely prominent in their fields. As for the List of Swarthmore College people, I agree that the presence of a blue link would be a good minimum criterion there. Graham 87  05:21, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * @Graham87/@Jax MN, I can speak to this situation pretty directly, having taken Pomona College, a close peer of Swarthmore, through FAC, which involved a lot of consideration of who to include.
 * This sort of list is deceptively tricky, and in order to really feel I did it justice, I basically had to FLC List of Pomona College people first. After I had that knowledge, I chose a target length for the list at the main article that seemed WP:DUE, and limited it to people that reached a certain level of eminence. It's really hard to articulate exactly what that level is, which is unfortunate particularly given the need to explain it others inquiring about adding someone specific. The closest I can get is "at the top of their craft". Some standards (e.g. U.S. senators are listed, but U.S. Representatives aren't) are only in my mind. It's tempting to try to rigorously define them, as UC Riverside has interestingly tried to do, but ultimately that's a fool's errand, as the standard will change over time and it's impossible to define all the ways in which someone can be notable.
 * I had a slightly easier time with listing notable faculty, which is something that I think this article ought to do in addition to alumni. The way I put it in a hidden comment (and I'd strongly suggest a hidden comment here to avoid creep) is, As a rough rule of thumb, there should be a chance that a random person with no special interest in the listee's field might have heard of them. Be particularly picky about professors who taught only in brief visiting roles.
 * I'm not a fan of using the number of language editions as a proxy. Relying on something outside English Wikipedia to dictate our content feels off, and I'm not sure how accurate a measure of notability it is. As tempting as it is to cede editorial judgement like that, I don't think we can avoid it.
 * I would also recommend removing the gallery, replacing it with just an image of one person as illustration of the section. In the context of the entire breadth and history of an institution like Swarthmore, it's almost a stretch to say that any individual student is due to be mentioned, but it's certainly a stretch to say that they are so due as to warrant a photo.
 * Hope all that is helpful, and best of luck developing the article! It'd be great to see Swarthmore reach beyond C-class someday. Cheers, {{u| Sdkb  }}  talk 06:45, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for your detailed reply. It sounds like you've done an absolutely enormous amount of work on Pomona's page and the related articles. I for one don't have any great ambitions for this article; I came across it because a good friend of mine, Codeofdusk, went to the college and it ended up on my watchlist because I did a bit of work on the history section back in 2018; my interest in the alumni section, the only other one to which I've made any significant contribution, came a bit later.
 * You make an interesting point that the interlanguage links are completely out of enwiki's control. what do you mean by one image as an illustration of the section? As I'm blind I prefer not to deal with images if I can help it ... I'd be OK with just removing the gallery completely. As for faculty, I'm being very picky but on a quick skim, only Solomon Asch, Wolfgang Köhler, and W. H. Auden (for name recognition more than length of service) really stand out to me. Graham 87 09:54, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Many sections benefit from having a visual element, so I just mean that I'd be alright with a single photo of an alum being used in the article. This works best when the article is in need of more visual elements and when there's a single alum who stands out above the rest (e.g. Obama at Occidental). But I'd also be fine with no image; the main thing I object to is galleries, which use up an undue amount of space. {{u| Sdkb  }}  talk 20:18, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * It strikes me that Detlev Bronk (for his presidency of a national science body and a very high-ranking university), John Hopfield (for popularizing the Hopfield network), and Jane S. Richardson (for her work on ribbon diagrams seem to meet your "top of their craft" rough criterion you mentioned, but I removed them while filtering out the list. But I can't think how to articulate what would make them worthy of reinclusion in a form that I could add in an HTML comment ... hmmm ... Graham 87 10:05, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I tend to agree with your point,, regarding the excessive space taken up by galleries. I wouldn't want multiple lines of galleries, but a line that can be scrolled is perhaps acceptable - some other school articles do this.  I am stridently against publicity seeking, like that sought by every manner of "internet influencers", but do not mind the inclusion of bona fide graduates who have attained professional competency or other notability, with their own WP articles, it may be an evolution of our standard that is allowable if Wikipedia is to be a comprehensive source.  We're not space limited, like a print encyclopedia, but should not and cannot include all material.  That's what the references are for: we are a starting point.  Here, it seems fair to surmise that plucky Swarthmore backers seek to promote the legitimacy of that campus, in the same way that the Ivys, Stanford, MIT and several other schools do, within this space. It's a good school, and they're probably not wrong in asserting such. "Where to draw the line" is the issue, hence I favor strict rules by each category of professional work. Jax MN (talk) 20:34, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * OK I've removed the strict language requirement, removed the gallery (as I don't think just *one* alumnus particularly stands out here), and added a brief notable faculty section. Whyile searching for "notable a" in the wikitext, I found this PhillyVoice article which was added in 2016 (with the wrong title), which had some interesting entries I hadn't thought of adding before (e.g. the actor Stephen Lang and baseball administrator Lee MacPhail (he doesn't have so many interwiki articles but not many people have been elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame, especially executives). I also found this thing, which isn't directly usable as a source of course but did cough up another highly notable entry, Robert D. Putnam. That's about as much work as I personally want to do on the lists for the time being. Graham 87 10:31, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Swarthmore College


text:
Jónas Hallgrímsson

Jónas Hallgrímsson (16 November 1807 – 26 May 1845) was an Icelandic poet, writer and naturalist. He was one of the founders of the Icelandic journal Fjölnir, which was first published in Copenhagen in 1835. The magazine was used by Jónas and his fellow Fjölnismenn to promote Icelandic nationalism, in the hope of giving impetus to the Icelandic Independence Movement. Jónas remains one of Iceland's most beloved poets, penning some of the best-known Icelandic poems about Iceland and its people. Since 1996, Jónas's birthday has been officially recognised in Iceland as the Day of the Icelandic Language. On 16 November each year, the Jónas Hallgrímsson Award is awarded to an individual for their outstanding contribution to the Icelandic Language.

Biography
Jónas was born in the north of Iceland, in Öxnadalur in Eyjafjörður. He was the son of Hallgrímur Þorsteinsson, a curate, and Rannveig Jónasdóttir. He was the third of their four children; his siblings were Þorsteinn (born 1800), Rannveig (born 1802) and Anna Margrét (born 1815). In 1816 Jónas' father drowned in a lake and Jónas was sent to live with his aunt. In 1821 he returned home to Öxnadalur to be confirmed, before going away to a school in Skagafjörður, where he was taught by the Reverend Einar H. Thorlacius. He studied there for two years, and won a scholarship to attend the school at Bessastaðir for a further six.

After passing his final examinations in 1829, Jónas moved to Reykjavík and was employed by a sheriff as a clerk, living in his home. During this time, he also worked as a defence lawyer. It is said that sometime in the winter of 1831–1832, Jónas proposed to a woman called Christiane Knudsen, but he was rejected. He was heartbroken.

In 1832 he sailed to Denmark, and passed the entrance exam for the University of Copenhagen. He began working for a law degree, but after four years switched to literature and natural sciences, excelling in both subjects. In 1835, along with fellow Icelandic students Brynjólfur Pétursson, Konráð Gíslason and Tómas Sæmundsson, he founded the patriotic journal Fjölnir.

After graduation he was awarded a grant from the state treasury to conduct scientific research in Iceland, a project which he worked on from 1839 to 1842. He continued to pursue his interest in the natural history of Iceland, and to work on Fjölnir throughout his life, dividing his time between Denmark and research trips to Iceland. It was in Fjölnir that many of his poems and essays first appeared. Jónas also worked as a translator of foreign material, including scientific works. In these can be found many of the Icelandic words coined by Jónas. One of these, for an example, is reikistjarna, meaning planet. This is a compound word from the verb að reika (to wander) and the noun stjarna (star).

On 21 May 1845 in Copenhagen, Jónas slipped on the stairs up to his room and broke his leg. He went to the hospital the next day, but died of blood poisoning, aged only 37.

Style
Jónas is considered one of the founding fathers, and best examples, of romanticism in Iceland. The imagery in his poetry was strongly influenced by the Icelandic landscape. He is also known for introducing foreign metres, such as pentameter, to Icelandic poetry.

 * Charming and fair is the land,
 * and snow-white the peaks of the jokuls [glaciers],
 * Cloudless and blue is the sky,
 * the ocean is shimmering bright,
 * But high on the lave fields, where
 * still Osar river is flowing
 * Down into Almanna gorge,
 * Althing no longer is held,
 * Now Snorri's booth serves as a sheepfold,
 * the ling upon Logberg the sacred
 * Is blue with berries every year,
 * for children's and ravens' delight.
 * Oh, ye juvenile host
 * and full-grown manhood of Iceland!
 * Thus is our forefathers' fame
 * forgotten and dormant withal.

Iceland Translated by Gudmund J. Gislason Beck, Richard, editor, Icelandic Lyrics: Originals and Translations, Thorhallur Bjarnarson, Publisher, Post Box 1001, Reykjavik 1930

Controversy over Jónas' Remains
In 1946, the bones of Jónas Hallgrímsson were moved from Copenhagen to Iceland in a controversy known in Icelandic as the beinamálið ('the case of the bones'). While ostensibly a national triumph, the reburial has been argued to have been an enormously problematic exercise in hegemony by Iceland's post-independence elites and "instead of uniting the nation, the episode uncovered a great divide within the people of Iceland". The main campaigner behind this was Sigurjón Pétursson, an admirer of Jónas who claimed to be in telepathic communication with the dead poet and wanted to re-bury his remains in Öxnadalur, where Jónas grew up. Sigurjón came up against serious opposition from a number of the political élite, including Ólafur Thors, who was then Prime Minister of Iceland. The government informed him that Jónas' bones were state property, and would be buried at the national burial ground at Þingvellir, alongside the poet Einar Benediktsson.

However, the government proved unwilling to finance the excavation and transportation. Sigurjón covered most of the cost, even paying for Matthías Þórðarson, the director of the National Museum, to oversee the excavation. The process was a lengthy one, because a father and son had been buried on top of Jónas in 1875, and another couple in 1900, and they needed to be excavated first.

Finally, Sigurjón was able to transport the remains to Iceland. He drove north with them, intending to bury them in Öxnadalur in defiance of the government, but the priests there refused to perform the rites. The coffin stood in a church for a week before being driven back south and buried in the government's chosen spot on 16 November, Jónas' birthday. Since 1996, the date has been celebrated in Iceland as Icelandic Language Day.

The controversy, its motivations and outcomes were satirised by, amongst others, Halldór Laxness's 1948 novel Atómstöðin and Milan Kundera's Ignorance.

title: Jónas Hallgrímsson


text:
Louisiade Archipelago

The Louisiade Archipelago is a string of ten larger volcanic islands frequently fringed by coral reefs, and 90 smaller coral islands in Papua New Guinea.

It is located 200 km southeast of New Guinea, stretching over more than 160 km and spread over an ocean area of 26000 km2 between the Solomon Sea to the north and the Coral Sea to the south. The aggregate land area of the islands is about 1871 km2, with Vanatinai (Tagula) being the largest.

Rogeia, Samarai and Sariba lie closest to New Guinea, while Misima, Vanatinai, and Rossel islands lie further east.

History
The islands were discovered by a Spanish expedition led by Luis Váez de Torres in 1606, that was part of the Fernandez de Quiros fleet which had sailed from South America in search of Australia. The Torres expedition visited various islands including Basilaki Island, which he named San Buenaventura in July 1606. It is possible that Malay and Chinese sailors also visited the islands earlier. More than a century later, in 1768, Louis Antoine de Bougainville visited the islands and named them for Louis XV, the king of France. Visits were also paid by Admiral Bruni d'Entrecasteaux in 1793 and Captain Owen Stanley in 1849.

The 1942 Battle of Coral Sea was fought nearby, after Japanese occupation in the same year. The Deboyne Islands were the site of the 1942 Raids on Deboyne.

Rain forests
The islands have a moist tropical climate, and are largely covered with tropical moist broadleaf forests. The Louisiade Archipelago rain forests form a distinct ecoregion, and are home to a number of endemic species, including several endemic trees (in genera Pandanus, Diospyros, and Hopea), as well as five endemic frog species, two endemic lizard species, and five endemic bird species.

Government
The archipelago is divided into the Local Level Government (LLG) areas Bwanabwana Rural (western part, with Basilaki), Louisiade Rural (central part, with Misima), and Yaleyamba (eastern part, with Rossell and Vanatinai islands). The LLG areas are part of Samarai-Murua District of Milne Bay. The seat of the Louisiade Rural LLG is Bwagaoia on Misima Island, the population center of the archipelago. The seat of the Yaleyamba is changed every couple of years between Rambuso and Jingo (Rossell). The seat of the Bwanabwana was Samarai from the Louisiade archipelago, but was recently transferred to the mainland of Papua New Guinea to the city of Alotau.

Islands
The Louisiade Archipelago consists of the following island groups and islands:

title: Louisiade Archipelago


text:
Pretender

A pretender is someone who claims to be the rightful ruler of a country although not recognized as such by the current government. The term is often used to suggest that a claim is not legitimate. The word may refer to a former monarch or a descendant of a deposed monarchy, although this type of claimant is also referred to as a head of a house.

Queen Anne popularized this word, using it to refer to her Roman Catholic half-brother James Francis Edward Stuart, the Jacobite heir, in an address to Parliament in 1708: "The French fleet sailed from Dunkirk ... with the Pretender on board."

In 1807 the French Emperor Napoleon complained that the Almanach de Gotha continued to list German princes whom he had deposed. This episode established that publication as the pre-eminent authority on the titles of deposed monarchs and nobility, many of which were restored in 1815 after the end of Napoleon's reign.

Etymology
The noun "pretender" is derived from the French verb prétendre, itself derived from the Latin praetendere ("to stretch out before", "to hold before (as a pretext)", "to extend [a claim] before" ), from the verb tendo ("to stretch"), plus the preposition prae ("before, in front"). The English, French and Latin words have prima facie no pejorative connotation, although one who pretends to a position with no plausible claim or with an entirely false claim, may be differentiated as a "false pretender", see for example Perkin Warbeck.

Roman Empire
Ancient Rome knew many pretenders to the offices making up the title of Roman emperor, especially during the Crisis of the Third Century.

These are customarily referred to as the Thirty Tyrants, which was an allusion to the Thirty Tyrants of Athens some five hundred years earlier; although the comparison is questionable, and the Romans were separate aspirants, not (as the Athenians were) a Committee of Public Safety. The Loeb translation of the appropriate chapter of the Augustan History therefore represents the Latin triginta tyranni by "Thirty Pretenders" to avoid this artificial and confusing parallel. Not all of them were afterwards considered pretenders; several were actually successful in becoming emperor at least in part of the empire for a brief period.

Byzantine Empire
Successions to the Roman Empire long continued at Constantinople. Most seriously, after the fall of Constantinople to the Fourth Crusade in 1204, and its eventual recovery by Michael VIII Palaiologos, there came to be three Byzantine successor states, each of which claimed to be the Roman Empire, and several Latin claimants (including the Republic of Venice and the houses of Montferrat and Courtenay) to the Latin Empire the Crusaders had set up in its place. At times, some of these states and titles were subjected to multiple claims.

Cypriot pretenders
Following the defeat and death of King James III King of Cyprus in 1474, his younger and illegitimate brother, Eugène Matteo de Lusignan, also styled d'Arménie (died 1523) removed to Sicily, then to Malta. He was acknowledged as rightful heir to the thrones of Cyprus, Armenia, Jerusalem, and Antioch, although he never made serious efforts to pursue the claims. The title of "Barone de Baccari" was created in 1508 for Jacques Matteo (sives Eugene Matteo) d'Armenia with the remainder to his descendants in perpetuity. Eugene, illegitimate son of King Jacques II of Cyprus, had, when his family were exiled, first gone to Naples, then Sicily, then settled on Malta, marrying a Sicilian heiress, Donna Paola Mazzara (a descendant of the Royal House of Aragon of Sicily and Aragon), with issue.

Modern Greece
The claimant to the throne of the last Greek kingdom is Pavlos, Crown Prince of Greece. He belongs to the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg, the senior branch of the House of Oldenburg. His designated heir is his son Prince Constantine Alexios of Greece and Denmark.

French pretenders
The establishment of the First Republic and the execution of Louis XVI in 1793 led to the king's son becoming pretender to the abolished throne, styled as Louis XVII. As Louis XVII was a child and imprisoned in Paris by the revolutionaries, his uncle, the Comte de Provence, proclaimed himself regent in his nephew's name. After Louis XVII died in 1795, the Comte de Provence became pretender himself, as Louis XVIII.

Louis XVIII was restored to the throne in 1814, and was succeeded by his brother Charles X in 1824. Charles X was, however, forced into exile by the July Revolution. Charles X and his son, Louis-Antoine, Duke of Angoulême, abdicated their claims in favor of Charles's grandson, Henri, Count of Chambord; however, their cousin the Duke of Orléans, a descendant of Louis XIV's younger brother, mounted the throne as Louis Philippe I, King of the French.

For most of the July Monarchy, the legitimists, as supporters of the exiled senior line came to be known, were uncertain of whom to support. Some believed the abdication of Charles and his son legal, and recognized the young Chambord as king, while others maintained that abdication was unconstitutional in France of the ancien régime, and continued to recognize first Charles X and then Louis-Antoine, until the latter's death in 1844. On his uncle's death, Chambord claimed the crown, but lived in exile and upon his death in 1883, the direct male-line of Louis XV became extinct.

In 1848, Louis Philippe was himself overthrown by the February Revolution, and abdicated the throne in favor of his young grandson, Philippe, Comte de Paris. However, a republic was proclaimed, leaving Paris, like his cousin Chambord, merely a pretender to a no longer existing crown. Over the next several decades, there were several attempts at a so-called "fusion", to unite both groups of monarchists in support of the childless Chambord as king, who would recognize the Count of Paris as his heir. Those efforts failed in the 1850s, but after the establishment of the Third Republic in 1870, when a royalist majority was elected to the Chamber of Deputies, fusion again became the monarchist strategy. As a result, in 1873 the Count of Paris withdrew his own bid for the throne and recognized Chambord as legitimate pretender to the French crown. In spite of this apparent unity among royalist forces, restoration of the monarchy was not to be; Chambord refused to accept the Tricolor flag, which rendered him unacceptable to most Frenchmen as a constitutional king. The monarchists hoped that after Chambord's death they could unite and crown the Orléanist candidate. But Chambord lived until 1883, while France's royalists had lost their majority in parliament by 1877. The erstwhile Orléanist Adolphe Thiers thus called Chambord "The French Washington", i.e. the true "founder" of the Republic.

By 1883 most French monarchists accepted the Count of Paris as head of royal house. A minority of reactionaries, the so-called Blancs d'Espagne ("Spanish Whites"), continued to withhold support from the House of Orléans and chose instead Juan, Count of Montizon, the Carlist pretender to the Spanish throne, who also happened to be the senior male descendant of Louis XIV.

The arguments are, on one side, that Louis XIV's younger grandson, Philip de Bourbon, Duke of Anjou renounced any future claim to the French throne when he left France to become king of Spain as Philip V in 1700 (the renunciation was ratified internationally by the Treaty of Utrecht), ostensibly leaving the Dukes of Orléans as heirs to the throne of France in the event of extinction of descendants of Louis XIV's elder grandson Louis, Duke of Burgundy, which occurred in 1883. On the other side, Anjou's renunciation is held to be invalid because prior to the revolution it was a fundamental tenet of the French monarchy that the crown could never be diverted from the rightful (senior line) heir of Hugh Capet. Moreover, although the Orléans volunteered to defer their rival claim to the throne after 1873, the regicidal vote of their ancestor Philippe Égalité in 1789 and the usurpation of Louis Philippe in 1830 are alleged to have extinguished all rights to the throne for the Orléans branch. The schism has continued to the present day, with supporters of the senior line reclaiming the title of "Legitimist", leaving their opponent royalists to be known, once again, as "Orléanists". The current representative of the senior line is Louis Alphonse, Duke of Anjou, the senior legitimate living descendant of Hugh Capet (and of Philip V d'Anjou of Spain) who was born and raised in Spain. The Orléanist line, which returned to live in France when the law of banishment was repealed in 1950, is represented by Prince Jean, Duke of Vendôme, senior male-line descendant of King Louis Philippe.

In addition to these two claims to the historic royal throne of France, there have also been pretenders to the imperial throne of France, created first by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1804 and recreated by his nephew Emperor Napoleon III in 1852 (abolished 1870). This claim is today disputed between Jean-Christophe, Prince Napoléon and his own father, the self-avowed republican Prince Charles Napoléon (deemed to be excluded from the succession due to a non-dynastic re-marriage), both descendants of Napoleon I's youngest brother, Jérôme Bonaparte.

Russian pretenders
There is much debate over who is the legitimate heir to the Russian throne, and bitter dispute within the family itself. Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna is considered by some to be the legitimate heir. She is the only child of Grand Duke Vladimir who died in 1992, a great-grandson of Tsar Alexander II, whom some considered the last male dynast of the House of Romanov. Some of her opponents believe she is ineligible to claim the throne because she was born of a marriage that would have been deemed morganatic under Russia's monarchy, which was abolished in 1917. Others oppose her for reasons similar to those of the anti-Orleanist rationale: her grandfather's perceived disloyalty and dynastic ambition are seen as removing any rights which might otherwise have belonged to her branch of the former dynasty.

Still others maintain that the restrictive, pre-revolutionary marital rules of the Romanovs leave no one who can claim to be rightful heir to the dynasty's legacy. Others recognized Nicholas Romanov, Prince of Russia as head of the family, being a descendant of Emperor Nicholas I and the elected president of the Romanov Family Association, which consists of most living male-line descendants of the Romanov emperors. Neither he nor his younger brother, Prince Dimitri Romanov, had sons and since their deaths no new claims have been advanced by this branch.

Anna Anderson attempted to prove she was Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia, the lost daughter of Nicholas II, but DNA testing on her remains eventually proved her to be an impersonator. Although she did not claim the throne, per se, as women could not succeed to the Russian throne so long as any male dynast survived, she became more famous than any of the various Romanov claimants to the throne.

Prince Karl Emich of Leiningen (born 1952), who converted to the Eastern Orthodoxy in 2013, is the latest pretender to the Russian throne under the name of Prince Nikolai Kirillovich of Leiningen. He is the grandson of Grand Duchess Maria Cyrillovna of Russia, (sister of Vladimir, and aunt of Maria Vladimirovna), and great-grandson of Cyril Vladimirovich, Grand Duke of Russia. The Monarchist Party of Russia supports Prince Nikolai as the heir of the Russian throne, since they are of the opinion that Maria Vladimirovna Romanova and Nicholas Romanov are not dynasts. In early 2014, Nikolai Kirilovich declared himself Emperor Nicholas III (successor to Nicholas II).

In 2007 Nicholas married Countess Isabelle von und zu Egloffstein and in 2010 had a son, Emich.

Spanish pretenders
The Carlist line has claimed the throne of Spain after Ferdinand VII was succeeded by his daughter Isabella II instead of his brother Infante Carlos María Isidro, Count of Molina. Their claim was defended in several wars during the 19th centuries. Following the death of the last senior-line claimant, Infante Alfonso Carlos, Duke of San Jaime in 1936, Prince Xavier of Bourbon-Parma became regent and later claimed the throne as Javier I. However, following the death of Xavier in 1977, the Carlist succession was in disarray as the heir, Prince Carlos Hugo of Bourbon-Parma, held left-wing socialist views that were viewed as incompatible with Carlism, and thus an incompatible claimant, leaving his younger, more conservative brother the Duke of Aranjuez as a rival claimant. As of 2024, the two legitimate claimants to the Carlist succession are Prince Sixtus Henry of Bourbon-Parma, Duke of Aranjuez and his nephew Prince Carlos, Duke of Parma and Piacenza.

England, Scotland and Ireland
After the execution by the English Parliament of Stuart King Charles I in 1649, his son Charles II was proclaimed king in Scotland (where he was crowned in 1651) and Ireland; but those two countries were invaded by English forces and annexed to the Commonwealth of England under Oliver Cromwell in 1653. Thus, Charles II was pretender to the throne of England from 1649 to the restoration of 1660, and exiled/deposed King of Scots and King of Ireland, 1653 to 1660. He died in 1685 and his brother James II and VII came to the throne. He had converted to Catholicism but this only became a worry when his second wife bore a son who would precede his two Protestant daughters. James was thus deposed by his elder daughter and his son-in-law (who was also his nephew, son of his sister Mary) during the Glorious Revolution in December 1688; they were formally offered the English and Scottish thrones by their respective parliaments a month later – which was still 1688 in England (where New Year's Day was 25 March until 1752) but was already 1689 in Scotland (which adopted 1 January as New Year's Day in 1600). James made several attempts to regain the throne before his death in 1701, the most important of which was an effort he made with Irish support – that country having not yet acceded to the succession of William and Mary – which led to the Battle of the Boyne and the Battle of Aughrim, and set the stage for the subsequent Jacobite risings (or rebellions). These were a series of uprisings or wars between 1688 and 1746 in which supporters of James, his son ("The Old Pretender") and grandson ("The Young Pretender") attempted to restore his direct male line to the throne.

 * James Francis Edward Stuart, the Roman Catholic son of the deposed James II and VII, was barred from the succession to the throne by the Act of Settlement 1701. Notwithstanding the Act of Union 1707, he claimed the separate thrones of Scotland, as James VIII, and of England and Ireland, as James III, until his death in 1766. In Jacobite terms, Acts of Parliament (of England or Scotland) after 1688 (including the Acts of Union) did not receive the required royal assent of the legitimate Jacobite monarch and, therefore, were without legal effect. James was responsible for a number of conspiracies and rebellions, particularly in the Highlands of Scotland. The most notable was the Jacobite rising of 1715–16.
 * Charles Edward Stuart ("Bonnie Prince Charlie"), James Francis' elder son and the would-be Charles III, who led in his father's name the last major Jacobite rebellion, the Jacobite rising of 1745–46. He died in 1788 without legitimate issue.
 * Henry Benedict Stuart (best known as the Cardinal-Duke of York), the younger brother of Charles Edward and a Roman Catholic Cardinal, who took up the claim to the throne as the would-be Henry IX of England, though he was the final Jacobite heir to publicly do so. He died unmarried in 1807.

After 1807, the line of James VII and II became extinct. The Jacobites had ceased to have much political significance after the failure of the 1745 uprising, and the movement essentially became completely dormant after Henry's death. Genealogically, the next most senior line to the English and Scottish thrones was through James II's youngest sister, Henriette Anne, whose daughter had married into the House of Savoy. To the very limited extent that Jacobitism survived the death of Cardinal York, they supported the claims of this line. Its current representative is Franz, Duke of Bavaria, though he himself does not claim the title, his secretary having announced once that "HRM (sic) is very content being a Prince of Bavaria".

Other pretenders to the throne have included:
 * Lambert Simnel (c. 1477) was a pretender to the throne of England. His claim to be Edward Plantagenet, 17th Earl of Warwick in 1487 threatened the newly established reign of King Henry VII (reigned 1485–1509).
 * Perkin Warbeck, a Fleming who claimed to be Richard of Shrewsbury, Duke of York, and tried twice to invade England and capture the throne in the late 15th Century.
 * Simon Abney-Hastings, 15th Earl of Loudoun, (1974- ) Australian Peer & head of the House of York. Member of the Abney-Hastings family; also known as King Simon I.

Wales
Owain Glyndŵr (1349–1416) is probably the best-known Welsh pretender, though whether he was pretender or Prince of Wales depends upon one's source of information. Llywelyn ap Gruffydd ap Llywelyn, who died in 1282, was the only Prince of Wales whose status as ruler was formally recognised by the English Crown, though three of the four men who claimed the throne of Gwynedd between the assumption of the title by Owain Gwynedd in the 1160s and the loss of Welsh independence in 1283 also used the title or similar. Madog ap Llywelyn also briefly used the title during his revolt of 1294–95. Since 1301, the title of Prince of Wales has been given to the eldest living son of the King or Queen Regnant of England (subsequently of Great Britain, 1707, and of United Kingdom, 1801). The word "living" is important. Upon the death of Arthur, Prince of Wales, Henry VII invested his second son, the future Henry VIII, with the title. The title is not automatic, however, but merges into the Crown when a prince dies or accedes to the throne, and has to be re-conferred by the sovereign.

Nevertheless, it is Glyndŵr whom many remember as the last native Prince of Wales. He was indeed proclaimed Prince of Wales by his supporters on 16 September 1400, and his revolt in quest of Welsh independence was not quashed by Henry IV until 1409. Later, however, one of Glyndŵr's cousins, Owain Tudor, would marry the widow of Henry V, and their grandson would become Henry VII, from whom the current British monarch is descended (through his daughter Margaret Tudor, who married James IV of Scotland).

The various minor kingdoms that came together to form what is today known as the Principality of Wales each had their own royal dynasty. The most important of these realms were Gwynedd, Powys and Deheubarth. After 878 the ruling dynasties in these kingdoms each claimed descent from the sons of Rhodri Mawr who had conquered them or otherwise achieved their thrones during his reign. Merfyn Frych, the father of Rhodri Mawr, had come to power in Gwynedd because the native dynasty, known as the House of Cunedda had expired. Merfyn was descended from royalty through his own father Gwriad and claimed ancestors from among the rulers of British Rheged (in particular Llywarch Hen). It was acknowledged by all of the realms of Wales after the time of Rhodri Mawr that the House of Gwynedd (known as the House of Aberffraw) was senior and homage should be paid by each of them to the king of Gwynedd. After the reign of Owain ap Gruffudd of Gwynedd the realm began to merge with the concept of a Principality of Wales. This was realised by Owain's descendant Llywelyn ap Gruffudd in 1267. It was not to last and this new Wales was invaded by England and dismantled between 1277 and 1284. All of the descendants of Llywelyn "the last" and his brothers were either imprisoned or killed.

Irish pretenders
The business of Irish pretenders is rather more complicated because of the nature of kingship in Ireland before the Norman take-over of 1171. In both Ireland and early Gaelic Scotland, succession to kingship was elective, often (if not usually) by contest, according to a system known as Tanistry.

The High King of Ireland (Ard Rí) was essentially a ceremonial, federal overlord, who exercised actual power only within the realm which was his dynastic seat. Because of the laws of succession, there could not be a pretender to this title in the sense it is normally understood. From the 5th century onwards the kingship tended to remain within the dynasty of the Uí Néill until Brian Boru of Munster wrested control of much of Ireland from Máel Sechnaill mac Domnaill in 1002. Following his death in 1014 and that of Máel Sechnaill in 1022, the struggle for dominance resulted in Norman intervention from Henry II of England in 1171.

There were later attempts by Irish rulers fighting against the Normans to revive the High Kingship such as in 1258 when Brian Ua Néill of Cenel Eoghan was so acknowledged, in 1262 when the crown was offered to Haakon IV of Norway and in 1315 when an offer was made to the Scottish Edward Bruce. Effectively, the title fell into abeyance. Apart from the coronation oath, the title was not even used by the Kings of England, each of whom styled himself Lord of Ireland. In 1542 Henry VIII, styled himself "King of Ireland".

Some Irish rebels discussed offering the Irish throne to Prince Joachim of Prussia (son of Kaiser Wilhelm II) before the 1916 Easter Rising. After the failure of the Rising, the royalists were a minority among the rebels, and so the offer was never made. According to Hugo O'Donnell, 7th Duke of Tetuan, Éamon de Valera raised the idea of an Irish monarchy with his great-grandfather Juan O'Donnell.

Ottoman pretenders
Cem Sultan, eldest of the sons of Mehmet the Conqueror born during his reign, claimed the Sultanate after the death of his father; he was defeated in battle months later by his eldest brother (by birth) Bayezid II. He fled to the island of Rhodes, then eventually to the Papal States. His descendants claimed his rights until the Knights Hospitaller defeated the Ottomans in the 16th century. After the Ottoman Empire was abolished and the Republic of Turkey came into power, the successive heads of the Ottoman family claimed the throne of the Ottoman Empire. The latest pretender to the Imperial House of Osman is Harun Osman, since 18 January 2021.

Kingdom of Jerusalem
The Emperors of Ethiopia held the title of "King of Zion" through their claim of descent from the Biblical House of David through his son King Solomon. Menelik II dropped the use of this title. The Ethiopian Emperors continued to use the honorific of "Conquering Lion of the Tribe of Judah" up until the monarchy ended with the fall of Emperor Haile Selassie in 1974.

Since the fall of the Kingdom of Jerusalem, many European rulers have claimed to be its rightful heir. None of these, however, have actually ruled over a part of the former Kingdom. Today there are several potential European claimants on the basis of the inheritance of the title. None of the claimants have any power in the area of the former Kingdom.

Japan
In the fourteenth century, two lines of the Imperial clan, Northern Court and Southern Court, claimed the throne. Their rivalry was resolved in 1392: while every emperor of the Southern Court enthroned prior to 1392 was established as legitimate, the throne was determined by Emperor Go-Komatsu of the Northern Court and his successors.

Since 1911, the Japanese government has declared the southern claimants were actually the rightful emperors despite the fact that all subsequent emperors including the then-Emperor Meiji were descended from the Northern Court, reasoning the Southern Court retained possession of the Three Sacred Treasures, thus converting the emperors of the former Northern court into mere pretenders. In other words, six former emperors of the Northern Court have been counted as pretenders instead since then. As a result of this compromise, the present Japanese Imperial Family is descended of the Northern Court Emperors.

Kumazawa Hiromichi publicly challenged Emperor Hirohito, disputing the legitimacy of his bloodline. Kumazawa claimed to be the 19th direct descendant of Emperor Go-Kameyama, the last Emperor of the Southern Court.

Singapore
Sultan Hussein Shah of Johor ceded the territory of Singapore to the British in the 19th century, but their descendants lived in the former royal palace until expelled by the government. They now live in obscurity.

Heraldry
Pretence is demonstrated in heraldry by placing on the shield of the pretender an inescutcheon of the arms of the former holder of the title pretended to, known as an "inescutcheon of pretence". As well as being used by royalty, the inescutcheon of pretence is also used by English aristocratic and gentry families where a husband of an heraldic heiress (i.e. a daughter with no brothers) will display his wife's paternal arms on an inescutcheon placed within his own coat of arms. Following the husband's death the couple's son and heir will remove the inescutcheon and show it instead as a quartering.

False pretenders
Throughout history people have claimed fraudulently to be displaced monarchs or heirs who had disappeared or supposedly died under mysterious circumstances. Some of them were look-alikes. Such false pretenders include:
 * Bertrand of Rais (or Ray), who claimed to be Baldwin I of Constantinople
 * Thomas the Slav, who claimed to be the blinded Byzantine Emperor Constantine VI
 * Lambert Simnel, who claimed to be Edward Plantagenet, 17th Earl of Warwick
 * Perkin Warbeck, who claimed to be Richard of Shrewsbury, 1st Duke of York
 * Gabriel de Espinosa, one of four people who claimed to be Sebastian of Portugal
 * Yemelyan Pugachev, who claimed to be Peter III of Russia
 * False Dmitry I, actually reigned as Tsar of Russia for nearly a year before he was killed in a riot
 * False Dmitry II
 * False Dmitry III
 * Kaspar Hauser, who was claimed to be the stillborn son of Karl, Grand Duke of Baden
 * False Margaret, who claimed to be Margaret, Maid of Norway
 * Bou Hmara, who claimed to be a Sultan of Morocco

title: Pretender


text:
Reichsdeutsche

Reichsdeutsche, literally translated Germans of the Reich, is an archaic term for those ethnic Germans who resided within the German state that was founded in 1871. In contemporary usage, it referred to German citizens, the word signifying people from the German Reich, i.e., Imperial Germany or Deutsches Reich, which was the official name of Germany between 1871 and 1949.

The opposite of the Reichsdeutsche is, then, depending on context and historical period, Volksdeutsche, Auslandsdeutsche (however, usually meaning German citizens living abroad), or a more specific term denoting the area of settlement, such as Baltic Germans or Volga Germans (Wolgadeutsche).

Term
The key problem with the terms reichsdeutsch, volksdeutsch, deutschstämmig (of German descent, as to citizenship or ethnicity), and related ones is that the usage of the words often depends on context, i.e. who uses them where and when. There are, in that sense, no general legal or "right" definitions, although during the 20th century, all terms acquired legal — yet also changing — definitions.

The reason for the differentiation is that there has been a historical shift in the meaning of what belonging to a nation means. Until the early 19th century, a demonym such as "German" — apart from the theodiscus vernacular — was not too meaningful, although at least since the German Campaign of the Napoleonic Wars, the concept certainly existed. If anything, it was more seen as a cultural concept. The idea of a Kulturnation, as advocated by philosophers like Johann Gottfried Herder (1744–1803) and Johann Gottlieb Fichte (1762–1814), includes German first language, religion (in different forms), and already sometimes German origin, descent or race in a vague sense.

With the 1871 unification of Germany under Prussian leadership, the concept of the German people first acquired a legal-political meaning, which they have retained until now. However, the German Empire as a "Lesser German" answer to the German Question, did not encompass more than two thirds of the German Sprachraum (language area). For someone who considered themselves German but living abroad, e.g., in multi-ethnic Austria-Hungary, reichsdeutsch meant any German who was a citizen of the German Reich, as opposed to someone living abroad (and usually without a German passport). Part of the identity of ethnic German minorities living abroad — a classic example are the Baltic Germans — was to define themselves as German, using the pre-1871 concept. However, Reichsdeutsche visiting the Russian Baltic governorates in the late 19th century, for instance, resented the claims of the Baltic Germans to be German — for the Germans from the Reich, to be German meant to be a German citizen, while for the Baltic Germans, it meant cultural-historical belonging.

It was however not until the German nationality law (Reichs- und Staatsangehörigkeitsgesetz) of 1913 finally established the citizenship of the German Reich, whereas earlier political rights (including the claim to receive identity papers and passports) derived from one's citizenship of one of the States of the German Empire. The citizens of some German states comprised also autochthonous or immigrant ethnic minorities of other than German ethnicity, which is why citizens of the German Empire always also comprised people of other ethnicity than the German (e.g. Danish, French, Frisian, Polish, Romani, Sorbian etc.). German citizenship is passed on from parent to child (jus sanguinis) whatever their ethnicity is. With naturalisation of aliens as German citizens, however, their eventual German ethnicity formed or still forms an advantage under certain circumstances (see Aussiedler).

In Nazi Germany, the Reichsbürgergesetz of 1935, part of the Nuremberg Laws established the legal status of Reichsbürger, i.e. German citizens "of German or congeneric blood". As a result, Jews and "Mischlinge" officially became second-class citizens.

After World War II and the establishment of the West German Federal Republic of Germany in 1949, the analogous terms Bundesdeutsche (i.e., Federal Germans) and Bundesbürger (i.e., Federal citizens) were colloquially used to distinguish de facto citizens from people entitled to German citizenship, but as a matter of fact unwilling or unable to exercise it, such as citizens of East Germany (DDR-Bürger) and East Berlin, or of the Saar Protectorate.

title: Reichsdeutsche


text:
International Chemistry Olympiad

The International Chemistry Olympiad (IChO) is an annual academic competition for high school students. It is one of the International Science Olympiads. The first IChO was held in Prague, Czechoslovakia, in 1968. The event has been held every year since then, with the exception of 1971. The delegations that attended the first events were mostly countries of the former Eastern bloc and it was not until 1980, the 12th annual International Chemistry Olympiad, that the event was held outside of the bloc in Austria. Up to 4 students for each national team compete around July in both a theoretical and an experimental sections, with about half of the participants being awarded medals.

About
The International Chemistry Olympiad (IChO) is an annual competition for the world’s most talented chemistry students at the secondary school level. Nations around the world send a team of four students who are tested on their chemistry knowledge and skills in a five-hour laboratory practical exam and a five-hour written theoretical examination that are held on separate days with the practical examination usually being before the theoretical examination. Countries who wish to participate in the IChO must send observers to two consecutive Olympiads before their students can participate in the event. Presently, around 80 countries participate in the International Chemistry Olympiad.

All participants are ranked based on their individual scores and no official team scores are given. Gold medals are awarded to the top 12% of students, silver medals are awarded to the next 22% of students, and bronze medals are awarded to the next 32% of students. Honorable mentions are awarded to the top 10% of non medalist participants. One special award is given to the student that achieves the highest score overall. Two separate special awards are given to the students who get the best score in the theoretical and practical examinations. Preparation for the International Chemistry Olympiad demands a high level of understanding and interest in chemistry and an outstanding ability to relate chemical subjects with one another as well as with the practical world.

Structure and rules

Each delegation consists of up to four students and two mentors (one of them is designated as the head of the delegation or "head mentor"). A delegation may also include a handful of guests and scientific observers. Students must be under the age of 20 and must not be enrolled as regular students in any post-secondary education institution. The International Information Center of the International Chemistry Olympiad is based in Bratislava, Slovakia.

Countries who wish to participate in the IChO must send observers to two consecutive olympiads before their students can participate in the event. A total of 68 countries took part in the 38th IChO in 2006: 67 as participants and 1 as an observer. In 2017 more than 80 countries are expected to send students.

The competition consists of two examinations, a theoretical examination and a practical examination. Both have durations of up to 5 hours, and are held on separate days with the practical examination usually being before the theoretical examination. The theoretical examination has a value of 60 points and the practical examination has a value of 40 points. Each examination is evaluated independently from the other and the sum of the results of the examinations determines a participant's overall result. A scientific jury, which is installed by the host country, suggests the tasks. The international jury, which consists of the 2 mentors from each of the participating countries, discusses the competition tasks and translates them into the language of their students' preference.

Students receive the examinations translated into their languages of preference. It is the duty of the mentors to translate the examinations from English before they are given to the participants. After the examinations are held and evaluated by a committee appointed by the host country and before awards are presented, mentors discuss the evaluation of the exams with judges of the committee to assure fairness in their evaluation. Because the mentors review the examinations before they are given to participants, any communication between the mentors and the students is strictly forbidden prior to the completion of both exams, and the students are required to surrender any mobile phones and laptop computers to the organizer.

The syllabus of the competition contains subjects from several areas of chemistry, including organic chemistry, inorganic chemistry, physical chemistry, analytical chemistry, biochemistry, and spectroscopy. Though some of these subjects are included in most secondary school chemistry programs, for the most part, they are evaluated at a much deeper level and many may require a level of knowledge and understanding comparable to that of post-secondary education. In addition, the host country of each IChO issues a set of preparatory problems well in advance of the competition every year. These preparatory problems cover specific topics in considerable more depth than typical post-secondary education. Preparation for the International Chemistry Olympiad demands a high level of understanding and interest in chemistry and an outstanding ability to relate chemical subjects with one another as well as with the practical world.

These events are also outstanding opportunities for the students to meet people from all around the world who share similar interests, to visit different places, and to get in touch with different cultures. As the aims of the competition establish, the IChO competitions help to enhance friendly relations among young people from different countries; they encourage cooperation and international understanding.

Preparation
While each country is free to choose its team by whatever means it seems appropriate, the selection process usually involves holding regional and national olympiad competitions. Many countries hold "training camps" for its top students, where mentors from the country give the students accelerated college-level courses in chemistry with an emphasis on the topics covered in that year's preparatory problems as well as practical training. It is agreed that such training programs must not exceed a total duration of two weeks but there are allegations every year that some countries exceed this limit by months or even years. Another concern is that some countries tend to bring the same students to the competition year after year, which helps them win better medals. Although some believe that this is against the spirit of the olympiad, many nations find it hard to justify leaving their best students at home.

History
The idea of the International Chemistry Olympiad was developed in the former Czechoslovakia in 1968. It was designed with the aim to increase the number of international contacts and the exchange of information between nations. Invitations were sent by the Czechoslovak national committee to all Warsaw Pact countries, except Romania (due to political issues between Romania and USSR). However, in May 1968, relations between Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union became so delicate that only Poland and Hungary participated in the first international competition.

The first International Chemistry Olympiad took place in Prague between 18 and 21 June 1968. Each of the three participating countries sent a team of six students, and four theoretical tasks were to be solved. Guidelines for the next competitions were already suggested. The second chemistry Olympiad took place in 1969 in Poland, and Bulgaria also participated, with USSR and GDR only sending observers. Each team consisted of five pupils, and an experimental competition was added. The decision was made to invite more socialist countries to future competitions and to limit the number of pupils to four. The third Olympiad in 1970 was organized in Hungary with the GDR, Romania and the Soviet Union as new countries. In this competition, more than three prizes were distributed for the first time.

There was no Olympiad held in 1971, as at the end of the competition in 1970, an organizer and host for the next event could not be agreed on. This was solved for the next three years by diplomatically agreeing on the Soviet Union to host 1972, Bulgaria in 1973, and Romania in 1974, starting the tradition to decide the host years in advance. 1972 was the first time where preparation tasks for the International Chemistry Olympiad were created. Also, at a jury session, it was suggested that invitations should be sent to Vietnam, Mongolia, and Cuba. Unfortunately though, these invitations were not sent, leaving seven to compete in 1973.

In 1974, Romania invited Sweden and Yugoslavia to the Olympiad in Bucharest and Germany and Austria sent observers. The Federal Republic of Germany was the first NATO-country with an observer present and this was only able to occur because the Brandt government had contracts in the East. Thus, in 1975, West Germany, Austria, and Belgium also participated in the International Chemistry Olympiad.

The first Olympiad in a non-socialist country took place 1980 in Linz in Austria, although the Soviet Union did not participate. Since then the number of the participating countries has increased steadily. In 1980, only 13 nations took part but this number increased to 21 by the 1984 Olympiad in Frankfurt/Main. With the fall of the Iron Curtain and the break-up of the Soviet Union into independent states in the early 1990s, the number of participants increased again. In addition, the increasing interest of Asian and Latin American countries became apparent with the numbers of participants. Altogether 47 delegations participated in 1998. Presently, 88 countries are invited to the International Chemistry Olympiads.

Remote IChO
Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, IChO 2020, 2021 and 2022 were organized remotely without a laboratory exam in order to keep the Olympic spirit of collaboration and peace even in harsh times.

Distribution of medals
The current list of countries with the best results for last decade by Golds are as follows as of Feb 2024 (Consolidated from following sources:          ):

0 denotes participated and yet did not get any gold

title: International Chemistry Olympiad