text:
Mount Auburn Cemetery

Mount Auburn Cemetery, located in Cambridge and Watertown, Massachusetts, is the first rural or garden cemetery in the United States. It is the burial site of many prominent Boston Brahmins, and is a National Historic Landmark.

Dedicated in 1831 and set with classical monuments in a rolling landscaped terrain, it marked a distinct break with Colonial-era burying grounds and church-affiliated graveyards. The appearance of this type of landscape coincides with the rising popularity of the term "cemetery," derived from the Greek for "a sleeping place," instead of graveyard. This language and outlook eclipsed the previous harsh view of death and the afterlife embodied by old graveyards and church burial plots.

The 174 acre cemetery is important both for its historical aspects and for its role as an arboretum. It is Watertown's largest contiguous open space and extends into Cambridge to the east, adjacent to the Cambridge City Cemetery and Sand Banks Cemetery. It was designated a National Historic Landmark District in 2003 for its pioneering role in 19th-century cemetery development.

History
The land that became Mount Auburn Cemetery was originally named Stone's Farm, though locals referred to it as "Sweet Auburn" after the 1770 poem "The Deserted Village" by Oliver Goldsmith. Mount Auburn Cemetery was inspired by Père Lachaise Cemetery in Paris and was itself an inspiration to cemetery designers, most notably at Green-Wood Cemetery in Brooklyn (1838), Hollywood Cemetery in Richmond, Virginia, and Abney Park in London. Mount Auburn Cemetery was designed largely by Henry Alexander Scammell Dearborn with assistance from Jacob Bigelow and Alexander Wadsworth.

Bigelow came up with the idea for Mount Auburn as early as 1825, though a site was not acquired until five years later. Bigelow, a medical doctor, was concerned about the unhealthiness of burials under churches as well as the possibility of running out of space. With help from the Massachusetts Horticultural Society, Mount Auburn Cemetery was founded on 70 acre of land authorized by the Massachusetts Legislature for use as a garden or rural cemetery. The original land cost $6,000; it was later extended to 170 acre. The main gate was built in the Egyptian Revival style and cost US$10000 1831. The first president of the Mount Auburn Association, Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story, dedicated the cemetery in 1831. Story's dedication address, delivered on September 24, 1831, set the model for many more addresses in the following three decades. Garry Wills focuses on it as an important precursor to President Lincoln's Gettysburg Address.

The cemetery is credited as the beginning of the American public parks and gardens movement. It set the style for other suburban American cemeteries such as Laurel Hill Cemetery (Philadelphia, 1836), Mount Hope Cemetery (Bangor, Maine, 1834), America's first municipal rural cemetery; Green-Wood Cemetery (Brooklyn, 1838), The Green Mount Cemetery (Baltimore, Maryland, 1839) Mount Hope Cemetery (Rochester, NY, 1838), Lowell Cemetery (Lowell, Massachusetts, 1841), Allegheny Cemetery (Pittsburgh, 1844), Albany Rural Cemetery (Menands, New York, 1844), Swan Point Cemetery (Providence, Rhode Island 1846), Spring Grove Cemetery (Cincinnati, 1844), and Forest Hills Cemetery (Jamaica Plain, 1848) as well as Oakwood Cemetery in Syracuse, New York. It can be considered the link between Capability Brown's English landscape gardens and Frederick Law Olmsted's Central Park in New York (1850s).

Mount Auburn was established at a time when Americans had a sentimental interest in rural cemeteries. It is still well known for its tranquil atmosphere and accepting attitude toward death. Many of the more traditional monuments feature poppy flowers, symbols of blissful sleep. In the late 1830s, its first unofficial guide, Picturesque Pocket Companion and Visitor's Guide Through Mt. Auburn, was published and featured descriptions of some of the more interesting monuments as well as a collection of prose and poetry about death by writers including Nathaniel Hawthorne and Willis Gaylord Clark. Because of the number of visitors, the cemetery's developers carefully regulated the grounds: they had a policy to remove "offensive and improper" monuments and only "proprietors" (i.e., plot owners) could have vehicles on the grounds and were allowed within the gates on Sundays and holidays. However, Mount Auburn differed from previously established cemeteries in that it was open to the general public and was not restricted to specific religious groups, reflecting the growing religious pluralism of Boston during the time.

In the 1840s, Mount Auburn was considered one of the most popular tourist destinations in the nation, along with Niagara Falls and Mount Vernon. A 16-year-old Emily Dickinson wrote about her visit to Mount Auburn in a letter in 1846. 60,000 people visited the cemetery in 1848 alone.

Buildings
The cemetery has three notable buildings on its grounds. Washington Tower was designed by Bigelow and built in 1852–54. Named for George Washington, the 62 ft tower was built of Quincy granite and provides excellent views of the area. Bigelow Chapel was built in the 1840s and rebuilt in the 1850s, also of Quincy granite, and was renovated in 1899 under the direction of architect Willard Sears to accommodate a crematorium. Its interior was again renovated in 1924 by Allen and Collins. Through all of these alterations, stained-glass windows by the Scottish firm of Allan & Ballantyne were preserved.

In 1870 the cemetery trustees, feeling the need for additional function space, purchased land across Mount Auburn Street and constructed a reception house. This building was supplanted in the 1890s by the construction of the Story Chapel and Administration Building, adjacent to the main gate. The first reception house was designed by Nathaniel J. Bradlee, and is (like the cemetery) listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The second building was designed by Willard Sears, and is built of Potsdam sandstone in what Sears characterized as "English Perpendicular Style". The chapel in this building was redecorated in 1929 by Allen and Collins to include stained-glass by New England artist Earl E. Sanborn.

Today
More than 93,000 people are buried in the cemetery as of 2003. A number of historically significant people have been interred there since its inception, particularly members of the Boston Brahmins and the Boston elite associated with Harvard University, as well as a number of prominent Unitarians.

The cemetery is nondenominational and continues to make space available for new plots. The area is well known for its beautiful environs and is a favorite location for bird-watchers; over 220 species of birds have been observed at the cemetery since 1958. Guided tours of the cemetery's historic, artistic, and horticultural points of interest are available.

Mount Auburn's collection of over 5,500 trees includes nearly 700 species and varieties. Thousands of very well-kept shrubs and herbaceous plants weave through the cemetery's hills, ponds, woodlands, and clearings. The cemetery contains more than 10 miles (17 km) of roads and many paths. Landscaping styles range from Victorian-era plantings to contemporary gardens, from natural woodlands to formal ornamental gardens, and from sweeping vistas through majestic trees to small enclosed spaces. Many trees, shrubs, and herbaceous plants are tagged with botanic labels containing their scientific and common names.

The cemetery was among those profiled in the 2005 PBS documentary A Cemetery Special.

title: Mount Auburn Cemetery


text:
Talk:Logarithmic timeline

Old text
Err ... why this page? Charles Matthews 13:06, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

OK, content has now arrived. Would exponential timeline be a better title?

Charles Matthews 13:55, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * It seems like this article should actually be logarithmic timeline. -- Decumanus 17:31, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Well, one can be a redirect. It's true that an exponential scale down one side of a graph is normally thought of as logarithmic graph paper (which, more importantly, shouldn't be a red link).

Charles Matthews 17:36, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You mean line = ln time? May be. Kenny sh

Shouldn't "modern communications" or something like that be in the second section? Very important, I think. r3m0t 15:44, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
 * What do you mean? Try to add. I'll review latter. Kenny sh —Preceding undated comment added 09:59, 28 March 2004 (UTC)

Unifying
May be to unify Events and Inventions / Discoveries ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenny sh (talk • contribs) 20:57, 11 July 2004 (UTC)

 * Moved to end of discussion. This has been proposed & discussed previously - read the comments.

The stated criterion - "as progress toward the current state of human civilization" - is inherently pov. As such it stimulates thought, whereas, a bland appearances vs dissapearances is Ho-hum. Extinction of the dinos was bad for them, but where would we be if it had not happened? So although my initial reaction a while back was similar to yours, now I'd have to disagree. Thinking is good for the brain :-) -Vsmith 13:02, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Better name for "Outside context problem"
User:MyRedDice deleted the "Outside context problem" column with the comment rm OCP - Iain Banks is not a scientist - out of place here. This seems like a spurious criterion to me: after all, "robot" and "robotics" were coined by science fiction writers. But let's be generous and assume that MyRedDice meant something like "this term is not in widespread use in the scientific community and so not appropriate for an encyclopedia". But that doesn't mean that the material in the column is wrong, perhaps just that the header could be improved.

So what would be a better column heading? Gdr 15:58, 2004 Jul 16 (UTC)

 * I don't think OCP (with the Banks meaning) is an appropriate term for what is listed in that column. It's meant to be something so totally beyond present experience that civilisation is unable to cope. So famine in the 11th century isn't an OCP, because everybody knew about famine. A better term might be "crises", or "potential crises". Roget suggests words like "danger", "critical time", "emergency", and "difficulty", among others. --AlexG 21:41, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * The 9/11/2001 disaster in the U.S. POV was an OCP because it lay beyond the imagination of those in power. "failure to connect the dots". Ancheta Wis 01:37, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC) In that case the difficulty was in the lack of imagination, or in excess complacency; hence an OCP in the Banks meaning.
 * No, 9/11 did not have enough impact to be classed as an OCP. An outside context problem fatally undermines the basic assumptions of a civilisation - like the example of the island whose inhabitants believe it to be the only place in the world, their society being shaken by the arrival of technologically advanced outsiders revealing it to be just one of many, comparatively minor, islands. The discovery of the stars in Isaac Asimov's Nightfall is similar. In Iain Banks' Excession, the appearance of the big black sphere is an OCP because it demonstrates that it is possible to travel to infinitely many nested universes (meaning that existence is no longer limited by the Big Crunch) and that there are civilisations vastly more powerful than the Culture. It could also be considered OCP because the Culture's reaction to it reveals that they are not as serene and democratic as they hold themselves to be. In any case, what should the column heading be? Any advance on "Crises"? --AlexG 18:19, 19 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * The column could be the negative of Inventions/Discoveries (in the progressive sense) so that the sum of the Inventions - the sum of the 'crises' = net progress of civilization. Hopefully not not negative and not zero. If always zero, then there is some kind of conservation law in play. Ancheta Wis 21:49, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I like this idea; for the titles, how about "progress" or "development" as set against "regression"? These are also general enough to allow a wider range of information to be put in the table. --AlexG 23:57, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Ancheta Wis 00:16, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I have done the deed. --AlexG 20:58, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

---

James Joyce was "not a scientist". Does that mean we should delete the quark from Wikipedia and (while we're at it) from particle physics?

chocolateboy 21:32, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Good things v. bad things
I vote for merging the "progress" and "regression" columns into one "major events" column. Although some of the judgements might be obvious, others are just a matter of opinion. For example, to classify mass extinctions in the "bad" column is pure speculation - who knows whether the present world would be better or worse if they had not happened? A nasty species that was even more destructive than mankind might have gained dominance and blown the planet to bits. On the "good" side, we might think that nanotechnology is cool today, but in a few centuries it might (and this is just a wild guess) be viewed in the way that we now think of 20th-century eugenics and racial theory, or nuclear weapons. --Heron 13:37, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * In other words, the Neandertal extinction is not a 'bad thing', but a step toward 'civilization'. There is a value in separating events. The continued destruction of the ecosystems which support the species of the earth, other than human, is a 'bad thing'. This is a categorical statement. Ancheta Wis 14:07, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Looking at it another way, we need to define what ultimate goal or direction we are using to judge "progress" and "regression". I suspect this will be quite difficult.  Is the survival of mankind, or the health of the planet, or maybe a comfortable afterlife for religious believers, the ultimate goal?  It depends on your POV. --Heron 16:28, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * When Watt re-designed the Steam engine, he didn't just dump the cold water from the mines back onto the boiler, which was the previous design. He separated the cold from the hot water. This was later formalized in the Carnot cycle. We can't just dump any old event into the pot, Progress becomes impossible if we live without understanding which factors are productive, which factors are counter-productive. If we attach a label to an event, it can then be viewed retrospectively, re-examined, and debugged in light of an overall process. Ancheta Wis 16:47, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

OK. I agree that your definition of progress has a valid basis, and I agree that we should take advantage of hindsight. I am just making the points that (a) some people might classify events differently than you (they might not even think that "progress" is a good thing, or they might think that all nonhuman species are worthless except as food, although these points of view are probably rare amongst Wikipedians), and (b) whatever definition we use, it should be stated. --Heron 17:33, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * progress and regression are problematic here - very POV dependent. I would vote for elimination and combination into a more neutral Major Events. As an example, I've moved religion and majic to regression. Does that bother anyone? ;) -Vsmith 0☺0:24, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * No problem here, when your action is viewed as a step to greater understanding, per the scientific method. The labels are like + and - charges for electricity. Is it POV to favor electrons? When we fail to distinguish basics, we fail to progress to  electronics. Its like personal hygiene, like separating closets from garbage bins. Ancheta Wis 12:58, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC) -- upon review, I see that I need to add more explanation here:  your action actually reinforces the statement of the Category:The Enlightenment movement to lessen the effect of kinship groups on governance. That is a good thing. It was the philosophical basis of the Bill of Rights First Amendment, which historically was the ideological basis for the British colonization of the Americas. Again, no problem here. Obviously, if you reversed your action, which you are free to do, I might have other comments.
 * Thanks. Different reaction than I expected, gives me a different way of viewing it. Is religion now in the garbage bin - hmm... Anyway I have no plan to revert (although I'm tempted, just to see your other comments). If the progress - regress dichotomy remains, I would be inclined to include religion in both. -Vsmith 21:40, 10 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Um...I find it unrealistic and unfair to put religion in regress...so basically, what you're saying is that people who are religious are causing the Human population to regress? I completely agree with the idea of just a single "major events" section.
 * No offense meant. This is a problem with the kinship group, which is basically the cause of a fallacy: "The enemy of my brother is my enemy." Anyone who believes that will commit heinous acts in the name of kinship. Just because Jeffrey Dahmer was religion X, does not mean that all peoples who are persuaded of religion X are bad. Ancheta Wis 12:11, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * More wars are fought over religion and politics, and even worse, the conflation of religion and politics, than any other cause in today's world. There is clearly something wrong with the current implementations of religion. It was a religious mob that destroyed the library at Alexandria. Ancheta Wis 11:45, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Other editors have proposed putting religion in both columns, which simply points out that there are unresolved factors in the religious impulse, and the human condition in general which leads to progress on one side, and to regression on the other. The key is to pinpoint which factors are harmful, and which are not. In the Bible, for example, it clearly documents that the Jews were not given the 10 commandments while in Egypt so ... Ancheta Wis 11:58, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Jimbo's statement of WikiLove is in order here. If some element of an edit is causing distress, then we need to pinpoint what that is. Does anyone disagree that strict obedience to 613 commandments does not solve the march toward civilization? It is acceptable for an individual to obey 613 commandments. It is clearly unacceptable for an individual to force the entire world to obey 613 commandments and to punish the unbelievers. That is totalitarian dictatorship. In the name of a religion. Ancheta Wis 13:19, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I think I have the concept: The regression, more precisely, is the hijacking of political control over a kinship group in the name of a religion. In other words, the regression is a form of demagoguery. I propose replacing the word religion in the regression column with the word demagoguery Ancheta Wis 14:34, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Does anyone have any problem with my including the emergence of the human condition as an event? Some other items, such as the emergence of maternal love, compassion and the differentiation between vice and virtue? I truly believe these facets are part of civilization Ancheta Wis 18:11, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * OK, but --- how do you define human condition (that article is a bit ill defined.) and what evidence do you have for an emergence? Agreed that these are most important parts of civilization. Question is, when did they start? Maternal love is not restricted to humans - when did it originate? Don't think we know. -Vsmith 00:08, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * We have some clues: the alligator and other crocodilians carry around their eggs in their mouths (without eating them), when they need to move them. Birds will mimic distress, sometimes limping away, to lure away intruders, when intruders get too near to their nests. Binti jua the mother gorilla protected the young boy who fell into her cage. Men will generally ignore the cries of a baby, but women will generally respond to the cry of a baby. Mammal mothers have a hormone response which quiets them when they are breastfeeding their babies. All of this points out to the emergence of maternal love perhaps 100 million years ago. Clearly by the time of emergence of mammals, say 60-100 million years ago. Ancheta Wis 05:47, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * With mammals in Tertiary or crocs & Dinos. in Paleozoic-Mesozoic? I can agree with that. Now, about the differentiation between vice and virtue. How do you define this and when did it all start? -Vsmith 15:34, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * It is interesting that the human condition requires introspection and reflection; thus a mature human can be expected to know limitations, and that teenagers, typically feel immortal (i.e., they don't do too much introspection and reflection). Perhaps we can project that the emergence of introspection and reflection are approximately coeval with the emergence of art, magic and religion. I realize that there are some missing pieces here. When did this condition become common to all humans? Perhaps language plays a part? Certainly experience and the custom of respecting elders? In that case, we can date that with the people of New Guinea, who still respect the elders. They arrived about 45,000 BC. Of course, they were still headhunters then. But then the definition of vice and virtue is certainly culture-bound. The Romans still practiced slow poisoning, for example. (That was in Selected Anniversaries for Agrippina) In that case, the question is universal definition of vice and virtue, and we are not there yet, with all the beheadings that are still going on. Ancheta Wis 16:55, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Here is a possible proxy concept for emergence of the differentiation of vice and virtue: the emergence of the taboo. I know that the Australian aborigines and the peoples of Southeast Asia and the Polynesians definitely observed taboos. So the date of arrival of the Aborigines to Australia would date the taboo. Ancheta Wis 17:14, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

10k
Paleolithic belongs with Pleistocene, and holocene started (not ended - it's the current period) 10k years ago --Random|832 18:44, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Fixed that problem, I think :-) -Vsmith 15:36, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Progress & Regression
Let's rename Progress & Regression to some more NPOV like Appearance and Disappearance. And move all distinctions, end of dynasties, empires, Troy to Disappearance column. Conan 11:01, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Appearance and Disappearance
Let's vote to rename to Appearance and Disappearance. Conan 13:03, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Whatever the names are, we need to avoid the Doctor Panglossian This is the best of all possible worlds. There needs to be a critical division between the facets which the timeline is cataloging. The Enlightenment posited a sense that natural law was the expression of the Creator; this viewpoint, which is embodied in the institutions of the U.S. has held up for over two centuries. Appearance, as in appearance of the mammals did not have much effect until disappearance of the dinosaurs. Thus if the names become Appearance and Disappearance, then whenever some trend appears, like a new species, if we at the same time, list the ending or failure of some other trend, like the extinction of a species, then this would allow the tracking of a new trend. As an example,
 * Appearance of industrialization in mass society needs to be coupled with Systematic overfishing in the negative column, which then allows a rational examination of the costs of industrialization, and which then provides the rationale for the next consequence, which is Decrease in growth rate of human society, and eventual stability of size of human society. See what I mean? If we can put down On the one hand and also On the other hand, then we can document the basis for past, current and even future events in the timeline. Shades of Isaac Asimov's Foundation series! I believe this is a proper function for the Wikipedia. Ancheta Wis 15:13, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * Re-reading the associated articles, I see that two centuries for natural law is an understatement, and may even have been eight centuries, since 1215, which is well before the establishment of the U.S., of course. Ancheta Wis 15:32, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Let's not rename or vote until you read the previous dicussions and clarify your proposal with some detailed reasoning and consideration of the results. Are you Conan the Destroyer or Conan the Builder :-) -Vsmith 15:27, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I am Conan hacker :), BTW, I've founded this page under name Kenny. Thanks for participation :) I've read sometimes all discussion. Conan 20:54, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

102/3 scale
Surely it would be more intuitive and convenient to use a scale based on powers of five in the second chart? 102/3 is, after all, about 4.6. -- 20:06, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Reverting massive and questionable rewrite
I don't think that a massive rewrite which was disguised as a dozen minor edits was fair play. This talk page is here for discussion - if you think a total rewrite is needed then discuss here first. -Vsmith 00:17, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * It isn't necessary to cast the revisions as a "disguise". I made one non-minor edit and a series of very small adjustments.  The tables suffer from a layout problem that goes beyond terming events "progress" or "regression"; long lists forced into small boxes are unsightly and difficult to read.

 * At a glance, there are a number of oddities and glaring omissions: the pyramids and the ice age are somehow progress; the most important invention of the second millenium is missing (gunpowder); the great depression is overlooked; real nanotechnology (not just very small toys) is alleged to exist; and the selection of events displays some kind of weird Western quasi-Judeoatheist bias. History can be presented more professionally.

 * Additionally, the introduction is less formal than it should be and isn't very accurate of the current article (for example, neither chart has fit on a page in months). It also seems to have developed something like feature creep — there's no need to define period or event, nor for pedantic reminders that any interpretation will be subjective and arbitrary to some degree.  [[User:Eequor|‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ]]] 01:04, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * OK - I apologise for the "disguise" comment, just my initial irritation in control. However, a discussion is warranted before such a complete rewrite. Your formatting is easier to read, but the content changes are in question. I'm not sure about the need for undue "formality" in the intro and am not sure just what "pedantic reminders" are, the focus as defined was toward human civilization (that was added because of some apparant unfocused "feature creep"). The old table does come close to fitting a page depending on the screen resolution and font size.

 * Your comment some kind of weird Western quasi-Judeoatheist bias was amusing, how do you define your bias? Any such list as this cannot help but be biased and POV to a degree and am not sure that this is intended to be a professional historical summary, more a thought provoking list.

 * There are always going to be glaring omissions and oddities: it cannot be a comprehensive listing. For one example, the ice ages may well have provided the stress which lead to the evolution of the sapiens brain. And, maybe it's just my ...athiest bias :-), but there is reason to put religion in both positive and negative columns.

 * It may be that most will prefer your version, but I wanted a discussion in light of the previous comments on this page. That's it for now... -Vsmith 02:56, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I'm concerned that too much interest is given to speculation, especially in trying to discredit magic and religion, which is just demagogy of a different sort, really. The ice age might have had a direct positive effect, but how are we to know whether it did?  We've only had one ice age, and it ended before recorded history.  Similarly, different approaches to religion might have been more beneficial if they had been popular, but we can't say with certainty that religion didn't get us where we are today.  We're lacking any sort of verifiability.

 * We can, however, say that some things were necessary to modern civilization, while some events were almost unequivocally bad. The world we live in is the product of many different advances in technology, and a good timeline should highlight the advances that proved most important.  It isn't POV to say progress was gained in some areas and lost in others — this is clearly a timeline of human civilization; dolphins might find these tables silly, but we aren't writing for them.

 * The tables seem to be written for a specific segment of humanity, which is worrying. From what was included (or left out), our audience seems to be somebody living along the Mediterranean Sea with strong tendencies for atheism and pacifism.  They seem to have a certain affectation for Jewish settlements, which they've somehow reconciled with the Pyramids being progress and the slavery happening at about the same time being regression.  They've heard of a place called America, but they don't pay attention to anything that happens there (nor to anything else outside of Europe apart from the Red Sea area).

 * In my opinion, it would be more helpful to categorize events by crises, religion, science, and technology, but I'm at a loss for how those might be incorporated into the table without making it excessively wide. Maybe the tables should be abandoned altogether.  [[User:Eequor|‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ]]] 17:25, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Total rewrite of this page is needed. Progress and regression introduces POV and should go. I'd rather see an article broken into paragraphs than a table. Equoor's version was better, but I'd go further. But these changes should have been more transparently major; better use of the preview button I think! Zeimusu 01:29, 2004 Dec 20 (UTC)

 * In defense of the Progress and Regression columns, here is an example which is nonthreatening but which illustrates the usage:

 * Ancheta Wis 02:31, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Guidelines for Logarithmic timeline

 * 1) Keep the page length about one screen. Readers should see logarithmic timescale clearly.
 * 2) Write only most important info in each row.
 * 3) All other events could be in periodical subpages.

 * Well, which is more important — history or the logarithmic scale? I don't think it's helpful to arbitrarily limit the table to one page, especially since there is likely to be some disagreement about what should be included.  Timeline of invention does well enough without subpages, and it's like 20 pages long.  [[User:Eequor|‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ]]] 17:25, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I've originated this table to be first of all observable. Observability is much more important than comprehensiveness. There a lot of very detailed and long timelines. See Category:Timelines, Timeline of evolution, Geologic timescale, List of themed timelines. If you like very long lists, please contribute there. Conan 18:22, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Doubts about the page
(Conan 09:56, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC))
 * 1) Progress and Regression is NPOV violation and maker harder to read.

Where is Jesus?
I can't find him on here. Also, the progress and regression lists were severely POV. Just list major events (like Jesus's birth, fer crissakes!) and be done w it. Also I prefer eequor's change to the second timeline, the old version was too weird, mathwise. [[User:Sam Spade|Sam]] Spade wishes you a merry Christmas! 11:35, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I thought eequor had gotten rid of the 2/3rds logarithim in favor of another? Apparently not? I'm confused. [[User:Sam Spade|Sam]] Spade wishes you a merry Christmas! 11:41, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * It was tempting, but that's a much larger change than just reformatting the table (which is a horrid mess anyway). I'm also not certain whether a base 4 or base 5 scale would be better.  The table will need a lot of work.

 * My feeling about Jesus is that including him would place the tables on a particularly awkward slippery slope — perhaps other religious leaders deserve a mention too, or their religions, or even non-religious figures. Aristotle may have had a larger influence on history than anyone else; he must certainly be added if other people are.  [[User:Eequor|‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ]]] 17:25, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Aristotle? Its clear to me that Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Einstein, Newton, Hitler, etc... outdo aristotle. Why is aristotle important other than records of him accidentilly having survived? I know alot of people find the Ancient Greeks mind-blowingly signifigant in general, but can't we at least focus on ones who made a substantial contribution, like say.. Hero of Alexandria? :) [[User:Sam Spade|Sam]] Spade wishes you a merry Christmas! 18:04, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * It's interesting to note that 2000 years after Aristotle, the Catholic Church was still persecuting and killing people for disagreeing with him. In contrast, the Church has had an abominable history of mostly ignoring everything Jesus said (particularly in its disregard for human life), though it's been getting better recently.

 * Exactly which of the ancient Greeks affected civilization the most is something of a toss-up; a lot could be said for Plato or Pythagoras as well. Aristotle, though, studied nearly every field of science and philosophy, and his ideas formed the basis of the scientific method — which is accepted by all scientists regardless of their religious background.  Aristotle and alchemy are at least partly responsible for every technological advancement in the Common Era.  --[[User:Eequor|‣ ᓛᖁ  [[Image:Venus symbol (blue).gif|♀]] [ ᑐ ]]] 20:00, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Sorry, it seems to me, the table is too small to including peoples here, and this is NPOV violation. Conan 18:11, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Regression is the POV violation, and not including people like Jesus is extremely POV. [[User:Sam Spade|Sam]] Spade wishes you a merry Christmas! 13:05, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

New version
I've created Logarithmic timeline/New version which takes into account many of the criticisms discussed above. I've written a new introduction which discusses by whom and why this was proposed. I've also attempted to NPOV the table by merging the seriously POV Progress and Regression columns into a single Events column and I've deleted a few of the events. I've also deleted the second table, as that seemed to be original research, and not very usable as a timeline. I hope that people think this is an improvement and can replace the current version (obviously with modifications where necessary). --G Rutter 22:04, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * The flow of the events in a single row, currently reads like Progress on the left, and Regression on the right, which is acceptable for an on the one hand ..., and on the other hand ... set of events. Would that be acceptable to everyone? It would represent more of a continuum than a good vs bad. OK with everyone? i.e., this is acceptable to me. Ancheta Wis 23:36, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Or we may choose alphabetic or chronological order for events. BTW, pay attention, that good and bad are NPOV violation and not a main idea of the Logarithmic timeline. Conan 12:28, 11 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Thanks, look good. Conan (15:49, 10 Jan 2005)

The New version is quite possibly more problematic with regard to NPOV problems. It is quite impossible to not have a bias when creating a limited or selective list of important events. The list is POV for what is included and what is not -- who decides and what is their POV? The current version at least states up front This is an arbitrary listing as progress toward the current state of human civilization is the apparent selection criterion; as such it is a thought provocative rather than a bland listing. Sure is it going to be biased by the writers and their background - everything is. Quite impossible to do this without being a bit POV - better than a dead listing of everything that ever happened all lumped together and dull. Vsmith 20:33, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree that the New version is still POV with regard to its selection of events, especially for the last three lines, but as Conan says dividing the events into Progress and Regression is not the main point of the Logarithmic timeline. The main point of the timeline is to enable an approximately equal distribution of important events in a single dated diagram.
 * Would the addition of the following sentence (or equivalent) be an acceptable compromise:
 * "This is a somewhat arbitary selection of events, selected as those that appear to be most influential to human society in the early 21st century."
 * That probably needs some work, but hopefully this address part of your problem. As for your other points, I think that the other version is inherently very POV, and appears to be original research. The selection of events should be there to illustrate the concept of the Logarithmic timeline- that's meant to be the thought-provoking bit, not the events themselves. --G Rutter 13:46, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Logarithmic index to Wikipedia?
I spent months on this 1000-line logarithmic timeline: http://www.robotwisdom.com/science/logarithmic.html

I propose redoing it as a (partial) index to Wikipedia, if anyone wants to help.

(maybe break it into ten 100-line pieces?) --robotwisdom 16:08, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The 'NOW' date could be set as 10 January, 2001, which was the launch of Wikipedia.

I limited myself to one 80-character line per entry, but we could open things up so every relevant article gets a link. --robotwisdom 16:32, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

In fact, it might be handy to do it to base 'e' and allow 2000 lines, because events get pretty thick in certain places-- Greece and Rome, the Sixties. --robotwisdom 16:35, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I've started an experimental implementation of one 100-line page covering 1000AD to 1901AD: E3e2 --robotwisdom 17:03, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Converting it is trivially easy-- I put square brackets around each individual, and so far only 10% of them have even needed tweaking! --robotwisdom 17:10, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"Thousands groups coloured"
I've reverted an edit which in the edit summary said it coloured the thousand groups (the 10k-100k, the 100k-1M, the 1M-10M and the 1B-14B) as I was not at all clear what this was meant to show. Weirdly, it now appears to have vanished from the revision history (how did that happen?) so I can't remember who did it or their exact explanation. Anyway, it needed some form of explanation both on the talk page first and then on the article page if agreed. --G Rutter 16:03, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I think you're misunderstanding Wikipedia policy. I have not heard of a policy that requires an explanation asking on the talk page before making a layout improvement. In the contrary, we are clearly encouraged to be bold in improving articles. If you are aware of a policy that states, as you say, that changes like this need some form of explanation on the talk page first, and then agreement, please provide a link to it.

 * Even if there is such a policy, you did not stick to it yourself. You reverted the page half an hour before you talked about it. Moreover, you are not giving any reason why you think the page is better after your edit. It seems you are applying double standards.

 * For now, I will revert your change. This will people give the chance to look at it and decide which version they prefer. (People know what a table without coloring looks like). If it turns out that a majority prefers it without coloring, we can certainly revert it.

 * I see the following advantages in coloring it:
 * It is a common practice in tables to color groups of 1, 2 or 3 rows in alternating colors to make them easier to read.
 * The group size of 3 rows maps nicely to the English words like "thousands" or "millions".
 * Color is a proven help in memorization.
 * It just looks nicer.
 * Sebastian 06:27, 2005 Mar 27 (UTC)

IMHO, Colors are redundant. Conan

 * The half hour gap was due to Wikipedia refusing to save my comment on this page the first four times I tried. I don't think it looks nicer and I fail to see why you'd want to memorise this table. I think it makes the table more confusing- I couldn't work out the logic behind why some rows were coloured and some weren't. As it's a fairly small table, if you think it needs making easier to read, what do people think about colouring every other line? (And I'd prefer not in that particular shade of yellow!) --G Rutter 18:32, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree. Conan 10:13, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

"Longer version"
I've reverted the longer version of the logarithmic timeline as original research, which isn't allowed in Wikipedia. The "short version" is an example of a logarithmic timeline of the sort envisaged by Heinz von Foerster and is there to illustrate his point on how such a timeline could work. There's lots of different sorts of logarithmic timelines that could be created, but unless they've actually been used by someone in a published work (or equivalent) I'm afraid that we can't include them in this article. --G Rutter 15:03, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * The problem arises when you try to choose the most significant events, which requires opinion. A workaround might be to sort *all* Wikipedia articles into the relevant section, but then you'd need to expand it at least 100:1, and maybe more. (See my test at E3e2. --robotwisdom 16:00, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * Yeah, that is the fundamental problem- and like you say it would be possible to produce a "logarithmic index" of Wikipedia - and there's List of themed timelines as well. But, this page is meant to illustrate Heinz von Foerster's point. I think it's got most of the broad themes represented - what other themes (rather than specific events) do you think should be included? --G Rutter 19:35, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I was flabbergasted (and flattered!) to read that my table was "original research"!! It's not research at all! Nor is it new. I bought something similar back in the 1960's at a museum, done by John B. Sparks back in 1932!

 * The reason I made this table is simply that I think there should be a place in Wikipedia where one can see a logarithmic timeline going from the Big Bang till a few years ago, giving a fairly decent summary of the main events. There are other timelines on evolution or the universe, but they are either not logarithmic or not general enough (evolution plus geology plus history).

 * The idea is to have a timeline one can consult, and add things to.

 * I don't think this article should be limited to "illustrating Heinz von Foerster's point". I never heard of him. If Wikipedia can have other useful timelines, why not one that is logarithmic and general? If you can think of a better name to call it, tell us, but I think "logarithmic timeline" is a good name.

 * By the way, looking back at the history, I see that there used to be a very nice timeline, as I would like. (The one thing I don't like about it is the funny 10^(2/3) scale. I think the scale I used is better. And don't worry, the scale I used is not original!) The person who got rid of it, Conan, says he moved it to Detailed logarithmic timeline, but that link doesn't exist! What happened to it?

 * I don't think that the fact that the timeline I envisage would not contain every possible link is a reason not to do it. I think Robotwisdom's E3e2 is nice, but maybe even too exhaustive. If we want, we can put in links to millennia or centuries where things would be covered in more detail.

 * I realize that choosing what events to put in is a matter of opinion. But I don't think that goes agains the policy of Wikipedia. We would not be saying explicitly, "The most important event in this period is ...", which of course would be non-neutral. Every article in Wikipedia expresses the opinions of the authors as to what is important! That is unavoidable.

 * EricK 16:01, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * As a compromise, I propose someone create a separate page for the expanded version. (I think when you try filling it in, you'll realise how subjective it is, but I don't want to discourage your experiment.) It could always be hosted on someone's personal site...? --robotwisdom 16:55, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Reverse direction???
What would a reverse-direction log timeline look like?

 * 1st three minutes
 * 1st 30 minutes
 * 1st 5hrs
 * 1st 2 days
 * 1st 20 days
 * 1st 200 days
 * 1st 6 years
 * 1st 60 years
 * 1st 600 years
 * 6000
 * 60,000
 * 600,000
 * 6M
 * 60M
 * 600M
 * 6B
 * present
 * present

It seems possible but unenlightening.--robotwisdom 1 July 2005 11:46 (UTC)

I decided to give it a shot, using Timeline of the Big Bang. Not sure if it works or not.--robotwisdom 2 July 2005 00:18 (UTC)

 * I'm not sure that it adds much to the article- though it might be worth moving to the Timeline of the Big Bang article itself- it might be useful there. --G Rutter 2 July 2005 13:47 (UTC)

 * The more I think about it the more I like it-- and since there's only two basic plans possible (regular and inverse) I think they should both be included. I was worried that it wouldn't be interesting because most of the segments would be empty, but it turns out to be interesting in a completely different way. --robotwisdom 2 July 2005 14:27 (UTC)

Overview
I don't really think the current emphasis is right. The singularity business is secondary, and that graph isn't really a logarithmic timeline, imho. I only see two natural forms of log timeline-- the 'inverse' where the pov is from the big bang forward, and the usual where the pov is from the human ego backward. If a singularity occurs, it will screw things up because the log sequence will change after the singularity. --robotwisdom 11:16, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Present-looking-forward
Digg linked this future-timeline this morning-- can we use it to rough out a log timeline that starts now and looks forward?

I think it's impossible to choose the right scaling-factor until you know how dense the events are, eg:

 * next ten years
 * next 1,000 yrs
 * next 100,000 yrs
 * next 10M yrs
 * next 1B yrs
 * next 100B yrs? --robotwisdom 13:22, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Event ideas: Sun expands; Viking (et al) reach galactic milestones; "I Love Lucy" reaches other galaxies? --robotwisdom 13:28, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Ultimate fate of the universe --robotwisdom 14:18, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Automatic updating of the past few days row?
Just wondered, if there is any kind of template that can automatically extract from the current events portals e.g. the first news story, and place it in the first row, last column box of the looking backwards table? --gejyspa (talk) 14:42, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Logarithmic timeline. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050308021341/http://www.robotwisdom.com/science/logarithmic.html to http://www.robotwisdom.com/science/logarithmic.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:13, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Logarithmic timeline


text:
Greg Rusedski

Gregory Rusedski (born 6 September 1973) is a British-Canadian former professional tennis player. He was the British No. 1 in 1997, 1999 and 2006, and reached the ATP ranking of world No. 4 for periods from 6 October 1997 to 12 October 1997 and from 25 May 1998 to 21 June 1998.

In 1997, he was the US Open finalist, which led to him receiving the BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award and the ITV Sports Champion of the Year Award. Also, he scored 30 wins and 13 losses with the Great Britain Davis Cup team.

Personal life
Rusedski was born in Montreal, Quebec, to a British mother and a father of Polish and Ukrainian descent. He was a very promising junior player in Canada in the 1980s, and subsequently caused some anger in Canada when he decided to adopt British citizenship and play for Great Britain in 1995. Rusedski made the decision for "lifestyle reasons", noting that his girlfriend — who later became his wife — lived in Britain.

Rusedski has been with his wife Lucy Connor since 1991, they met while he was competing in a junior tournament where she was a ball girl. They married in a Catholic ceremony at Douai Abbey in West Berkshire in December 1999. They have two children: a daughter born in 2006, and a son born in 2009.

Career
Rusedski's first career singles tournament title was at the Hall of Fame Championship in Newport, Rhode Island in 1993. He opted to compete for the United Kingdom rather than Canada from 22 May 1995 onwards, a decision which was received poorly by Canadian fans; it was reported that he was given a "traitor's reception" by the crowd when he competed in his first Canadian Open after the switch.

Rusedski reached the singles final of the US Open in 1997, where he lost to Pat Rafter in four sets (shortly thereafter reaching his career high rank of world No. 4). He also won the BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award and the ITV Sports Champion of the Year Award. In 1998, Tim Henman eclipsed Rusedski as the UK number one tennis player. Rusedski, however, won the Grand Slam Cup in 1999.

In the 1999 US Open, Rusedski reached the fourth round where he was eliminated 5–7, 0–6, 7–6 (7–3), 6–4, 6–4, by Todd Martin; Rusedski had a two-sets-to-none advantage and was serving for the match in the third set, then in the fifth set he was up 4–1, but lost 20 of the final 21 points including a stretch of 18 consecutive points.

In the 2002 US Open, after losing to Pete Sampras in the third round in a grueling five-set match, Rusedski described Sampras as "a half-step slow" and predicted that Sampras would lose his fourth-round match to young German star Tommy Haas. Sampras, however, went on to win the tournament.

At Wimbledon in 2003, Rusedski was playing in a second-round match against Andy Roddick. Roddick had won the first two sets, but Rusedski was 5–2 up in the third set. During a point on Roddick's service game, a member of the crowd loudly called one of Roddick's shots long, causing Rusedski to stop playing the point as he believed it was a line judge. The umpire ruled that the ball was good and that, as Roddick's next shot landed in court, Roddick was awarded the point. Rusedski, believing the point should have been replayed, launched into a long and expletive-riddled tirade at the umpire and, never regaining his composure, went on to lose the next five games without reply to concede the match. Rusedski apologized after the match, and Roddick reached the semifinals.

Rusedski tested positive for nandrolone in January 2004, but he was cleared of the charges in a hearing on 10 March 2004.

Rusedski was defeated in the second round of Wimbledon in 2005 by Joachim Johansson of Sweden. Later that year, he defended his title at the Hall of Fame Championship, defeating Vince Spadea in the final. This was the first time he had successfully defended a title and the third time he had won the championship. He then reached the semifinals at both the RCA Championships in Indianapolis, losing to Taylor Dent, and the Canada Masters tournament in Montreal, losing to Andre Agassi.

Towards the end of 2005, Rusedski's ranking had risen to the high 30s. A defeat for Rusedski in the first round of the Challenger event in Dnipropetrovsk, Ukraine, left him ranked 38th, just one place short of regaining the UK top spot. Rusedski reclaimed the UK number-one spot on 15 May 2006, overtaking Andy Murray by getting to the third round of the Rome Masters. He lost the top UK ranking again after a first-round exit at Wimbledon.

On 7 April 2007, Rusedski officially retired from tennis after partnering with Jamie Murray to a doubles victory over the Netherlands in a Davis Cup match, a result which gave Great Britain a winning 3–0 lead in the tie. He announced his retirement immediately after the win during a live interview with Sue Barker on BBC Television. Rusedski has stayed involved with professional tennis in his retirement, and currently works for the Lawn Tennis Association as a talent and performance ambassador. Rusedski held the record for fastest serve at 149 miles per hour until Andy Roddick broke it.

On 24 January 2009, Rusedski confirmed he had been seeking a return to professional tennis. However, Davis Cup captain John Lloyd turned down his offer to compete in the Davis Cup, and Rusedski was unable to obtain any wild-card tournament entries. Because of this, Rusedski quickly retracted his announcement and is still retired.

Rusedski vs. Henman
Rusedski was often overshadowed in the British press by Henman, especially at Wimbledon. They were generally closely matched over their careers; both reached a highest world ranking of 4. Rusedski won 15 singles titles compared to Henman's eleven, and also reached the final of the US Open in 1997, whereas Henman never made it past the semifinals of a Grand Slam tournament. However, Henman reached six Grand Slam semifinals and an additional four quarterfinals, whereas Rusedski reached two Grand Slam quarterfinals in total: at the US Open where he reached the final, and at Wimbledon the same year. Neither Rusedski nor Henman ever reached the quarterfinals of the Australian Open. Henman reached the semifinals of the French Open, while Rusedski never made it past the fourth round at that tournament.

His Davis Cup singles record was considerably poorer than Henman's. In Great Britain's two key Davis Cup ties in the World Group knockout stage, Rusedski lost all four singles rubbers, despite home advantage (against the US in 1999 and Sweden in 2002). However, as a doubles partnership, Rusedski and Henman won several Davis Cup matches, as well as other tournaments.

Rusedski's final match at a Grand Slam was against Henman, at the 2006 US Open. Henman won 7–6, 6–2, 6–3. Over their careers, in head-to-head encounters, Henman won 8–2.

Media career
Rusedski has an active media career, having written columns for The Sun, The Daily Mirror and The Daily Telegraph. He also works for the television channel British Eurosport providing analysis during the stations' coverage of the Australian Open. He provided commentary and analysis for Sky Sports for their coverage of the US Open and ATP World Tour Events, and for the BBC's coverage of Wimbledon. He has done some acting, appearing in an episode of Agatha Christie's Marple as a tennis player. In 2008, he appeared as a contestant on the reality TV shows Dancing on Ice and Beat the Star. He has appeared in "Dictionary Corner" on the Channel 4 game show Countdown.

Singles performance timeline
1 This event was held in Stockholm through 1994, Essen in 1995, and Stuttgart from 1996 through 2001.

2 Rusedski was granted British citizenship in May 1995, and competed for Great Britain from 22 May 1995 onwards.

title: Greg Rusedski


text: User:GerardM/kladblok

title: User:GerardM/kladblok


text:
Talk:Ford Crown Victoria

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 28 one external links on Ford Crown Victoria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090728020336/http://autos.msn.com:80/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=1997&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria to http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=1997&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090515150410/http://autos.msn.com:80/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=1996&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria to http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=1996&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070608011424/http://autos.msn.com:80/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=1999&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria to http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=1999&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060426181740/http://autos.msn.com:80/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2000&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria to http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2000&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090513001334/http://autos.msn.com:80/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2001&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria to http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2001&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090513002833/http://autos.msn.com:80/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2002&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria to http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2002&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090513001334/http://autos.msn.com:80/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2004&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria to http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2004&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090114190508/http://autos.aol.com:80/cars-Ford-Crown+Victoria-2004/expert-review to http://autos.aol.com/cars-Ford-Crown+Victoria-2004/expert-review
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090513003509/http://autos.msn.com:80/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2005&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria to http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2005&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090609220109/http://autos.msn.com:80/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2006&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria to http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2006&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090513002833/http://autos.msn.com:80/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2007&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria to http://autos.msn.com/research/vip/overview.aspx?year=2007&make=Ford&model=Crown%20Victoria
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101107025402/http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=1051 to http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=1051
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081220024641/http://www.accessmylibrary.com:80/coms2/summary_0286-33331708_ITM to http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-33331708_ITM
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080101185859/http://www.autoweek.com:80/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060802/FREE/60731029/1041 to http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060802/FREE/60731029/1041
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110619113918/http://media.ford.com:80/article_display.cfm?article_id=34802 to http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=34802
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110821141013/http://media.ford.com:80/article_display.cfm?article_id=34269 to http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=34269
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120528090843/http://www.wkbw.com/news/business/150-Ford-Workers-to-be-Laid-Off-123688069.html to http://www.wkbw.com/news/business/150-Ford-Workers-to-be-Laid-Off-123688069.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20080827204555/http://www.theglobeandmail.com:80/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080825.whIconsCrownVic0825/BNStory/specialGlobeAuto to http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080825.whIconsCrownVic0825/BNStory/specialGlobeAuto
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110519224522/http://media.ford.com:80/article_display.cfm?article_id=31418 to http://media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=31418
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121106001821/http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-15995167.html to http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-15995167.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121106001842/http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-18994987.html to http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-18994987.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110430101525/http://media.ford.com/pdf/Dec2002sales.pdf to http://media.ford.com/pdf/Dec2002sales.pdf
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110525171438/http://media.ford.com/pdf/Dec2004sales.pdf to http://media.ford.com/pdf/Dec2004sales.pdf
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20121007235022/http://media.ford.com/pdf/December06sales.pdf to http://media.ford.com/pdf/December06sales.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090206054304/http://media.ford.com:80/images/10031/dec08sales.pdf to http://media.ford.com/images/10031/dec08sales.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20110124044733/http://media.ford.com:80/images/10031/Dec10sales.pdf to http://media.ford.com/images/10031/Dec10sales.pdf
 * Added archive archive.org/web/20120131003153/http://media.ford.com/images/10031/Dec11sales.pdf to http://media.ford.com/images/10031/Dec11sales.pdf
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20130123110331/http://media.ford.com/images/10031/Dec12sales.pdf to http://media.ford.com/images/10031/Dec12sales.pdf

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 09:03, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Ford Crown Victoria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111001204809/https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/2009fleetshowroom/2009-crownvictoria.asp to https://www.fleet.ford.com/showroom/2009fleetshowroom/2009-crownvictoria.asp

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:05, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Ford Crown Victoria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=%2F20060802%2FFREE%2F60731029%2F1041
 * Corrected formatting/usage for https://www.thestar.com/printArticle/200078
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110421074830/http://www.statesman.com/news/local/austin-police-ask-for-4-5-million-to-1409441.html to http://www.statesman.com/news/local/austin-police-ask-for-4-5-million-to-1409441.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:23, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ford Crown Victoria. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160918065210/http://www.nhtsa.gov/Laws+%26+Regulations/Electronic+Stability+Control+%28ESC%29 to http://www.nhtsa.gov/Laws+%26+Regulations/Electronic+Stability+Control+%28ESC%29/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 15:34, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Proposed merge of Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor into Ford Crown Victoria
Just a police version and we don't need a separate article on a police version Qwv (talk) 18:12, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

 * The Police version has enough notable differences and history to have its own article. Cvpi71 (talk) 23:53, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose. I too believe that there are notable differences. This merger proposal is a little too undeveloped in general. I don't see how these could be successfully merged. Grk1011 (talk) 13:15, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose There are many differences between the two.  Bobherry  Talk   My Edits  23:44, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose: There are very notable differences between the two and the CVPI has enough history and relevance (to the topic of policing and cars) to have its own article. These two articles couldn't be merged in a condensed fashion without destroying a lot of relevant content. Scorch (talk | ctrb) 02:34, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Oppose: The CVPI does have many notable differences between the civilian version and the PI version as others said, and I believe it should have a different article since the PI itself has much history on law enforcement, popular culture and in vehicles general, and also so the main CV article will be easier to see without having a whole section about CVPIs. Candleblox (talk) 12:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Support - just a derivative of the Crown Vic. No benefit to have it as a standalone.  Mr.choppers |   ✎  13:27, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Strong Oppose: The CVPI's influence on policing absolutely deserves its own article. There are also many notable differences and variations with the CVPI to civilian versions. I don't believe we can adequately do the CVPI justice by just merging the article. UpstateCops (talk) 07:44, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Export markets
Under the heading of Export, Canada is at the top of the list. However, given that all Crown Victoria and related models were manufactured in Canada (as mentioned earlier in the article), it is incorrect to list Canada under this heading. Technically, the U.S. is an export market.

Unrelated, Canada’s RCMP is the single biggest purchaser of police vehicles in North America — might be worth mentioning somewhere. Steveedee (talk) 16:07, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Ford Crown Victoria


text:
Nizamuddin Auliya

Khawaja Syed Muhammad Nizamuddin Auliya (sometimes spelled Awliya; 1238 – 3 April 1325), also known as Hazrat Nizamuddin (lit. 'Holy Nizamuddin'), Sultan-ul-Mashaikh (lit. 'Lord of the pious') and Mahbub-e-Ilahi (lit. 'Beloved of God'), was an Indian Sunni Muslim scholar, Sufi saint of the Chishti Order, and is one of the most famous Sufis from the Indian Subcontinent. His predecessors were Fariduddin Ganjshakar, Qutbuddin Bakhtiyar Kaki, and Moinuddin Chishti, who were the masters of the Chishti spiritual chain or silsila in the Indian subcontinent.

Nizamuddin Auliya, like his predecessors, stressed love as a means of realising God. For him his love of God implied a love of humanity. His vision of the world was marked by a highly evolved sense of religious pluralism and kindness. It is claimed by the 14th century historiographer Ziauddin Barani that his influence on the Muslims of Delhi was such that a paradigm shift was effected in their outlook towards worldly matters. People began to be inclined towards mysticism and prayers and remaining aloof from the world. It is also believed that Ghiyasuddin Tughlaq, the founder of Tughluq dynasty, interacted with Nizamuddin. Initially, they used to share good relationship but soon this got embittered and relation between Ghiyas-ud-din Tughluq and Nizamuddin Auliya never been reformed due to opinion disharmony and their antagonism resulted regular disputes between them during that era.

Life
Nizamuddin Auliya was born in a Sayyid family in Badayun, Uttar Pradesh. At the age of five, after the death of his father, Syed Abdullah bin Ahmad AlHussaini Badayuni, he came to Delhi with his mother, Bibi Zulekha. His biography finds mention in Ain-i-Akbari, a 16th-century document written by Mughal Emperor Akbar's vizier, Abu'l-Fazl ibn Mubarak.

At the age of twenty, Nizāmuddīn went to Ajodhan (the present Pakpattan Sharif in Punjab, Pakistan ) and became a disciple of the Sufi saint Fariduddin Ganjshakar, commonly known as Baba Farid. Nizāmuddīn did not take up residence in Ajodhan but continued with his theological studies in Delhi while simultaneously starting the Sufi devotional practices and the prescribed litanies. He visited Ajodhan each year to spend the month of Ramadan in the presence of Baba Farid. It was on his third visit to Ajodhan that Baba Farid made him his successor. Shortly after that, when Nizāmuddīn returned to Delhi, he received news that Baba Farid had died.

Nizāmuddīn lived at various places in Delhi, before finally settling down in Ghiyaspur, a neighbourhood in Delhi undisturbed by the noise and hustle of city life. He built his Khanqah here, a place where people from all walks of life were fed, where he imparted spiritual education to others and he had his own quarters. Before long, the Khanqah became a place thronged with all kinds of people, rich and poor alike.

Many of his disciples achieved spiritual height, including Shaikh Nasiruddin Chirag Delhavi, and Amir Khusro, noted scholar/singer, and the royal poet of the Delhi Sultanate.

He died on the morning of 3 April 1325. His shrine, the Nizamuddin Dargah, is located in Delhi. and the present structure was built in 1562. The shrine is visited by people of all faiths, through the year, though it becomes a place for special congregation during the death anniversaries, or Urs, of Nizamuddin Auliya and Amīr Khusrao, who is also buried at the Nizāmuddīn Dargāh.

Key beliefs
Besides believing in the traditional Sufi ideas of embracing God within this life by destroying the ego and cleansing the soul, and that this is possible through considerable efforts involving Sufi practices, Nizamuddin also expanded and practised the unique features introduced by past saints of the Chisti Sufi order in India. These included:
 * Emphasis on renunciation and having complete trust in God.
 * The unity of mankind and shunning distinctions based on social and economic status.
 * Helping the needy, feeding the hungry and being sympathetic to the oppressed.
 * Strong disapproval of mixing with the Sultans, the princes and the nobles.
 * Exhortation in making close contact with the poor and the downtrodden
 * Adopting an uncompromising attitude towards all forms of political and social oppression.
 * Adopting the permissibility of Sema.
 * Holding the stance however that Sema is only permissible when musical instruments and dancing are not present.
 * Holding the orthodox Sunni belief that musical instruments are prohibited.

Nizamuddin did not much bother about the theoretical aspects of Sufism, believing rather that it were the practical aspects that counted, as it was anyway not possible to describe the diversified mystical experiences called spiritual states or stations which a practicing Sufi encountered. He discouraged the demonstration of Karamat and emphasised that it was obligatory for the Auliya to hide the ability of Keramat from the commoners. He also was quite generous in accepting disciples. Usually whoever came to him saying that he wanted to become a disciple was granted that favour. This resulted in him being always surrounded by people from all strata of society.

Ancestral history
Like many saints before him, Nizamuddin Aulia traced his lineage from the family of Muhammad.

Spiritual history
He was merely sixteen or seventeen years old when he first heard the name of Farīduddīn Ganjshakar, and feelings of love and respect arose in his heart right then. He narrates to his disciples that he never felt the same after hearing or even meeting any other Sufi. The love kept increasing like a burning fire. If his classmates would like to have some work out of him they used to invoke the name of Baba Farid, and he never refused anything asked in his name. He didn't feel the same for anyone else in his entire lifetime. He became his disciple after completing his studies at the age of 20. He visited him thrice in his lifetime.

Students
He had more than 600 khalifas (a khalifa is a disciple who is given the authority to take his own disciples and thus propagate the spiritual lineage) who continued his lineage all over the world. Some of his most famous disciples are:

 * Nasiruddin Chiragh Dehlavi: He was the spiritual successor of Nizamuddin Auliya. He is considered fifth amongst the big five of the Chisti order in India (the others being Moinuddin Chishti, Qutbuddin Bakhtiar Kaki, Fariduddin Ganjshakar, Nizamuddin Auliya). His shrine is in Chirag Dilli, New Delhi, India.
 * Amir Khusrow: He was the most loved disciple of his master. He was so close to his master that once Nizāmuddīn Auliyā' said, "If the sharī'ah allowed me I would have liked him to be buried with me in the same grave." It is said that he also said once that whoever comes to visit his grave must visit the grave of Amīr Khusro first and then his. He died within a few months of his master's death. He was buried at the feet of his master. His shrine is in Nizāmuddīn Dargāh, New Delhi.
 * Qazi Qawam-Udeen Siddiqui: He was given the title Zubtadul Awliya and was a disciple of his master. He along with his father-in-law Qazi Sultan Zulqarni build Rohtak fort. His descendants are named Qawami Siddiquis and now number in thousands, all have migrated to Pakistan and can be found in Mirpur AK, Islamabad, Karachi, Lahore and Multan.
 * Akhi Siraj Aainae Hind: He was given the title of Āainae-Hind (Mirror of India) by Nizāmuddīn Auliyā' and lived with him for a long time. He was amongst the earliest disciples of Nizāmuddīn Auliyā', who sent him to Bengal. His shrine is at Pirana Pir Dargah, Malda City, Malda, West Bengal.
 * Burhanuddin Gharib: He is also amongst the earliest disciples of Nizamuddin Auliya and lived with the master until his death. After the death of Nizamuddin Auliya, he went to the Deccan, and the place where he lived became famous thereby. His shrine is in Khuldabad in Maharashtra.
 * Hasan Sijzi: Author the spiritual manual Fawaid ul Fuad, a famous compilation of the discourses of Nizamuddin Awliya

Descendants
Nizamuddin Auliya had one brother named Jamaluddin. He told him, "your descendants will be my descendants". Jamaluddin had one son named Ibrahim. He was nurtured by Nizamuddin Auliya after Jamaluddin's death. Nizamuddin Auliya sent his nephew to Bengal in Eastern India along with one of his disciples (khalifa) Akhi Siraj Aainae Hind, known as Aaina-e-Hind. Alaul Haq Pandavi (the master (Pir) of Ashraf Jahangir Semnani) became his disciple and khalifa. Ala-ul-Haq Pandwi married his sister-in-law (sister of Syed Badruddin Badr-e-Alam Zahidi) to Ibrahim. They had one son, Fariduddin Tavaela Bukhsh, who became a well known Chisti Sufi of Bihar. He was married to the daughter of Alaul Haq Pandavi. He became the khalifa of Noor Qutb-e-Aalam Padwi (the eldest son and spiritual successor of Alaul Haq Pandavi). His shrine is in Chandpura, Bihar Sharif, Bihar. Many of his descendants are well known Sufis, namely Moinuddin Sani, Naseeruddin Sani, Sultan Chisti Nizami, Bahauddin Chisti Nizami, Deewan Syed Shah Abdul Wahab (his shrine is in Choti Takiya, Biharsharif), Sultan Sani, Amjad Hussain Chisti Nizami, among others. He spread Chisti Nizami order all over Northern India. Ijaza of his Silsila (order) is present in all the existing khanqahs of Bihar. His descendants still reside in Bihar Sharif and can be found in many parts of the world. The current Sajjada Nasheen of Chillah of Usman Harooni is his direct descendant. Fariduddin Tavaela Bukhsh commemorated (originated) the Urs of Usman Harooni at his chillah in Belchi, Bihar Sharif (First Sajjada Nasheen).

Nizamuddin Aulia also had one sister named Bibi Ruqayya who is buried next to Bibi Zulekha, the mother of Khwaja Nizamuddin Aulia in Adhchini village in Delhi. Nizamuddin Auliya did not marry. He brought his Pir/Shaikh's grandson named Khwaja Muhammad Imam, who was the son of Bibi Fatima (daughter of Baba Farid and Badruddin is'haq) as mentioned in Seyrul Aulia book, Nizami bansari, The life and time of Khwaja Nizamuddin Aulia by Khaliq Ahmed Nizami. Still the descendants of Khwaja Muhammad Imam are the caretakers of dargah sharif.

The Chisti Nizami order
Nizamuddin Auliya was the founder of the Chisti Nizami order. He had hundreds of disciples (khalifa) who had Ijaza (khilafat) from him to spread the order. Many of the Sufis of the Chisti Nizami order are recognised as great Sufis; the following is a list of notable Sufis of the Chisti Nizami order, which includes his descendants as well as his disciples and their subsequent disciples:

Nasiruddin Mahmud Chiragh Dehlavi, Amir Khusro, Khwaja Banda Nawaz Gesudaraz Muhammad al-Hussaini, Alaul Haq Pandavi and Nur Qutb Alam, Pandua, West Bengal; Ashraf Jahangir Semnani, Kichaucha, Uttar Pradesh; Hussam ad-Din Manikpuri (Pratapgarh, Uttar Pradesh) Faqruddin Faqr Dehlvi, Mehrauli, New Delhi; Shah Niyaz Ahmad Barelvi, Bareilly, Uttar Pradesh; Shafruddin Ali Ahmed and Fakhruddin Ali Ahmed, Chirag Dilli, New Delhi; Zainuddin Shirazi, Burhanpur, Madhya Pradesh; Muhiuddin Yousuf Yahya Madani Chishti, Medina; Kaleemullah Dehlvi Chishti, Delhi; Nizamuddin Aurangabadi; Nizamuddin Hussain, and Meerza Agha Mohammad; Muhammad Sulman Taunswi, Pakistan, Mohammad Meera Hussaini, Hesamuddin Mankpuri, Mian Shah Mohammad Shah, Hoshiarpur, Punjab, India, Mian Ali Mohammad Khan, Pakpattan, Pakistan. Khuwaja Noman Nayyir Kulachvi (Khalifa e Majaz) Kulachi, Pakistan, Khalifa Omer Tarin Chishti-Nizami Ishq Nuri, Qalandarabad, Pakistan.

Branches
The Chisti order branched out with Nizamuddin Auliya to form the Chisti Nizami order. A parallel branch which started with Alauddin Sabir Kaliyari, another disciple of Baba Farid, was the Chisti Sabiri branch. People started adding Nizami gracefully after their name. He spiritually made many great Sufis amongst his students, descendants and the Sufis of the Nizami order.

The branches of the Chisti Nizami order are as follows:

Naseeria
His disciple Nasiruddin Muhammad Chirag-e-Dehli started the Nizamia Naseeria branch.

Hussainia
The Hussainia branch is named for Syed Muhammad Kamaluddin Hussaini Gisudaraz Bandanawaz. He was the most famous and loved disciple of Nasiruddin Muhammad Chirag-e-Dehli. The khanqah he established in Gulbarga, Karnataka, is still in existence.

Fakhri The "Fakhri" branch is named for Muhib Un Nabi Maulana Fakhr Ud Din Fakhr E Jahan Dehlvi, peer o murshid of Shah Niyaz Be Niyaz.

Niyazia
Shah Niyaz Ahmad Barelvi, in the 19th century started the Niyazia branch.

Serajia
The Nizamia Serajia branch was started by Serajuddin Aqi Seraj. This branch is also known as Chistia Serajia.

Ashrafia
The Chistia Ashrafia branch was started by Ashraf Jahangir Semnani. He established a khanqah, still in existence at Kichaucha sharif, Uttar Pradesh, India.

Faridia
The Chistia Serajia Faridia order was started by Fariduddin Tavaelabukhsh, a descendant of Nizamuddin Auliya and a Sufi of the Serajia branch of the Chisti order. This branch is also known as Nizamia Serajia Faridia.

Ishq-Nuri
The Ishq Nuri order, branch of the main Chishti- Nizami, was founded by Shaikh Khwaja Khalid Mahmood Chishti sahib, in Lahore, Pakistan, in the 1960s. It is the most contemporary expression of this traditional Sufi lineage. It is mostly found in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh, although now some followers are also to be found in the West.

Lutfia Silsila Chishtia-Nizamia-Lutfia was continued by Moulana Lutfullah Shah Dankouri. The disciples of this silsila are found in Pakistan, India, England, Canada and USA.

During the short reign of Qutbu'd-Din Mubarak Shah
During the last years of Alauddin Khalji's life, the intrigues of Malik Kafur deprived Khizr Khan of succeeding legitimately to the throne. Malik Kafur had Khizr Khan blinded and Qutbuddin Mubarak Shah (1316–20), another claimant to the throne, narrowly escaped death. When Mubarak Shah ascended the throne he had Khizr Khan and the latter's brothers executed. Shaikh Nizamu'd-Din took no interest in political upheavals but could not escape the brunt of Sultan Mubarak Shah's fury for having made Khizr Khan his disciple. Speaking disparagingly of the Shaikh he began to hatch schemes against him. He prohibited his nobles from visiting Ghiyaspur. Mubarak Shah also constructed a mosque, the Masjid-i Miri, Where all the Sufis and 'ulama' were ordered to perform their prayers. The Shaikh refused to comply with the Sultan's orders, remonstrating that the mosque in his neighborhood had a greater claim on him.

On the first day of each month, the entire religious community of Delhi, gathered at the palace to offer congratulations prayer to the Sultan. The Shaikh further angered the Sultan by sending a servant as his delegate. The Sultan threatened the Shaikh with serious consequences if he personally failed to pay homage. Refusing to heed the threat, the Shaikh quietly prayed at his mother's tomb and returned to his jama'at-khana. As the last day of the month approached, the capital was filled with anxiety, while the Shaikh himself remained calm. But the first day of the next month did not come for the Sultan. He was assassinated on the first night of Jumada II, 720/8 July 1320 by his favorite and protege, Khusraw Khan Barwar, who was later overthrown by Ghazi Malik who later came to be known as Ghiyasuddin Tughluq.

Urs
The Urs-e-Nizamuddin Aulia is celebrated at the Nizamuddin Dargah on the 17th-18th of Rabi II (Rabi-ul-Aaqir), and that of Amir Khusro on the 18th of Shawwal.

In popular culture
Aulea-E-Islam, a 1979 Indian Muslim social film by A. Shamsheer pays tribute to various Islamic saints including Nizamuddin Auliya, featuring a song "Nizamuddin Aulia" sung by Jani Babu Qawwal and written by Viqar Nagri.

Arziyan, a qawwali in the film Delhi 6 (2009) composed by A. R. Rahman, is dedicated to Nizamuddin Auliya. Kun Faya Kun a song in the film Rockstar (2011) is also dedicated to him, and was shot at the dargah. A famous Bangla song 'Nizamuddin Aulia" is dedicated to him on his historic return to Delhi.

title: Nizamuddin Auliya