text:
U engine

A U engine is a piston engine made up of two separate straight engines (complete with separate crankshafts) placed side-by-side and coupled to a shared output shaft. When viewed from the front, the engine block resembles the letter "U".

Although much less common than the similar V engine design, several U engines were produced from 1915 to 1987 for use in airplanes, racing cars, racing and road motorcycles, locomotives, and tanks.

Design
The main benefit of a U engine layout is the ability to share common parts with straight engine upon which is it based. Additionally, if the two crankshafts rotate in opposite directions, the gyroscopic effect of the rotating components in each cylinder bank cancel each other out.

A V engine is typically more compact and lighter than a U engine, in part due to the lack of a second crankshaft, making V engines far more common than U engines. However, the V engine does not cancel the gyroscopic effect.

The H engine layout uses a similar concept to U engines, whereby two flat engines are stacked vertically.

Petrol engines

The first U engine known to have been built was the 1915–1916 Bugatti U-16 aircraft engine, which had 16 cylinders and a displacement of 24.3 L. Approximately 40 engines were built at the Duesenberg factory in the United States during World War I. A small number of engines based on the Bugatti U engine were also produced after the war by Breguet Aviation in France.

The Fiat 806 was a 1927 Grand Prix racing car that was powered by a 1.5 L twelve-cylinder U engine. This engine, designated the 'Type 406', used a supercharger and had a single centrally-mounted intake camshaft which operated the intake valves located on the inside of each cylinder bank. Two separate camshafts operated the exhaust valves (one per bank). On test the unit delivered 187 bhp at 8,500 rpm at maximum boost. The Fiat 806 car competed in only one race, the 50 km Milan Grand Prix on 4 September 1927 (not to be confused with the 500 km 1927 Italian Grand Prix held on the same day). The race was won by the Fiat 806; however, Fiat then retired from Grand Prix racing and the Type 806 did not race again.

The 1931–1959 Ariel Square Four motorcycle used a four-cylinder engine (also called a 'square four' engine). The engine was compact and had as narrow a frontal area as a 500 cc, parallel twin. The rear pair of cylinders on this air-cooled engine were prone to overheating.

The 1985–1987 Suzuki RG500 motorcycle, and several related racing motorcycles, used a water-cooled four-cylinder U engine. Although some racing success was achieved, the road bikes did not sell well and the design was phased out in favour of a conventional inline-four engine.

Diesel
In the 1930s Sulzer Brothers Ltd. began production of an 'LD series' twelve-cylinder U engine for use in rail locomotives. The LD series was replaced by the LDA series, for a combined production period of over 50 years. The Sulzer 12LDA twin-bank engine formed the mainstay of British locomotives built in the 1960s, with over 700 used in the Peak and Class 47 locomotives. The Sulzer LDA engine used a smaller gear for the central output shaft than the two gears attached to the crankshaft. This resulted in the output shaft rotating at approximately 1000 rpm while the crankshafts rotated at approximately 750 rpm. The purpose of this gearing was to allow the use of a smaller, and lighter, electrical generator when the engine was used in a diesel-electric locomotive.

The General Motors 6046 is a twin-engine setup that was used by Sherman tanks during World War II. The 6046 was built using two straight-six engines that were separately clutched to a single output shaft, which was itself clutched to the transmission unit. A total of 10,968 6046D-powered M4A2 Shermans were produced. After World War II, several Soviet Union tanks powered by 16-cylinder and 18-cylinder engines that were reverse-engineered from the General Motors 6046 engine. These Soviet engines were designated Russkiy Dizel (Diesel Energo) DPN23/2H30 and the DRPN23/2H30.

Tandem twin engine

A tandem twin engine, occasionally used in motorcycles and go-karts, is a two-cylinder engine which uses a similar design to U engines. The motor has two crankshafts, one for each cylinder  which are joined and kept in co-ordination by load carrying, crank-phasing gears connecting the two cylinders.

The tandem twin layout is used only with two-stroke engines since these must have a discrete crankcase chamber per cylinder. The prime advantage of a tandem-twin two-stroke is that the engine can be very narrow while allowing chain final drive without a power-wasting 90° turn.

Between 1975 and 1982, Kawasaki used the design to win four 250 cc and four 350 cc world championships before they retired from Grand Prix racing. The engine design was also used for a road legal production motorcycle inspired by the racer. The Kawasaki KR models were instrumental in establishing the company as a manufacturer of high-performance motorcycles.

Rotax developed a similar tandem twin design, the model 256, which it sold to independent constructors. The CCM Armstrong 250 cc, Waddon, EMC, Hejira, Decorite, and Cotton racers used this engine. CCM Armstrong developed a 350 cc version of the engine. Aprilia's 1985 GP racing bikes also used the Rotax model 256.

Single crankshaft
An unusual variation on the U engine is the use of a single crankshaft which is linked to the pistons in both cylinder banks by rocking beams. This system was used in an eight-cylinder petrol engine produced by the All-British Car Company between 1906 and 1908.

title: U engine


text:
Talk:Squib (wizard)

Redirect
Is this page really necessary? I think a redirect to the 'Squib' entry in Magic in Harry Potter would be preferable to avoid duplication. neatnate 18:35, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree, and have made the move. Kevyn 22:54, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Squib (wizard)


text: User talk:209.247.222.30

title: User talk:209.247.222.30


text:
Old Gaol Building (Ingwavuma)

The Old Gaol Building is a historic wood and iron building dating from the 1900s in Ingwavuma, KwaZulu-Natal Province, South Africa. The building is located near the welfare buildings. In 2004, the building was restored as part of a project run by Nansindlela School. H.C. Lugg, Chief Native Commissioner of Natal in the 1930s, described the Old Gaol as it was in 1920 in his book A Natal Family Looks Back as follows:

"The gaol, like the court house, was also constructed of wood and iron. One day its walls were blown down, but soon re-erected by the convicts.  Any attempt by a prisoner to escape, was followed by a hue and cry in which the convicts took part, never failing to get their man."

title: Old Gaol Building (Ingwavuma)


text: User talk:209.247.222.34

title: User talk:209.247.222.34


text:
Maritime identification digits

Maritime identification digits are used by radio communication facilities to identify their home country or base area in digital selective calling (DSC), Automatic Transmitter Identification System (ATIS), and Automatic identification system (AIS) messages as part of their Maritime Mobile Service Identities. The International Telecommunication Union facilitates the assignment of MIDs to countries. Note that not all countries have MIDs; those without are typically landlocked, with no access to international waters. Sorting MID assignments in numerical order reveals a regional structure, with the first digit:
 * 2 assigned to Europe,
 * 3 to North America and the Caribbean,
 * 4 to Asia (except the southeast),
 * 5 to the Pacific and Eastern Indian Oceans and Southeast Asia,
 * 6 to Africa, the Atlantic Ocean and Western Indian Ocean, and
 * 7 to South America.

Useful Sites

 * MID Mappings to ISO 3166 Country Codes

title: Maritime identification digits


text: User talk:216.37.190.111

title: User talk:216.37.190.111


text:
U16

U16 may refer to:

Naval vessels

 * GERMAN SUBMARINE U-16, various vessels
 * HMS Amethyst (U16), a Black Swan-class sloop of the Royal Navy
 * HMS Grimsby (U16), a Grimsby-class sloop of the Royal Navy
 * SM U-16, a submarine of the Austro-Hungarian Navy

Other uses

 * Bugatti U-16, an automobile engine
 * Cubitruncated cuboctahedron
 * Small nucleolar RNA SNORD16
 * Uint16_t, an 16-bit unsigned integer
 * Uppland Runic Inscription 16
 * U16, or under-16, a type of basketball tournament by FIBA

title: U16


text:
Mukataa

Mukataa (مقاطعة) is an Arabic word for headquarters or administrative center, particularly in Palestine. Mukataas were mostly built during the British Mandate as Tegart forts and were used both as British government centers and as dwellings for the British administrative staff. Some Mukataas also included police stations and prisons. After the British left, the buildings often functioned similarly under the Jordanians, and then the Israelis.

After the Oslo Accords, the Mukataas were used as governmental offices and headquarters for the Palestinian National Authority. The Mukaatas in Ramallah and Gaza, the two major Palestinian cities, were also used as headquarters to the high Palestinian Authority leadership, including as office for Yasser Arafat, long-time Palestinian Authority president.

During Operation Defensive Shield in April 2002, the Israeli Defence Forces raided the Mukataas in the West Bank. Some Mukataas, including the Mukataa in Hebron, were entirely demolished.

Arafat's compound
The Mukataa in Ramallah, built in the 1930s during the British Mandate by the British engineer Sir Charles Tegart, was a military headquarters, a court of law and a prison. In May 1948, Jordan took over, and used the compound again as a prison and as a residence for Jordanian army officers and their families. From the occupation in 1967 it was the Israeli military headquarters, until the establishment of the Palestinian Authority in 1994. In 1996, Arafat moved in and the Mukataa became the official West Bank headquarters, known as Arafat's compound.

Israeli siege of March 2002
On 29 March 2002, the Israel Defense Forces raided the compound and placed it under siege during Operation Defensive Shield. The Israeli army destroyed the offices of three security services, along with a VIP guesthouse, a prison, sleeping quarters for guards, a large kitchen, a car repair shop and a large meeting hall.

The siege was lifted on 2 May after six men wanted by Israel – four of them convicted of involvement in the October 2001 assassination of the Israeli tourism minister Rehavam Ze'evi – were moved to a prison in Jericho to be guarded by U.S. and British wardens. The US-brokered plan was to enable Israel to avoid angering the United States over the Israeli Cabinet decision to bar a UN fact-finding mission from investigating allegations surrounding Israeli army actions in Jenin refugee camp during Operation Rampart. Although the military had withdrawn from the compound, the cities and refugee camps in the West Bank remained surrounded by Israeli troops.

Siege of 6 June 2002
On 6 June 2002, the IDF executed a new siege after having attacked the headquarters with tanks, bulldozers and armored vehicles. Arafat's office building was partly destroyed, besides other parts of the compound. The attack was a retaliation for a suicide bombing carried out by Islamic Jihad.

While Arafat was building a new Cabinet, the Israeli army five days later strengthened the siege on his headquarters with the support of US President George W. Bush. The White House rejected Egypt's call for a quick timetable for Palestinian statehood and Bush hinted that an international conference was a long way off, "because no one has confidence in the emerging Palestinian government."

Siege of September 2002

After a suicide bombing struck Tel Aviv on 19 September 2002, the Mukataa was again placed under siege. During the next ten days, the IDF destroyed all of the buildings that had survived the former sieges with bulldozers and explosives, including the main interior ministry building. Only part of the building where Arafat and his people remained was left.

The siege re-ignited Palestinian support for Yasser Arafat. On 24 September 2002, the UN Security Council demanded an end of the siege, but Israel ignored the Resolution.

UN Under-Secretary-General Terje Rød-Larsen, one of the architects of the Oslo Accords, said on 27 September that "the Israeli army's siege of Yasser Arafat amid the ruins of his bulldozed presidential compound could mean 'the death' of hopes for a Palestinian state and a peace agreement." He alluded to the possible death of the two-state solution and said that "we're moving in the direction of state destruction and not state-building".

On 11 September 2003, the Israeli security Cabinet decided to "remove" Arafat, who still remained in the besieged compound. In a statement it said: "Recent days' events have proven again that Yasser Arafat is a complete obstacle to any process of reconciliation... Israel will act to remove this obstacle in the manner, at the time, and in the ways that will be decided on separately...." The compound remained under siege until Arafat's transfer in October 2004, for medical care in a French hospital.

Temporary burial-place of Arafat

In the early days of November, when it was clear his death was near, several locations were mentioned as possible burial sites. Jerusalem was the first choice, but Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said he would not allow this.

Following Arafat's death on 11 November 2004, the Palestinian leadership decided that he was to be "temporarily" interred in the Mukataa compound, pending the establishment of a Palestinian state and the transfer of his body to the Dome of the Rock compound on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. Plans for Arafat to lie in state at the Mukataa prior to burial were canceled, because thousands of emotional mourners overwhelmed Palestinian security forces. Arafat was buried within the compound on 12 November, in a temporary manner. On 11 November 2007, a larger tomb clad in Jerusalem stone, and designed by Palestinian architects opened to the public. The message on the tomb indicated that the final resting place of Arafat shall be in Jerusalem, if it comes under Palestinian control.

title: Mukataa


text: User talk:219.77.226.227

title: User talk:219.77.226.227


text:
Talk:Aristides Pereira

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Aristides Pereira. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160918225323/http://asemana.sapo.cv/spip.php?article71071 to http://asemana.sapo.cv/spip.php?article71071

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:36, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Aristides Pereira


text:
Talk:Legend of the Red Dragon

Cleaning up and expanding
Alright, I've been working on and cleaning up this article and well, due to an upcoming change in version 4.07 (as noted here), the weapons and armor are going to become editable. The reason I note this is that someone has done a full list of both in the article. For now, I am going to delete the list, replacing it instead with a note about the upcoming change. Eric42 03:52, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Celebrities
Wow! We've had both Seth Robinson and Micheal Preslar here at Wiki editing this entry. For those who don't know (and thus, never read the actual entry), Seth Robinson is the creator of the game and Micheal Preslar is the current maintainer. Quite nifty actually.

 * Actually, this is a problem. Before today this article contained many sections which were either POV, software documentation, or arguably self-promotional in nature. Please review What Wikipedia is not -- it is highly problematic for either the original creator of LORD or for its current maintainer to contribute to this article without it becoming biased or unencyclopedic. While I deeply appreciate the contributions that Robinson and Preslar have made to the LORD software (and indeed to the history of bulletin board systems), it is not appropriate for them to contribute to this article. --G0zer 10:16, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Can you point to any particular change which is attributable to Michael or Seth that exhibits the sort of problems you describe? --Hawke666 00:59, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm mostly referring to the addition of unverifiable claims about future versions of the software. —ptk✰fgs 01:07, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Memories
Oh, corks! I remember this game. The twelve levels, the ShadowStormWarrior, the armor and weapons, scribbling in the Dark Cloak Tavern, using the fairy to pick the lock...has it been so long? I only have the most fleeting of memories of LORD. Evidently, some people are still selling it (?!). I'm surprised that the original is not freely available, or else I would have downloaded it straightaway and run it on dosemu. --Ardonik 18:41, 2004 Aug 4 (UTC)

-- Lord was a very special doorgame, in a very special time.

I met friends while playing lord, that i still have today.

It probably goes without saying that lord was the most successful doorgame of all time [in many aspects].

-oblivious-
 * Unfortunately, 24.209.116.148, your recent edits have completely ravaged this article. Instead of cleaning up its content, you removed most of it, turning the article back into a stub.  I'm going to revert your change and put a cleanup tag on the top of the article. (doesn't look like cleanup is necessary; the article looks okay to me, if a little rough around the edges.)  --Ardonik.talk* 15:37, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

- i'm sorry you feel that way ardonik, but having played the doorgame since 1992, i felt that preslar's recent additions to the entry were extremely biased and 'chocked full' of redundant content.. ie:pasting the entire weapon/armor/etc lists...

i was also unhappy about him slamming the igms[in game modules] which really made the l.o.r.d doorgame so very interesting and popular! without them, all you could do is visit the forest, kill something there, kill sleeping players, goto the bank..buy new weapons and armor.... not much to it, if you want to play it more than once! :D

but i sort of agree with you, i did chop out a bit too much, i was feeling a little bit guilty and i loaded up the wayback machine, and i was going cut and paste the original here... but i see you reverted the article, so all is well..

sometimes i let my anger get the best out of me... l.o.r.d was a great way to meet people in my area, and we had a lot of fun. i feel bad that it's developement has been taking over by someone that i truly believe does not care about the project. [sorry z, that's the way other lord lovers and i've really felt about it all along]

--

Dont care about the game? I care about it a lot more than anyone could ever realize. Something else that a lot of people dont realize is that I have a family and a dayjob that both take priority over my hobby programming. Lord does, and always will, hold a special place in my heart, but paying my bills, and spending time with my 1.5 year old son are more important to me right now.

But for those that are wondering. 4.07 dos/win32/nix are very close to being done. It all depends on beta testing. People that run the binaries never report problems. (I'll leave one in on purpose just to see if theyre paying attention).. So really. Once I know that they game is as bug free as I can make it for now, it will be released.

Michael -- I too have memories of playing LORD. It was back in the time when MBNet (MikroBitti's BBS) still ran on a telephone-based system instead of the Internet. So I set my modem to dial to the BBS and played LORD. I remember being quite an irritating newbie at it... J I P | Talk 08:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

where to download and play the game
http://lord.lordlegacy.com/downloads/ is the download site on Michael's website. Also on Michael's website at http://lord.lordlegacy.com/converse.php is a link to a place where you can play the game!

Most bbses have this excellent doorgame installed. Here's some bbs lists and bbs related sites to get you started:

thebbs.org:THE largest bbs related site (l.o.r.d author is involved with operators)

Synchronet BBS software's networked bbs list (updated daily)

The BBS Corner's telnet bbs list (over 400 listings but not all have L.O.R.D.)

Over 100 Telnettable BBSs with registered L.O.R.D. John Elson ★ 3Dham ★  WF6I A.P.O.I. 22:43, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Legend of the Green Dragon
What happened to the Legend of the Green Dragon article? I can't find any deletion logs or any evidence that it even existed. X-Kal 07:50, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh. COuld we start a new one? It's a popular game, after all. 124.189.211.26 (talk) 22:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Aha, someone replied! There used to be one that was deleted, due to a lack of notability. Unfortunately, I can't seem to get a firm enough understanding of Wikipedia's policies to know more detailed reasons than that, and I would fear that the new article would be deleted faster than I can say "create new article." Perhaps someone more experienced in Wikipedia could help me work on how to get the article back, and how to change it so that it stays? It is certainly notable enough - it just needs to meet guidelines and policies. X-Kal (talk) 08:26, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

That'd be because the people that run wikipedia are idiots. More people (nowdays) have probably heard of LotGD over LotRD, but who cares? as long as it makes sense to the 5 or so people in charge, what does it matter what 5000 odd people think? Wikipedia is a free range website for all ideas and good things? bollocks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.0.217.95 (talk) 04:25, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

There is a big article in the german wikipedia (de:Legend of the Green Dragon), a wiki that is known for quick deletion of everything that is not relevant enough. The green dragon should also be relevant enough for the english wikipeda (no, it isn't a german game). However, this shouldn't be decided by somebody judging by the very similar name, that the games are nearly identical, which is nonsense. I am a native speaker of german, but I have not enough insight in the topic to re-create the article Legend of the Green Dragon. By the way, I found out about this issue beeing forwared from the green dragon to the red one, without even mentioning the green dragon in the introduction. --JonnyJD (talk) 14:45, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Actually, there is a quite good version here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Legend_of_the_Green_Dragon&oldid=168365447 I just don't have the time now to argue the relevancy. --JonnyJD (talk) 11:59, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Legend_of_the_Green_Dragon_(second_nomination) the LoGD article was supposed to be merged into this one. I think anyone should feel free to add a LoGD section to this article, but don't recreate an article just for it. PuerExMachina (talk) 19:18, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

 * I'll gladly merge any LoGD information that can be attributed to an independent, reliable source (WP:V). Marasmusine (talk) 19:49, 23 May 2009 (UTC)

It is pretty obvious that it is notable enough to justify a separate article, and a link from this article "see also", not merely a section within this article. The game is quite different from LORD, and it has to be so that it doesn't violate any LORD copyrights. You'll note that Kool-Aid and Flavor Aid have separate articles even though they are essentially the same thing, just made by different companies. LOGD and LORD are different not only in name but in game play as well and are made by different people. There is far more difference between LOGD and LORD than between Kool-Aid and Flavor Aid! Note also that TLORD and WTLORD are variations authorized the original author and have similar gameplay, whereas the game play of LOGD is deliberately different because it was neither written nor authorized by the original author and it has to be substantially different for legal reasons. John Alan Elson ★  WF6I A.P.O.I. 21:48, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Open-source status of Legend of the Green Dragon
Due to the recent revert, I feel that I need an explanation as to why Legend of the Green Dragon is no longer open source. The license agreement requires that all source code of the software and third-party modifications be available upon request, and it is publicly available at the modding community's site, http://dragonprime.net - since when did Creative Commons and open source negate each other? X-Kal (talk) 06:46, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Creative Commons is not definitely open source or free, since it includes even licenses which prohibit modification (or only minor modifications, like CC Sampling+) and commercial use at the same time.
 * See Open source, Open source software and item 1 of the definition.
 * --AVRS (talk) 11:31, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Check, check, check. Legend of the Green Dragon fits all criteria listed in the definition, and upon skimming the other two articles, it seems to fit those, too.  What about this specific software appears that it's not open-source, then?  The Creative Commons licenses have variations that allow for closed-source projects, for projects that do not allow modifications and derivations, but also do seem to have room for open-source projects such as this one.  You're citing that it's possible to prohibit modifications under certain variations of the Creative Commons license, but this instance doesn't even have that kind of restriction.  The *only* thing I might come up with is that the Creative Commons by-nc-sa license prohibits commercial use - "You may not exercise any of the rights granted to You in Section 3 above in any manner that is primarily intended for or directed toward commercial advantage or private monetary compensation."  If that's it, I don't think that's enough to revoke it's open source status.  If there's something else going on, I'm clearly missing it. X-Kal (talk) 07:18, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

 * OSD criterion (sp?) #1 is what I mean — the software must be sellable royalty-free as a part of an aggregate distribution. Also criterion #6: “may not restrict the program from being used in a business” --AVRS (talk) 10:16, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Removal of notability tag
Removed the notability tag, as it was most likely placed by someone who never used BBSes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.119.155 (talk) 09:20, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
 * I have re-added the notability tag, as the article still does not explain how this game meets the general notability guideline. Marasmusine (talk) 10:04, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia idiocy
I love how wikipedia claims to be the sum total of all human knowledge, yet for some reason pursues an endless quest to remove all knowledge. This game is notable. Ask ANYONE who has ever used a BBS in the 1990's, they will know what LORD is. I'm sorry if all the publications from back then are practically impossible to find now, and I'm sorry that BBS's flew under the mainstream radar for a long time, but it's notable, and the notability tag will only lead to one thing: deletion. I've seen it a hundred times. To those of you who keep putting the tag on, you're destroying wikipedia. So go ahead and keep deleting articles, you're only ruining the site. And yet somehow the thousands of unsourced pokemon pages remain... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.251.160.34 (talk) 01:45, 28 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If it's notable, then WP:PROVEIT. Notability and Verifiability are inclusion criteria on Wikipedia. This means that every article must be based on reliable, third-party published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy, whether or not the subject's notability is blatantly obvious to you or anyone else. And for what it's worth, I used BBSs in the 1990s and I've never heard of this game. Anyone else feel like reverting? I don't want to run afoul of WP:3RR. Wyatt Riot (talk) 05:39, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Removing the notability template is harmful to the article, as it means that it's less likely that someone will add a citation to one of the "publications from back then". Also note that "word of mouth" isn't a notability criteria, and no-one is currently thinking of taking the article to deletion discussion. Would you prefer the less-harsh Template:Importance. ? Marasmusine (talk) 18:20, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Platforms
The article states "The software is compatible with DOS, Microsoft Windows, and OS/2." - yet later in the article it is mentioned that an extension was being made first for Amiga. A quick search on Google and I find information about Robinson having indeed released an Amiga version. Does anyone with more definite knowledge feel like adding which platforms it was made available for? 87.157.44.134 (talk) 11:53, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Single female players giving birth
Although it doesn't happen often, single female players do sometimes give birth, though male players they've flirted with don't get any children that way. John Elson ★ 3Dham ★  WF6I A.P.O.I. 22:38, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

WTLORD features incorporated into DOS L.O.R.D.? *not*
Robinson was impressed with this port and used some of its features in later releases of LORD. Though the reference does actually say that I would like to know what, if any, features from WTLORD were incorporated into DOS L.O.R.D. My FAQ highlights differences between the two and also notes the fact that several features of DOS L.O.R.D are missing in WTLORD (such as Olivia and Jennie codes).

Olivia herself was an advertisement for a 3rd party IGM called "Wizardstone" which never came out and at least one game feature, the Blackjack game, was from that IGM, but I have yet to come across a feature from WTLORD that was incorporated into DOS L.O.R.D. John Elson ★ 3Dham ★  WF6I A.P.O.I. 20:20, 19 May 2013 (UTC)

Since there is no discussion on this it would appear that there is little interest, but I have done further research and believe it is time this was changed. To make this discussion better organized I will present it as "points"

 * 1) The source given is an article in an online magazine and although parts of it appear to be based on an actual interview, containing quotes from Robinson, much of it appears to be from memory, and is thus no more authoritative than a blog entry from a seasoned veteran player. The statement in question in particular, gives no references and seems to have come out of thin air.
 * 2) The statement is way too vague and is not elaborated on. Though it says "several features" it doesn't name the features or even give a single example.
 * 3) The actual statement in the article is: "The second was written by Joe Marcelletti in 1996 for Wildcat BBS systems. Marcelletti's implementation was so good that Robinson ended up using some features from it in his next version." Version 3.55 came out on 12/17/95, with the Olivia and the men/maidens in distress events already included. WTLORD didn't come out until 1996, so no feature in that version could have come from WTLORD. The next version produced by Robinson was version 4.0.
 * 4) The only new feature (aside from tweaks and bug fixes) in 4.0 is the Black Jack game event which came from the never released IGM "Wizard Stone" The statement by Robinson on this is: Took a REALLY nice BlackJack game that Shawn Teal made for his IGM Wizardstone (he has scrapped the IGM since) and made it a random event in LORD.  I recolored some stuff to make the color scheme fit and changed a few small things in it.
 * 5) The only other version produced by Robinson after WTLORD was released was 4.0a, the last Robinson version, which contained no new features aside from tweaks and bug fixes. So the only new feature introduced by Robinson after the release of WTLORD was the blackjack game which Robinson himself attributes to Wizardstone, not WTLORD. In fact, the game docs don't even mention WTLORD, let alone credit it for inspiring new features.
 * 6) The next version after 4.0a was 4.02, which was not written by Robinson, but by Michael Preslar as were all subsequent versions.

Thus we can see that, aside from being poorly sourced and vague, the statement is demonstrably false. Accordingly, it will be deleted. John Alan Elson ★  WF6I A.P.O.I. 16:38, 6 September 2015 (UTC)

Note that the article only says "next version" it doesn't say next version what! It entirely possible that the article was referring to the next version of TLORD rather than the next version of LORD, since TLORD does contain the Jabber room, which doesn't exist in LORD and it also lacks Jennie codes, just like WTLORD. The article is vague not only in regard to the features it references but also in whether it was talking about TLORD or LORD. However, if you look at the statement in the context of the article, it is clear that is is, indeed, talking about TLORD, not LORD. John Alan Elson ★  WF6I A.P.O.I. 21:00, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

Here is what the article actually says:

'The game soon spawned numerous spin-offs. The first was a tournament version Robinson wrote for MBBS/Worldgroup named Tournament LoRD, which sold for $300 per copy. The second was written by Joe Marcelletti in 1996 for Wildcat BBS systems. Marcelletti's implementation was so good that Robinson ended up using some features from it in his next version.'

So you can see that the most obvious interpretation is that the author is referring to the next version of TLORD, not LORD and that makes sense because the last version of TLORD has several features found in WTLORD but not in LORD. John Alan Elson ★  WF6I A.P.O.I. 21:18, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

 * Hey, Seth here. Yeah, I think the interviewer misunderstood what I said about WTLORD.  I think I've only ever played it once, for maybe 10 minutes as I called Joe's website to test it.  His implementation was good enough that I would allow it to be an official port. (We'd signed a contract where I had to give an OK before that could happen)  I didn't play it enough to know how well it handled the tricky live duel/chat that T-LORD could though, I suspect given the limitations of wcCode (I later wrote something with wcCode, it's...bad) it couldn't hold a candle to T-LORD for Worldgroup which was written in C though.

 * I think a single feature of T-LORD DID come from WTLORD though. The "horse event", where you could get a horse and sometimes it would help you out in battle at the cost of its life. I won't edit the article (bad form because I'm in it!) and I don't know if a comment on here means anything (probably not), but there ya go, my two cents. Mrfun (talk) 03:22, 2 July 2019 (UTC)

 * Please Mrfun, tell me what you know about the horse event? It's been so long, I don't know if I remember it correctly.
 * ProphetZarquon (talk) 03:09, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * HiProphetZarquon, there are a few 'horse events' in the game. Sometimes, in the forest, you run across someone who will offer to buy or sell you a horse. Sometimes, you'll get a horse from a fairy blessing. You can use your horse to get to Dark Horse Tavern in the woods any time you want. Horses don't really help in battle, though. If you have one, occasionally, an enemy will throw a "crystal" at you and your horse will step in to block it.  When that happens, your horse dies and you, in a blind rage, will kill whatever it is that you were fighting.  This is really just a way for the game to take your horse away.  Sometimes it happens when fighting the Red Dragon, which makes the battle very easy.  Players call this an HK, for 'horse kill', but this was patched in version 4.07 76.190.231.25 (talk) 21:37, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Legend of the Red Dragon


text: User talk:69.156.50.69

title: User talk:69.156.50.69


text:
Abraham van Riebeeck

Abraham van Riebeeck (18 October 1653 – 17 November 1713) was a merchant with the Dutch East India Company and the Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies from 1709 to 1713.

Biography
Abraham van Riebeeck was born on 18 October 1653 in the Dutch Cape Colony (present-day South Africa). His father was Jan van Riebeeck, commander of the Cape, and his mother was Maria van Riebeeck. When his father moved to Batavia in the Dutch East Indies (present-day Indonesia) in 1662, he sent Van Riebeeck and his brother to Holland. He studied law at Leiden University from 1673 to 1676.

After his studies, he became a merchant with the Dutch East India Company and travelled on the ship De Vrijheyt to Batavia, where he arrived 1677.

He married Elisabeth van Oosten in 1678. They had six children, Johanna Maria (1679–1759), Johannes (1691–1735), Elisabeth (1693–1723), and three others who died in their childhood.

He was Governor-General of the Dutch East Indies from 1709 until his death in 1713. He was a keen explorer, who undertook several smaller and a few larger voyages in the Indies. In 1712, he managed to land in Palabuhanratu and grow coffee plants with success.

Death
After he became the first person to reach the summit of Tangkuban Perahu, Van Riebeeck contracted dysentery on his way home. He was unable to recover from the disease and died on 17 November 1713 in Batavia in the Dutch East Indies.

title: Abraham van Riebeeck


text:
Sherm Lollar

John Sherman Lollar Jr. (August 23, 1924 – September 24, 1977) was an American professional baseball player and coach. He played in Major League Baseball as a catcher from 1946 to 1963, most prominently as a member of the Chicago White Sox where he was a perennial All-Star player and was an integral member of the American League pennant-winning team.

Although he was often overshadowed by his contemporary, New York Yankee catcher Yogi Berra, Lollar was considered to be one of the best catchers in the major leagues during the 1950s. Lollar began his career playing for the Cleveland Indians, New York Yankees, and the St. Louis Browns where he earned his first All-Star berth however, he blossomed as a player while with the White Sox. He was an American League All-Star for seven seasons. In 1957, Lollar received the first Rawlings Gold Glove Award for the catcher position in Major League Baseball.

Lollar became a coach in the major leagues and managed at the minor league level after his MLB playing career ended. He was chosen for the Chicago White Sox All-Century Team on September 30, 2000.

Biography
Lollar was born in Durham, Arkansas in the rural Ozark mountains. He was a batboy for the Fayetteville, Arkansas Class D minor league team in the Arkansas–Missouri League in the 1930s. In 1943 Lollar was signed as an 18-year-old by the Baltimore Orioles, which then was a minor league franchise in the International League. In 1945 he hit 34 home runs and led the International League with a .364 batting average, winning the league's Most Valuable Player award. Baltimore had a working agreement with the Cleveland Indians, and sold Lollar to the Indians after the 1945 season.

Cleveland Indians (1946)
Lollar made his major league debut on April 20, 1946. He was a backup catcher for the Cleveland Indians behind catchers Frankie Hayes and then Jim Hegan. His playing time as a third string catcher was minimal so, he requested to be sent back to the minor leagues.

New York Yankees (1947–1948)
Lollar was traded to the New York Yankees along with Ray Mack after the 1946 season, and competed with Yogi Berra in 1947 for the Yankee catching job. Both Lollar and Berra were considered excellent hitting prospects but defensive liabilities, although both eventually would become outstanding receivers. Lollar started two games in the 1947 World Series for the Yankees against the Brooklyn Dodgers and went 3 for 4 with two doubles. Yankee coach and Hall of Fame catching great, Bill Dickey, advised the Yankees that Berra's left-hand bat was more suited to the dimensions of Yankee Stadium (301'-457'-461'-407'-296' LF-LCF-CF-RCF-RF) than Lollar's right-hand bat. During the 1948 season, Lollar suffered a hand injury due to a foul tip, resulting in limited action for the rest of the year.

St. Louis Browns (1949–1951)
Lollar was traded to the St. Louis Browns and replaced Les Moss as their starting catcher for the 1949 season. In 1950, Lollar was hitting .314 in mid-July and earned his first of seven All-Star selections (nine total games). He ended the season hitting .280 with a career-high .391 on-base percentage. In 1951, Lollar hit .252 for the season and was traded to the White Sox that November.

Chicago White Sox (1952–1963)
In 1952, Lollar took over the season's regular catching job for the White Sox from catcher Phil Masi. His defensive skills improved under the tutelage of manager and former major league catcher Paul Richards. Lollar, whom Richards called "a manager on the field", was a quiet workhorse who led by example and was an excellent handler of pitchers. In 1954, after allowing a stolen base to Al Smith on May 25, he threw out all 18 would-be base stealers during the remainder of the year. He became a mainstay behind the plate for the Go-Go White Sox teams of the 1950s and early 1960s, which included future Hall of Fame members Luis Aparicio, Nellie Fox, George Kell, Hoyt Wilhelm, and Early Wynn.

Described as a dangerous hitter with power in Who's Who in Baseball History, Lollar played most of his career in cavernous Comiskey Park, whose dimensions were 352'-415'-352' LF-CF-RF. He tied a major League record on April 23, 1955 when he got hits twice in two different innings of the same game. Lollar never struck out more than 50 times in a season and walked more than he struck out in each of the 15 seasons he played after becoming an every day player. His career on-base percentage was higher than Berra's (.357 versus .348). He hit a career-high .293 with 28 doubles in 1956.

The White Sox finished in third place for five consecutive seasons until 1957, when the Sox held first place until late June, before finishing the season in second place behind the Yankees. Lollar won the first Gold Glove Award for catcher in, which initially had one recipient per position for both leagues. That year he caught Bob Keegan's no-hitter on August 20. In 1958, the White Sox would battle back from being in last place on June 14 to once again finish the season in second place behind the Yankees. Lollar led the team with 20 home runs and 84 runs batted in.

In 1959, the White Sox won their first American League pennant since the Black Sox scandal in, finishing the regular season five games ahead of the Cleveland Indians. Lollar helped guide the White Sox pitching staff to the lowest earned run average in the American League. He also led the team once again with a career-high 22 home runs and 84 runs batted in and winning his third consecutive Gold Glove Award. He had 5 hits and 5 runs batted in, including a home run, in the 1959 World Series, as the White Sox were defeated by the Los Angeles Dodgers in a six-game series.

Lollar remained the White Sox starting catcher through the 1962 season. In 1962, he fractured his thumb on June 20 when he was hit by a pitch by Ted Sadowski of the Minnesota Twins. He did not return until July 25, and appeared in only 84 total games during the season. Lollar retired from playing at the end of the 1963 season at the age of 38.

Ned Garver enjoyed working with Lollar, recalling that he would often pitch entire games throwing the first pitch Lollar flashed a sign for.

Hall of Fame eligibility
In The Case for Those Overlooked by the Baseball Hall of Fame, published in 1992, Lollar was named as one of 32 former major league players considered worthy of Hall of Fame consideration. Seven of the book's players have since been enshrined in the Hall of Fame: Richie Ashburn, Orlando Cepeda, Larry Doby, Nellie Fox, Bill Mazeroski, Hal Newhouser, and Ron Santo. Lollar is one of 36 catchers who are portrayed in Thomas Owens’ Great Catchers.

Lollar is currently eligible to be identified as a Golden Era ballot candidate in November 2017 by the Baseball Writers' Association of America's-appointed Historical Overview Committee (screening committee of 10-12 BBWAA members). If he is selected for the Golden Era ballot list of 10 candidates, he is eligible for consideration for election to the Hall of Fame in December 2017 by the 16-member Golden Era Committee, under the Hall of Fame's, Golden Era rules for election for players.

MLB stats and highlights
In an eighteen-year major league career, Lollar played in 1,752 games, accumulating 1,415 hits in 5,351 at bats for a .264 career batting average along with 155 home runs, 808 runs batted in and a .357 on-base percentage. A seven-time All-Star, Lollar led American League catchers in fielding percentage four times over his career. In 1961, he committed only one error over the entire season. At the time of his retirement in 1963, Lollar's .992 career fielding percentage was the highest for a catcher in major league history. During his career, Lollar threw out 46.18% of the base runners who tried steal a base on him, ranking him 5th on the all-time list. He caught 110 shutouts during his career, ranking him 21st all-time among major league catchers. At the time of his retirement in 1963, he ranked 9th all-time in career home runs by catchers.

 * All Star (AL): 1950, 1955, 1956, 1958, 1959-2, 1960-2
 * American League leader in fielding percentage for catcher: 1951, 1953, 1956, 1960, 1961
 * Gold Glove Award (ML): 1957
 * Gold Glove Award (AL): 1958, 1959
 * Major League record: .992 fielding average as catcher
 * Chicago White Sox All-Century Team: 2000

Coaching and minor league managing career
Lollar was hired as the bullpen coach for the Baltimore Orioles on November 27, 1963. He remained in that capacity through the 1966 World Series championship season until the announcement on September 28, 1967, that he would not be retained for the 1968 season. He subsequently was a coach for the Oakland Athletics in 1968, and managed the Athletics' minor league affiliates the Iowa Oaks and the Tucson Toros in the 1970s. Lollar eventually owned a bowling alley in Springfield, Missouri, where he died of cancer at age 53 on September 24, 1977.

title: Sherm Lollar


text:
User talk:Mtgops

First Thoughts
I was hoping to be able to start working on the content for the entry on Savings and Loan Association. So far, I don't believe that anyone has bothered to take that one on. More later.

Welcome, and Hybrid car
Welcome to Wikipedia. May your time here be fun and fruitful, and all that.

I just saw your post to the talk page of Hybrid car. Wikipedia is not a place where other users 'own' an article. If you know something about a topic, feel free to correct what we have. It's even better if you can provide sources and references so that others can check out your additions, but you don't have to. —Morven 20:33, Jan 7, 2005 (UTC)

Yakima, Washington
As a matter of fact, we'd appreciate it--greatly--if you would lend your time and expertise with Yakima matters to the article. Yakima's article right now is, shall we say, not one of our best. =P Anything you could do to improve it would be awesome. Happy editing! Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk? ) 04:08, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Mtgops


text:
Ong-Bak: Muay Thai Warrior

Ong-Bak: Muay Thai Warrior (องค์บาก, ), also known as Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior or simply Ong-Bak, is a 2003 Thai martial arts film directed by Prachya Pinkaew and featured action choreography by Panna Rittikrai. It stars Tony Jaa in the lead role, alongside Petchtai Wongkamlao and Pumwaree Yodkamol.

Ong-Bak proved to be Jaa's breakout film, with the actor hailed internationally as the next major martial arts star. Jaa went on to star in Tom-Yum-Goong (called The Protector in the US and Warrior King in UK) and directed and starred in two prequels of Ong-Bak titled Ong-Bak 2 and Ong-Bak 3.

Plot
An ancient Buddha statue named Ong-Bak ia kept in the village of Ban Nong Pradu in rural northeastern Thailand. The villagers fall in despair after thieves from Bangkok desecrate the statue Ong-Bak and take the head with them. Ting, a resident and Muay Thai expert, volunteers to travel to Bangkok to recover the stolen head. Ting's only lead is Don, a drug dealer who attempted to buy an amulet in Nong Pradu earlier. Upon arriving in Bangkok with a bagful of money donated by the village, Ting meets his cousin Humlae, who has dyed his hair blond and begun calling himself "George."

Humlae and his friend Muay Lek are street-bike racing hustlers who make a living out of conning yaba dealers. Reluctant to help Ting, Humlae steals Ting's money and bets it in an underground fighting tournament at a bar on Khaosan Road. Ting tracks down Humlae and gets his money back after stunning the crowd by knocking out the champion, where his extraordinary skill grabs the attention of Komtuan, a grey-haired crime lord who uses a wheelchair and needs an electrolarynx to speak. Don is the one who ordered Ong-Bak's head stolen to sell it to Komtuan, who sees no value in it and orders him to dispose of it.

The next day, Humlae and Muay Lek are chased all over town by drug dealer Peng and his gang after a botched baccarat game scam at an illegal street gambling booth. Ting fights off most of the thugs and helps Humlae and Muay Lek escape in exchange for helping him find Don. They return to the bar, where Ting wins the respect of the crowd after defeating three opponents consecutively. The trio find Don's hideout, triggering a lengthy tuk-tuk chase. The chase ends at a port in the Chao Phraya River, where Ting discovers Komtuan's cache of stolen Buddha statues submerged underwater.

After the statues are recovered by police, Komtuan sends his thugs to kidnap Muay Lek and tells Humlae to ask Ting to fight his bodyguard Saming near the Thai-Burmese border in exchange for Muay Lek and the Ong-Bak head. Ting is forced to throw the match against the drug-enhanced Saming, and Humlae throws in the towel. After the fight, Komtuan reneges on his promise to release Muay Lek and return the head, where he orders his henchmen to kill the trio. Ting and Humlae subdue the thugs and head to a mountain cave, where Komtuan's men are cutting a giant Buddha statue.

Ting defeats the remaining thugs and Saming but is shot by Komtuan, who attempts to destroy the Ong-Bak head with a sledgehammer. Humlae protects it with his body, taking the brunt of the hammer blows. The giant Buddha statue head suddenly falls, crushing Komtuan to death and critically injuring Humlae. With his dying breath, Humlae gives the Ong-Bak head to Ting and asks him to look after Muay Lek. The head is returned to Ban Nong Pradu. Humlae's ashes, carried by an ordained monk, is brought to the village in a procession on an elephant's back while the villagers, Ting and Muay Lek celebrate the return of Ong Bak's head.

Cast

 * Tony Jaa as Ting
 * Petchtai Wongkamlao as George/Humlae (as Mum Jokemok in ending credits)
 * Pumwaree Yodkamol as Muay Lek
 * Chattapong Pantana-Angkul as Saming Sibtid
 * Suchao Pongwilai as Komtuan (as Suchoa Pongvilai in ending credits)
 * Wannakit Sirioput as Don (Komtuan's henchman) (as Wannakit Siriput in ending credits)
 * Chumphorn Thepphithak as Uncle Mao (as Chumporn Teppitak in ending credits)
 * Rungrawee Barijindakul as Ngek (as Rungrawee Borrijindakul in ending credits)
 * Cheathavuth Watcharakhun as Peng (as Chetwut Wacharakun in ending credits)
 * Somjal Jonmoontee as Bodyguard 1 (as Somjai Gunmoontree in ending credits)
 * Somchai Moonma as Bodyguard 2
 * Taworn Tonapan as Bodyguard 3
 * Dan Chupong as Bodyguard 4 (as Chupong Changprung in ending credits)
 * Chaiporn Gunmoontree as Bodyguard 5
 * Don Ferguson as Bodyguard 6
 * Panna Rittikrai as Nong Pradu Villager (uncredited)

Club fighters:
 * David Ismalone as Mad Dog
 * Hans Eric as Pearl Harbour
 * Paul Gaius as Lee
 * Nick Kara as Big Bear
 * Nudhapol Asavabhakhin as Toshiro
 * Taweesin Visanuyothin as Doctor Sak

Production
Ong-Bak introduced international audiences to a traditional form of muay Thai (or Muay Boran, an ancient muay Thai style), a kickboxing style that is known for violent strikes with fists, feet, shins, elbows, and knees. The fights were choreographed by Panna Rittikrai, who was also Tony Jaa's mentor and a veteran director of B-movie action films.

Jaa, who was trained in Muay Thai since childhood, wanted to make the film in order to bring Muay Thai to the mainstream. He and Panna struggled to raise money to produce a demo reel to drum up interest for the making of the film. Their first reel was made on expired film stock, so they had to raise more money and start over. During the foot chase through the alleys, there is writing on a shop house door that reads "Hi Speilberg, let do it together" [sic]. This refers to the director's desire to someday work with Steven Spielberg. During the tuk-tuk chase, a pillar on the left side of the screen reads: "Hi, Luc Besson, we are waiting for you". The French producer-director's company, EuropaCorp, would go on to purchase the international distribution rights to the film.

Alternate versions
After Ong-Bak became a hit in Thailand, sales rights for outside Asia were purchased by Luc Besson's EuropaCorp, which in turn re-edited the film. Most of the subplot involving Muay Lek's sister, Ngek, was removed, and the final showdown between Ting and Saming was shortened. EuropaCorp also replaced some of the score with different ones, along with adding a pair of hip-hop songs to the end credits. Contrary to popular belief, the main film score is the same in the Thai and EuropaCorp cuts. It is this version that has been made available in the United States and most of the Western world.

For the United Kingdom release, the soundtrack was rescored with an orchestral score by Richard Wells, but the film was left uncut with the subplot of Ngek. The Hong Kong cut of the film's theatrical release omits a "bone breaking" sequence toward the end, where George's arm is snapped and Ting in turn snaps the leg of a bad guy. DVD releases in Hong Kong have the scene restored.

An alternative ending offered on the Thai, U.S., Australian, and UK DVD releases has Humlae surviving. He is seen at the end bandaged up, limping, with his arm broken, supported by his parents. Prachya Pinkaew stated in an interview that although there was debate, they ultimately decided it would be appropriate for him to make a meaningful sacrifice for the village.

Alternate titles

 * In Thailand, Germany and in France, it was simply called Ong-Bak. This name was also preserved in Premier Asia's UK release.
 * For the release in Singapore, Australia and other territories, as well as film festivals, the film was released as Ong-Bak: Muay Thai Warrior.
 * In the United States, Canada and other areas, the film was released as Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior.
 * The Hong Kong English title was Thai Fist.
 * In Japan, the film was released as Mahha!!!!!!!! (マッハ!!!!!!!!) (the Japanese word for "Mach").
 * In Italy, the title was Ong-Bak: Nato per Combattere, which translates as Ong-Bak: Born to Fight.
 * In India, the title was Enter the New Dragon in reference to Bruce Lee.
 * In Mexico, the title was Ong-Bak: El Nuevo Dragón, which translates as Ong-Bak: The New Dragon, in reference to Bruce Lee.
 * In Vietnam, the title was Ong-Bak: The Hunt of the Statue of Buddha (Ong-Bak: Truy tìm tượng Phật).
 * In Brazil, the title was Ong-Bak: Sacred Warrior ("Ong-Bak: Guerreiro Sagrado").

Home media
Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior was released in the U.S. on DVD by Magnolia Pictures on August 30, 2005 and on Blu-ray Disc by 20th Century Fox on February 2, 2010.

Box office
Ong-Bak premiered as the closing film of the 2003 Bangkok International Film Festival, and then opened in a wide release in Thailand cinemas in February 2003. On February 11, 2005, the film was released in North America in 387 theatres under the title Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior. In its opening weekend, it grossed US$1,334,869 ($3,449 per screen), on its way to a US total of $4,563,167.

Critical response
Ong-bak was praised for its action sequences, especially its onrush of chase scenes, hand-to-hand combat and acrobatics, which are emphasized over its plot or characters. The action choreography drew notice for its quality, inventiveness and lack of CGI and wire-fu.

The film holds an 85% rating on Rotten Tomatoes based on 109 reviews, with the consensus being: "While Ong-Bak: The Thai Warrior may be no great shakes as a movie, critics are hailing the emergence of a new star in Tony Jaa, whose athletic performance is drawing comparisons with Bruce Lee, Jackie Chan and Jet Li". On Metacritic it has a score of 69% based on reviews from 28 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".

Combat sports and striking analyst Jack Slack stated that Ong-Bak "is perhaps the finest martial arts movie of this generation".

Prequels
After Ong-Bak became a huge worldwide hit, Jaa's name was attached to many projects. He went on to act in a small role in the Petchtai Wongkamlao vehicle, The Bodyguard (co-directed by Panna Rittikrai), and then starred in the much-anticipated Tom-Yum-Goong in 2005. Ong Bak 2, a prequel to the original film, was released in December 2008, with Jaa debuting as director.

A second prequel, Ong Bak 3, followed where the second film left off.

title: Ong-Bak: Muay Thai Warrior


text:
User:Chameleon/to do

 * Add UTF-8 Chinese to key articles.
 * Finally finish recording Chomsky article.

title: User:Chameleon/to do


text:
DVD-D

DVD-Ds, also referred to as disposable DVDs, were a type of disposable digital versatile disc/digital video disc that were designed to be used for a maximum 48 hours after the containing package is opened. After this time, the DVDs became unreadable to DVD players because they contained a chemical that, after the set period of time, will prevent the underlying data from being read by DVD drives. The medium in itself was copy protection neutral and did not require additional Digital Rights Management types of applications to be installed for the content to be accessible.

title: DVD-D


text:
User talk:Texture/Archive-2004 August

Conspiracy links?
Why are you deleting my links? You have done so twice.

One of the links was from ABC News 20/20
 * ABC News 20/20: The White Van Were Israelis Detained on Sept. 11 Spies? (June 21, 2002)

Certainly it cannot be because it is not relevance or because the source is not official, especially when you don't have an issue with the following link from a propaganda website:

 * Palestinian Authority Threatens Cameraman Prevents Broadcast of Palestinians Celebrating Attack on U.S. (September 11-13, 2001)

But for some reason you are trying to censure information that you may not like.

But please let me know perhaps you do have valid explanation and you are not just vandalizing...

 * These strange theories are only good for amusing people. They do not belong in a serious article. -  Tεx  τ  urε  18:26, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Did you even bather to read the ABC News 20/20 Article?

 * No one is accusing the "Jews" or "Israel" the article is not about that, if that is that your particular problem.

 * But the fact remains that there where five Israelis celebrating the destruction of the towers. Perhaps they where just immature people, much like the couple Palestinians filmed celebrating. But You don't seem to have a problem with that link from www.us-israel.org (a propaganda site) saying that Palestinian Authority threatens cameraman prevents broadcast of Palestinians celebrating attack, but you do have a problem with a similar piece of News about Israelis celebrating attack..

 * The Associated Press wrote articles about it at the time and the link cites the Foreign Press Association. These are documented. -  Tεx  τ  urε  19:26, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Then post the The Associated Press articles and not the propaganda site link

 * Just because you would not like people to find out about something does not mean it did not happened that way.

 * Read the article, if you know of information that contradict that article le me know, maybe you are right and I am wrong. But don't just delete the link just because you may not like what you read.

 * I read the article. It's infonews fluff about five people who filmed the attacks out of five hundred thousand who had cameras that day.  Their misfortune was that they were middle eastern.  The real news is that they were mistreated for their appearance. I'm not the first person to remove your links.  They were not "mistakenly" removed. -  Tεx  τ  urε  19:26, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes fluff, a compromise would be to remove both links, since 10 Pals celebrating among 4 millions is also fluff...

 * Texture again, if you have something to add please do so. If you believe my links are incorrect let me know. But can you please stop deleting my links just because you don't like them. That is your personal opinion, and you are entitle to it. Let people read the article and decide by them self. How would you react if I visit everything that you have posted and decided whether I like it or not and remove it base on my opinion?

 * If you don’t know, but what you are doing is vandalizing and censure base on your taste and opinion.

You appear to have no interest in compromise. Anything less than an advertisement for your website seems to inflame you and cause you to attack me personally. Please discuss this on the appropriate talk page. Apparantly you took no notice that I left the news story that I still think is fluff but you still debate it. Please don't advertise your agenda and conspiracy web site on Wikipedia. - Tεx  τ  urε  20:14, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

OK Texture Let Talk. I will not update the links anymore if we can reach an agreement. Deal? For The records deleting something that someone else wrote, just because you don't like it in YOUR OPINION is not a valid reason.

I in fact it is my opinion that the link from www.us-israel.org is not relevant to the page since it is just used to create a “conspiracy theory” where the Palestinian where somehow also responsible and it offer as proof that footage from Palestinians possible celebrating the attack may have been deleted by the PA. But hey, I believe readers will read the article and see thru them. Maybe I am wrong, but I will not DELETE like you are doing a link just because I don’t like it.

Now To my links First: Why do you believe a compromise is to add to my link the wording “Conspiracy Theory”? Especially when I am posting a link to a news article reported by ABC News 20/20. Did you even read the article? They are not talking about a theory. There in fact where 5 Israelis that where celebrating the attack and where videotaping the attack. After been question their first response was “We are not your problem, the Palestinians are” Those are the facts. Now who where they we don’t know. Probably just a couple of loser who happen to be from Israel. Like the couple of loser from Palestine that where celebrating.

The problem is that by adding the wording “Conspiracy Theory” You are stating an opinion that will make the reader create pre-judge their opinion about the article before reading the link. How would you feel about adding the word “Propaganda Site” infront of the www.us-israel.org? Would you call that a compromise?

'''Second: the Second links is as worthy as the www.us-israel.org site. But if you are willing to remove that site I would be willing to remove this site. After all Why a group of people celabrating is more newsworthy than the other if both group had nothing to with the 9/11 attack.'''

Now Explain to me what is your reasoning for your behavior.--156.153.255.210 20:55, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Do you realize that Wikipedia is a cooperative effort on all articles? Anyone can add, edit, or delete content to improve an article.  I improved the article by deleting dubious links.  I compromised and included the ABC link despite my feelings for it.  You have not compromised a bit or discussed on the Talk:September 11, 2001 attacks page so that others could comment on your opinion.  The last change I made also did not include "Conspiracy Theory" on the ABC article since I was seeking to work a compromise.  Instead you assault me again with these things despite my bending over backward to compromise with you.

 * I compromise over and over and you again and again make personal attacks that are unsubstantiated by the facts. Please direct your efforts to the appropriate talk page and gain community support if you want to continue to advertise your conspiracy web site. -  Tεx  τ  urε  21:04, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Do you realize that you are vandalizing by deleting stuff you don't agree with and preventing other people from deciding for themselves? You are not compromising by deleting one of my links. Would you call a compromise if I go around and delete half of yours?

 * I feel I have been assaulted by your constant deletion of my links just because you don't like the title. You did not even bather to read the whole article before you concluded it should not be there.

 * It is obvious that you don’t seek a compromise since you keep avoiding to give an explanation of how did you concluded the links did not belong there.

 * I have not seen you offer a single compromise or even acknowledge my attempts to do so. You keep claiming vandalism about changes that I have undone and refuse to discuss the matter on the talk page.  I've done all I can.  You can continue to attack me but until you work with me there is nothing I can do.  Obviously you have an agenda to advertise your web site and no compromise is acceptable to you. -  Tεx  τ  urε  14:45, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes there is something you could do. You can start by stop deleting the link and or tell me the real reason why you would not like other people to be exposed to related information.

 * To be honest I was introduced to wikipedia by a very naive co-worker who thinks that the idea of wikipedia was great because "every voice could be heard". Thanks to you I have been able to prove him that in this kind of "collaborative projects" there is always a bully who fells they are their "brother’s keeper" and feel they are the sole judge of what other people should read. So wikipedia instead of becoming a please where you get all the information from different sources and then your decided for yourself, it became the place where the must stubborn person (or group) push their agenda.

 * Anyway, Texture it is obvious that you, for whatever agenda you may have, feel more strongly about this than me. So if you want to delete the links go ahead. I have rested my case.

 * Peace

--156.153.255.210 15:56, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

So, if you get what you want you feel you got a compromise. I'm glad to hear this conversation is over. - Tεx  τ  urε  17:21, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Are you telling this to yourself? Because you are the one who feels that deleting one of link was a compromise...

 * Simple question and just try to answer instead of going to the tangent...

 * How would you react if I go over your stuff and delete your stuff, then say ok I will compromise and put half with a warning next to it base on my unique biases. And then if you complain say "well I was trying to be nice and compromise, but I see that there is no way to talk to you". That is what you are doing. You have no consensus on your actions you decided out of your own biases that you don't like that link and you will remove that link. Do you really don't see it?

 * BTW: I have been asking for an explanation and you keep just changing the conversation also and I did offer a compromise to remove both links the one I posted and the one from the us-israel.org, so don's say did not offer a compromised just because you like to write back before you are done reading what I wrote. Yes go back read my posts to see it I will bolded for you so it is easier to find.

 * What was your suggested compromise? Did you have one?  Or did you suggest deleting a news story supported by the Associated Press and Foreign Press Association as being somehow inaccurate? No, you refused to compromise or even discuss compromise.  I am not following you around as you suggest but rather supporting another users deletion of a link.  (Which you claimed was "mistaken".)  Go talk to that user or better yet do as you said you would and just stop. I'll be deleting this nonsense from my talk page. -  Tεx  τ  urε  17:58, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

In hopes that you learn to work with others, here is some guidance that you failed to do in this case:
 * If more than one user deletes biased links to a page you are trying to advertise it might not be just one persons opinion.
 * Compromise. I can see you have no plans to but it would be good practice for you.
 * Discuss your version on the article talk page.
 * Do not attack a user for having a different opinion from yours.
 * When a user compromises and agrees to part of your "demands" you should acknowledge it and not continue to attack them for not agreeing on those points. It makes you look bad.
 * If you have unrelated changes you want made don't try extortion to get that other change done. Make it a separate discussion.

Hope this helps you grow and learn to work with others. - Tεx  τ  urε  18:03, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Texture/Archive-2004 August


text:
Jesus in Ahmadiyya Islam

Ahmadiyya Islam considers Jesus (ʿĪsā) as a mortal man, entirely human, and a prophet of God born to the Virgin Mary (Maryam). Jesus is understood to have survived the crucifixion based on the account of the canonical Gospels, the Qurʾān, hadith literature, and revelations (waḥy and kašf) to Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. Having delivered his message to the Israelites in Judea, Jesus is understood to have emigrated eastward to escape persecution from Judea and to have further spread his message to the Lost Tribes of Israel. In Ahmadiyya Islam, Jesus is thought to have died a natural death in India. Jesus lived to old age and later died in Srinagar, Kashmir, and his tomb is presently located at the Roza Bal shrine.

Although sharing many similarities with the other Islamic views of Jesus, the Ahmadiyya teachings are distinct from the beliefs held by most mainstream Muslims, who deny the crucifixion of Jesus and believe that he ascended bodily to heaven, and will, according to Islamic literary sources, return before the end of time.

Ahmadis believe the prophecies surrounding the second advent of the messiah Jesus were fulfilled in the likeness and personality of Mīrzā G̲h̲ulām Aḥmad, who initiated the foundation of the Ahmadiyya movement.

Overview
According to Ahmadiyya beliefs, a literal interpretation of the miracles performed by ʿĪsā (Jesus) in the Qurʾān (such as creating birds and bringing back the dead to life) is inconsistent with the Quran and attributes a semi-divine status to Jesus. This understanding is replaced with a hermeneutic interpretation of the Qurʾānic verses on account of these miracles. For example, Jesus bringing the dead back to life is understood in the context of bringing back a 'spiritual life' to people who were spiritually dead.

Ahmadi scholars regard the contemporary Islamic interpretations relating to the Second Coming of Jesus (see Ahmadi prophetology) are inaccurate. Ahmadis believe that the expected return of an Israelite prophet after the Islamic prophet Muhammad contravenes the finality of Muhammad's prophethood. Traditional Muslims, however, hold the view that in his second coming - Jesus son of Mary will come as "just ruler" rather than in a prophetic capacity.

The ḥadīth prophecies of Jesus are understood in the Ahmadiyya view to be interchangeably linked with the prophecies of the coming of the Mahdi. Ahmadiyya believes that both the terms, Jesus Son of Mary and Mahdi (as used in Islamic hadith and eschatological literature), designate two titles for the same person.

History
Ahmad, in his treatise Jesus in India (Urdu: Masih Hindustan Mein), proposed that Jesus survived crucifixion and travelled to India after his apparent death in Jerusalem.

The views of Jesus having travelled to India had been put forth prior to Mirza Ghulam Ahmed's publication, most notably by Nicolas Notovitch in 1894. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad expressly rejected the theory of a pre-crucifixion visit that Notovitch had proposed, arguing instead that Jesus's travels to India took place after surviving crucifixion.

The first response in English to Ahmad's writings came in a book by Howard Walter, an Urdu-speaking American pastor in Lahore, The Ahmadiyya Movement (1918). Walter, like later scholars, identified the Islamic version of the Barlaam and Josaphat story as the primary of Ahmad's evidence despite the fact that the four chapters of his book are arranged around evidence from the Gospels, the Quran and hadith, medical literature and historical records–respectively.

In his writings Mirza Ghulam Ahmad elaborated that the Roza Bal tomb in Srinagar, that is said by locals in the Srinagar region to contain the grave of a holy Jewish saint known as Yuz Asaf, is the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth.

The teaching was further researched by Ahmadi missionaries. Kamal ud-Din and Khwaja Nazir Ahmad (1952), who added to Notovitch's theory of his first earlier visit.

Although the material of Notovitch and Ahmad has been refuted by notable historians, such as the Indologist Günter Grönbold (1985) and Norbert Klatt (1988), it has been supported by others such as the archaeologist Fida Hassnain and the writer Holger Kersten.

Other publications
Ahmadi Muslims have published extensively on the topic of Jesus' natural death expanding upon Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's work in light of newer archeological discoveries and historical research. In 1978, Mirza Nasir, the third Khalifa of the Ahmadiyya movement, travelled to London where the international conference of Jesus' Deliverance from the cross was held at the Commonwealth Institute in Kensington. This was attended by a number of scholars and academics who had presented papers discussing the circumstances surrounding the crucifixion of Jesus, in which the Ahmadiyya viewpoint regarding the death of Jesus was presented. Nasir Ahmad's lecture discussed the subject of Jesus' survival from death upon the cross, his travel to the east, the Unity of God and the status of Muhammad.

In 2003, the viewpoint of Roza Bal being Jesus' tomb was covered in a BBC documentary by Richard Denton, Did Jesus Die?. Jesus' possible travels to India are also discussed in a 2008 documentary Jesus in India by Paul Davids.

Death of Jesus
The Ahmadiyya movement advocates the notion of Jesus' survival of crucifixion through a mixture of biblical and quranic analysis.

Biblical sources

 * 1) Jesus had prophesied that his fate would be like that of Jonah (the story of Jonah is one of survival).
 * 2) Jesus was placed on the cross for only a few hours. Death by crucifixion usually takes several days. While he was on the cross his legs were left intact, and not broken as was the normal procedure. This would have prevented death by respiratory distress. As blood and water were reported to have 'gushed' from the spear wound, this was sign of a beating heart.
 * 3) Jesus prayed to be rescued from death on the cross.
 * 4) Pilate, having sympathy for Jesus, secretly devised to save him by setting his Crucifixion shortly before Sabbath day.
 * 5) The Gospel of John records that Nicodemus brought myrrh and aloes. These healing plants, particularly aloe plants, are considered medicinal and applied to wounds. It would make little sense applying them to a dead body.
 * 6) According to the Bible "He that is hanged is accursed of God."; something Paul imputed to Jesus. However, since the word "curse" would signify a satanic connection, divine antipathy and displeasure, spiritual impurity, faithlessness and disobedience to God; Jesus' being from God and the beloved of God, does not allow for him to have become accursed at any moment and therefore for him to have died on a cross.
 * 7) After he had awoken from his swoon ("resurrection"), Jesus bared his wounds to Thomas, showing he did not have a supernatural, resurrected body, but a wounded human body. He was also seen in the flesh by a large number of his followers, baring the same wounds that he had suffered from his ordeal on the Cross.
 * 8) After his wounds had sufficiently healed Jesus left the tomb and met some of his disciples and had his food with them and walked from Jerusalem to Galilee.
 * 9) In his post-crucifixion appearances, Jesus left the tomb in the darkness of night; he appears to have been moving away from the source of danger; he showed himself only to his disciples, people whom he trusted and not the general public; and met them under the cover of darkness at night. This behaviour is uncharacteristic of one who had just miraculously succeeded in defying death at the hands of his enemies, having been given a new eternal life with an immortal physical body, and is more consistent with one who had just survived it and was avoiding their (that is both the government agencies and the public) notice lest he be recaptured.
 * 10) Jesus stated that he was sent only for the "lost sheep of the house of Israel" and prophesied that he would go to seek out the Lost Ten Tribes of Israel (residing beyond the Palestine region). The Jews of Jesus's time believed that the Lost Tribes of Israel had become dispersed in different lands.
 * 11) When Joseph requested Jesus' body from the cross, Pilate asked a centurion if Jesus was already dead. The centurion confirmed that Jesus was already dead. This centurion was a believer that Jesus was the son of God.
 * 12) There are no accounts in the gospel of Jesus ascending into the heavens, aside from accounts that were absent from the earliest written gospels.

Quranic sources
Ahmadiyyas state that there are at least 30 verses of the Quran that suggest that Jesus did not ascend to Heaven but instead died a natural death on Earth. The verses in Chapter Al-Nisa (4:157-158) indicate that Jesus did not die on the Cross - but rather that God had "raised" Jesus unto God Himself (not into heaven).

As the Quran speaks of God being Omnipresent in the Earth and in the hearts of mankind, God's existence is not to be misconstrued as being confined to the Heavens alone, making any bodily movement towards God impossible. Ahmadis interpret the Arabic word raised in these verses to mean "exalted". In other words, Jesus' spiritual rank and status was raised to come closer to God as opposed to him dying the accursed death which his adversaries had wished for.

To further support the view of Jesus having died a mortal death, Ahmadis use the following verse in the Quran 5:76:

In the preceding verse, Jesus is compared to the previous Messengers – all of whom had died a natural death and none of whom had ascended bodily to Heaven.

From the following verse in Al-Imran and Al-Anbiya, the Quran clarifies that all messengers before Muhammad, including Jesus, had died:

Hadith accounts
To illustrate the death of Jesus, Ahmadiyya scholars use references to various Islamic hadith. For example,

As Muhammad had lived and died after some 60 years, Jesus must also have died. In other words, as Muhammad had died, this states that there likewise was a death of Jesus.

During the Mi'raj, Muhammad had also seen Jesus in the second heaven along with John the Baptist. Thus, because Islam believes the dead cannot dwell amongst the living, it can only indicate that Jesus must also be dead.

Second Coming of Jesus
The Ahmadiyya movement interprets the prophecised Second Coming of Jesus as being of a person "similar to Jesus" (mathīl-i ʿIsā), rather than that of Jesus of Nazareth himself. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad professed that the prophecy in traditional religious texts were greatly misunderstood to interpret that Jesus of Nazareth himself would return.

Ahmadis consider that the founder of the movement, in both his teachings and character as well as his situation and struggles, was likewise a circumstantial representation of that of Jesus's struggles.

Universal prophethood
Adherents of the Ahmadiyya movement assert that the expected arrival of a latter day Messiah is represented across all major faiths. The prophecy of the messiah historically diverged into several theories and distinct interpretations which filtered across through the world's religious movements. The original Messianic prophecy nonetheless, only referred to a single Messiah. As such, Ahmadis declare that the Messiah for all major world faiths and mankind has been unified by the advent of a single Promised Messiah (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad).

Ahmadi's believe that God will cause all world faiths to gradually fade away and gravitate towards the Ahmadiyya faith; that such a process will follow a correlative pattern of circumstances and take a similar amount of time as what it took for Christianity to rise to dominance (e.g. roughly 300 years – Seven sleepers).

Contention with mainstream Islamic beliefs
The Encyclopedia of Islam states that the post-crucifixion journey of Jesus towards the East and his natural death as an aspect of Ahmadi belief is one of three primary tenets that distinguish Ahmadi teachings from general Islamic ones, and that it has provoked a fatwa against the movement.

Last of the Prophets / Seal of the Prophets
Contemporary Muslim scholars argue that no prophet can come after Muhammed based upon abstractions from the hadith and this is the principal reason for rejecting and advocating persecution against the movement.

Ahmadi scholars use hadith and the quranic sources that indicate these strictly rigid ideologies are a fallacy of misplaced concreteness. The following hadith for instance illustrates the context of when Muhammad had declared himself to be the "last of the prophets", with the same breath he had also declared his mosque as the "last" of the mosques.

This hadith implicates the rhetoric of Muhammad being the "last" in the absolute sense. If for instance Muhammad declared his mosque as being "last" of the mosques by the same interpretation this would have invalidated all subsequent mosques that have ever been built after his advent.

The Ahmadiyya understanding of the term Khatam an-Nabiyyin (Seal of Prophets) with reference to Muhammad, establishes that a prophet cannot come after Muhammad from outside the Islamic dispensation. In other words, one whose prophethood which is independent of Muhammad cannot develop a new faith.

Contemporary Muslims interpret from the hadith the notion of Jesus's actual physical return in person after the advent of Muhammad. According to the Quran, Jesus' revelation was addressed for the Israelites. Since Jesus had received his revelation independently of Muhammad, this would conversely violate the Seal of Prophethood of Muhammed altogether.

Thus Ahmadis regard that, as Ghulam Ahmad was only a follower and reviver of the original Islamic faith, his claim of being a subordinate prophet (in the likeness of Jesus being a subordinate prophet) does not in any way violate the Seal of Prophets (Muhammad).

Finality of prophethood
The claim that Mirza Ghulam was a prophet forms a point of contention with mainstream Islam, as it is considered a violation of the quranic and hadith teachings of Muhammad. In particular, contemporary Islamic scholars view the Ahmadiyya belief as a contradiction with the verse in the Quran, Chapter 33 (The Combined Forces), verse 40: "'Muhammad is not the father of [any] one of your men, but [he is] the Messenger of Allah and Seal of the prophets. And ever is Allah, of all things, Knowing.'"

Farewell sermon
In his Farewell Sermon, delivered just prior to his death, Muhammad warned his followers and all mankind with the following message: "'O People! No Prophet or apostle will come after me and no new faith will be born. Reason well, therefore O People! and understand words that I convey to you. I leave behind me two things, the Qur'an and the Sunnah and if you follow these you will never go astray.'"

The Ahmadiyya movement interpret the hadith context of "Last of the Prophets" to signify the "Very Best" and "Most Exalted Law Giver Prophet" among all the Prophets. The farewell sermon had indicated only that no prophet would come immediately after Muhammad had died.

The movement consider the literal interpretation of the term "finality" that is zealously constrained by the mainstream Islamic view, completely paradoxes their own views of the hadith concerning the second advent of Jesus. In the manner that the Islamic mainstream views that Jesus himself is expected to physically return in the latter days from Heaven, it becomes implausible to also presume that it is absolutely impossible for any prophet to come after Muhammad.

Consensus of companions of Muhammad on Jesus' death
Ahmadi scholars state that when Muhammad died, the Sahaba were grieved. Umar, angered and upset, took out a sword, and said that he would kill anyone who said Muhammad is dead. At this instance Abu Bakar quoted: "[3:144] And Muhammad is but a messenger; the messengers passed away before him; if then he dies or is killed will you turn back upon your heels? And whoever turns back upon his heels, he will by no means do harm to Allah in the least and Allah will reward the grateful.'"

The Ahmadiyya movement believe that no companion ever stated Jesus is alive in heaven. Nor that he would come physically in the Second Coming. As such according to the quranic verses, Jesus could only have died a natural death (and not have died on the Cross).

Fulfilment of messianic prophecies
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad regarded the prophecies and concepts in hadith and Bible concerning his advent in an entirely metaphorical light. As an example, in his publication, Izala-e-Auham Mirza Ghulam Ahmad stated: "The second special aspect of the prophecy, which relates to the advent of the Promised Messiah, is that he will break the cross, slaughter the swine and kill the one-eyed Antichrist. Every disbeliever who is touched by his breath will die instantly. The spiritual interpretation of this special aspect is that the Promised Messiah will crush under his feet all the glory of the religion of the cross, that he will destroy with the weapon of conclusive arguments those who are afflicted with shamelessness like swine, and who devour filth like pigs, and that he will wipe out with the sword of clear proofs the opposition of those who possess only the eye of the world and are bereft of the eye of the faith in place of which they have only an unsightly taint. Not only such one-eyed ones, but also every disbeliever who views Islam with contempt will suffer spiritual extinction through the glorious breath of Messianic reasoning. In short all these signs are metaphoric, the significance of which has been fully revealed to me. Some may not appreciate it at this time but after waiting for sometime, and despairing altogether of the hopes that they now entertain, all of them will accept it.' (Izala-e-Auham, Volume 3, Pages 141-143)"

Battle against Dajjal (Anti-Christ)
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad elaborated on the depictions of Antichrist as prophecised in the Bible and the hadith concerning the emergence of the Dajjal. These are interpreted in Ahmadiyya teachings, in metaphorical terms - to denote a group of nations centred upon falsehood. The reference to the Dajjal is personified as a unified system - a chain of deceptive ideas indicating it's chains of unity as a class (instead of any single person).

The defeat of the Dajjal, was by force of reason and argument and by the warding off of its mischief through the ideologies and teachings of the Messiah, rather than by way of any physical warfare; with the Dajjal's power and influence gradually disintegrating and ultimately allowing for the recognition and worship of God along Islamic ideals to prevail throughout the world.

Breaking of the cross
The Islamic hadith describe that Jesus would, upon his second coming, "Break the Cross". Ahmadis interpret this to mean that he will "make plain the error of the creed of the cross". Ghulam Ahmad's teachings of Jesus, being a mortal man who survived crucifixion and died a natural death upon earth, is considered as a testimony of the prophecy being fulfilled.

Ahmadis believe the followers of Christianity will gradually come to accept the same teaching and this will repeal the central doctrines of the divinity of Jesus, Atonement and Resurrection. In turn, the traditional Christian reverence for the cross and doctrine of the immortality of Jesus will become untenable.

Ending of wars
In 1894, Ghulam Ahmad had declared that the contemporary Islamists views of Jihad of the sword and Holy War was a fundamental misrepresentation of Islam, that was invented during the Dark Ages. He advocated for these false beliefs to be ended in their entirety.

The Ahmadiyya Movement believe that any military jihad in Islam is permitted only and exclusively for the defence of religious freedom and in very strictly defined circumstances (not exclusive only to Islam). Those circumstances did not exist at the present time of British rule in India. As a result, early Ahmadis had faced virulent opposition from extremist groups, some of whom protested a conspiracy that Ghulam Ahmad had been put in place as a pacifist by the British Government to appease Muslims. Ahmadis believe that in the modern era, the "Jihad of the pen" (peaceful intellectual reasoning) is the only potent way of espousing and spreading the Islamic teaching.

Accordingly, as per scriptural prophecies in the hadith relating to the Messiah ending of wars, the movement regard this declaration has deprecated "Jihad of the sword" and consider the prophecies in the hadith relating to ending of religious wars had been fulfilled by Ghulam Ahmad teachings.

Journey from Judea to India
According to Ghulam Ahmad, (and further developed by the next generation of Ahmadi writers such as Khwaja Nazir Ahmad in 1952), Jesus taught the message of Jewish messianism to his disciples and to the people living in Judea. After surviving his ordeal on the cross, Jesus remained in Judea for a short time before leaving from there. Jesus was declared a criminal and therefore, decided to leave Judea with his mother Mary, his wife Mary Magdalene and his apostle Thomas the Apostle. Thereafter, Jesus traveled toward Asia.

From Judea to Iraq
With these three companions, he went first to Iraq. Here he met his disciple, Ananias. He met his rival Paul who later became a Christian. In Nusaybin, he got another tension at the hands of a cruel king. He was arrested again. Prophet Jesus along with his mother performed some miracles and impressed the king. The king gave him permission to go to the kingdom of Parthia. There was a strong Jewish community living there.

Iraq to Iran and Afghanistan
From Iraq, he went to Iran where he was honourably received by the Persian Jews. Five centuries before Cyrus the Great had conquered Babylon and the Jews were freed. Many of the Jews went to live in Iran and were known as Persian Jews. Jesus preached here and went on to Bactria (Afghanistan). At that time, Persia was a great center of Judaism. He professed the advent of the coming of a great prophet named Muhammad to his fellowmen in these areas specially in the area of Afghanistan. He met with the first king of Parthia who honored him. The Pashtun people have a tradition in their royal and non-royal functions and consider themselves to be the sons of Children of Israel. Many of these Persian Jews who had been receiving the teachings from Jesus proselytized to Muslims at the time of Muhammad and accepted his call. Qais Abdur Rashid, his name is this and the original was Kish.

Reasons for coming to India
According to Ahmadiyya sources (Islam International Publications Ltd.) the Tribes of Israel who had migrated to eastern countries seeing the attraction in Hinduism and Buddhism had themselves become Hindus and Buddhists. They subsequently became unaware of their religion. Jesus and Thomas the Apostle later arrived in India to restore the Abrahamic teachings to these tribes.

Jesus meets Shalivahana
According to a late section of the Hindu Bhavishya Purana (written after 1739 ), Jesus met a Hindu king, Shalivahana.

The king along with his companions went to the peak of the Himalayas to meet a man who was a dignified person of fair complexion in white clothes sitting in the mountain. When the king asked who he was, the man replied "I am the Messiah, born of a virgin."

He told the king he had come from a far off place where he has suffered at the hands of his people. When the king asked what religion he adhered to, he said that his religion was of peace, love and purity of heart. The king was impressed, so he paid homage to him.

Tomb of Jesus

During his initial research into Jesus' death, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad postulated that Jesus may have been buried in either Galilee or Syria. After investigating further he eventuality uncovered evidence to conclude that the tomb of Jesus was located at the Roza Bal shrine in Srinagar, Kashmir. Based upon this evidence, Ahmadis today believe the tomb of Jesus is located in the Srinagar region of Kashmir.

Ghulam Ahmad, and later Ahmadi writers have cited various evidences for identifying the grave as that of Jesus: The Bhavishya Purana Official Decree, The Glass Mirror, Tarikh-i-Kashmir, Qisa-shazada, The Garden of Solomon (Bagh-i-Sulaiman) by Mir Saadullah Shahabadi (1780 A.D.), Wajeez-ut-Tawarikh, Ikmal-ud-Din (962 AD), Ain-ul-Hayat, The Acts of Thomas, Takhat Sulaiman (Throne of Solomon, a hill in Kashmir), Tarikh-i-Kabir, and Rauzat-us-Safa. Ahmadis believe that these sources testify to the view that Yuz Asaf and Jesus are the same person.

Haji Mohi-ud-din Miskin, writing in 1902, three years after Mirza Ghulam Ahmad in 1899, is the first historian to mention that "some" connect the shrine of Yuz Asaf as the grave of Hazrat Isa Rooh-Allah (Jesus the Spirit of God).

The importance of the shrine has been preserved in the memory of the descendants of the ancient Israelites to this day. They call the shrine "The tomb of Hazrat Issa Sahib", "The Tomb of Prophet Jesus (Isa)".

The building constructed is named "Roza Bal" or "Rauza Bal". "Rauza" is generally a term used to denote the tomb of a celebrated personality, i.e. noble, wealthy, or saintly. A local scholar and supporter of the theory, Fida Hassnain, has claimed that the tomb is arranged with the feet pointing in the direction of Jerusalem, and claimed that this is in accordance with Jewish tradition.

Ahmadis give the Yuz Asaf enshrined in the tomb the epithet Shahzada Nabi, "Prophet Prince". The majority Srinagar Sunni Muslim community reject the Ahmadiyya claims that the tomb is that of Jesus and consider this viewpoint as blasphemous.

Tomb of Mary
Muslim and Persian documents — the Tafir-Ibn-I-Jarir, the Kanz-al-Ummal, and the Rauzat-us-Safa — have references that contribute to the theory of Jesus' escape. Some of these also mention that Jesus was accompanied by Mary, and there is another burial place in Pakistan, along his theoretical route to Kashmir, known as Mai Mari da Ashtan, or "resting place of Mother Mary."

title: Jesus in Ahmadiyya Islam


text:
Progressive Reform Party (South Africa)

The Progressive Reform Party (Progressiewe Reformiste Party) was a South African party that was formed on 26 July 1975 by the fusion of the Reform Party led by Harry Schwarz and Progressive Party led by Colin Eglin. Harry Schwarz predicted that the merger would lead to a "new political dimension in South Africa".

Colin Eglin was elected leader of the party while Harry Schwarz was made Chairman of the Federal Executive.

In 1977, the United Party merged with another small party to form the New Republic Party. A number of United Party members left to form the Committee for a United Opposition, which then joined the Progressive Reform Party to form the Progressive Federal Party with Colin Eglin as its leader.

title: Progressive Reform Party (South Africa)