text:
Battle of Mons

The Battle of Mons was the first major action of the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) in the First World War. It was a subsidiary action of the Battle of the Frontiers, in which the Allies clashed with Germany on the French borders. At Mons, the British Army attempted to hold the line of the Mons–Condé Canal against the advancing German 1st Army. Although the British fought well and inflicted disproportionate casualties on the numerically superior Germans, they were eventually forced to retreat due both to the greater strength of the Germans and the sudden retreat of the French Fifth Army, which exposed the British right flank. Though initially planned as a simple tactical withdrawal and executed in good order, the British retreat from Mons lasted for two weeks and took the BEF to the outskirts of Paris before it counter-attacked in concert with the French, at the Battle of the Marne.

Background
Britain declared war on Germany on 4 August 1914 and on 9 August, the BEF began embarking for France. Unlike Continental European armies, the BEF in 1914 was exceedingly small. At the beginning of the war, the German and French armies numbered well over a million men each, divided into eight and five field armies respectively; the BEF had c. 80,000 soldiers in two corps of entirely professional soldiers made up of long-service volunteer soldiers and reservists. The BEF was probably the best trained and most experienced of the European armies of 1914. British training emphasised rapid-fire marksmanship and the average British soldier was able to hit a man-sized target fifteen times a minute, at a range of 300 yd with his Lee–Enfield rifle. This ability to generate a high volume of accurate rifle-fire played an important role in the BEF's battles of 1914.

The Battle of Mons took place as part of the Battle of the Frontiers, in which the advancing German armies clashed with the advancing Allied armies along the Franco-Belgian and Franco-German borders. The BEF was stationed on the left of the Allied line, which stretched from Alsace-Lorraine in the east to Mons and Charleroi in southern Belgium. The British position on the French flank meant that it stood in the path of the German 1st Army, the outermost wing of the massive "right hook" intended by the Schlieffen Plan (a combination of the Aufmarsch I West and Aufmarsch II West deployment plans), to pursue the Allied armies after defeating them on the frontier and force them to abandon northern France and Belgium or risk destruction.

The British reached Mons on 22 August. In the afternoon of that same day arrived a message from the French Fifth Army commander, General Charles Lanrezac, sent to Field Marshal Sir John French requesting the BEF to turn right to attack von Bülow's advancing flank. The French Fifth Army, located on the right of the BEF, was engaged with the German 2nd and 3rd armies at the Battle of Charleroi. French refused, instead agreeing to hold the line of the Condé–Mons–Charleroi Canal for twenty-four hours, to prevent the German 1st Army from threatening the French left flank. The British spent the day digging in along the canal.

British preparations
At the Battle of Mons the BEF had some 80,000 men, comprising the Cavalry Division, an independent cavalry brigade and two corps, each with two infantry divisions. I Corps was commanded by Sir Douglas Haig and was composed of the 1st and 2nd Divisions. II Corps was commanded by Sir Horace Smith-Dorrien and consisted of the 3rd and 5th Divisions. Each division had 18,073 men and 5,592 horses, in three brigades of four battalions. Each division had twenty-four Vickers machine guns – two per battalion – and three field artillery brigades with fifty-four 18-pounder guns, one field howitzer brigade of eighteen 4.5-inch howitzers and a heavy artillery battery of four 60-pounder guns.

The II Corps, on the left of the British line, occupied defensive positions along the Mons–Condé Canal, while I Corps was positioned almost at a right angle away from the canal, along the Mons–Beaumont road (see map). I Corps was deployed in this manner to protect the right flank of the BEF in case the French were forced to retreat from their position at Charleroi. I Corps did not line the canal, which meant that it was little involved in the battle and the German attack was faced mostly by II Corps. The dominant geographical feature of the battlefield, was a loop in the canal, jutting outwards from Mons towards the village of Nimy. This loop formed a small salient which was difficult to defend and formed the focus of the battle.

The first contact between the two armies occurred on 21 August, when a British bicycle reconnaissance unit encountered a German force near Obourg and Private John Parr became the first British soldier to be killed in the war. The first substantial action occurred on the morning of 22 August. At 6:30 a.m., the 4th Royal Irish Dragoons laid an ambush for a patrol of German lancers outside the village of Casteau, to the north-east of Mons. When the Germans spotted the trap and fell back, a troop of the dragoons, led by Captain Charles Hornby gave chase, followed by the rest of his squadron, all with drawn sabres. The retreating Germans led the British to a larger force of lancers, whom they promptly charged and Hornby became the first British soldier to kill an opposing soldier in the Great War, fighting on horseback with sword against lance. After a further pursuit of a few miles, the Germans turned and fired upon the Irish cavalry, at which point the dragoons dismounted and returned fire. Private E. Edward Thomas, a cavalryman and drummer, is reputed to have fired the first shot of the war for the British Army, hitting a German trooper.

That very same day, having used British reconnaissance planes along with Lanrezac's messaging to his Army Staff, BEF's Chief of Intelligence, Colonel George Macdonogh warned Sir John French that three German army corps were advancing straight against them. The Field Marshal chose to ignore these claims, instead proposing to advance towards Soignies.

German preparations
Advancing towards the British was the German 1st Army, commanded by Alexander von Kluck. The 1st Army was composed of four active corps (II, III, IV, and IX Corps) and three reserve corps (III, IV and IX Reserve corps), although only the active corps took part in the fighting at Mons. German corps had two divisions each, with attendant cavalry and artillery. The 1st Army had the greatest offensive power of the German armies, with a density of c. 18,000 men per 1 mi of front, or about ten per 1 m.

Late on 20 August General Karl von Bülow, the 2nd Army commander, who had tactical control over the 1st Army while north of the Sambre, held the view that an encounter with the British was unlikely and wished to concentrate on the French units reported between Charleroi and Namur, on the south bank of the Sambre; reconnaissance in the afternoon failed to reveal the strength or intentions of the French. The 2nd Army was ordered to reach a line from Binche, Fontaine-l'Eveque and the Sambre next day to assist the 3rd Army across the Meuse by advancing south of the Sambre on 23 August. The 1st Army was instructed to be ready to cover Brussels and Antwerp to the north and Maubeuge to the south-west. Kluck and the 1st Army staff expected to meet British troops, probably through Lille, which made a wheel to the south premature. Kluck wanted to advance to the south-west to maintain freedom of manuoeuvre and on 21 August, attempted to persuade Bülow to allow the 1st Army to continue its manoeuvre. Bülow refused and ordered the 1st Army to isolate Maubeuge and support the right flank of the 2nd Army, by advancing to a line from Lessines to Soignies, while the III and IV Reserve corps remained in the north, to protect the rear of the army from Belgian operations southwards from Antwerp.

On 22 August, the 13th Division of the VII Corps, on the right flank of the 2nd Army, encountered British cavalry north of Binche, as the rest of the army to the east began an attack over the Sambre river, against the French Fifth Army. By the evening the bulk of the 1st Army had reached a line from Silly to Thoricourt, Louvignies and Mignault; the III and IV Reserve corps had occupied Brussels and screened Antwerp. Reconnaissance by cavalry and aircraft indicated that the area to the west of the army was free of troops and that British troops were not concentrating around Kortrijk (Courtrai), Lille and Tournai but were thought to be on the left flank of the Fifth Army, from Mons to Maubeuge. Earlier in the day, British cavalry had been reported at Casteau, to the north-east of Mons. A British aeroplane had been seen at Louvain (Leuven) on 20 August and on the afternoon of 22 August, a British aircraft en route from Maubeuge, was shot down by the 5th Division. More reports had reached the IX Corps, that columns were moving from Valenciennes to Mons, which made clear the British deployment but were not passed on to the 1st Army headquarters. Kluck assumed that the subordination of the 1st Army to the 2nd Army had ended, since the passage of the Sambre had been forced. Kluck wished to be certain to envelop the left (west) flank of the opposing forces to the south but was again over-ruled and ordered to advance south, rather than south-west, on 23 August.

Late on 22 August, reports arrived that the British had occupied the Canal du Centre crossings from Nimy to Ville-sur-Haine, which revealed the location of British positions, except for their left flank. On 23 August, the 1st Army began to advance north-west of Maubeuge, to a line from Basècles to St. Ghislain and Jemappes. The weather had turned cloudy and rainy, which grounded the 1st Army Flieger-Abteilung all day, despite an improvement in the weather around noon. News that large numbers of troops had been arriving at Tournai by train were received and the advance was suspended, until the reports from Tournai could be checked. The IX Corps divisions advanced in four columns against the Canal du Centre, from the north of Mons to Roeulx and on the left (eastern) flank, met French troops at the canal, which was thought to be the junction of the British and French forces. The corps commander, General von Quast, had ordered an attack for 9:55 a.m. to seize the crossings, before the halt order was received. The two III Corps divisions were close to St. Ghislain and General Ewald von Lochow ordered them to prepare an attack from Tertre to Ghlin. In the IV Corps area, General Sixt von Armin ordered an attack on the canal crossings of Péruwelz and Blaton and ordered the 8th Division to reconnoitre from Tournai to Condé and to keep contact with Höhere Kavallerie-Kommando 2 (HKK 2, II Cavalry Corps).

Morning
At dawn on 23 August, a German artillery bombardment began on the British lines; throughout the day the Germans concentrated on the British at the salient formed by the loop in the canal. At 9:00 a.m., the first German infantry assault began, with the Germans attempting to force their way across four bridges that crossed the canal at the salient. Four German battalions attacked the Nimy bridge, which was defended by a company of the 4th Battalion, Royal Fusiliers and a machine-gun section led by Lieutenant Maurice Dease. Advancing at first in close column, "parade ground formation", the Germans made easy targets for the riflemen, who hit German soldiers at over 1000 yd, mowing them down by rifle, machine-gun and artillery fire. So heavy was the British rifle fire throughout the battle that some Germans thought they were facing batteries of machine-guns.

The German attack was a costly failure and the Germans switched to an open formation and attacked again. This attack was more successful, as the looser formation made it harder for the Irish to inflict casualties rapidly. The outnumbered defenders were soon hard-pressed to defend the canal crossings and the Royal Irish Fusiliers at the Nimy and Ghlin bridges only held on with piecemeal reinforcement and the exceptional bravery of two of the battalion machine-gunners. At the Nimy bridge, Dease took control of his machine gun after the rest of the section had been killed or wounded and fired the weapon, despite being shot several times. After a fifth wound he was evacuated to the battalion aid station, where he died. Private Sidney Godley took over and covered the Fusilier retreat at the end of the battle but when it was his time to retreat he disabled the gun by throwing parts into the canal then surrendered. Dease and Godley were awarded the Victoria Cross, the first awards of the First World War. An equally brave attempt was made by Captain Theodore Wright of the Royal Engineers, who attempted to blow up five of the bridges that crossed the canal in a three mile run. He managed to destroy the Jemappes pass but while setting up charges at Mariette he was struck in the head by a projectile fragment and had to retreat. Having retreated for a small while, he nonetheless tried again protected by the cover fire of the Northumberland Fusiliers. However, he slipped and fell in the canal, being saved by a comrade and forced to give up the whole endeavour. For this action he was also awarded a Victoria Cross. Theodore Wright would be killed in action the following month at Vailly.

To the right of the Royal Fusiliers, the 4th Battalion, Middlesex Regiment and the 1st Battalion, Gordon Highlanders, were equally hard-pressed by the German assault on the salient. Greatly outnumbered, both battalions suffered many casualties but with reinforcements from the Royal Irish Regiment, from the divisional reserve and support from the divisional artillery, they managed to hold the bridges. The Germans expanded their attack, assaulting the British defences along the straight reach of the canal to the west of the salient. The Germans used the cover of fir plantations that lined the northern side of the canal and advanced to within a few hundred yards of the canal, to rake the British with machine-gun and rifle fire. The German attack fell particularly heavily on the 1st Battalion, Royal West Kent Regiment and the 2nd Battalion, King's Own Scottish Borderers, which despite many casualties, repulsed the Germans throughout the day.

Retreat
By the afternoon, the British position in the salient had become untenable; the 4th Middlesex had suffered casualties of 15 officers and 353 other ranks killed or wounded. To the east of the British position, units of the German IX Corps had begun to cross the canal in force, threatening the British right flank. At Nimy, Private Oskar Niemeyer had swum across the canal under British fire to operate machinery closing a swing bridge. Although he was killed, his actions re-opened the bridge and allowed the Germans to increase pressure against the 4th Royal Fusiliers.

Having returned from Valenciennes, Commander-in-Chief Sir John French was still convinced that an advance could soon be made, however, by 3:00 p.m., the 3rd Division was ordered to retire from the salient, to positions a short distance to the south of Mons and a similar retreat towards evening by the 5th Division to conform. By nightfall, II Corps had established a new defensive line running through the villages of Montrœul, Boussu, Wasmes, Paturages and Frameries. The Germans had built pontoon bridges over the canal and were approaching the British positions in great strength. News had arrived that the French Fifth Army was retreating, dangerously exposing the British right flank and at 2:00 a.m. on 24 August, II Corps was ordered to retreat south-west into France to reach defensible positions along the Valenciennes–Maubeuge road. Sir John finally accepted that an advance would not be able to take place and admitted that a retreat had to be made quickly, else the consequences would be irreparable for the BEF.

The unexpected order to retreat from prepared defensive lines in the face of the enemy, meant that II Corps was required to fight a number of sharp rearguard actions against the Germans. For the first stage of the withdrawal, Smith-Dorrien detailed the 15th Brigade of the 5th Division, which had not been involved in heavy fighting on 23 August, to act as rearguard. On 24 August they fought various holding actions at Paturages, Frameries and Audregnies. During the engagement at Audregnies the 1st Battalions of the Cheshire and Norfolk Regiments halted the German advance from Quiévrain and Baisieux until the morning of 25 August despite being outnumbered and suffering ruinous losses, and with the support of the 5th Brigade artillery, they also inflicted many casualties on the advancing German regiments. An evening roll call of the Cheshires 1st Battalion, who had not received a withdrawal order, indicated that their establishment had been reduced by almost 80 per cent. Their refusal to fall back without orders led Smith-Dorrien to later state that on reflection the 1st Battalion, Cheshires together with the Duke of Wellington's regiment had "saved the BEF".

At Wasmes, elements of the 5th Division faced a big attack; German artillery began bombarding the village at daybreak, and at 10:00 a.m. infantry of the German III Corps attacked. Advancing in columns, the Germans were immediately met with massed rifle and machine-gun fire and were "mown down like grass". For a further two hours, soldiers of the Northumberland Fusiliers, 1st West Kents, 2nd Battalion, King's Own Yorkshire Light Infantry, 2nd Battalion, Duke of Wellington's Regiment and the 1st Battalion, Bedfordshire Regiment, held off German attacks on the village, despite many casualties and then retreated in good order to St. Vaast. On the extreme left of the British line, the 14th and 15th Brigades of the 5th Division were threatened by a German outflanking move and were forced to call for help from the cavalry. The 2nd Cavalry Brigade, along with the 119th Battery Royal Field Artillery (RFA) and L Battery RHA, were sent to their aid. Dismounting, the cavalry and the two artillery batteries screened the withdrawal of the 14th and 15th Brigades in four hours of intense fighting.

German 1st Army
On 23 August, the 18th Division of IX Corps advanced and began to bombard the British defences near Maisières and St. Denis. Part of the 35th Brigade, which contained large numbers of Danes from Northern Schleswig, got across the canal east of Nimy with few casualties and reached the railway beyond in the early afternoon but the attack on Nimy was repulsed. The 36th Brigade captured bridges at Obourg against determined resistance, after which the defenders of Nimy gradually withdrew; the bridges to the north were captured at 4:00 p.m. and the town stormed. Quast ordered the 18th Division to take Mons and push south to Cuesmes and Mesvin. Mons was captured unopposed, except for a skirmish on the southern fringe and by dark, the 35th Brigade was in the vicinity of Cuesmes and Hyon. On higher ground to the east of Mons, the defence continued. On the front of the 17th Division, British cavalry withdrew from the canal crossings at Ville-sur-Haine and Thieu and the division advanced to the St. Symphorien–St. Ghislain road. At 5:00 p.m., the divisional commander ordered an enveloping attack on the British east of Mons, who were pushed back after a stand on the Mons–Givry road.

By 11:00 a.m., reports from the IV, III and IX corps revealed that the British were in St. Ghislain and at the canal crossings to the west, as far as the bridge at Pommeroeuil, with no troops east of Condé. Intelligence reports from 22 August, had noted 30,000 troops heading through Dour towards Mons and on 23 August, 40,000 men had been seen on the road to Genlis south of Mons, with more troops arriving at Jemappes. To the north of Binche, the right flank division of the 2nd Army had been forced back to the south-west by British cavalry. In the early afternoon, the II Cavalry Corps reported that it had occupied the area of Thielt–Kortryk–Tournai during the night and forced back a French brigade to the south-east of Roubaix. With this report indicating that the right flank was clear of Allied troops, Kluck ordered the III Corps to advance through St. Ghislain and Jemappes on the right of IX Corps and for IV Corps to continue towards Hensis and Thulies; IV Corps was already attacking at the Canal du Centre, the II Corps and the IV Reserve Corps were following on behind the main part of the army.

III Corps had to advance across meadows to an obstacle with few crossings, all of which had been destroyed. The 5th Division advanced towards Tertre on the right, which was captured but then the advance on the railway bridge was stopped by small-arms fire from across the canal. On the left flank, the division advanced towards a bridge north-east of Wasmuel and eventually managed to get across the canal against determined resistance, before turning towards St. Ghislain and Hornu. As dark fell, Wasmuel was occupied and attacks on St. Ghislain were repulsed by machine-gun fire, which prevented troops crossing the canal except at Tertre, where the advance was stopped for the night. The 6th Division was counter-attacked at Ghlin, before advancing towards higher ground south of Jemappes. The British in the village stopped the division with small-arms fire, except for small parties, who found cover west of a path from Ghlin to Jemappes. These isolated parties managed to surprise the defenders at the crossing north of the village, with the support of a few field guns around 5:00 p.m., after which the village was captured. The rest of the division crossed the canal and began a pursuit towards Frameries and Ciply but stopped as dark fell.

The IV Corps arrived in the afternoon, as the 8th Division closed on Hensies and Thulin and the 7th Division advanced towards Ville-Pommeroeuil, where there were two canals blocking the route. The 8th Division encountered the British at the northernmost canal, west of Pommeroeuil and forced back the defenders but then bogged down in front of the second canal, under machine-gun fire from the south bank. The attack was suspended after night fell and the British blew the bridge. The 7th Division forced the British back from a railway embankment and over the canal, to the east of Pommeroeuil but was pushed back from the crossing. Small parties managed to cross by a footbridge built in the dark and protected repair parties at the blown bridge, which allowed troops to get across and dig in 400 m south of the canal, on either side of the road to Thulin.

Late in the day, the II Corps and the IV Reserve Corps rested on their march routes at La Hamaide and Bierghes, after marching 32 and 20 km respectively, 30 and 45 km behind the front, too far behind to take part in the battle on 24 August. In the mid-afternoon of 23 August, IV Corps was ordered to rest, as reports from the front suggested that the British defence had been overcome and the 1st Army headquarters wanted to avoid the army converging on Maubeuge, leaving the right (western) flank vulnerable. In the evening, Kluck cancelled the instruction, after reports from IX Corps reporting that its observation aircraft had flown over a column 3 km long, moving towards Mons along the Malplaquet road. Two more columns were seen on the Malplaquet–Genly and the Quevy–Genly roads, a large force was seen near Asquillies and cavalry was found further east, which showed that most of the BEF was opposite the 1st Army. It was considered vital that the second canal crossings were captured along the line, as had been achieved by the IX and part of III corps. IV Corps was ordered to resume its march and move the left wing towards Thulin but it was already engaged at the canal crossings. The III and IX corps attack during the day, had succeeded against "a tough, nearly invisible enemy" but the offensive had to continue, because it appeared that only the right flank of the army could get behind the BEF.

The situation remained unclear at the 1st Army headquarters in the evening, because communication with the other right flank armies had been lost and only fighting near Thuin by VII Corps, the right-flank unit of the 2nd Army had been reported. Kluck ordered that the attack was to continue on 24 August, past the west of Maubeuge and that II Corps would catch up behind the right flank of the army. IX Corps was to advance to the east of Bavay, III Corps was to advance to the west of the village, IV Corps was to advance towards Warnies-le-Grand 10 km further to the west and the II Cavalry Corps was to head towards Denain, to cut off the British retreat. During the night there were several British counter-attacks but none of the German divisions was forced back over the canal. At dawn the IX Corps resumed its advance and pushed forwards against rearguards until the afternoon, when the corps stopped the advance due to uncertainty about the situation on its left flank and the proximity of Maubeuge. At 4:00 p.m. cavalry reports led Quast to resume the advance, which was slowed by the obstacles of Maubeuge and III Corps congesting the roads.

On the III Corps front to the west, the 6th Division attacked Frameries at dawn, which held out until 10:30 a.m. and then took La Bouverie and Pâturages, after which the British began to retreat; the division turned west towards Warquignies and the 5th Division. St. Ghislain had been attacked by the 5th Division behind an artillery barrage, where the 10th Brigade had crossed the canal and taken the village in house-to-house fighting, then reached the south end of Hornu. A defensive line had been established by the British along the Dour–Wasmes railway, which stopped the German advance and diverted the 9th Brigade until 5:00 p.m., when the British withdrew. The German infantry were exhausted and stopped the pursuit at Dour and Warquignies. During the day Kluck sent liaison officers to the corps headquarters, stressing that the army should not converge on Maubeuge but pass to the west, ready to envelop the British left (west) flank.

The IV Corps headquarters had ordered its divisions to attack over the canal at dawn but found that the British had blown the bridges and withdrawn. Repairs took until 9:00 a.m. and the 8th Division did not reach Quiévrain until noon; the 7th Division reached the railway at Thuin during the morning and then took Élouges late in the afternoon. As the 8th Division moved on, the vanguard was ambushed by British cavalry before an advance to Valenciennes could begin and then attacked a British rearguard at Baisieux, which then slipped away to Audregnies. The rest of the division skirmished with French Territorials south-west of Baisieux. The IV Corps attack forced back rearguards but inflicted no serious damage, having been slowed by the bridge demolitions at the canals. The cavalry divisions had advanced towards Denain and the Jägerbattalions had defeated troops of the French 88th Territorial Division at Tournai and then reached Marchiennes, after a skirmish with the 83rd Territorial Division near Orchies.

Air operations
German air reconnaissance detected British troops on 21 August, advancing from Le Cateau to Maubeuge, and on 22 August from Maubeuge to Mons, as other sources identified halting places, but poor communication and lack of systematic direction of air operations led to the assembly of the BEF from Condé to Binche being unknown to the Germans on 22–23 August. British reconnaissance flights had begun on 19 August with two sorties and two more on 20 August, which reported no sign of German troops. Fog delayed flights on 21 August but in the afternoon German troops were seen near Kortrijk and three villages were reported to be burning. Twelve reconnaissance sorties were flown on 22 August and reported many German troops closing in on the BEF, especially troops on the Brussels–Ninove road, which indicated an enveloping manoeuvre. One British aircraft was shot down and a British observer became the first British soldier to be wounded while flying. By the evening Sir John French was able to discuss with his commanders the German dispositions near the BEF which had been provided by aircraft observation, the strength of the German forces, that the Sambre had been crossed and that an encircling move by the Germans from Geraardsbergen was possible. During the battle on 23 August, the aircrews flew behind the battlefield looking for troop movements and German artillery batteries.

Analysis
By nightfall on 24 August, the British had retreated to what were expected to be their new defensive lines, on the Valenciennes–Maubeuge road. Outnumbered by the German 1st Army and with the French Fifth Army also falling back, the BEF had no choice but to continue to retire – I Corps retreating to Landrecies and II Corps to Le Cateau. The chaos and confusion were graphically illustrated in Landrecies on 25 August, where a senior officer "apparently took leave of his senses and began firing his revolver down a street". The Great Retreat continued for two weeks and covered over 250 mi. The British were closely pursued by the Germans and fought several rearguard actions, including the Battle of Le Cateau on 26 August, the Étreux rearguard action on 27 August and the action at Néry on 1 September. Units disappeared and "More guns were lost than at any time since the American War of Independence."

Both sides had success at the Battle of Mons: the British had been outnumbered by about 3:1 but managed to withstand the German 1st Army for 48 hours, inflict more casualties on the Germans and then retire in good order. The BEF achieved its main strategic objective, which was to prevent the French Fifth Army from being outflanked. The battle was an important moral victory for the British; as their first battle on the continent since the Crimean War, it was a matter of great uncertainty as to how they would perform. In the event, the British soldiers came away from the battle with a clear sense that they had got the upper hand during the fighting at Mons. The Germans appeared to recognise that they had been dealt a sharp blow by an army they had considered inconsequential. German novelist and infantry officer Walter Bloem wrote:

"The men all chilled to the bone, almost too exhausted to move and with the depressing consciousness of defeat weighing heavily upon them. A bad defeat, there can be no gainsaying it ... we had been badly beaten, and by the English – by the English we had so laughed at a few hours before."

For the Germans, the Battle of Mons was a tactical repulse and a strategic success. The staff at Kluck's headquarters claimed that the two-day battle had failed to envelop the British, due to the subordination of the army to Bülow and the 2nd Army headquarters, which had insisted that the 1st Army keep closer to the western flank, rather than attack to the west of Mons. It was believed that only part of the BEF had been engaged and that there was a main line of defence from Valenciennes to Bavay, which Kluck ordered to be enveloped on 25 August. The 1st Army was delayed by the British and suffered many casualties but crossed the barrier of the Mons–Condé Canal and began its advance into France. The Germans drove the BEF and French armies before them almost to Paris, before being stopped at the Battle of the Marne.

Casualties
J. E. Edmonds, the British official historian, recorded "just over" 1,600 British casualties, most in the two battalions of the 8th Brigade which had defended the salient and wrote that German losses "must have been very heavy", which explained German inertia after dark, when the 8th Brigade was vulnerable, several other gaps existed in the British line and the retirement had begun. John Keegan estimated German losses to have been c. 5,000 men. In 1997, D. Lomas recorded German losses from 3,000 to 5,000 men. In 2009, Herwig recorded 1,600 British casualties and c. 5,000 German casualties, despite the fact that Kluck and Kuhl did not reveal 1st Army casualties. Post-war German records estimated 2,145 dead and missing and 4,932 wounded in the 1st Army from 20–31 August. Using German regimental histories, Terence Zuber gave "no more than 2,000" German casualties.

Legacy
The Battle of Mons has attained an almost mythic status. In British historical writing, it has a reputation as an unlikely victory against overwhelming odds, similar to the English victory at the Battle of Agincourt. Mons gained two myths, the first being the a miraculous tale that the Angels of Mons—angelic warriors sometimes described as phantom longbowmen from Agincourt—had saved the British Army by halting the German troops. The second one was the Hound of Mons, which alleged a German scientist engineered a hellhound to be unleashed on British soldiers at night.

Soldiers of the BEF who fought at Mons became eligible for a campaign medal, the 1914 Star, often colloquially called the Mons Star, honouring troops who had fought in Belgium or France 5 August – 22 November 1914. On 19 August 1914, Kaiser Wilhelm allegedly issued an Order of the Day which read in part: ". . . my soldiers to exterminate first the treacherous English; walk over Field Marshal French's contemptible little Army." This led to the British "Tommies" of the BEF proudly labelling themselves "The Old Contemptibles". No evidence of the Order of the Day has been found in German archives and the ex-Kaiser denied giving it. According to the controversial book Falsehood in War-Time, an investigation conducted by General Frederick Maurice traced the origins of the Order to the British GHQ, where it had been concocted for propaganda purposes.

The Germans established the St Symphorien Military Cemetery as a memorial to the German and British dead. On a mound in the centre of the cemetery, a grey granite obelisk 7 m tall was built with a German inscription: "In memory of the German and English soldiers who fell in the actions near Mons on the 23rd and 24th August 1914." Originally, 245 German and 188 British soldiers were interred at the cemetery. More British, Canadian and German graves were moved to the cemetery from other burial grounds and more than 500 soldiers were eventually buried in St. Symphorien, of which over 60 were unidentified. Special memorials were erected to five soldiers of the Royal Irish Regiment believed to be buried in unnamed graves. Other special memorials record the names of four British soldiers, buried by the Germans in Obourg Churchyard, whose graves could not be found. St. Symphorien cemetery also contains the graves of the two soldiers believed to be the first (Private John Parr, 4th Battalion, Middlesex Regiment, 21 August 1914) and the last (Private Gordon Price, 28th Canadian Infantry Regiment, 11 November 1918) Commonwealth soldiers to be killed during the First World War. A tablet in the cemetery sets out the gift of the land by Jean Houzeau de Lehaie. A bronze tablet was erected on a wall of Obourg railway station, commemorating British soldiers who lost their lives around Obourg including an unnamed soldier who is said to have stayed behind at the cost of his own life, perched atop the station, in order to cover his withdrawing comrades. The small portion of the wall supporting the plaque was preserved when the rest of the building was demolished in 1980.

title: Battle of Mons


text:
Talk:John Antoine Nau

Evidence for and against this article
There is no such place as King's College, Oxford. Numerous colleges were founded by kings and Brasenose is even called King's Hall and the College of the Brazen Nose, but there is no college called "King's". Further, I don't think Oxford colleges have Directors of Literary Studies or whatever it calls "Dr Brent". On the other hand, seven years would in fact be the correct length of time for him to be kept waiting for his degree since the MA is conferred 21 terms after matriculation. This detail could have become confused in the translation from English into French and back into English again.

Ah, ok, I looked on the university catalogue and there is one book:

Author Nau, John-Antoine, 1860-1918. Title Force ennemie : roman / John-Antoine Nau. Publisher Paris : Editions de la plume, 1903. Description [4], 351, [1] p. ; 19 cm.

Library Holdings Location Call Number Status Maison Franc. MFO Main Libr R NAU 1 Available

and indeed Torquet, Eugène, 1860-1918 (0) redirects to [See] Nau, John-Antoine, 1860-1918 (1)--AlexanderLondon 19:55, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

''This article was listed on Votes for deletion. After a rewrite, consensus was to keep. Discussion archived at Talk:John Antoine Nau/Delete.''

OK, here's the text of the article in the French Wikipedia:

John-Antoine Nau (1860-1918), le premier des lauréats du Prix Goncourt.

De son vrai nom Eugène-Léon-Édouard-Joseph Torquet, John-Antoine Nau est né le 19 novembre 1860 à San Francisco (USA). Il meurt à Tréboul, à 53 ans, le 17 mai 1918.

En 1903, il reçoit le premier prix Goncourt pour son roman Force ennemie paru en février de la même année. Mais le prix est encore inconnu et Nau restera dans l'oubli.

And here's a translation from altavista:

John-Antoine Nau (1860-1918), the first of the prizes winner of the Goncourt Price. From his true name Eugene-Leon-Édouard-Joseph Torquet, John-Antoine Nau was born on November 19, 1860 in San Francisco (the USA). He dies in Tréboul, at 53 years, May 17, 1918. In 1903, it receives the first Goncourt price for its Force novel enemy appeared in February of the same year. But the price is still unknown and Nau will remain in l'oubli.

Anybody want to tackle that? :) RickK 02:54, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Old text should be moved out of article space to Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense. -- Infrogmation 18:36, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Is this a joke?
I know nothing about this guy, and can find no evidence either corroborating or detracting what is written here, so I'll leave it, but it sure sounds like a joke to me.--Jackyd101 12:48, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * This was a stub someone added a lot of nonsense to - I reverted it back to the stub. Ruhrfisch 19:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:John Antoine Nau


text:
Feynman–Kac formula

The Feynman–Kac formula, named after Richard Feynman and Mark Kac, establishes a link between parabolic partial differential equations and stochastic processes. In 1947, when Kac and Feynman were both faculty members at Cornell University, Kac attended a presentation of Feynman's and remarked that the two of them were working on the same thing from different directions. The Feynman–Kac formula resulted, which proves rigorously the real-valued case of Feynman's path integrals. The complex case, which occurs when a particle's spin is included, is still an open question.

It offers a method of solving certain partial differential equations by simulating random paths of a stochastic process. Conversely, an important class of expectations of random processes can be computed by deterministic methods.

Theorem
Consider the partial differential equation $$ \frac{\partial u}{\partial t}(x,t) + \mu(x,t) \frac{\partial u}{\partial x}(x,t) + \tfrac{1}{2} \sigma^2(x,t) \frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x^2}(x,t) -V(x,t) u(x,t) + f(x,t) = 0, $$ defined for all $$x \in \mathbb{R}$$ and $$t \in [0, T]$$, subject to the terminal condition $$ u(x,T)=\psi(x), $$ where $$\mu,\sigma,\psi,V,f$$ are known functions, $$T$$ is a parameter, and $$u:\mathbb{R} \times [0,T] \to \mathbb{R}$$ is the unknown. Then the Feynman–Kac formula expresses $$u(x,t)$$ as a conditional expectation under the probability measure $$Q$$ $$ where $$X$$ is an Itô process satisfying $$ \mathrm{d}X_t = \mu(X,t)\,\mathrm{d}t + \sigma(X,t)\,\mathrm{d} W^Q_t, $$ and $$W_t^{Q}$$ a Wiener process (also called Brownian motion) under $$Q$$.

Intuitive interpretation
Suppose that the position $$X_t$$ of a particle evolves according to the diffusion process $$ dX_t = \mu(X,t)\,\mathrm{d}t + \sigma(X,t)\,\mathrm{d} W^Q_t. $$ Let the particle incur "cost" at a rate of $$f(X_s, s)$$ at location $$X_s$$ at time $$s$$. Let it incur a final cost at $$\psi(X_T)$$.

Also, allow the particle to decay. If the particle is at location $$X_s$$ at time $$s$$, then it decays with rate $$V(X_s, s)$$. After the particle has decayed, all future cost is zero.

Then $$u(x, t)$$ is the expected cost-to-go, if the particle starts at $$(t, X_t = x).$$

Partial proof
A proof that the above formula is a solution of the differential equation is long, difficult and not presented here. It is however reasonably straightforward to show that, if a solution exists, it must have the above form. The proof of that lesser result is as follows:

Let $$u(x,t)$$ be the solution to the above partial differential equation. Applying the product rule for Itô processes to the process $$ Y(s) = \exp\left(-\int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right)u(X_s,s) + \int_t^s \exp\left(-\int_t^r V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right) f(X_r,r) \, dr$$ one gets: $$ \begin{align} dY_s = {} & d\left(\exp\left(-\int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right)\right) u(X_s,s) + \exp\left(-\int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right)\,du(X_s,s) \\[6pt] & {} + d\left(\exp\left(-\int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right)\right)du(X_s,s) + d\left(\int_t^s \exp\left(-\int_t^r V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right) f(X_r,r) \, dr\right) \end{align} $$

Since $$d\left(\exp\left(- \int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right)\right) = -V(X_s,s) \exp\left(-\int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right) \,ds,$$ the third term is $$ O(dt \, du) $$ and can be dropped. We also have that $$ d\left(\int_t^s \exp\left(- \int_t^r V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right)f(X_r,r)dr\right) = \exp\left(-\int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right) f(X_s,s) ds. $$

Applying Itô's lemma to $$du(X_s,s)$$, it follows that $$ \begin{align} dY_s = {} & \exp\left(-\int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right)\,\left(-V(X_s,s) u(X_s,s) +f(X_s,s)+\mu(X_s,s)\frac{\partial u}{\partial X}+\frac{\partial u}{\partial s}+\tfrac{1}{2}\sigma^2(X_s,s)\frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial X^2}\right)\,ds \\[6pt] & {} + \exp\left(- \int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right)\sigma(X,s)\frac{\partial u}{\partial X}\,dW. \end{align} $$

The first term contains, in parentheses, the above partial differential equation and is therefore zero. What remains is: $$ dY_s=\exp\left(-\int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right)\sigma(X,s)\frac{\partial u}{\partial X}\,dW.$$

Integrating this equation from $$t$$ to $$T$$, one concludes that: $$ Y(T) - Y(t) = \int_t^T \exp\left(-\int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right) \sigma(X,s)\frac{\partial u}{\partial X}\,dW. $$

Upon taking expectations, conditioned on $$X_{t} = x$$, and observing that the right side is an Itô integral, which has expectation zero, it follows that: $$ E[Y(T)\mid X_t=x] = E[Y(t)\mid X_t=x] = u(x,t). $$

The desired result is obtained by observing that: $$ E[Y(T)\mid X_t=x] = E \left [\exp\left(-\int_t^T V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right) u(X_T,T) + \int_t^T \exp\left(-\int_t^r V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right)f(X_r,r)\,dr \,\Bigg|\, X_t=x \right ] $$ and finally $$ u(x,t) = E \left [\exp\left(-\int_t^T V(X_\tau,\tau)\, d\tau\right) \psi(X_T) + \int_t^T \exp\left(-\int_t^s V(X_\tau,\tau)\,d\tau\right) f(X_s,s)\,ds \,\Bigg|\, X_t=x \right ]$$

Remarks
\exp\left(-\int_0^t V(x(\tau))\, d\tau\right) $$ in the case where x(τ) is some realization of a diffusion process starting at $x(0) = 0$. The Feynman–Kac formula says that this expectation is equivalent to the integral of a solution to a diffusion equation. Specifically, under the conditions that $$u V(x) \geq 0$$, $$ E\left[\exp\left(- u \int_0^t V(x(\tau))\, d\tau\right) \right] = \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} w(x,t)\, dx $$ where $w(x, 0) = δ(x)$ and $$\frac{\partial w}{\partial t} = \frac{1}{2} \frac{\partial^2 w}{\partial x^2} - u V(x) w. $$ The Feynman–Kac formula can also be interpreted as a method for evaluating functional integrals of a certain form. If $$ I = \int f(x(0)) \exp\left(-u\int_0^t V(x(t))\, dt\right) g(x(t))\, Dx $$ where the integral is taken over all random walks, then $$ I = \int w(x,t) g(x)\, dx $$ where $w(x, t)$ is a solution to the parabolic partial differential equation $$ \frac{\partial w}{\partial t} = \frac{1}{2} \frac{\partial^2 w}{\partial x^2} - u V(x) w $$ with initial condition $w(x, 0) = f(x)$.
 * The proof above that a solution must have the given form is essentially that of with modifications to account for $$f(x,t)$$.
 * The expectation formula above is also valid for N-dimensional Itô diffusions. The corresponding partial differential equation for $$ u:\mathbb{R}^N\times [0,T] \to\mathbb{R}$$ becomes: $$\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} + \sum_{i=1}^N \mu_i(x,t)\frac{\partial u}{\partial x_i} + \frac{1}{2} \sum_{i=1}^N \sum_{j=1}^N\gamma_{ij}(x,t) \frac{\partial^2 u}{\partial x_i \partial x_j} -r(x,t)\,u = f(x,t), $$ where, $$ \gamma_{ij}(x,t) = \sum_{k=1}^N \sigma_{ik}(x,t)\sigma_{jk}(x,t),$$ i.e. $$\gamma = \sigma \sigma^{\mathrm{T}}$$, where $$\sigma^{\mathrm{T}}$$ denotes the transpose of $$\sigma$$.
 * More succinctly, letting $$A$$ be the infinitesimal generator of the diffusion process,$$\frac{\partial u}{\partial t} + A u -r(x,t)\,u = f(x,t), $$
 * This expectation can then be approximated using Monte Carlo or quasi-Monte Carlo methods.
 * When originally published by Kac in 1949, the Feynman–Kac formula was presented as a formula for determining the distribution of certain Wiener functionals. Suppose we wish to find the expected value of the function $$

Finance
In quantitative finance, the Feynman–Kac formula is used to efficiently calculate solutions to the Black–Scholes equation to price options on stocks and zero-coupon bond prices in affine term structure models.

For example, consider a stock price $$S_t$$ undergoing geometric Brownian motion $$dS_t = (r_t dt + \sigma_t dW_t) S_t $$ where $$r_t$$ is the risk-free interest rate and $$\sigma_t$$ is the volatility. Equivalently, by Itô's lemma, $$ d\ln S_t = \left(r_t - \tfrac 1 2 \sigma_t^2\right)dt + \sigma_t \, dW_t. $$ Now consider a European call option on an $$S_t$$ expiring at time $$T$$ with strike $$K$$. At expiry, it is worth $$(X_T - K)^+.$$ Then, the risk-neutral price of the option, at time $$t$$ and stock price $$x$$, is $$ u(x, t) = E\left[e^{-\int_t^T r_s ds} (S_T - K)^+ | \ln S_t = \ln x \right]. $$ Plugging into the Feynman–Kac formula, we obtain the Black–Scholes equation: $$\begin{cases} \partial_t u + Au - r_t u = 0 \\ u(x, T) = (x-K)^+ \end{cases}$$ where $ A = (r_t -\sigma_t^2/2)\partial_{\ln x} + \frac 12 \sigma_t^2 \partial_{\ln x}^2 = r_t x\partial_x + \frac 1 2 \sigma_t^2 x^2 \partial_{x}^2. $ More generally, consider an option expiring at time $$T$$ with payoff $$g(S_T)$$. The same calculation shows that its price $$u(x,t)$$ satisfies $$\begin{cases} \partial_t u + Au - r_t u = 0 \\ u(x, T) = g(x). \end{cases}$$ Some other options like the American option do not have a fixed expiry. Some options have value at expiry determined by the past stock prices. For example, an average option has a payoff that is not determined by the underlying price at expiry but by the average underlying price over some predetermined period of time. For these, the Feynman–Kac formula does not directly apply.

Quantum mechanics
In quantum chemistry, it is used to solve the Schrödinger equation with the Pure Diffusion Monte Carlo method.

title: Feynman–Kac formula


text:
HMS Vigo (D31)

HMS Vigo was a Battle-class destroyer of the Royal Navy. She was named after the Battle of Vigo, which took place in 1702 during the War of Spanish Succession between a British-Dutch Fleet and the French, and which ended in a victory for the British. Vigo was built by Fairfield Shipbuilding and Engineering Company of Govan. She was launched on 27 September 1945 and commissioned on 9 December 1946.

Service history
Upon commissioning, Vigo was placed in Reserve along with a number of her sister-ships. In 1949, Vigo joined the 3rd Destroyer Flotilla, based in the Mediterranean, which at that time, had quite a large Royal Navy presence. She performed a variety of operations there, at a time when there was much going on in the region and nearby, such as the internal turmoil in Egypt between 1951–1954.

In 1953, while still in the Mediterranean, Vigo suffered a fire onboard her, causing minor damage, though Vigo would suffer another fire in 1954. Also that year, Vigo became the Gunnery Training Ship based at Portsmouth, a duty that a number of her sister ships also performed.

In addition to being the Gunnery Training Ship to HMS Excellent, at Whale Island, Vigo was also Captain (D) of the Portsmouth Squadron.

As well as her Gunnery duties, during the period 1958–59, Vigo also carried out two Icelandic patrols during the first Cod War; took part in NATO exercises, and visited such ports as Vigo, Cuxhaven, Caen and Den Helder, before being paid off in September, 1959, having been relieved as Captain (D) by HMS Wakeful (1943) around 17 August 1959. By this date her hull was considered to be beyond economic repair. Her last commanding officer, Captain Michael Pollock, went on to become an Admiral of the Fleet.

Disposal
Following decommissioning in 1959, she was finally scrapped in 1964 at Faslane.

title: HMS Vigo (D31)


text:
Battlefords—Lloydminster

Battlefords—Lloydminster is a federal electoral district in Saskatchewan, Canada, that has been represented in the House of Commons of Canada since 1997.

Following the 2022 Canadian federal electoral redistribution, this riding will be renamed Battlefords—Lloydminster—Meadow Lake at the first election held after April 22, 2024. It will gain Beaver Lake, Spiritwood, Meadow Lake, Loon Lake and the remainder of the Medstead Rural Municipalities, including enclosed Indian Reserves, Villages and the City of Meadow Lake from Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River; lose the Rural Municipalities of Eye Hill, Grass Lake, Tramping Lake, Reford, Rosemount, Heart's Hill, Progress, Mariposa, Grandview, Antelope Park, Prairiedale, Oakdale, Winslow and all enclosed towns and villages in those RMs to Swift Current—Grasslands—Kindersley.

Geography
The district is in Central-Western Saskatchewan. It includes the communities of North Battleford, Battleford and Unity; as well as the Saskatchewan portion of Lloydminster.

Demographics

 * According to the 2011 Canadian census

Languages: 87.4% English, 4.5% Cree, 2.5% German, 1.4% French, 1.0% Tagalog, 3.2% Other

Religions: 71.4% Christian, 3.6% Traditional (Aboriginal) Spirituality, 0.8% Other, 24.2% None

Median income: $29,976 (2010)

Average income: $37,724 (2010)

History
The electoral district was created in 1996 from Kindersley—Lloydminster and The Battlefords—Meadow Lake ridings.

This riding lost territory to Cypress Hills—Grasslands and gained a fraction of territory from Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar during the 2012 electoral redistribution.

Members of Parliament
The riding has been represented by Rosemarie Falk since 2017. It has elected the following members of the House of Commons of Canada:

Election results
On 5 November 2017, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced a by-election will be held on December 11, 2017.

title: Battlefords—Lloydminster


text:
Dung beetle

Dung beetles are beetles that feed on feces. Some species of dung beetles can bury dung 250 times their own mass in one night.

Many dung beetles, known as rollers, roll dung into round balls, which are used as a food source or breeding chambers. Other dung beetles like Euoniticellus intermedius, known as tunnelers, bury the dung wherever they find it. A third group, the dwellers, neither roll nor burrow: they simply live in dung. They are often attracted by the feces collected by burrowing owls. There are dung beetle species of various colors and sizes, and some functional traits such as body mass (or biomass) and leg length can have high levels of variability.

All the species belong to the superfamily Scarabaeoidea, most of them to the subfamilies Scarabaeinae and Aphodiinae of the family Scarabaeidae (scarab beetles). As most species of Scarabaeinae feed exclusively on feces, that subfamily is often dubbed true dung beetles. There are dung-feeding beetles which belong to other families, such as the Geotrupidae (the earth-boring dung beetle). The Scarabaeinae alone comprises more than 5,000 species.

The nocturnal African dung beetle Scarabaeus satyrus is one of the few known invertebrate animals that navigate and orient themselves using the Milky Way.

Taxonomy
Dung beetles are not a single taxonomic group; dung feeding is found in a number of families of beetles, so the behaviour cannot be assumed to have evolved only once.
 * Coleoptera (order), beetles
 * Scarabaeoidea (superfamily), scarabs (most families in the group do not use dung)
 * Geotrupidae (family), "earth-boring dung beetles"
 * Scarabaeidae (family), "scarab beetles" (not all species use dung)
 * Scarabaeinae (subfamily), "true dung beetles"
 * Aphodiinae (subfamily), "small dung beetles" (not all species use dung)

Ecology and behavior

Dung beetles live in many habitats, including desert, grasslands and savannas, farmlands, and native and planted forests. They are highly influenced by the environmental context, and do not prefer extremely cold or dry weather. They are found on all continents except Antarctica. They eat the dung of herbivores and omnivores, and prefer that produced by the latter. Many of them also feed on mushrooms and decaying leaves and fruits. The Neotropical Deltochilum valgum, D. kolbei and D. viridescens are carnivores with a strong preference for preying upon millipedes. Two other species from Brazil, Canthon dives and Canthon virens, prey on queens and other winged forms of leafcutter ants. One species from the Iberian Peninsula, Thorectes lusitanicus, feeds on acorns. Dung beetles do not necessarily have to eat or drink anything else, because the dung provides all the necessary nutrients.

Most dung beetles search for dung using their sensitive sense of smell. Some smaller species simply attach themselves to the dung-providers to wait for the dung. After capturing the dung, a dung beetle rolls it, following a straight line despite all obstacles. Sometimes, dung beetles try to steal the dung ball from another beetle, so the dung beetles have to move rapidly away from a dung pile once they have rolled their ball to prevent it from being stolen. Dung beetles can roll up to 10 times their weight. Male Onthophagus taurus beetles can pull 1,141 times their own body weight: the equivalent of an average person pulling six double-decker buses full of people.

A species of dung beetle (the African Scarabaeus zambesianus) navigates by polarization patterns in moonlight, the first animal known to do so. Dung beetles can also navigate when only the Milky Way or clusters of bright stars are visible, making them the only insects known to orient themselves by the Milky Way. The eyes of dung beetles are superposition compound eyes typical of many scarabaeid beetles; The sequence of images shows a sequence of the beetle rolling a dung ball. It does this to navigate.

Benefits and uses
Dung beetles play a role in agriculture and tropical forests. By burying and consuming dung, they improve nutrient recycling and soil structure. Dung beetles have been further shown to improve soil conditions and plant growth on rehabilitated coal mines in South Africa. They are also important for the dispersal of seeds present in animals' dung, influencing seed burial and seedling recruitment in tropical forests. They can protect livestock, such as cattle, by removing the dung which, if left, could provide habitat for pests such as flies. Therefore, many countries have introduced the creatures for the benefit of animal husbandry. The American Institute of Biological Sciences reports that dung beetles save the United States cattle industry an estimated US$380 million annually through burying above-ground livestock feces.

In Australia, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) commissioned the Australian Dung Beetle Project (1965–1985) which, led by George Bornemissza, sought to introduce species of dung beetles from South Africa and Europe. The successful introduction of 23 species was made, most notably Digitonthophagus gazella and Euoniticellus intermedius, which has resulted in improvement of the quality and fertility of Australian cattle pastures, along with a reduction in the population of pestilent Australian bush flies by around 90%. In 1995 it was reported that dung beetles were being trialled in the Sydney beach suburb of Curl Curl to deal with dog droppings.

An application has been made by Landcare Research to import up to 11 species of dung beetle into New Zealand. As well as improving pasture soils the Dung Beetle Release Strategy Group say that it would result in a reduction in emissions of nitrous oxide (a greenhouse gas) from agriculture. There is, however, strong opposition from some at the University of Auckland, and a few others, based on the risks of the dung beetles acting as vectors of disease. There are public health researchers at the University of Auckland who agree with the current EPA risk assessment and there are several Landcare programmes in Australia that involve schoolchildren collecting dung beetles.

The African dung beetle (D. gazella) was introduced in several locations in North and South America and has been spreading its distribution to other regions by natural dispersal and accidental transportation, and is now probably naturalized in most countries between México and Argentina. The exotic species might be useful for controlling diseases of livestock in commercial areas, and might displace native species in modified landscapes; however, data is not conclusive about its effect on native species in natural environments and further monitoring is required.

Like many other insects, (dried) dung beetle, called qiāngláng (蜣蜋) in Chinese, is used in Chinese herbal medicine. It is recorded in the "Insect section" (蟲部) of the Compendium of Materia Medica, where it is recommended for the cure of 10 diseases.

In Isan, Northeastern Thailand, the local people eat many different kinds of insects, including the dung beetle. There is an Isan song กุดจี่หายไปใหน "Where Did the Dung Beetle Go", which relates the replacement of water buffalo with the "metal" buffalo, which does not provide the dung needed for the dung beetle and has led to the increasing rarity of the dung beetle in the agricultural region.

The Mediterranean dung beetle (Bubas bison) has been used in conjunction with biochar stock fodder to reduce emissions of nitrous oxide and carbon dioxide, which are both greenhouse gases. The beetles work the biochar-enriched dung into the soil without the use of machines.

Scientists in Canberra in 1965 discovered that Dung beetles (Scarabaeids), specifically Onthophagus australis Guérin-Méneville, improve plant yields using their dung. Japanese millet was studied and data on nutrient uptake. These plants were placed in pots lacking nitrogen, phosphorus, and sulfur. Cow-dung was then added in treatment groups with or without O. australis. Some treatment groups even had two out of the three nutrients supplemented in the pots. Comparisons of the treatment and control groups were made to show that top growth and roots significantly increased when the dung was mixed well into the soil in the pots. Results showed that dung beetle activity greatly improved plant life. The dung has little impact alone, but in combination with the dung beetle, the nutritional value for the plants increases greatly. This suggests that dung beetles have many positive implications for the environment, including a beneficial role with plant life.

In culture
Some dung beetles are used as food in South East Asia and a variety of dung beetle species have been used therapeutically (and are still being used in traditionally living societies) in potions and folk medicines to treat a number of illnesses and disorders.

Ancient Egypt

Several species of the dung beetle, most notably the species Scarabaeus sacer (often referred to as the sacred scarab), enjoyed a sacred status among the ancient Egyptians. Egyptian hieroglyphic script uses the image of the beetle to represent a triliteral phonetic that Egyptologists transliterate as xpr or ḫpr and translate as "to come into being", "to become" or "to transform". The derivative term xprw or ḫpr(w) is variously translated as "form", "transformation", "happening", "mode of being" or "what has come into being", depending on the context. It may have existential, fictional, or ontologic significance.

The scarab was linked to Khepri ("he who has come into being"), the god of the rising sun. The ancients believed that the dung beetle was only male-sexed, and reproduced by depositing semen into a dung ball. The supposed self-creation of the beetle resembles that of Khepri, who creates himself out of nothing. Moreover, the dung ball rolled by a dung beetle resembles the sun. Plutarch wrote: "The race of beetles has no female, but all the males eject their sperm into a round pellet of material which they roll up by pushing it from the opposite side, just as the sun seems to turn the heavens in the direction opposite to its own course, which is from west to east."

The ancient Egyptians believed that Khepri renewed the sun every day before rolling it above the horizon, then carried it through the other world after sunset, only to renew it, again, the next day. Some New Kingdom royal tombs exhibit a threefold image of the sun god, with the beetle as symbol of the morning sun. The astronomical ceiling in the tomb of Ramses VI portrays the nightly "death" and "rebirth" of the sun as being swallowed by Nut, goddess of the sky, and re-emerging from her womb as Khepri.

The image of the scarab, conveying ideas of transformation, renewal, and resurrection, is ubiquitous in ancient Egyptian religious and funerary art.

Excavations of ancient Egyptian sites have yielded images of the scarab in bone, ivory, stone, Egyptian faience, and precious metals, dating from the Sixth Dynasty and up to the period of Roman rule. They are generally small, bored to allow stringing on a necklace, and the base bears a brief inscription or cartouche. Some have been used as seals. Pharaohs sometimes commissioned the manufacture of larger images with lengthy inscriptions, such as the commemorative scarab of Queen Tiye. Massive sculptures of scarabs can be seen at Luxor Temple, at the Serapeum in Alexandria (see Serapis) and elsewhere in Egypt.

The scarab was of prime significance in the funerary cult of ancient Egypt. Scarabs, generally, though not always, were cut from green stone, and placed on the chest of the deceased. Perhaps the most famous example of such "heart scarabs" is the yellow-green pectoral scarab found among the entombed provisions of Tutankhamen. It was carved from a large piece of Libyan desert glass. The purpose of the "heart scarab" was to ensure that the heart would not bear witness against the deceased at judgement in the Afterlife. Other possibilities are suggested by the "transformation spells" of the Coffin Texts, which affirm that the soul of the deceased may transform (xpr) into a human being, a god, or a bird and reappear in the world of the living.

One scholar comments on other traits of the scarab connected with the theme of death and rebirth: "It may not have gone unnoticed that the pupa, whose wings and legs are encased at this stage of development, is very mummy-like. It has even been pointed out that the egg-bearing ball of dung is created in an underground chamber which is reached by a vertical shaft and horizontal passage curiously reminiscent of Old Kingdom mastaba tombs.'"

In contrast to funerary contexts, some of ancient Egypt's neighbors adopted the scarab motif for seals of varying types. The best-known of these being Judean LMLK seals (8 of 21 designs contained scarab beetles), which were used exclusively to stamp impressions on storage jars during the reign of Hezekiah.

The scarab remains an item of popular interest thanks to modern fascination with the art and beliefs of ancient Egypt. Scarab beads in semiprecious stones or glazed ceramics can be purchased at most bead shops, while at Luxor Temple a massive ancient scarab has been roped off to discourage visitors from rubbing the base of the statue "for luck".

In literature
In Aesop's fable "The Eagle and the Beetle", the eagle kills a hare that has asked for sanctuary with a beetle. The beetle then takes revenge by twice destroying the eagle's eggs. The eagle, in despair, flies up to Olympus and places her latest eggs in Zeus's lap, beseeching the god to protect them. When the beetle finds out what the eagle has done, it stuffs itself with dung, goes straight up to Zeus and flies right into his face. Zeus is startled at the sight of the unpleasant creature, jumping to his feet so that the eggs are broken. Learning of the origin of their feud, Zeus attempts to mediate and, when his efforts to mediate fail, he changes the breeding season of the eagle to a time when the beetles are not above ground.

Aristophanes alluded to Aesop's fable several times in his plays. In Peace, the hero rides up to Olympus to free the goddess Peace from her prison. His steed is an enormous dung beetle which has been fed so much dung that it has grown to monstrous size.

Hans Christian Andersen's "The Dung Beetle" tells the story of a dung beetle who lives in the stable of the king's horses in an imaginary kingdom. When he demands golden shoes like those the king's horse wears and is refused, he flies away and has a series of adventures, which are often precipitated by his feeling of superiority to other animals. He finally returns to the stable having decided (against all logic) that it is for him that the king's horse wears golden shoes.

In Franz Kafka's The Metamorphosis, the transformed character of Gregor Samsa is called an "old dung beetle" (alter Mistkäfer) by a charwoman.

title: Dung beetle


text:
Abstract nonsense

In mathematics, abstract nonsense, general abstract nonsense, generalized abstract nonsense, and general nonsense are nonderogatory terms used by mathematicians to describe long, theoretical parts of a proof they skip over when readers are expected to be familiar with them. These terms are mainly used for abstract methods related to category theory and homological algebra. More generally, "abstract nonsense" may refer to a proof that relies on category-theoretic methods, or even to the study of category theory itself.

Background
Roughly speaking, category theory is the study of the general form, that is, categories of mathematical theories, without regard to their content. As a result, mathematical proofs that rely on category-theoretic ideas often seem out-of-context, somewhat akin to a non sequitur. Authors sometimes dub these proofs "abstract nonsense" as a light-hearted way of alerting readers to their abstract nature. Labeling an argument "abstract nonsense" is usually not intended to be derogatory, and is instead used jokingly, in a self-deprecating way, affectionately, or even as a compliment to the generality of the argument.

Certain ideas and constructions in mathematics share a uniformity throughout many domains, unified by category theory. Typical methods include the use of classifying spaces and universal properties, use of the Yoneda lemma, natural transformations between functors, and diagram chasing.

When an audience can be assumed to be familiar with the general form of such arguments, mathematicians will use the expression "Such and such is true by abstract nonsense" rather than provide an elaborate explanation of particulars. For example, one might say that "By abstract nonsense, products are unique up to isomorphism when they exist", instead of arguing about how these isomorphisms can be derived from the universal property that defines the product. This allows one to skip proof details that can be considered trivial or not providing much insight, focusing instead on genuinely innovative parts of a larger proof.

History
The term predates the foundation of category theory as a subject itself. Referring to a joint paper with Samuel Eilenberg that introduced the notion of a "category" in 1942, Saunders Mac Lane wrote the subject was 'then called "general abstract nonsense"'. The term is often used to describe the application of category theory and its techniques to less abstract domains.

The term is believed to have been coined by the mathematician Norman Steenrod, himself one of the developers of the categorical point of view.

title: Abstract nonsense


text:
NESticle

NESticle is a Nintendo Entertainment System emulator, which was written by Icer Addis of Bloodlust Software. Released on April 3, 1997, the widely popular program originally ran under MS-DOS and Windows 95. It was the first freeware NES emulator, and became commonly considered the NES emulator of choice for the 1990s. Initially offering few features and only supporting a handful of games, development proceeded rapidly and to expand usability such that NESticle is today credited with introducing the concept of recordable playthrough for emulation, as well as providing the capacity for users to create their own graphical hacks via an integrated graphics editor. In pioneering this heightened level of access for users, and providing the tools for fans to hack and remix familiar classics, NESticle has been credited by Spin as representing a milestone toward the development of video game music as a genre.

While the emulator is no longer updated and has become obsolete as other emulation projects have developed and improved, NESticle remains frequently listed among prominent top tier emulators and it is still regarded as a good choice for emulation on older (486 and earlier) computers.

In January 2022, the source code for a Super NES version of the emulator, SNESticle, was released by Addis after a programmer attempted to reverse-engineer the code, which had been released in a GameCube game, Fight Night Round 2. In February of that same year, Addis began work on a follow-up to NESticle, an experimental macOS-based application based on transistor-level simulation of the NES chipset, called metalnes.

Development
NESticle offered its initial release as NESticle v0.2 on April 3, 1997. Its name is a portmanteau of "NES" (the console it emulates) and "testicle". The program originally ran under DOS and Windows 95, offering few features and only supporting a handful of games. It was one of the first freeware NES emulators, and soon became more popular than shareware rivals such as iNES.

NESticle was coded in C++ and assembly using Microsoft Visual C++ 4.10. Part of the emulator's appeal was performance: its system requirements capped at around 25MHz enabling it to run on modest Pentium and 486 DX2 PCs. Its GUI was colorful and easy to use, featuring numerous utilities that allowed user to view, edit, and save custom graphics, palettes, and the like. Within two months of its April release, NESticle could take screenshots mid-game, pause and resume progress at any point using save states, edit in-game palettes and graphics, play games online, save audio output, and record and playback gameplay movies. NESticle, as its name implied, also had a dash of lowbrow and morbid humor. The mouse pointer, for instance, was skinned with a bloody, dismembered left hand extending its pointer finger.

The source code for NESticle was illegally copied from Addis's computer by a code cracker who accessed its network shares with Samba. Because of the incident, Addis decided to discontinue NESticle. August 1998 saw the final NESticle release, version x.xx, and support for the emulator was discontinued. This version featured noticeably improved emulation, especially audio emulation (the triangle wave was correctly 4-bit quantized, the 50% pulse wave had the correct duty cycle and the noise was corrected). It was also DOS only. NESticle eventually became obsolete as other emulation projects continued to develop and improve. In particular, NESticle has been criticized within modern emulation circles for an overwhelmingly aesthetics-based philosophy making heavy reliance on emulation quirks which resulted in game images that would only work on this emulator specifically. Nevertheless, it continues to be noted years after its obsolescence for its speed, particularly on lower-end computers.

Influence
As one of the more popular early emulators, NESticle's influence on the emulation scene has been far-reaching. Its innovative development of 'NES movie' playthrough recording, and its use as a tool for homebrew graphical hacks enabled it to influence the development of even tangentially related fields such as the video game music genre, and console case modding. The emulator has been noted as an influence in the gaming backgrounds of video game collectors like Pat Contri (known as "Pat the NES Punk"), Destructoid's Samit Sarkar, and indie video game musicians, The NESkimos.

title: NESticle


text:
USS Admirable

USS Admirable (AM-136) was the lead ship of her class of minesweeper built for the United States Navy during World War II. In commission from 1943 to 1945, she was transferred to the Soviet Navy in 1945 and served as T-331 until stricken in 1958.

Construction and commissioning
Originally classified as a "coastal minesweeper," AMc-113, Admirable was reclassified as a minesweeper, AM-136, on 21 February 1942. She was laid down on 8 April 1942 at Tampa, Florida, by the Tampa Shipbuilding Company. She was launched on 18 October 1942, sponsored by Mrs. Ann Pillsbury Fehr, daughter of Commander Horace W. Pillsbury, and commissioned on 20 April 1943.

U.S. Navy, World War II, 1943-1945
Admirable departed Tampa on 23 April 1943 and conducted a shakedown cruise in the Gulf of Mexico before heading for Hampton Roads, Virginia, on 23 June 1943. Admirable operated out of Naval Amphibious Base Little Creek, Virginia, for five months of training in antisubmarine warfare, minelaying, and minesweeping techniques. After upkeep and fitting out, she departed Naval Station Norfolk, Virginia, on 28 November 1943 in company with the internal combustion engine repair ship USS Luzon (ARG-2) for duty in the Pacific. Transiting the Panama Canal on 8 December 1943, Admirable continued on to San Diego, California, where she moored on 18 December 1943. In January 1944, following tests at the West Coast Sound School, she received orders to proceed independently to Adak, Territory of Alaska. During the voyage, she encountered heavy seas which damaged her sonar gear. Following her arrival in Kuluk Bay, Adak Island, on 6 February 1944, she was drydocked for repairs.

On 13 February 1944, Admirable was assigned to Task Group 91.2 (TG 91.2). She operated out of Adak, escorting merchant and troopships to such ports in Alaska and the Aleutian Islands as Kodiak, Dutch Harbor, Amchitka, Kiska, Cold Bay, and Attu Island. On four occasions during her 18-month tour in the Aleutians, Admirable went alongside the destroyer tender USS Black Hawk (AD-9) at Adak briefly to repair damage caused by the cold weather, heavy seas, and violent, gusting winds known as "williwaws".

In July 1944, Admirable began to clear the minefield in Chiniak Bay off Kodiak Island. She was the lead ship of a group, composed of the minesweepers USS Augury (AM-149), USS Agile (AMc-111), and USS Affray (AMc-112), and the auxiliary motor minesweeper USS YMS-285, which, on 2 August 1944, began a sweep of the channel to St. Paul's Harbor. The minesweepers then established patrols outside the harbor to await the arrival of President Franklin D. Roosevelt aboard the heavy cruiser USS Baltimore (CA-68). Roosevelt had left San Diego on 14 July, steamed to Pearl Harbor, Territory of Hawaii, to meet with General Douglas MacArthur and Admiral Chester Nimitz to discuss plans for the invasion of the Philippines, and stopped at Kodiak on 7 August 1944. Baltimore pulled out of St. Paul's Harbor the same day, and Roosevelt continued his journey back to the United States aboard the destroyer USS Cummings (DD-365). Admirable then resumed escort duty and continued that work into March 1945.

On 14 March 1945, Admirable's commanding officer was designated officer in tactical command of eight ships and all aircraft participating in a combined air-surface attack on a fictitious submarine in Kuluk Bay. The minesweeper then returned to her escort duties.

Selected for transfer to the Soviet Navy in Project Hula – a secret program for the transfer of U.S. Navy ships to the Soviet Navy at Cold Bay in anticipation of the Soviet Union joining the war against Japan – Admirable proceeded to Dutch Harbor in May 1945 for repairs preparatory to her transfer. Because of the continual beating of the heavy seas, 12 ft of the forward end of each of her bilge keels as well as her sonar gear were replaced. With her repairs complete, she then steamed to Cold Bay, where Soviet Navy Rear Admiral Boris Dmitrievich Popov, the Soviet commanding officer at Cold Bay under Project Hula, inspected Admirable on 30 May 1945 and accepted her for transfer to the Soviet Union. On 18 June 1945, a Soviet crew reported on board to train for one month in gunnery, engineering, and minesweeping procedures.

Soviet Navy, 1945-1958
Following the completion of training for her Soviet crew, Admirable was decommissioned on 19 July 1945 at Cold Bay and transferred to the Soviet Union under Lend-Lease immediately. Also commissioned into the Soviet Navy immediately, she was designated as a tralshik ("minesweeper") and renamed T-331 in Soviet service. She soon departed Cold Bay bound for Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky in the Soviet Union, where she served in the Soviet Far East.

In February 1946, the United States began negotiations for the return of ships loaned to the Soviet Union for use during World War II, and on 8 May 1947, United States Secretary of the Navy James V. Forrestal informed the United States Department of State that the United States Department of the Navy wanted 480 of the 585 combatant ships it had transferred to the Soviet Union for World War II use returned. Deteriorating relations between the two countries as the Cold War broke out led to protracted negotiations over the ships, and by the mid-1950s the U.S. Navy found it too expensive to bring home ships that had become worthless to it anyway. Many ex-American ships were merely administratively "returned" to the United States and instead sold for scrap in the Soviet Union, while the U.S. Navy did not seriously pursue the return of others because it viewed them as no longer worth the cost of recovery. The Soviet Union never returned Admirable to the United States, although the U.S. Navy reclassified her as a "fleet minesweeper" (MSF) and redesignated her MSF-136 on 7 February 1955.

Disposal
T-331 was stricken in 1958 and apparently was sold for scrap in the Soviet Union. Unaware of this, the U.S. Navy retained Admirable on its Naval Vessel Register until finally striking her name on 1 January 1983.

title: USS Admirable


text:
Talk:The X Factor (album)

dark album
As for this being a dark album, Somewhere In Time isn't exactly what i'd call a cheerful album either... Gringo300 12:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Almost all Iron Maiden albums are dark. I'd be hard pressed to pick the darkest one.

What do you guys have against Bayley?

 * However, it is worth noting how little of the songwriting is by Harris compared to many other albums.

Removed this from the article. Harris is credited on 10/11 of the songs. Now my math may not be the best around but that's roughly 91%. The only album that even goes higher is Killers. I'm also getting the image that the people making the latest additions have something against this album or Bayley and therefore I'm gonna be putting those ugly citasion needed signs in the article until someone gives factual proof that this album or its cover are somehow so incredibly inferior to everything else Maiden have done that it actually warrants mention. -TheHande 19:19, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Name
"It is called The X Factor because it is the band's 10th studio album." I remember from some interview that wasn't the only reason they called it The X Factor. But I can't quite remember what the other reasons were. --Mika1h 20:07, 15 November 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Iron Maiden - The X Factor.jpg
Image:Iron Maiden - The X Factor.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

title: Talk:The X Factor (album)


text:
Admirable-class minesweeper

The Admirable class was one of the largest and most successful classes of minesweepers ordered by the United States Navy during World War II. Typically, minesweepers detected and removed naval mines before the rest of the fleet arrived, thereby ensuring safe passage for the larger ships. They were also charged with anti-submarine warfare (ASW) duties with rear-mounted depth charge racks and a forward-firing Hedgehog antisubmarine mortar. Their job was essential to the safety and success of U.S. naval operations during World War II and the Korean War. These minesweepers were also employed as patrol vessel and convoy escorts. The only remaining ship of this class is located at Freedom Park, Omaha, NE.

The PCE-842-class patrol craft of patrol craft escorts was based on the Admirable-class design.

Service in other Navies
As a part of Project Hula – a secret 1945 program that transferred 149 U.S. Navy ships to the Soviet Navy at Cold Bay, Territory of Alaska, in anticipation of the Soviet Union joining the war against Japan – the U.S. Navy transferred 24 Admirable-class minesweepers to the Soviet Navy between May and August 1945. At least some of them saw action in the Soviet offensive against Japanese forces in Northeast Asia in August 1945. The Soviet Union never returned them to the United States.

After World War II, the United States transferred Admirable-class minesweepers to the Republic of China Navy, the Republic of China's Chinese Maritime Customs Service, the Republic of Korea Navy, the Republic of Vietnam Navy, and the Dominican, Mexican, Myanmar, and Philippine navies.

USS Hazard (AM-240) survives as a museum ship on dry land in Omaha, Nebraska. USS Inaugural (AM-242) was a museum ship on the Mississippi River in St. Louis, until she sank during the Great Flood of 1993. USS Scuffle (AM-298) was scuttled off the coast of Cozumel, Mexico in 1999. It is now a popular site for scuba diving.

Production

 * Tampa Shipbuilding Company, Tampa, FL (24)
 * USS Admirable (AM-136) ... USS Bombard (AM-151)
 * USS Crag (AM-214) ... USS Diploma (AM-221)
 * Willamette Iron and Steel Works, Portland, OR (23)
 * USS Bond (Am-152) ... USS Counsel (AM-165)
 * USS Creddock (AM-356), USS Dipper (AM-357), USS Drake (AM-359)
 * USS Dunlin (AM-361) ... USS Harrier (AM-366)
 * Savannah Machine & Foundry, GA (9)
 * USS Implicit (AM-246) ... USS Invade (AM-254)
 * Winslow Marine Railway and Shipbuilding Company, Puget Sound, WA (13)
 * USS Garland (AM-238) ... USS Inaugural (AM-242)
 * USS Salute (AM-294) ... USS Shelter (AM-301)
 * Gulf Shipbuilding Madisonville, LA (16)
 * USS Notable (AM-267) ... USS Rampart (AM-282)
 * General Engineering & Dry Dock Company, Alameda, CA (7)
 * USS Ransom (AM-283) ... USS Report (AM-289)
 * Associated Shipbuilders, Puget Sound, WA (14)
 * USS Signet (AM-302) ... USS Superior (AM-311)
 * USS Execute (AM-232) ... USS Fixity (AM-235)
 * American Ship Building Company, Lorain, OH (17)
 * USS Jubilant (AM-255) ... USS Nimble (AM-266)
 * USS Disdain (AM-222) ... USS Embattle (AM-226)

Engines

 * Two 855shp ALCO 539 diesel engines, Farrel-Birmingham single reduction gear, two shafts. (30)
 * AM-136 ... AM-165
 * Two 855shp Cooper Bessemer GSB-8 diesel engines, National Supply Co. single reduction gear, two shafts (84)
 * AM-214 ... AM-226, AM-232 ... AM-235, AM-240 ... AM-242
 * AM-246 ... AM-291, AM-294 ... AM-311
 * Two 855shp Busch-Sulzer 539 diesel engines, Farrel Birmingham single reduction gear, two shafts (9)
 * AM-356, AM-357, AM-359, AM-361 ... AM-366
 * ref:

title: Admirable-class minesweeper


text:
Fort McMurray—Athabasca

Fort McMurray—Athabasca (formerly Athabasca) was a federal electoral district in Alberta, Canada, that was represented in the House of Commons of Canada from 1968 to 2015. It was a predominantly rural riding in northeastern Alberta, representing the Regional Municipality of Wood Buffalo, the Municipal District of Opportunity No. 17, the Municipal District of Lesser Slave River No. 124, Big Lakes County, Lac La Biche County, Athabasca County and the southeastern part of Northern Sunrise County.

Demographics

 * According to the 2011 Canadian census

Ethnic groups: 65.8% White, 22.1% Aboriginal, 3.8% South Asian, 2.5% Filipino, 1.9% Black, 1.2% Arab Languages: 80.7% English, 4.9% Cree, 3.1% French, 1.6% Tagalog Religions: 67.3% Christian (33.4% Catholic, 7.3% Anglican, 5.0% United Church, 3.8% Pentecostal, 1.5% Lutheran, 1.4% Baptist, 1.3% Christian Orthodox, 13.6% Other Christian), 3.4% Muslim, 1.5% Hindu, 26.2% No religion Median income (2010): $47,348

History
It was created as "Athabasca" riding in 1966 from Athabaska and Peace River ridings.

In 2004, it was renamed "Fort McMurray—Athabasca".

Following the Canadian federal electoral redistribution, 2012, this riding was abolished. 69% was redistributed into the new riding of Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, 19% to Peace River—Westlock (notably the towns of Slave Lake and High Prairie among others) and 11% to Lakeland.

Members of Parliament
This riding has elected the following members of Parliament:

title: Fort McMurray—Athabasca


text:
Talk:ARA General Belgrano

Crew size? Any survivors? Sunk with all hands?
The Pink Floyd song "Get Your Filthy Hands Off My Desert" claims the cruiser was taken with all hands. Is it true there were no survivors? Or is that artistic licence? 2.31.164.120 (talk) 20:58, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

 * Thanks for that . The article says her complement was 1138 and that Argentine and Chilean ships rescued 772 men from 3 to 5 May. In total, 323 were killed in the attack so I think we can reasonably assume that our sources are accurate are more correct than the song. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 13:32, 8 April 2022 (UTC)

Removal of Cited Content
This edit, removed cited content, I'd carefully checked it was confirmed by the additional cite I added. 's edit summary was Once again source doesn't back up what is being claimed here..

The content:

Its record as the largest ship sunk since the end of the Second World War was only eclipsed by the sinking of the Russian cruiser Moskva on 14 April 2022.

From the source:

The missile cruiser Moskva is the most significant naval vessel to be sunk since Argentina’s General Belgrano in 1982. Photograph: Russian Defence Ministry/EPA

It is the most significant naval vessel to be sunk since the Argentinian cruiser General Belgrano was torpedoed by a British submarine, HMS Conqueror, in 1982.

The source does back up the claim, verbatim, so I don't see this as a legitimate edit summary. WCM email 17:38, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

 * Agreed. Edit: Fell into OR trap (Hohum @ ) 17:52, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

Content and source are not the same. And WCM, you just presented two different quotes and said one is, quote, "verbatim" of the other. Do you know what verbatim means? —Loginnigol 00:04, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

 * I cannot see a direct connection between either source and what was written. Am I missing something? Roger 8 Roger (talk) 01:00, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

 * The BBC source dated 15 April says "The 12,490-tonne vessel is the biggest Russian warship to be sunk in action since World War Two." The earlier archived version of 14 April is without the word 'Russian'. Significant and largest are not the same. The sources seem to be adjusting themselves. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 11:22, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

 * I was quoting the Guardian, both quotes are in the same source - 1 is a caption to a photo, the other is in the text. I even included a reference that it was from a photo.  This quibbling merely demonstrates the superficial nature of your examination of the source, which backs up my edit.  Your edit summary and removal of content is not for a legitimate reason. WCM email 07:04, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Stop lying. Stop spreading false information. The source does NOT back up your edit. Your edit is your personal opinion at this point. —Loginnigol 07:34, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * , Calm down, escalating does not help. Chill out and discuss civilly. Curbon7 (talk) 07:44, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * WCM is not discussing (providing support for his point of view) but editing despite there being no acceptance of his wp:original claim that (I'm literally quoting) it's "the largest ship sunk since the end of the Second World War". That is a bold claim that needs to be backed up 100%. No ifs and buts. —Loginnigol 07:52, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I have a personal rule not to refer to the essay WP:DICK but I feel it's use is warranted on this occasion as feedback on your behaviour. I would suggest you consider this a learning experience. WCM email 17:11, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

By way of observation, that I hope does not add fuel to the fire, IMO the Belgrano loss was of distinctly greater significance than the Moskva loss. Meaning, the first, and more important, notable point is the relative significance of each sinking, followed by the relative sizes. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 08:56, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Just to re-state what I said at the RSN thread here, I could not find a source that directly ties together the General Belgrano and the Moskva regarding the size of loss. As I stated: . Additionally, it seems largely irrelevant to include such a factoid. Curbon7 (talk) 08:03, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * To further add, the basis is not necessarily wrong. The Moskva is slightly larger than the General Belgrano, per one of the sources, so yeah you can piece together that it is the largest loss. However, to include this in the article, it must be explicitly mentioned in the source. Curbon7 (talk) 08:06, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

And, there seems to be a belief that the Moskva in some way now supersedes the Belgrano in importance. In size perhaps, but that is all. The term "It is the most significant naval vessel to be sunk since the Argentinian cruiser General Belgrano" could mean that the Moskva's significance is important but still second to that of the Belgrano. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:16, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

 * Thanks for your input, I was influenced by a number of newspaper reports which have compared the two. I perhaps didn't look into it in the detail you have and it seemed a reasonable factoid to include.  Having listened to your arguments I'm no longer sure about that so will think about it a little further before taking any further action.  I do appreciate you taking the time to comment and add your input. WCM email 17:11, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Times
just checked, the IP is correct that the attack was launched at 18:57 ZT, might it not be better to use UTC throughout the article to make it consistent? The reference to various time zones could be confusing. WCM email 15:57, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

 * FTR, according to the tz database, all of Argentina was on UTC-3 in 1982, while the Falklands were on UTC-4. The UK was on UTC+1 from 28 March 1982.

 * That said, the data in the database is not authoritative. My guess would be that Argentine military authorities did not put their clocks back during the occupation, but that a lot of islanders didn't put their clocks forward either.  Camp Time is still a thing today.

 * I see two clock times in this article, the time of the attack at 14:57 (UTC-4) and the time of the order to abandon ship, "twenty minutes after the attack" at 16:24 (presumably UTC-3). We need to be consistent.  UTC is fine, but UTC-3 (i.e. Argentine time, the time most likely used on board ship) might be better because the article goes on to comment on how it was already dark by the time the escort ships became aware that Belgrano was in trouble. Kahastok talk 17:06, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

Crew of 1138 compared to U.S. original 868
Can anyone explain the larger crew size in Argentine service? Buckshot06 (talk) 23:57, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I believe it also functioned as a training ship and carried a complement of trainees. I just did a quick google search to back up my memory but failed to find a cite. WCM email 06:55, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Had another look and failed, Darius are you able to shed any light?  I have confirmed the crew size in other online publication, which may simply reflect wikipedia? I did note 750+ survivors and 323 officially KIA, so it appears accurate. WCM email 19:12, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi J, thanks for thinking of me for this kind of issues ;). I can cite the 1992 book wrote by Belgrano´s last commander, Héctor E. Bonzo. From the very title, you can infer the crew size at the time of the sinking: 1093 tripulantes del Crucero ARA General Belgrano (ISBN 950-07-0739-X). Furthermore, inside Bonzo's work I found a 1954 reference from former US crewmembers in pp. 434-35, where they recalled that "the peacetime complement of 600 (sic) increased to 1200 by 1941" (...) "including naval reservists". We should conclude then that the 868 cited as the original crew size is just the peacetime complement while in US service. In the case of the 1982 conflict, Bonzo also stresses, as you correctly have noted, that the cruiser carried a detachment of 120 cadets (p. 26), plus a complement of marines and naval air servicemen (pp. 22-23); in all these decades, however, I've never heard of any navy's cadet either lost or rescued after the sinking, so as a side note I guess they were landed at Ushuaia just before Belgrano´ last mission. Therefore we should assume that 868 was the number of seamen carried by the ship in peacetime, while the 1200 (minus) crew belongs to the cruiser at full combat readiness.--Darius (talk) 21:08, 12 July 2022 (UTC)
 * No worries, thanks for the help answering the question. WCM email 08:41, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Many thanks thankyou WCM and FarSouthNavy. If I am asking this question, others may too: is it possible to add a quick summary of your answer above FarSouthNavy to the article, with the refs you cite? Buckshot06 (talk) 09:42, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:ARA General Belgrano