text:
Talk:Aurel Vlaicu

[Untitled]
This page needs followup to confirm which of the two universities in Munchen Mr. Vlaicu attended. See hidden comment in main page. --Gary D 06:54, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 05:03, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Do we need the 50 lei bill in the text?
I guess that the bill is here to show a portrait of him but is that really necessary? It seems so unrelated to the text...89.136.41.31 (talk) 09:58, 21 June 2008 (UTC)Apass

Protochronism
Claims made here must be viewed in the light of Protochronism - the widespread falsification of Romanian history (whereby they make absurd attempts to having invented nearly everything). All sources on Aurel Vlaicu are Romanian and are thus unreliable. No mention of him is to be found in contemporary western aviation sources.NiD.29 (talk) 01:57, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Add the absurd claim about being the first military flight after the French when many other nations were already operating aircraft under the authority of the military, including operating flying schools for military aviators. Romania was preceded by France (1909), Italy (1910), Germany (1910), Russia (1910), and the US (1909) in using aircraft for military purposes. Just about the only major power left out is the UK.

RESPONSE: Why do you think that Romanian sources are unreliable?
 * Maybe you should read the article on Protochromism linked above? Simply put, the Romanian government had an official policy of fabricating history to make it seem that Romanians were in the midst of many cultural and technological innovations (making absurd claims that they had been responsible for them) when in fact they were a minor backwater whose sum total contribution to humankind has been negligible at best. This widespread fabrication colours anything published in Roumania, and will do so for a long time to come.NiD.29 (talk) 22:47, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

RESPONSE: Flying airplanes by military officers trained as pilots does not mean using these aircraft for "military purposes". Vlaicu delivered an envelope to the Chief of Staff.

When the aircraft is owned and operated by the military then EVERYTHING IT DOES (including training military aviators) is for military purposes, unlike a civilian pilot in his own private aircraft delivering an envelope - something that likely occurred even in the UK before it did in Romania.NiD.29 (talk) 02:46, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

RESPONSE: ''A. Vlaicu nr. I'' was build between Nov. 1909 and May 1010 with funding from the Romanian Minister of War. Months later they wanted to put the airplane to use, and it happened during the Fall Military Exercises. An there is a photograph for it in the article. In the spirit of Wikipedia, your claim "something that likely occurred even in the UK before it did in Romania" has to be substantiated with at least 1 (one) reference. Simiprof

 * The problem isn't the claim that he flew a message, it is that you are making the claim he was one of the first, which the evidence is overwhelming that he was not, other than in Roumania. You need a reference to make your claim, I do not need to provide a long list of references to counter your silly unsubstantiated claim.NiD.29 (talk) 22:47, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

RESPONSE: You make stereotypical statements, incompatible with a veteran Wikipedia editor. Maybe some Romanians living in the UK stole your spare tire lately, but that does not mean that Romanians are worthless. Simiprof
 * 1) You still need to learn to sign your posts.
 * 2) I do not live in the UK, nor am I from there (although I have visited there twice, while Romania is still on the todo list), nor do I particularly care one way or the other about Roumanians in general. Why would you assume I must have had a tire stolen by a Romanian? Are you suggesting something about Romanians? I wasn't aware this was a favourite pastime there.
 * 3) I do care about absurd claims, both here and on other pages, and that has nothing to do with Roumania.
 * 4) The Roumanian Government's policy colours any claims made, especially when they are unknown outside of Roumania. The Romanian people are no better or worse than people anywhere, however, people of all types are prone to believe the most absurd things, particularly when they have been told enough times, and equally will cling to those beliefs despite any and all evidence to the contrary.NiD.29 (talk) 23:37, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

RESPONSE: Sorry NiD.29 ! You lack impartiality and I lack the time to argue with you. Simiprof
 * Glad to see that you are finally starting to sign your posts (though you need to use 4 tildas so the date and time are added), as I said, the problem isn't with the nationality, but with the past policy of fabricating history. Nothing POV or partial about it, and I should point out that I have previously removeed absurd claims from British aircraft pages - false claims are false claims, regardless of nationality, however the Romanians ARE the only ones to have made falsification of history a government policy.
 * Clearly you misunderstand my entries here regarding Rumanians - I was getting very tired of having my well thought out edits to fix the atrocious grammar and worse wording, along with the absurd claims reverted without so much as a single edit summary in reply, or any comments here as is standard practice. Obviously you do not understand wikipedia, with you reverting other people's edits while refusing to divulge your reasoning or sources, so I could find where your misunderstandings were coming from, so as to be able to fix the problem.
 * As to prior claims (from The Aerospace Chronology by Michael Taylor... which lists the first flight of the Vlaicu, but not the exhibition with Garros.) -
 * 14 May 1909 - Samuel Cody flies British Army Aeroplane No 1 more than a mile (first flight of this military aeroplane was in October 1908).
 * 2 August 1909 - US Army purchases its first airplane the Wright 1909 Military Flyer, after testing the Wright flyer since 3 September 1908.
 * April 1910 - French Air Force formed.
 * 9 June 1910 - Henry Farman biplane used for photographic reconnaissance for French military.
 * 10 June 1010 - Wright biplane taken into French Army Service.
 * 30 June 1910 - Glenn Hammond drop dummy bombs from aircraft. (One of a number of people to do so)
 * 20 August 1910 - Lt Jacob Earl Fickel, US Army, fires a rifle from Curtiss biplane.

Russia formed an organization and raised money for military aircraft in January 1910 but didn't recieve their first military aircraft until 1911, though its pilots were in training during 1910 in France and from September in Russia. The German Army received its first aircraft (a Taube monoplane) in October 1910 but the first German military pilot had already soloed on 23 July 1910. I don't have much info on Serbian or Italian aviation, both of whom were also early adopters of aircraft. NiD.29 (talk) 00:53, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

NACA cowling
And please be reasonable to admit that the Vlaicu's cowled engines, particularly that of ''A. Vlaicu Nr. III'' is a NACA cowling: "The NACA cowling directs cool air to flow through the engine where it is routed across the motor's hottest parts, i.e. the cylinders and even more importantly, the cylinder heads."
 * This shows a lack of understanding of the full effects of an NACA cowling, which doesn't just direct air around the engine, but actually boosts propulsion via the Meredith effect, and had been a development of the earlier Townend ring which had a similar effect. The cowlings used during WW1 and before completely lacked this ability (and in fact didn't fly fast enough for it to make much of a difference) and were thus not NACA cowlings, doing little more than preventing oil from spraying up into the pilots face. It was a cowling, pure and simple and doesn't need a wikilink.NiD.29 (talk) 22:15, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Old Photographs
All B/W photographs are over 100 years old. The color ones are mine. Please do not delete them en block.

Cheers, NiD.29 (talk) 22:39, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) . You need to sign posts on the talk page with 4 tildas (ie: ~ ). This is a wikipedia rule.
 * 2) . You need to indicate on each photo's page that the photos are from your private collection, and that copyright is expired. (please do this soon, before they are deleted - I would like to see some of them on here, even if the gallery was excessive)
 * 3) . You cannot simply remove tags because you disapprove of them - you need to fix the problem(s) first.

 * Old black/white photos can still be copyrighted if they have never been published or only recent published, private collection doesnt tell us anything we need (or commons do) the provenance of the image. That said most of them are not needed in the article that is why we have commons. MilborneOne (talk) 18:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Vlaicu III shipped to Germany
"Vlaicu III was seized and shipped to Germany, and it was last seen in 1942 at an aviation exhibition in Berlin." C-tin C. Gheorghiu cites two Romanian Air-force officers that saw the airplane in Berlin at the said exhibition.

 * Is pretty much the authority on the Berlin aviation exhibition, and it makes no reference to the Vlaicu. A lot of aircraft over the years have been misidentified as having been there, and in this case it is likely they mistook something else for the Vlaicu.NiD.29 (talk) 23:37, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
 * A photograph of it clearly at the exhibition would of course clear this up, however none of the photos I have seen (and the exhibition was extensively photographed) show the Vlaicu.NiD.29 (talk) 23:38, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Photographs
Can somebody identify more of the people pictured here with Vlaicu?

Vlaicu with friends on Cotroceni air filed. From right to left: Caragiale (in the background, holding a walking cane), Magnani, Vlaicu, others. According to some reports, sitting in front of Vlaicu is his brother Ion

From left to right: Giovanni Magnani, Aurel Vlaicu, Ion Ciulu (Vlaicu's mechanic) and a friend in front of ''A. Vlaicu Nr. II''

Simiprof (talk)

Gallery
Can we keep some of the picture in the gallery? Certainly Wikipedia is not Pintrest, but the pictures add value to the article. Plus there are available nowhere else on the internet. Thank you! Simiprof (talk) 15:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * The point is that they are available elsewhere - at Wiki Commons, which is why there is a link to it there. In general we avoid massive photo galleries on Wikipedia and limit pictures to a quantity that fits in the article text. If more text is added then more photos will fit as well. I mean seriously, including scans of his student notebooks in an encyclopedia article? That is way beyond WP:TRIVIA. - Ahunt (talk) 16:04, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * ANSWER: Then why not removing only the student note scans and keep the rest? Still, his student notes show that (1) Aurel Vlaicu studied engineering and (2) was good at hand drawing.  (I teach engineering, and today's student have a hard time drawing by hand - I had this in mind also when posting his sketches).  Simiprof (talk) 16:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * It's not just the notes, there are way, way too many photos overall for the article. With the gallery it had 37 images on the page!! It makes it look like a "hero-worship" memorial instead of an encyclopedia article.

 * To get some wider input I have asked for other editors to express their opinions at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Aircraft. - Ahunt (talk) 16:20, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * According to Image_use_policy some gallery photos should be allowed. Could you please include a link to the Wikimedia Commons for Aurel Vlaicu in the see also section, because I don't know how to do it? Simiprof (talk) 16:27, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Agree with Ahunt about the gallery adding nothing. And the two images of the Vlaicu II are too similar for both to merit inclusion. Incidentally the aircraft articles are surely misnamed, the initial is not neccessary.TheLongTone (talk) 16:32, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

[ANSWER]: Vlaicu himself was naming his airplanes "A Vlaicu" see:

and.

I still believe that some gallery photos should be allowed. I am considering restoring some of them in the future. Regards, Simiprof (talk) 16:42, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * I also agree with Ahunt. This article is already well illustrated, perhaps too well. The gallery belongs on the Commons. If you wish to restore a few images, make sure you discuss it here first, but I do not hold out much hope for you. There is nothing notable about writing your name on an aeroplane. As for student notes, these are primary source material and drawing any conclusions from them would be original research and has no place here either. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 16:49, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * The commons link doesn't belong in the "see also" because that is for internal links, not external links. The commons link is where it belongs, under external links. Personally I think a lot of the images and such really belong on a "fan site" and not in an encyclopedia article. So far the consensus seems to be against the gallery and the excessive number of images, but let's wait a few days for some wider opinions to get a more complete consensus to emerge. - Ahunt (talk) 17:24, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * I agree with eliminating some of the gallery pics, but not with removing them entirely. Unfortunately, we cannot ask the 300+ daily [visitors of the Aurel Vlaicu page] if they like to have a picture gallery with the article or not. Simiprof (talk) 19:16, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

37 images is surely far too many? I took a fairly random selection from the aviators list, unscientifically picked by recognising names from the days before WWI. On average, these have 4 images. Two exceptions were Lilienthal (& plus 4 in a gallery) and the Wright Brothers 35. I chose these for the unusual impact on aviation of these three men and think the others are more typical pioneers.TSRL (talk) 21:19, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Readers can join the discussion here if they are interested in helping form a consensus and want a say. By the way the average number of visits over the last month is only 109. 300 was one single peak day's number. That is actually not much traffic for a Wikipedia page. To put it into perspective for an aviation subkect page, the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II page had averaged 5686 visits per day in the same period.- Ahunt (talk) 22:15, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Most of the gallery photos are beyond trivial and delve into "so what?" territory - stuff you'd find at the archives on most pioneers, and that would never end up in a book unless the author was desperate to fill up pages, much less an encyclopedia. A few significantly different photos of the man, one of each of his aircraft (more photos of the aircraft can be found on their respective pages) and the rest should stay in the commons link.NiD.29 (talk) 10:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Notoriety Claims
Vlaicu did more than just to "write his name on an aeroplane". Those were his airplanes, substantially different than those of his contemporaries, for which he has been granted several international patents (British, Danish and German, in addition to a Romanian patent).

''A. Vlaicu Nr. I'' flew for the first time on June 17, 1910 exactly as it was originally designed, with no modification whatsoever.

Vlaicu was the first to use two coaxial, counter-rotating propellers that canceled each other's reaction torque.

He was probably the first to install brakes to the wheels (rear wheel) of his airplane, and to fully cowl the engine - see ''A. Vlaicu Nr. III''.

NOTE: I am considering displaying Vlaicu's pilot license in a gallery to the article, in addition to some of the above pics.

Regards,

Simiprof (talk) 00:09, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * I think you are wrong both about the brakes and the co-axial propeller. Howard Wright built an aircraft with a coaxial propeller in 1909 & Breguet had fitted brakes by 1911, I believe. The Deperdussin Monocoque of 1912 was fully cowled.TheLongTone (talk) 00:47, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, but I am not seeing two propellers on Howard Wright 1909 Biplane - it is a pusher that looks very much like a Voisin / Farman III, while Breguet flew after Vlaicu I. Simiprof (talk) 01:12, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Read the description of the Howard Wrught machine in the 1909 Flight report on the Aero show at Olympia. Actually I think most of these who did what first disputes are stupid.TheLongTone (talk) 01:45, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * As is well understood in aviation history circles, you have to be very cautious in accepting claims of firsts for Romanians. In the communist era the national government caused many wild claims to be published to stir up Romanian nationalism and these sorts of books often turn up here as refs, though they are not reliable sources. See the section on above. - Ahunt (talk) 01:49, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Please provide references of pre-Vlaicu I airplanes that had co-axial counter-rotating propellers. Those are visible in photographs, irrespective of Protochronism theories.

"well understood in aviation history circles"  Who is aviation historian here by the way?! Simiprof (talk) 02:25, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * If you are indeed a professor as you claim (or even a university level student with passing grades), you more than most should be aware of the past history of the Romanian government in fabricating large swathes of history to make the most absurd claims. There is an entire branch of history devoted to it, so yes, "well understood" sums it up pretty well.

 * As for it being in a photo - first, that is original research, which is strictly verboten here as has been mentioned multiple times, and second is the claim about being first, which isn't proven by the photo at all - it merely shows that it had it, not that it was first. In fact it is likely that the first instances of coaxial propellers and brakes and almost any other claim pre-date the Wright brothers flight, as many such innovations did. Finally even if the configuration of his aircraft is unique, (doubtful given the dizzying variety of configurations tried out in France, the UK and the US) that is hardly something to boast of, as it means it probably wasn't a very good configuration, otherwise others would have used it, and if they had, they were not exactly well known, meaning they weren't all that successful. Why the need to add dross to a perfectly good article? He was a Romanian/Austro-Hungarian who built some early aircraft that flew, until he crashed one of them and killed himself - end of story. No need to make up a bunch of bs to make it seem like he was more important than he ever was. It is doubtful anyone outside Romanian had even heard of him even at the peak of his career, and claims about his importance have to be taken in that context.NiD.29 (talk) 09:49, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * The Howard Wright reference is here: it is also linked in the aircraft type article. TheLongTone (talk) 09:53, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * @Simiprof, you write, "Vlaicu did more than just to "write his name on an aeroplane". Those were his airplanes..." as if somebody is challenging that. I did not and nobody here is, but you made the point in a discussion about the image gallery and I replied also in the context of the image gallery. If you meant something else, you will need to explain what you meant. Also, claims of being first in anything are dangerous. History is being rediscovered and shared all the time and what one community believes a "first" may lead to disappointment when one learns of the earlier example. TheLongTone links above to the Flight article on the Howard Wright machine - the "tandem" or co-axial propeller is clearly visible in the accompanying photo, with the blades alternately shadowed or highlighted showing their opposite senses.
 * I would ask that editors - of whatever opinion - keep their personal judgements of each other to themselves and remain at all times polite and civil. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 12:04, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Vlaicu's airplane did not go unnoticed during his lifetime. A delegate of Marconi Co. selected his during the International Flight Week in Aspern-Vienna in the Summer of 1912 (there were 40 other aviators attending that event). When Vlaicu died a year later, two copies of A Vlaicu III airplanes were under construction, one for Marconi to evaluate it for use with aerial telegraphy, and one to remain with Vlaicu. I will upload the copy of a letter send by Vlaicu to his parents, where he mentions his relationship with Marconi Co. Of the two Vlaicu III airplanes, one was completed posthumously and disappeared during WWI. What is left of the other one is the Gnome Gamma engine, now on display in a museum in Bucharest. Imagine - a brand new Gnome Gamma engine available for some enthusiasts to build a replica of A Vlaicu III!

Another remarkable thing about Vlaicu is that he build his airplanes on very tight budgets (around 15,000 Romanian lei each of his first two airplanes - an army lieutenant's salary then was 600 lei a month). When Bleriot came to Bucharest to fly on Oct. 1909, his remuneration was 80,000 lei! And you know what? The demonstration had to be postponed because at the first attempt, on Oct. 14, the propeller of Bleriot's airplane broke and they had to ship a new one from France.

Same as with the automobile, there were a number of engineers and inventors that contributed to the advancement of the airplane. (I am seeing now that the counter-rotating props were indeed tried before - thanks for the link.).

Let as not forget that this controversy started by having the gallery to the article removed entirely. Of those pics and photocopies, some are documents relevant to the life of Aurel Vlaicu - like for example his knowledge of Machine Elements and of German language (in addition to Romanian and Hungarian), or the network of friends (writers and journalists) that helped him during his short career in Bucharest.

So Dear Folks: Feel free to add galleries to other aviation pioneers' articles that you favor, but allow me to restore some of the gallery photos to this article. Thank you!

As for you NiD.29, I am sure you are nice in person. Unfortunately I don't see how we could meet so that you could prove me right. And yes, I am an university prof. Simiprof (talk) 17:16, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * From this discussion so far there is clearly a consensus that a gallery of photos and especially of documents does not belong in an encyclopedia article. They are all available on Commons and linked from the article. - Ahunt (talk) 17:42, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Yes, it is very clear that consensus is against the gallery, and removing it entirely was indeed the correct thing to do. The controversy continues only because one editor does not yet understand why the gallery is not appropriate. The rest of us have explained at length why images providing evidence of various claims are not appropriate here. Yes, they are lovely historic images, they support fascinating historical claims and anecdotes which may well be true in part or in whole, and a gallery of them somewhere is an excellent idea. In fact, there is a Wikimedia Commons for this very purpose, where the images in fact already live. That is where the gallery belongs too. But they are not the kind of images we Wikipedians put in our biographies. "Feel free to add galleries to other aviation pioneers' articles that you favor" - no, no, you utterly misunderstand, this is not about Vlaicu, it is about biographical articles - no such galleries, not even for my own national pioneers such as George Cayley, Samuel Franklin Cody and John William Dunne, no galleries for them, either! "allow me to restore some of the gallery photos to this article" - I do not think so; as far as I can see none of those images best illustrates a notable aspect of Vlaicu's life discussed in the article (and I mean illustrates, not supports or demonstrates or shows - that must all be in the text and notes), the images worth having are already in the article. I do not think we can be clearer about this. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:51, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

 * By unnoticed, I am referring to the seeming paucity of coverage in the main aviation periodicals of the era, beyond that of Marconi and a few aviators being aware of its existence. A Bleriot with a broken prop is not unusual for the era - indeed it was a common occurrence (odd that he wasn't better prepared - perhaps he'd broken his spares). Vlaicu had an advantage, having workshops nearby.
 * Pay rates are hard to compare as the workmen doing most of the fabrication would have been paid very little in comparison to an army officer's pay (whereas now that situation is reversed), but even so, it is possible to built an aircraft for less. 15,000 Lei divided by 600/mo pay is 25 months pay. Current American army pay for a 2nd Lieutenant is a minimum of $34,862, or roughly $2905/month, or $72,625 over 25 months - for which it is possible to design and build a homebuilt from scratch and equip it with a engine and prop. Not an unusually tight budget, but perhaps better budgeted than some, and many of the materials are now relatively more expensive than they were then. Keep in mind Bleriot's remuneration would have been higher because he had a proven design already widely used with many well known records and exploits to his credit, and he probably wouldn't have travelled to Romania without a sufficiently large financial inducement, and the people cutting the cheques wanted his airplane badly enough to pay far more than they would for an untested aircraft of unknown capabilities. I am curious as to who else they paid money to for aircraft, and the success rate for the other designers. The expenditure is pretty minimal by the standards of an army, and they could have funded dozens of hopeful aircraft designers and most failed and still get something in return. I am also curious as to why they did not, prior to his death, (seemingly) make an effort at purchasing further aircraft if it was as successful as Romanian sources imply, while they did buy Bleriot XIs.
 * Still think, that even without the gallery that the article is over illustrated.
 * Simiprof - I've been to Texas many times - mostly San Antonio and Laredo (if you are still in Texas) however I don't currently have any plans to travel - please forgive me for my skepticism. I am guessing your specialty is in mechanics?NiD.29 (talk) 20:11, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

Vlaicu's ethnicity
Regarding the repeated incognito change of the ethnicity of Aurel Vlaicu from Austro-Hungarian to Romanian: As you can see, there is no ethnic group called Austro-Hungarian, only a redirect to the Austria-Hungary article. There are however Austrians, Hungarians, Slovaks, Croats, Slovenes, Bosnian etc. - all these people were part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. For example, Béla Bartók was born in Austro-Hungaria, so by the same token he should be Austro-Hungarian Hungarian. Try such an editing in Bartók article and see what happens! Simiprof (talk) 05:16, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Thank you for opening this discussion. I wish Vlaicu were as simple a case as Bartok! Auriel Vlaicu was born in Binţinţi (since renamed after him) near the town of Geoagiu, which lies in the Hunedoara County of Transylvania. At the time he lived Transylvania was part of Austria-Hungary, and did not become part of the Kingdom of Romania until 1918, several years after Vlaicu's death in 1913. But in 1909 he moved from Transylvania to the Kingdom of Romania, where he carried out most of his aeronautical work.
 * The idea behind the joining of Transylvania and other neighbouring areas with Romania was to unite all ethinic Romanians in a single country. Of course, other ethnic communities would also exist in these areas, especially from the nations who currently ruled them.
 * So, I see three questions to be answered:
 * The first is, what was Vlaicu's ethnic status? Was he definitely an ethnic Romanian, or was he born to non-Romanian parents? (I am assuming he was Romanian, but it would be good if this can be supported with a reference).
 * The second is, what was Vlaicu's nationality? Was he regarded at the time as a citizen of the Kingdom of Romania or merely a visitor from Austria-Hungary? Did he have dual nationality, with both states accepting him as a citizen?
 * And thirdly, whatever the answers are to those first two questions, how should Wikipedia reflect this in the article on him, per WP:MOSBIO?
 * — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 12:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Nikola Tesla is another example: Born in what is now Croatia, back then part of Austrian Empire, to Serbian parents, he is regarded as Serbian American.

Vlaicu is an old Romanian name - see Vlaicu Voda. Aurel Vlaicu was born to Romanian parents Ana and Dumitru Vlaicu as this commemorative plate acknowledges:

"In this Romanian house was born in 1882, the first flier of Ardeal AUREL VLAICU, conqueror of the sky, with his own designed and constructed airplane. Absorbed by the historical necessity of eliminating the border between brothers, like a forerunner, He indicated the road that the Romanian nation followed in 1916 towards victory and fulfillment of her centuries old aspirations. A martyr of the idea of unification and liberation, He sanctified with his young blood in 1913, the beginning of this path to salvation. Forever be blessed His memory and the nation that He was born in. ASTRA Orăștie 1925. "Aurel Vlaicu" high school Orăștie."

NOTE: Vlaicu crashed his plane and lost his life in an attempt to fly from Bucharest to Orăștie to attend ASTRA festivities. Simiprof (talk) 15:28, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't know what Vlaicu's immigration status was during his time in the Kingdom of Romania. One thing is for sure: He was employed by the Romanian Government during all these years.

Vlaicu was born an Austro-Hungarian citizen and the first thing in the header should be the citizenship, not ethnicity. bogdan (talk) 15:41, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

MOSBIO provides clear guidelines: Context (location, nationality, or ethnicity):  In most modern-day cases this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen, national or permanent resident, or if notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national or permanent resident when the person became notable . Simiprof (talk) 16:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

 * Thank you for the plaque. I think we can safely say that Vlaicu was an ethnic Romanian. But looking at MOSBIO a little more closely I think we already have enough information. I highlight the relevant text in bold:
 * Context (location, nationality, or ethnicity);
 * 1. In most modern-day cases this will mean the country of which the person is a citizen, national or permanent resident, or if notable mainly for past events, the country where the person was a citizen, national or permanent resident when the person became notable.
 * 2. Ethnicity or sexuality should not generally be emphasized in the opening unless it is relevant to the subject's notability. Similarly, previous nationalities or the country of birth should not be mentioned in the opening sentence unless they are relevant to the subject's notability.
 * So the lead should not mention either his country of birth or his ethnicity. That just leaves the country where he was a "permanent resident" when he became notable - the Kingdom of Romania. Since there is no such adjective "Kingdom of Romanian" he is just "Romanian". In other words, the anonmymous IP editor was right all along to delete the reference to Austria-Hungary. Does anybody still disagree with this? — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 16:52, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Not sure Romania existed as a country during his lifetime. MilborneOne (talk) 17:31, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The first King of the Kingdom of Romania was crowned in 1881, the year before Vlaicu was born. Doesn't affect the main discussion though. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 19:54, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

In my judgement, is it legitimate to say that Aurel Vlaicu was "a Romanian engineer, inventor, airplane constructor and early pilot" Simiprof (talk) 22:09, 24 February 2014 (UTC)
 * This discussion has been pretty one-sided, so I see no point in waiting longer. I just got on and did it. — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 16:55, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

Cause of death
Vlaicu died in a plane crash. According to witnesses his plane stalled and fell to a side crashing from a height of about 10 meters. What contributed/caused the crash is still subject to debate. Some speculated that he had a heart attack, kidney cramps, or a mechanical failure. (24.175.231.107 (talk) 18:02, 15 December 2015 (UTC))

Hi MilborneOne: Vlaicu died in an attempt to cross the Carpathian mountains in his aged Aurel Vlaicu II plane (made in 1911). He aborted the ascent to cross the mountains, made a turn and he was looking for a landing spot near the Ploiesti-Brasov road where he could have received assistance (he was followed by friends in an automobile). Witnesses saw him trying to avoid some tries, but the airplane stalled and slipped to a side. The dart-like tail of the airplane made it stiff at low speed (the elevator and ruder were placed in front), so he was always landing with the engine off, which meant that he could never abort a landing.

The heart attack of Vlaicu has not been confirmed by an autopsy "Cauzele nu sunt nici acum cunoscute, fiind avansate atât ipoteza unui atac de cord, cât şi problele tehnice ale avionului." quote from

One thing is for sure: He did not die during a test flight.

P.S. My main reference is the 1960 monograph "Aurel Vlaicu. Un Precursor Al Aviatiei Romanesti" by C. Gheorghiu (I have a copy), who had the chance to interview some of Valicu's contemporaries. Thanks.

 * 97.98.78.51 Thanks for the explanation, if you can add a realiable reference then I dont have a problem with the change. MilborneOne (talk) 18:05, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Aurel Vlaicu


text:
User talk:Stormie/Archive1

Welcome to Wikipedia! In case you haven't already found them, some useful links are Welcome, newcomers, Naming conventions, Manual of Style, and The perfect article. Most questions are answered at Help; if you have a question not answered there, then you can post it to the Village pump.

A word of warning: when comments are posted, the raw text appears without vocal inflections or body language; the lack of these nonverbal cues tends to make the raw text appear to be more terse/rude than the sender actually intended. This is stating the obvious, but people seem to forget it in the heat of the moment. So my word of warning is this: don't be surprised if someone makes comments to you that seem unnecessarily brusque; and try not to take it personally. It is a side-effect of the medium.

Cyan 07:41, 2 Sep 2003 (UTC)

User:MeenakshiM contributions
Regarding your posting of User:MeenakshiM contributions on Copyright problems - I need to know the page names that have had a copyright violation notice on them for more than seven days so they can be deleted. In the future, please list all pages tagged with the copyvio notice. - Tεx τ urε 16:50, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I though I did list everything tagged with the copyvio notice on the Copyright Violations page - although after doing half a dozen and seeing MeenakshiM had dozens more, I threw up my hands in despair and basically said "and everything else this guy has written!" in the hopes that somebody else could take over tagging them all. --Stormie 05:18, Apr 27, 2004 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Stormie/Archive1


text:
Christopher Latham Sholes

Christopher Latham Sholes (February 14, 1819 – February 17, 1890) was an American inventor who invented the QWERTY keyboard, and, along with Samuel W. Soule, Carlos Glidden and John Pratt, has been contended to be one of the inventors of the first typewriter in the United States. He was also a newspaper publisher and Wisconsin politician. In his time, Sholes went by the names C. Latham Sholes, Latham Sholes, or C. L. Sholes, but never "Christopher Sholes" or "Christopher L. Sholes".

Youth and political career
Born in Mooresburg, in Montour County, Pennsylvania, Sholes moved to nearby Danville and worked there as an apprentice to a printer. After completing his apprenticeship, Sholes moved to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 1837, and later to Southport, Wisconsin (present-day Kenosha). On February 4, 1841 in Green Bay, he married Mary Jane McKinney of that town. He became a newspaper publisher and politician, serving in the Wisconsin State Senate from 1848 to 1849 as a Democrat, in the Wisconsin State Assembly from 1852 to 1853 as a Free Soiler, and again in the Senate as a Republican from 1856 to 1857. He was instrumental in the successful movement to abolish capital punishment in Wisconsin; his newspaper, The Kenosha Telegraph, reported on the trial of John McCaffary in 1851, and then in 1853 he led the campaign in the Wisconsin State Assembly. Also noteworthy was Sholes' part in the massive railroad corruption scheme which permeated the legislature in 1856. Sholes was one of a small number of legislators who actually refused the bribe.

He was the younger brother of Charles Sholes (1816–1867), who was also a newspaper publisher and politician who served in both houses of the Wisconsin State Legislature and as mayor of Kenosha.

The "Voree Record"
In 1845, Sholes was working as editor of the Southport Telegraph, a small newspaper in Kenosha. During this time, he heard about the alleged discovery of the Voree Record, a set of three minuscule brass plates unearthed by James J. Strang, a would-be successor to Joseph Smith, founder of the Latter Day Saint movement. Strang asserted that this proved that he was a true prophet of God, and he invited the public to call upon him and see the plates for themselves. Sholes accordingly visited Strang, examined his "Voree Record," and wrote an article about their meeting. He indicated that while he could not accept Strang's plates or his prophetic claims, Strang himself seemed to be "honest and earnest" and his disciples were "among the most honest and intelligent men in the neighborhood." As for the "record" itself, Sholes indicated that he was "content to have no opinion about it."

Inventing the typewriter
Typewriters with various keyboards had been invented as early as 1714 by Henry Mill and have been reinvented in various forms throughout the 1800s. It is believed that Sholes drew inspiration from the inventions of others, including those of Frank Haven Hall, Samuel W. Soule, Carlos Glidden, Giuseppe Ravizza and, in particular, John Pratt, whose mention in an 1867 Scientific American article Glidden is known to have shown Sholes. Sholes' typewriter improved on both the simplicity and efficiency of previous models, which led to his successful patent and commercial success.

Sholes had moved to Milwaukee and became the editor of a newspaper. Following a strike by compositors at his printing press, he tried building a machine for typesetting, but this was a failure and he quickly abandoned the idea. He arrived at the typewriter through a different route. His initial goal was to create a machine to number pages of a book, tickets and so on. He began work on this at a machine shop in Milwaukee, together with fellow printer Samuel W. Soule. They patented a numbering machine on November 13, 1866.

Sholes and Soule showed their machine to Carlos Glidden, a lawyer and amateur inventor at the machine shop who was working on a mechanical plow. Glidden wondered if the machine could not be made to produce letters and words as well. Further inspiration came in July 1867, when Sholes came across a short note in Scientific American describing the "Pterotype", a prototype typewriter that had been invented by John Pratt. From the description, Sholes decided that the Pterotype was too complex and set out to make his own machine, whose name he got from the article: the typewriting machine, or typewriter.

For this project, Soule was again enlisted and Glidden joined them as a third partner to provide funding. The Scientific American article (unillustrated) had figuratively used the phrase "literary piano"; the first model that the trio built had a keyboard literally resembling a piano. It had black keys and white keys, laid out in two rows. It did not contain keys for the numerals 0 or 1 because the letters O and I were deemed sufficient: The first row was made of ivory and the second of ebony, the rest of the framework was wooden. Despite the evident prior art by Pratt, it was in this same form that Sholes, Glidden and Soule were granted patents for their invention on June 23, 1868 and July 14. The first document to be produced on a typewriter was a contract that Sholes had written, in his capacity as the comptroller for the city of Milwaukee. Machines similar to Sholes's had been previously used by the blind for embossing, but by Sholes's time the inked ribbon had been invented, which made typewriting in its current form possible. At this stage, the Sholes-Glidden-Soule typewriter was only one among dozens of similar inventions. They wrote hundreds of letters on their machine to various people, one of whom was James Densmore of Meadville, Pennsylvania. Densmore believed that the typewriter would be highly profitable, and offered to buy a share of the patent, without even having seen the machine. The trio immediately sold him one-fourth of the patent in return for his paying all their expenses so far. When Densmore eventually examined the machine in March 1867, he declared that it was good for nothing in its current form, and urged them to start improving it. Discouraged, Soule and Glidden left the project, leaving Sholes and Densmore in sole possession of the patent.

Realizing that stenographers would be among the first and most important users of the machine, and therefore best in a position to judge its suitability, they sent experimental versions to a few stenographers. The most important of them was James O. Clephane of Washington D.C., who tried the instruments as no one else had tried them, subjecting them to such unsparing tests that he destroyed them, one after another, as fast as they could be made and sent to him. His judgments were similarly caustic, causing Sholes to lose his patience and temper. But Densmore insisted that this was exactly what they needed:

"This candid fault-finding is just what we need. We had better have it now than after we begin manufacturing. Where Clephane points out a weak lever or rod let us make it strong. Where a spacer or an inker works stiffly, let us make it work smoothly. Then, depend upon Clephane for all the praise we deserve."

Sholes took this advice and set to improve the machine at every iteration, until they were satisfied that Clephane had taught them everything he could. By this time, they had manufactured 50 machines or so, at an average cost of $250 (equivalent to almost $5,000 in 2020). They decided to have the machine examined by an expert mechanic, who directed them to E. Remington and Sons (which later became the Remington Arms Company), manufacturers of firearms, sewing machines and farm tools. In early 1873, they approached Remington, who decided to buy the patent from them. Sholes sold his half for $12,000, while Densmore, still a stronger believer in the machine, insisted on a royalty, which would eventually fetch him $1.5 million.

Sholes returned to Milwaukee and continued to work on new improvements for the typewriter throughout the 1870s, which included the QWERTY keyboard (1873). James Densmore had suggested splitting up commonly used letter combinations in order to solve a jamming problem caused by the slow method of recovering from a keystroke: weights, not springs, returned all parts to the "rest" position. This concept was later refined by Sholes and the resulting QWERTY layout is still used today on both typewriters and English language computer keyboards, although the jamming problem no longer exists.

Sholes died on February 17, 1890, after battling tuberculosis for nine years. He is buried at Forest Home Cemetery in Milwaukee.

title: Christopher Latham Sholes


text:
2004 Taiwanese legislative election

The 2004 Taiwanese legislative election was held on 11 December 2004. All 225 seats of the Legislative Yuan were up for election: 168 elected by single non-transferable vote, 41 elected through party-list Proportional representation, eight elected from overseas Chinese constituencies on the basis of the proportion of nationwide votes received by participating political parties, eight elected by popular vote among the aboriginal populations. Members served three-year terms beginning on 1 February 2005, and ending 31 January 2008. The next term served four years.

This was the first election following Pan-Blue coalition candidate Lien Chen's narrow defeat in the presidential election in March. With the results of the presidential election still contested, many saw the legislative election as a referendum on Chen Shui-bian's Government and on the Pan-Blue Coalition's electoral viability. With the failure of the Pan-Green Coalition to win a majority, President Chen Shui-bian found it difficult, as in the past, to enact his policies.

Campaign issues
In the 5th Legislative Yuan (2002–2005), the opposition pan-blue coalition held a narrow majority, resulting in much of government-sponsored bills being deadlocked or heavily amended. The pan-blue coalition strongly argued that having a majority pan-green legislature would lead to a "super-president" while the pan-green coalition stated that a majority pan-green legislature was necessary to prevent deadlock and chaos and to finally eliminate the vestiges of the KMT's previous authoritarian government on Taiwan.

A major issue of the election was whether to amend or replace the Constitution of the Republic of China. In his second inaugural address in May 2004, President Chen Shui-bian proposed to hold a referendum in 2006 on an entirely new constitution to be adopted in 2008. The Pan-Green Coalition argued that the current constitution, drafted by the Kuomintang in mainland China in 1947, is outdated and unfit for Taiwan as it was originally designed for all of China. Though President Chen promised not to change the sovereignty status of the Republic of China (which still officially claims all of mainland China and Mongolia), the symbols of the Republic of China, or to declare an independent Taiwan, this proposal drew intense criticism from the People's Republic of China, which saw a new Constitution as a means to further the separation of Taiwan from the mainland. In Taiwan there is a general consensus across party lines that the Constitution needs reworking, but disagreement on the degree and type of reform. The Pan-Blue Coalition opposes enacting a new constitution, seeing the act as unnecessary, but supports amending it. In the summer of 2004, the legislature overwhelmingly passed a series of proposed constitutional amendments to halve the size of the legislature and abolish the National Assembly, among other measures. These measures will have to be approved by the National Assembly (elected ad hoc from the results of the 2004 election).

In addition, other issues were Chen's accusations of a soft coup after his March 2004 victory, as well as legal efforts (which most consider unlikely to succeed) by the leaders of the pan-blue coalition to overturn the results of the March presidential election. In a related issue, there were concerns that the 3-19 shooting incident was staged; an investigatory committee established by the legislature (only by overriding a cabinet veto) was criticized by the pan-green coalition, which refused to appoint any of its members to the committee as mandated by law.

Another initiative that was discussed was a US$18 billion arms deal with the United States. President Chen regarded the arms deal as necessary for the defense of Taiwan against China, but the Pan-Blue Coalition has blocked the deal from passing the legislature, arguing the money should be spent on other measures.

President Chen also complained that the party emblem of the KMT is too similar to the national emblem of the Republic of China, and if the KMT does not change its emblem, a newly elected pan-green legislature will force it. (In response, the KMT noted that its emblem has existed before the ROC and challenged the government to change the national emblem instead.) Chen announced on December 5 that state-owned enterprises and foreign offices bearing the name "China", such as the Chinese Petroleum Corporation, would be renamed to bear the name "Taiwan". The U.S. government objected to this proposal, saying it would "unilaterally change Taiwan's status", but the DPP argued it is meant to avoid confusion and was not politically motivated. Chen reacted to the American concerns by blasting the United States. This appeared to cause a great deal of consternation among American officials with one analyst stating bluntly that President George W. Bush was "more than a little irritated" by Chen.

During the campaign, the KMT had been laying off workers and shedding millions of dollars' worth of assets it accumulated when it monopolized power. Analysts say the downsizing was prompted by fear that a DPP-controlled legislature might call for new investigations of the party's finances.

Campaign tactics
The legislative elections were the last in Taiwan using the single non-transferable vote, as a constitutional amendment was passed in 2005 to convert the election format in the next legislative elections. The new electoral system supported by KMT and DPP, created interesting strategies such as vote allocation, as parties did not want to nominate too many candidates for a district, out of fear that it would divide party votes among too many candidates. In addition, the voting method resulted in complex negotiations between parties with similar ideological beliefs. The need to allocate votes resulted in a system in which political parties took out newspaper ads telling supporters how to vote based on their birthday.

The leaders of the KMT, PFP, and New Party, which all share similar political views, expressed concern over overcrowding. In 2001 elections, the DPP won 40% of the seats even though they only polled 36% of the vote, due in large part to the inability of the KMT, PFP, and New Party to coordinate their electoral strategies. To maintain its majority of the Pan-Blue Coalition, Kuomintang Chairman Lien Chan and People First Party Chairman James Soong proposed in May 2004 to merge their parties. In the election, the New Party ran seven of its eight candidates (the minimum number required to form a legislative caucus) under the KMT banner to avoid splitting the vote though their campaigns were funded and organized by the New Party. However, one candidate—Wu Cheng-tien of Kinmen, whose strongly Chinese unification-supporting district was considered safe—ran and won as a New Party candidate to signify the party's continued existence.

Similarly, negotiations between TSU "Spiritual Leader" Lee Teng-hui and Chen Shui-bian occurred, presumably over calls for the TSU and DPP avoid splitting up their votes but not much occurred towards this result.

However, the dynamics of the election have permitted intra-coalition competition, either from candidates not wanting to be "sacrificed" to more popular candidates in another party or from party leaders seeking to increase their proportional representation. For example, the Lee Teng-hui criticized President Chen Shui-bian for equating the "Republic of China" with "Taiwan" saying "If we continue to use the "Republic of China" as the nation's title, China may view our nation (as a rebellion group)...Taiwan itself is a nation" while campaigning for a TSU candidate in danger of losing the race to five other DPP candidates.

Faced with defections by independence supporters to the TSU accusing the DPP as being too moderate (President Chen's senior adviser for international affairs, Lai Shin-yuan, resigned from the administration and won a seat as a TSU candidate), President Chen seemed to be moving his party's campaign towards stronger support for Taiwan independence, calling for the renaming of state-owned enterprises. This strategy seemed to have worked in preventing defections to the TSU—the TSU, predicted to increase its presence to as many as 20 seats instead lost its membership by one seat. However, this might have alienated the center of the electorate and contributed to Pan-Green's overall defeat.

Results

The pro Republic of China conservative Pan-Blue Coalition (consisting of the Kuomintang, People First Party, and New Party) retained its majority in the legislature, winning 114 seats, compared to 101 seats won by the Taiwan independence-leaning Pan-Green Coalition (consisting of the Democratic Progressive Party and Taiwan Solidarity Union). The remaining ten seats went to independents and other groups.

A significant result was that voter participation was only 59% and was markedly lower than in previous elections (80% in the previous presidential election). Many commentators were concerned about this as it seemed to reflect public disillusionment with the tone of politics on Taiwan. The election also appeared to call into question the accuracy of public opinion polls, most of which failed to project a pan-blue victory just as they failed to predict the election of Chen Shui-bian. The DPP itself predicted that the pan-green coalition would capture 113 seats, and the TSU predicted that it would win at least 25 seats. On the other hand, the KMT underestimated itself by predicting that the pan-blue coalition altogether would win 109 seats.

Among the notable candidates elected, independent candidate Li Ao won a legislative seat, whereas former DPP chairmen turned pan-blue supporter Shi Ming-teh and Hsu Hsing-liang failed to get elected in their seats. Also of interest is a non-party legislator from Yunlin County, Chang Li-shan, the sister of the former county magistrate who was captured by the police the day before the election on corruption charges.

In their post-election speeches, all of the party spokesman called for moderation as well as unity and cooperation between the parties. Significantly, the pan-blue coalition consistently referred to the country by its legal name of the Republic of China whereas pan-green referred to the country with the term Taiwan.

Analysis
Although the party strengths were similar to the election of the 2001 ROC legislative election, but the results were widely seen as a major defeat for President Chen Shui-bian, who had campaigned hoping for an absolute majority for the pan green coalition. Reasons for the result included:

 * tactical voting strategies – the pan-blue coalition greatly limited the number of candidates nominated while the pan-green coalition nominated a very large number of candidates. This had a major impact on the result due to the Taiwanese electoral system.  In addition, the DPP nominated a large number of new unknown candidates, in part because the big names in the DPP were in the government, whereas the pan-blue coalition, being in opposition, found it easier to nominate people with a large amount of name recognition. The DPP's strategy was to "slit the throats" (割喉) of the pan-blue coalition by dominating the government with many candidates, following their success in the presidential election.  After the election, there was a consensus that this strategy seriously backfired.  While the number of seats that the DPP and TSU gained was similar to that of 2001, many experienced and famous DPP and TSU legislators lost their seats.
 * intra-coalition cooperation – many observers noted that the parts of the pan-blue coalition were much more adept at cooperating than the parts of the pan-green coalition. In particular, the NP ran seven of its candidates under the KMT banner and only ran one under NP in sure-win Kinmin county (Quemoy). Also, the PFP was willing to give up seats in order to improve the results of the overall coalition whereas the TSU was not as willing to coordinate in this way with the DPP.  James Soong, leader of the PFP, was quoted earlier as stating that he was willing to have the KMT win all of the seats in the pan-blue coalition if this was necessary to keep the pan-blue in power, whereas the TSU actively campaigned for a large number of seats and in some cases sharply criticized the DPP, and Lee Teng-hui urged the husband from each household to vote for DPP, and the wife to vote for TSU so both parties would have equal representation.
 * pan-green emphasis on symbolic issues of Taiwan independence – Although the pan-green coalition began the campaign focusing on good governance and reform issues, as the campaign progressed the pan-green coalition focused more on the symbolic issues of Taiwan independence such as calling for referendum, removing the name "China" from state owned corporations and schools, moving the history of the ROC to a section on general Chinese history in textbooks, demanding that the KMT change its party emblem, which is similar to the national emblem. While these efforts were intended to placate the voters of the TSU, most analysts feel that they did nothing to attract more moderate voters.

Although the pan-green coalition improved both their seat totals and their vote percentage over the last election, the legislative elections were widely interpreted as a major defeat for the pan-green coalition, given their goal of gaining a majority of seats in the Legislative Yuan. In the aftermath of the election, Chen Shui-bian resigned as chairman of the Democratic Progressive Party and was replaced by Su Tseng-Chang.

Some of the consequences of the election were:

 * the election established the Kuomintang as senior party within the pan-blue coalition and set the stage for the merger between all of the parties within the pan-blue coalition into a new Kuomintang. Seven of the KMT candidates were actually members of the New Party, and it is expected that a merger between the New Party and the KMT will occur very soon after the election.  Somewhat more difficult is the planned merger between the KMT and PFP.  These mergers are widely seen as essential due to the electoral changes that will occur in the next legislative elections.  In addition, the elections appeared to end speculation that the KMT was about to collapse, calls for the resignation of Lien Chan, and calls for the KMT to drop some of the "China"-based symbols.
 * the victory of the pan-blue coalition also strained the relationship between the KMT and PFP. Although cooperating with the KMT before the election, after the election PFP Soong Chu-yu complained about his parties poor showing and began moving toward cooperation with the DPP.
 * the election completely marginalized candidates outside the pan-blue and pan-green coalitions. Even candidates such as Shi Ming-teh and Hsu Hsin-liang, who both served long prison terms during the democratization movement of Taiwan and were pivotal in the Kaohsiung Incident but have since distanced away from the DPP, were defeated. Out of a total of 154 candidates from both the Non-Partisan Solidarity Union and Non-Party, only 10 were elected.
 * after the election, the PRC announced that it would pass an Anti-Secession Law. Most Western observers have stated that this was intended as a harsh measure to counteract an expected pan-Green coalition victory, but that when the election results were unexpectedly favorable to the PRC, that the planning for the law had been too far advanced to stop completely.

title: 2004 Taiwanese legislative election


text:
Homegrown

Homegrown may refer to any plants grown in a domestic setting. It may also refer to:

Music

 * Home Grown, an American rock band formed in 1994
 * Home Grown (Geri Allen album), 1985
 * Homegrown (Dodgy album), 1995
 * Home Grown (Blue Mountain album), 1998
 * Homegrown (XTC album), 2001
 * Homegrown (UB40 album), 2003
 * Homegrown (New Zealand Idol album), 2004
 * Homegrown (Neil Young album), 2020
 * Homegrown (EP), a 2013 EP by rapper Chris Webby
 * Homegrown, a 1999 album by Michelle Malone
 * Home Grown, a 1972 album by Johnny Rivers
 * Home Grown! The Beginners Guide to Understanding The Roots, Vol. 1 & 2, a 2005 compilation albums by The Roots
 * Home Grown, aka KKUA Home Grown, a series of records produced by Hawaii's Ron Jacobs from 1976 to 1997
 * "Homegrown" (Zac Brown Band song), 2015
 * "Homegrown", a song by Neil Young from the 1977 album American Stars 'n Bars
 * Homegrown (drum and bass event), Cape Town based drum and bass event
 * Homegrown Music Festival (Duluth), a local music showcase in Duluth, Minnesota, US
 * Homegrown Music Festival (New Zealand), a festival of Kiwi music in Wellington, New Zealand

Other

 * Homegrown (film), a 1998 movie starring Billy Bob Thornton
 * Homegrown F.C., a football club in Naivasha, Kenya
 * Homegrown (play), a 2010 Canadian play about visiting a "homegrown" terrorist suspect
 * Homegrown, an American gardening television show hosted by Jamila Norman

title: Homegrown


text:
Isaac of Armenia

Isaac or Sahak of Armenia (c. 350 – c. 438) was the catholicos (or patriarch) of the Armenian Church from c. 387 until c. 438. He is sometimes known as Isaac the Great or Sahak the Parthian (Սահակ Պարթեւ, ) in reference to his father's Parthian origin. He was the last Armenian patriarch who was directly descended from Gregory the Illuminator, who converted the Kingdom of Armenia to Christianity in the early fourth century and became the first head of the Armenian Church. He supported Mesrop Mashtots in the creation of the Armenian alphabet and personally participated in the translation of the Bible into Armenian.

Early life
Isaac was born c. 350 to the future Catholicos Nerses I ((r. c. 353 – c. 373)). Through his father he was a descendant of Gregory the Illuminator, who converted the Kingdom of Armenia to Christianity in the early fourth century and became the first head of the Armenian Church. Since that time, the descendants of Gregory had held the office of catholicos of Armenia hereditarily, with some interruptions. According to the anonymous Vita of St. Nerses, Isaac's mother was a Mamikonian princess called Sandukht, whom Nerses married in Caesarea prior to his consecration as catholicos. The Vita claims that Sandukht died after giving birth to Isaac. Another source, the Buzandaran Patmutʻiwnkʻ, neither names Nerses's wife nor mentions his time in Caesarea, while Movses Khorenatsi writes that Nerses married the daughter of "the great noble Aspion" (who is not known from other sources) in Constantinople.

During his father's patriarchate, Isaac studied for many years in Caesarea, Alexandria, and Constantinople. He learned Greek, Syriac and Persian. The Armenian historian Ghazar Parpetsi writes of him that he studied "among many learned Byzantines" and was "fully versed in musical notation, exhortatory rhetoric, and especially philosophy. He was later consecrated as a bishop and preached with his sixty students at Etchmiadzin Cathedral. His father died in c. 373, purportedly poisoned by the Arsacid king of Armenia Pap. At some point, Isaac had a daughter named Sahakanoysh, who later married Hamazasp Mamikonian. It is assumed that his wife died before he became catholicos.

Election and first deposition
Isaac was elected catholicos c. 387 after the death of his predecessor, Aspuraces. He supported King Khosrov IV of Armenia in his efforts to reunite the Armenian realm, which had been partitioned into Roman and Sasanian parts in 387. Khosrov was imprisoned by the Sasanian king in about 389, possibly because of his nomination of Sahak as catholicos without Persian approval. After Khosrov's imprisonment, Isaac was deposed as catholicos, but Khosrov's successor Vramshapuh managed to have him restored to his position.

Through Isaac's efforts the churches and monasteries destroyed by the Persians were rebuilt, education was cared for in a generous way, Zoroastrianism which Shah Yazdegerd I tried to set up was cast out, and three councils held to re-establish ecclesiastical discipline. The catholicos was noted for his ascetic lifestyle.

Creation of the Armenian alphabet
Prior to the invention of the Armenian alphabet, the languages of the Armenian Church were Greek and Syriac. Armenia had been divided into Roman and Sasanian client kingdoms in 387. In the Roman part, however, the Armenians were forbidden the use of the Syriac language and used Greek instead, and the country gradually Hellenized; in the Persian part, on the other hand, Greek was absolutely prohibited, while Syriac was used. In this way the ancient culture of the Armenians was in danger of disappearing and national unity was seriously compromised.

Isaac encouraged Mesrop Mashtots to invent the Armenian alphabet and himself translated and revised parts of the Bible. According to Ghazar Parpetsi, Mashtots and the first translators frequently turned to Isaac, who had received a solid education, for assistance while making the alphabet. Their translation from the Syriac Peshitta was revised by means of the Septuagint, and even, it seems, from the Hebrew text (between 410 and 430). The liturgy also, hitherto Syrian, was translated into Armenian, drawing at the same time on the liturgy of Saint Basil of Caesarea, so as to obtain for the new service a national color. Isaac had already established schools for higher education with the aid of disciples whom he had sent to study at Edessa, Melitene, Constantinople, and elsewhere. Through them he now had the principal masterpieces of Greek and Syrian Christian literature translated, e.g., the writings of Athanasius of Alexandria, Cyril of Jerusalem, Basil, Gregory of Nazianzus, Gregory of Nyssa, John Chrysostom, Ephrem the Syrian, and others. The invention of the Armenian alphabet sped up the process of the Christianization of the Armenian population.

Second deposition and death
In 428, the last Arsacid king of Armenia Artashir was deposed by the Sasanian king with the help of most of the Armenian nobles. Isaac was against this and was himself removed from his position as Catholicos. An Armenian named Surmak was appointed in his place but was soon replaced by the Syrian bishop Brkisho. Isaac was imprisoned in Ctesiphon until 432, when he was allowed to return to Armenia and occupy certain offices within the church. Isaac refused to retake the patriarchate after the death of Catholicos Samuel, Brkisho's Syrian successor, in 437.

Isaac died around 438 in the village of Blur in Bagrevand. His body was taken to Taron and buried in Ashtishat. Since Isaac was the last male of the Gregorid line, his house's territories of Taron, Bagrevand and Acilisene passed to the Mamikonians through Isaac's daughter Sahakanoysh, who was married to the Mamikonian prince Hamazasp.

Works
According to Abraham Terian, the identifiable works attributed to Isaac consist of canons and his two letters to Archbishop Proclus of Constantinople and Bishop Acacius of Melitene. The letter to Proclus is co-authored with Mashtots and concerns confessional matters. It is a reply to a letter sent by Proclus (Epistola II: Ad Armenios, de fide) to the Armenian clergy, which has been preserved in Greek and Armenian translation. The letter to Acacius is also a reply; Acacius's letter to Isaac, and another addressed to the Armenians, have been preserved in Armenian. Some authors have doubted the authenticity of the canons attributed to Isaac, although, according to Terian, these doubts are unjustified. Movses Khorenatsi's history quotes letters from Sahak to Eastern Roman emperor Theodosius II, the consul Anatolius, and Archbishop Atticus of Constantinople. Isaac is said to have been the author of liturgical hymns. Four sermons in the Armenian book of hours (zhamagirk) and many hymns (sharakans) are attributed to him.

Veneration
Isaac is venerated as a saint in the Armenian Apostolic and Roman Catholic churches. In the Armenian Apostolic Church, his memorial day is marked twice a year: first, on the Saturday preceding the penultimate Sunday before Lent, thus falling between January 24 and February 28; second, together with Saint Mesrop Mashtots, on the Thursday following the fourth Sunday after Pentecost, thus falling between June 1 and July 16.

Vision
The end of the first section of Ghazar Parpetsi's history contains a description of a vision supposedly seen by Sahak and narrated by him after he refused the request of the Armenian nobility to return to the patriarchal throne. In the vision, Sahak saw various symbols connected with the Church and faith and saw that the Arsacids of Armenia and Gregorids would fall from power and apparently disappear; however, after a period of chaos both would be restored to their respective thrones; his daughter Sahakanoysh would give birth to "powerful and pious men." The passage about Sahak's vision is thought by some scholars to be a later interpolation into Ghazar's sixth-century history, although Gohar Muradyan considers it possible that Ghazar himself wrote it, perhaps drawing from an existing source. Sahak's vision was repeated in many Armenian works and was translated into Greek and thence into Georgian. Some connected it with events in their own time, even as late as the end of the seventeenth century.

title: Isaac of Armenia


text:
Noojee

Noojee is a town in the Gippsland region of Victoria, Australia, north of Warragul and east of Melbourne, in the Baw Baw local government area. At the 2016 census, Noojee and the surrounding area had a population of 157. The town benefits from tourists passing through to the Mount Baw Baw Alpine Resort, 48 kilometres away, as it is the last stop with tourism services. There are also a number of walks in the area, including the Noojee Trestle Bridge, a 100m wooden rail bridge.

History
"Noojee" is an Aboriginal word meaning "valley of or place of rest".

It was first settled after gold was found in the area in the 1860s. Noojee became a major timber town when the railway connected the town to Warragul in 1919. Noojee Post Office opened on 3 May 1920, though an earlier office had been open between 1902 and 1904.

The town was destroyed by bushfires in 1926 and again in the Black Friday fires of 1939. The only building left standing after both fires was the Noojee Hotel which served as community meeting point during the emergency. The hotel also served as the school after the one room school was destroyed.

Economy
Noojee is well known for its trout fishing. A trout farm is located on the outskirts of the town.

title: Noojee


text:
Victor Buono

Victor Charles Buono (February 3, 1938 – January 1, 1982) was an American actor, comic, and briefly a recording artist. He was known for playing the villain King Tut in the television series Batman (1966–1968) and musician Edwin Flagg in What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962), the latter of which earned him Academy Award and Golden Globe Award nominations. He was a busy actor from his late teens until his death at the age of 43 and, with his large size and sonorous voice, he made a career of playing men much older than he was.

Early life and career
Buono was the son of Victor F. Buono. His father was a former police officer and bail bondsman who was sentenced to life imprisonment after being found guilty of first-degree murder and conspiracy to commit robbery in 1959. Released on parole after seven years but forced to serve a further sentence due to a previous conviction for bird smuggling, Victor Sr. continued to manage the affairs of his son while in prison.

Buono started appearing on local radio and television stations, and at age 18 joined the Globe Theater Players in San Diego. The director had confidence in Buono and cast him in Volpone, A Midsummer Night's Dream and other Globe presentations. He received good notices for his various Shakespearean roles and in modern plays such as The Man Who Came to Dinner and Witness for the Prosecution.

In the summer of 1959, a talent scout from Warner Bros. saw the heavy-set Buono play Falstaff at the Globe and took him to Hollywood for a screen test. Buono made his first network TV appearance playing the bearded poet Bongo Benny in an episode of 77 Sunset Strip. Over the next few years, he played menacing heavies in series on TV and appeared on The Untouchables. After appearing in a few uncredited film roles, he was cast by director Robert Aldrich in the psychological horror film What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962). The film starred Bette Davis and Joan Crawford and Buono played the hapless musical accompanist Edwin Flagg, a performance for which he was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor and the Golden Globe Award for Best Supporting Actor – Motion Picture.

Noteworthy film roles
Shortly after What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?, Buono appeared in Hush...Hush, Sweet Charlotte (1964) as Big Sam Hollis, the father of Bette Davis, who played the title role. The film was also directed by Aldrich. In the Biblical epic The Greatest Story Ever Told (1965), Buono portrayed the High Priest Sorak, and in The Strangler, a film based on the actual Boston Strangler Murders of the time, he portrayed Leo Kroll.

He also appeared in 4 for Texas (1963), Robin and the 7 Hoods (1964), The Silencers (1966), Who's Minding the Mint? (1967), Target: Harry (1969), Beneath the Planet of the Apes (1970), The Mad Butcher (1972) and The Evil (1978) as the Devil himself, clad in a white suit.

Television roles
Though Buono had a vast body of work in films, he also had extensive television appearances to his credit; one was in the recurring role of Count Manzeppi in The Wild Wild West. He also played unrelated characters in that series' premiere episode and in the second and final Wild Wild West reunion film More Wild Wild West (1980).

Buono was cast to play villains of various ethnic origins on many television programs between 1960 and 1970. He was cast twice in 1960 in the western series The Rebel, starring Nick Adams, in the episodes "Blind Marriage" and "The Earl of Durango". In 1962, he played Melanthos Moon in an episode of The Untouchables, titled "Mr. Moon", in which he played a San Francisco art and antique dealer who hijacked a supply of the paper used for printing United States currency. In a 1963 episode of the same series, titled The Gang War, he played Pamise Surigao, a liquor smuggler competing with the Chicago mob.

In the episode "Firebug" (January 27, 1963) of the anthology series GE True, hosted by Jack Webb, Buono plays a barber in Los Angeles, who is by night a pyromaniac. In the storyline, the United States Forest Service believes one arsonist is causing a series of fires in California.

Buono appeared in four episodes of Perry Mason. In season 5, (March 17, 1962), he portrayed Alexander Glovatsky, a small-town sculptor, in "The Case of the Absent Artist". In season 7, (April 2, 1964), he played John (Jack) Sylvester Fossette in the episode "The Case of the Simple Simon". In season 8, (April 29, 1965,) he played Nathon Fallon in "The Case of the Grinning Gorilla". In season 9, (February 27, 1966), he appeared in "The Case of the Twice Told Twist", the only color episode, as Ben Huggins, the ringleader of a car-stripping ring.

Buono played the villain King Tut on the television series Batman. A Jekyll-and-Hyde character, William McElroy is a timid Yale professor of Egyptology who, after being hit in the head with a brick at a peace rally, assumes the persona of the charismatic, monomaniacal Egyptian King Tut. When he suffers another blow to the head, the villain recovers his meek academic personality. The role, which proved to be the most frequently featured original villain in the series, was one of Buono's favorites because he was delighted at being able to overact without restraint.

He played another campy villain, "Mr. Memory", in a 1967 unsold TV pilot film based on the Dick Tracy comic strip, from the same producers of Batman and The Green Hornet.

Buono also played a scientist bent on world domination in the Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea in an episode titled "The Cyborg".

Buono made a guest appearance as Hannibal Day in the Get Smart episode "Moonlighting Becomes You", originally airing January 2, 1970, and appeared three times as Dr. Blaine in the sitcom Harrigan and Son, starring Pat O'Brien and Roger Perry as a father-and-son team of lawyers. He appeared in a segment of Night Gallery titled "Satisfaction Guaranteed". He also appeared in an episode of Hawaii Five-O, "The $100,000 Nickel", in which he played thief Eric Damien. It first aired on December 11, 1973. He made two memorable appearances on The Odd Couple, once in the episode "The Exorcists" and again in "The Rent Strike", where he portrayed Mr. Lovelace. In 1976, he appeared in the comedy The Practice, portraying Bernard in the episode "Jules and the Bum". He also made nine appearances on the 1977 series Man from Atlantis as the primary antagonist, Mr. Schubert.

Comedy record albums and comic poetry
In the 1970s, Buono released several comedy record albums which poked fun at his large stature, the first of which was Heavy!, as well as a book of comic poetry called It Could Be Verse. He began to style himself as "the fat man from Batman". During guest appearances on The Tonight Show Starring Johnny Carson, he frequently recited his poetry. The most popular of his poems was "Fat Man's Prayer", a work often erroneously attributed to Dom DeLuise or Jackie Gleason. It included many widely quoted couplets such as:

We are what we eat, said a wise old man, And Lord, if that's true, I'm a garbage can!

At oleomargarine I'll never mutter, For the road to hell is spread with butter.

And cake is cursed, and cream is awful, And Satan is hiding in every waffle.

Give me this day my daily slice— But cut it thin and toast it twice.

Later career
In the late 1970s and in 1980, Buono played the millionaire father of the memory-impaired Reverend Jim Ignatowski on Taxi. Christopher Lloyd, the actor portraying his son, was the same age as Buono, who died before the end of the series. One episode was made where Jim learns to cope with his father's death.

In 1980, Buono appeared in the television film Murder Can Hurt You as Chief Ironbottom, a parody of the title character from Ironside. His later roles were more of pompous intellectuals and shady con men, although he also played straight roles. In the miniseries Backstairs at the White House (1979), he portrayed President William Howard Taft. Buono also appeared on 4 different episodes of the ABC series Vega$ with Robert Urich, playing a sage and yet also street-wise Las Vegas casino high roller named 'Diamond Jim'.

Death
Buono was found dead at his home in Apple Valley, California on New Year's Day 1982; he died of a heart attack. He is entombed with his mother, Myrtle, in Greenwood Memorial Park in San Diego, but his name is not inscribed on the crypt.

Personal life
Buono attended the University of San Diego.

Buono liked to read and write, and one of his main interests was Shakespeare. "The more you study him," he said, "the greater he grows." He was also highly regarded as a gourmet chef.

In regard to relationships (and the implicit questioning of his sexuality), Buono is quoted as saying, "I've heard or read about actors being asked the immortal question, 'Why have you never married?' They answer with the immortal excuse, 'I just haven't found the right girl.' Because I'm on the hefty side, no one's asked me yet. If they do, that's the answer I'll give. After all, if it was good enough for Monty Clift or Sal Mineo..." Buono was closeted, like most gay actors at the time, but lived with boyfriends, and referred to himself as a "conscientious objector" in the "morality revolution" of the 1960s.

title: Victor Buono


text: User talk:68.96.46.96

title: User talk:68.96.46.96


text:
Black Friday bushfires

The Black Friday bushfires of 13 January 1939, in Victoria, Australia, were part of the devastating 1938–1939 bushfire season in Australia, which saw bushfires burning for the whole summer, and ash falling as far away as New Zealand. It was calculated that three-quarters of the State of Victoria was directly or indirectly affected by the disaster, while other Australian states and the Australian Capital Territory were also badly hit by fires and extreme heat. This was the third-deadliest bushfire event in Australian history, only behind the 1983 Ash Wednesday bushfires and the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires.

Fires burned almost 2000000 ha of land in Victoria, where 71 people were killed, and several towns were entirely obliterated. Over 1,300 homes and 69 sawmills were burned, and 3,700 buildings were destroyed or damaged. In response, the Victorian state government convened a Royal Commission that resulted in major changes in forest management. The Royal Commission noted that "it appeared the whole State was alight on Friday, 13 January 1939".

New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory also faced severe fires during the 1939 season. Destructive fires burned from the NSW South Coast, across the ranges and inland to, while Sydney was ringed by fires which entered the outer suburbs, and fires raged towards the new capital at Canberra. South Australia was also struck by the Adelaide Hills bushfires.

Conditions
Eastern Australia is one of the most fire-prone regions of the world, with predominant eucalypt forests that have evolved to thrive on the phenomenon of bushfire. However, the 1938-9 bushfire season was exacerbated by a period of extreme heat, following several years of drought. Extreme heatwaves were accompanied by strong northerly winds, after a very dry six months. In the days preceding the fires, the Victorian state capital, Melbourne, experienced some of its hottest temperatures on record at the time: 43.8 °C on 8 January and 44.7 °C on 10 January. On 13 January, the day of the fires, temperatures reached 45.6 °C, which stood as the hottest day officially recorded in Melbourne for the next 70 years. (Unofficial records show temperatures of around 47 °C were reported on the Black Thursday fires of 6 February 1851).

The subsequent Victorian Royal Commission investigation of the fires recorded that Victoria had not seen such dry conditions for more than two decades, and its rich plains lay "bare and baking; and the forest, from the foothills to the alpine heights, were tinder". The people who made their lives in the bush were worried by the dry conditions, but "had not lived long enough" to imagine what was to come: " the most disastrous forest calamity the State of Victoria has known." Fires had been burning separately across Victoria through December, but reached a new intensity and "joined forces in a terrible confluence of flame...". on Friday, 13 January.

Effects in Victoria
The most damage was felt in the mountain and alpine areas in the northeast and around the southwest coast. The Acheron, Tanjil and Thomson Valleys and the Grampians, were also hit. Five townships – Hill End, Narbethong, Nayook West, Noojee (apart from the Hotel), Woods Point – were completely destroyed and not all were rebuilt afterwards. The towns of Omeo, Pomonal, Warrandyte (though this is now a suburb of Melbourne, it was not in 1939) and Yarra Glen were also badly damaged.

The Stretton Royal Commission wrote:

"'On [13 January] it appeared that the whole State was alight. At midday, in many places, it was dark as night. Men carrying hurricane lamps, worked to make safe their families and belongings. Travellers on the highways were trapped by fires or blazing fallen trees, and perished. Throughout the land there was daytime darkness... Steel girders and machinery were twisted by heat as if they had been of fine wire. Sleepers of heavy durable timber, set in the soil, their upper surfaces flush with the ground, were burnt through... Where the fire was most intense the soil was burnt to such a depth that it may be many years before it shall have been restored...'"

An area of almost 2 e6ha burned, 71 people killed, and whole townships wiped out, along with many sawmills and thousands of sheep, cattle and horses. According to Forest Management Victoria, during the bushfires of 13 January 1939:

"'[F]lames leapt large distances, giant trees were blown out of the ground by fierce winds and large pieces of burning bark (embers) were carried for kilometres ahead of the main fire front, starting new fires in places that had not previously been affected by flames... The townships of Warrandyte, Yarra Glen, Omeo and Pomonal were badly damaged. Intense fires burned on the urban fringe of Melbourne in the Yarra Ranges east of Melbourne, affecting towns including Toolangi, Warburton and Thomson Valley. The alpine towns of Bright, Cudgewa and Corryong were also affected, as were vast areas in the west of the state, in particular Portland, the Otway Ranges and the Grampians. The bushfires also affected the Black Range, Rubicon, Acheron, Noojee, Tanjil Bren, Hill End, Woods Point, Matlock, Erica, Omeo, Toombullup and the Black Forest. Large areas of state forest, containing giant stands of Mountain Ash and other valuable timbers, were killed. Approximately 575,000 hectares of reserved forest, and 780,000 hectares of forested Crown land were burned. The intensity of the fire produced huge amounts of smoke and ash, with reports of ash falling as far away as New Zealand'."

Major fires
There were five major fire areas. Smaller fires included; East Gippsland, Mount Macedon, Mallee and the Mornington Peninsula. The major fires, listed roughly in order of size, included;
 * 1) Victorian Alps/Yarra Ranges
 * 2) Portland
 * 3) Otway Ranges
 * 4) Grampians
 * 5) Strzelecki Ranges

Towns damaged or destroyed

 * Central
 * Dromana
 * Healesville
 * Kinglake
 * Marysville
 * Narbethong – destroyed
 * Warburton
 * Warrandyte
 * Yarra Glen

 * East
 * Hill End – destroyed
 * Nayook West – destroyed
 * Matlock – 15 died at a sawmill
 * Noojee – destroyed
 * Omeo
 * Woods Point – destroyed

 * West
 * Pomonal
 * Portland

Stretton Royal Commission and long-term consequences
The subsequent Royal Commission, under Judge Leonard Edward Bishop Stretton (known as the Stretton Inquiry), attributed blame for the fires to careless burning, campfires, graziers, sawmillers and land clearing.

Prior to 13 January 1939, many fires were already burning. Some of the fires started as early as December 1938, but most of them started in the first week of January 1939. Some of these fires could not be extinguished. Others were left unattended or, as Judge Stretton wrote, the fires were allowed to burn "under control", as it was falsely and dangerously called. Stretton declared that most of the fires were lit by the "hand of man".

Stretton's Royal Commission has been described as one of the most significant inquiries in the history of Victorian public administration.

As a consequence of Judge Stretton's scathing report, the Forests Commission Victoria gained additional funding and took responsibility for fire protection on all public land including State forests, unoccupied Crown Lands and National Parks, plus a buffer extending one mile beyond their boundaries on to private land. Its responsibilities grew in one leap from 2.4 to 6.5 e6ha. Stretton's recommendations officially sanctioned and encouraged the common bush practice of controlled burning to minimise future risks.

Its recommendations led to sweeping changes, including stringent regulation of burning and fire safety measures for sawmills, grazing licensees and the general public, the compulsory construction of dugouts at forest sawmills, increasing the forest roads network and firebreaks, construction of forest dams, fire towers and RAAF aerial patrols linked by the Commissions radio network VL3AA to ground observers. The Commission's communication systems were regarded at the time as being more technically advanced than those of the police and the military. These pioneering efforts were directed by Geoff Weste.

Victoria's forests were devastated to an extent that was unprecedented within living memory, and the impact of the 1939 bushfires dominated management thought and action for much of the next ten years. Salvage of fire-killed timber became an urgent and dominant task that was still consuming the resources and efforts of the Forests Commission a decade and a half later.

It was estimated that over 6 million cubic meters of timber needed to be salvaged. This massive task was made more difficult by labour shortages caused by the Second World War. In fact, there was so much material that some of the logs were harvested and stockpiled in huge dumps in creek beds and covered with soil and treeferns to stop them from cracking, only to be recovered many years later.

Further major fires later in the 1943–44 Victorian bushfire season and another Royal Commission by Judge Stretton were key factors in the founding of the Country Fire Authority (CFA) for fire suppression on rural land. Prior to the creation of the CFA the Forests Commission had, to some extent, been supporting the individual volunteer brigades that had formed across rural Victoria in the preceding decades.

The environmental effects of the fires continued for many years and some of the burnt dead trees still remain today. Large areas of animal habitat were destroyed. In affected areas, the soil took decades to recover from the damage of the fires. In some areas, water supplies were contaminated for some years afterwards due to ash and debris washing into catchment areas.

Fires in other states
Other states also suffered severely in the extreme heat and fires. In New South Wales, suffered 37 consecutive days above 38 C and  hit a record 49.7 C on 10 January. In mid-January, Sydney was ringed to the north, south and west by bushfires - from and Port Hacking to the Blue Mountains.

 * New South Wales

Following the weekend of Black Friday, The Argus reported that on 15 January, fierce winds had also spread fire to almost every important area of New South Wales, burning in major fronts on Sydney's suburban fringes and hitting the south coast and inland: "hundreds of houses and thousands of head of stock and poultry were destroyed and thousands of acres of grazing land".

On 16 January, The Sydney Morning Herald reported that disastrous fires were burning in Victoria, New South Wales and the Australian Capital Territory as the climax to the terrible heatwave: Sydney faced record heat and was ringed to the north, south and west by bushfires from Palm Beach and Port Hacking to the Blue Mountains, with fires blazing at Castle Hill, Sylvania, Cronulla and French's Forest. Disastrous fires were reported at Penrose, Wollongong, Nowra, Bathurst, Ulludulla, Mittagong, Trunkey and Nelligen.

 * Australian Capital Territory

Canberra was facing the "worst bushfires" it had experienced, with thousands of acres burned out and a 45 mi fire front was driven towards the city by a south westerly gale, destroying pine plantations and many homesteads, and threatening Mount Stromlo Observatory, Government House, and Black Mountain. Large numbers of men were sent to stand by government buildings in the line of fire. While five deaths in New South Wales were reported, in Victoria the death toll had reached more than sixty.

 * South Australia

In South Australia, the Adelaide Hills bushfires also swept the state, destroying dozens of buildings.

Comparison with other major bushfires
Internationally, south-eastern Australia is considered one of the three most fire-prone landscapes on Earth, along with southern California and the southern Mediterranean. Major Victorian bushfires occurred on Black Thursday in 1851, where an estimated 5 e6ha were burnt, followed by another blaze on Red Tuesday in February 1898 in South Gippsland when about 260000 ha were burnt, 12 people died and more than 2,000 buildings were destroyed. The deadly pattern continued with more major fires on Black Sunday on 14 February 1926 sees the tally rise to sixty lives being lost and widespread damage to farms, homes and forests.

Considered in terms of both loss of property and loss of life the 1939 fires were one of the worst disasters, and certainly the worst bushfire event, to have occurred in Australia up to that time. Only the subsequent Ash Wednesday bushfires in 1983 and the Black Saturday bushfires in 2009 resulted in more deaths.

In terms of the total area burnt, the 1974–75 fires burned 117 e6ha, equivalent to 15% of Australia's land.; the Black Friday fires burned up 2 e6ha, with the Black Thursday fires of 1851 having burnt an estimated 5 e6ha.

title: Black Friday bushfires


text:
Góra

Góra is a town in Lower Silesian Voivodeship, in western Poland. It is the administrative seat both of Góra County and of the smaller district (gmina) called Gmina Góra.

Geography
The town is located within the historic Lower Silesia region, approximately 69 km north-west of the regional capital Wrocław. As at 2019, it has a population of 11,797.

History
The area became part of the emerging Polish state in the 10th century. Following the fragmentation of Poland into smaller provincial duchies, it initially formed part of Greater Poland before it passed to Silesia. The settlement was first mentioned as Gora in an 1155 deed by Pope Adrian IV conveying the property to the Diocese of Wrocław. The name of the town means "hill" or "mountain" in Polish. In 1256 the bishop of Wrocław Tomasz I gave the village to the Polish knight Gosław. In 1288 it became part of the Duchy of Głogów and was granted Magdeburg town rights by the Piast duke Henry III. In 1300, Henry III sold the local mint to the city council of Góra. Henry III, as well as the succeeding dukes Henry IV the Faithful and Konrad I granted new privileges to the town in 1306 and 1310. From the 14th century onwards, the town developed to a centre of cloth manufacturing, specific privileges were granted to the clothiers of Góra in 1304. The Germanized name Guhrau is first documented in 1336. In 1343, an annual fair was established. Also from that year comes the first mention of the existence of a parish school in Góra. The town remained under the rule of the Polish houses of Piast and Jagiellon as part of the duchies of Głogów, Ścinawa and Cieszyn until the 16th century.

The town, as Guhrau, was annexed by Prussia upon the First Silesian War in 1742 and from 1816 was the administrative seat of Landkreis Guhrau within the Province of Silesia, which from 1871 to 1945 was also part of Germany. In World War II it was occupied by the Red Army during the 1945 Vistula–Oder Offensive. According to the Potsdam Agreement, the town became again part of Poland, although with a Soviet-installed communist regime, which stayed in power until the 1980s, while the remaining German population was expelled. The historic name Góra was restored and the town was repopulated by Poles, expelled from former eastern Poland annexed by the Soviet Union. Again a county seat from 1946, from 1975 to 1998 Góra belonged to Leszno Voivodeship. In 1999 Góra's town limits were expanded by including the settlement of Sędziwojowice as its eastern district.

Notable people

 * Benno Erdmann (1851–1921), German philosopher
 * Augustin Rösler (1851–1922), German theologian
 * Wilhelm Klemm (1896–1985), German scientist
 * Werner Naumann (1909–1982), German Nazi Secretary of State
 * Paweł Tuchlin (1946-1987), Polish serial killer known as “Scorpion”
 * Izabella Sierakowska (1946–2021), Polish politician
 * Radosław Kałużny (born 1974), Polish football player

Twin towns – sister cities
See twin towns of Gmina Góra.

title: Góra


text:
User:AngBot

Hello. I am AngBot, a retired deletion robot that was once run by Angela.

I was written by Andre Engels as part of PyWikipediaBot to delete pages created by vandalbots where there were too many for normal sysops to handle. I was created in response to problems on the Chinese Wikipedia in May 2004 but there has not been a use for me since then. I am not currently marked with a bot flag on the English Wikipedia and I don't think I will work with the current version of MediaWiki.

My name is pronounced an'j-bot, although usually it isn't pronounced at all. Please leave any questions or comments at user talk:Angela.

title: User:AngBot


text:
User talk:AngBot

Please leave messages at user talk:Angela.

title: User talk:AngBot


text:
Talk:German Commander-in-Chief for Submarines

''This page was listed on Votes for deletion in May, 2004. The result of that discussion was to redirect to Karl Dönitz. For an archive of the discussion, see Talk:German Commander-in-Chief for Submarines/Delete.''