text:
Talk:Free Territory of Trieste

Treaty of Osimo
Free Territory of Trieste was indeed dissolved in 1954, when zone A was annexed by Italy and zone B by Yugoslavia, but Treaty of Osimo, which settled the border between Italy and Yugoslavia was only signed on November 10, 1975. --Peterlin 11:43, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

IMHO the treaty that dissolved FTT in 1954 was actually signed in London

Treaty of Osimo is a bilateral treaty and cannot redefine the multilateral (international) treaty of Peace, signed in 1947. So, why has Materialscientist reverted my edits to the old, incorrect version? --Dorje77 09.20, 25 Jan 2013 —Preceding undated comment added 08:27, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

The Memorandum of Understandings is not a treaty (it's called memorandum for a reason) and the Osimo Treaty goes against the Vienna convention of Treaties regarding multilateral treaty amendment. Moreover the 16th UN resolution is still in place and has not been rewritten. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.37.144.84 (talk) 16:12, 25 January 2013 (UTC)

Neither the Memorandum of London nor the Treaty of Osimo say anything about dissolving the FTT, so it still exists. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Manne 88 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

I propose to add this phrase in "Dissolution" section, at the end: "The Treaty has been ratified only by the italian parliament, 2 years later ".Dorje77 (talk) 12:21, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

- People who say the Free Territory of Trieste was dissolved in 1954 did never read the 1954 Memorandum of Understanding. To this day, Italian laws about the Free Territory of Trieste are in force, including the law establishing Region Friuli Venezia Giulia; at article 70 that implements and executes the obligations of the Italian Government as for the administration of the Free Territory of Trieste, regardless to the Treaty of Osimo, because again, that involved two States (with no authority over Trieste) while the Memorandum was signed by their Governments.

The ultimate evidence is that Italian Constitutional Law 1/1963 of Italy, establishing Region Friuli Venezia Giulia and, at article 70, transfers the powers of the "Commissario generale del Governo per il territorio di Trieste" (established by a Decree of the President of the Republic of Italy on 27 October 1954 to implement the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding of London as for the administration of the Free Territory - not its annexation) to a new Commissioner in the Region. See: http://www.normattiva.it/atto/caricaDettaglioAtto?atto.dataPubblicazioneGazzetta=1963-02-01&atto.codiceRedazionale=063C0001&currentPage=1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.0.153.28 (talk) 15:22, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

The Constitutional Law on the Italian official gazzette: http://www.normattiva.it/atto/caricaDettaglioAtto?atto.dataPubblicazioneGazzetta=1963-02-01&atto.codiceRedazionale=063C0001&currentPage=1

The 1983 UNSC letter PO 210 PI declaring that the appointment of the Governor can be resumed at initiative of any UN Member State (therefore the question of the FTT is not closed with Osimo): https://postimg.org/image/ex357ojth/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.0.153.28 (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Discrimination in Yugoslavia
At the same time, ethnic Italians and Germans living in Yugoslavia complained of discrimination and persecution and many of them also emigrated.

Could anyone give some historical sources confirming this, please? Boraczek 08:29, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There is a useful article at http://www.genealogienetz.de/reg/ESE/dshist.txt that covers the history of the Danube Germans, Aincluding those who lived in Slavonia. Towards the end there is mention of their fate after 1945. My mother-in-law is ethnically German from Slavonia, although her father was hung by the Germans during WWII. Interestingly, when Tito was presenting figures of Jugoslav losses in support of reparations after 1945, the reduction in population caused by the deported Volksdeutsch was made to appear as a loss to Jugoslavia meriting additional support! PeterDRG 16:55, 27 August 2005 (UTC)

 * The German minority in Yugoslavia which largely supported the German occupiers during WWII, did not "emmigrate". A large part left with German army in 1945, and the rest were interned after the war and expelled to Germany, following the pattern in the rest of eastern Europe. An exception was made for those that actively supported the resistance, and thousands of ethnic Germans stayed.
 * The situation of Italians was very much different. In Italy, there was internal communist resistance to the fascist regime and especially Germans after 1943, which was friendly with Yugoslav partisans. Very many of Istrian and other Italians were communists or at least anti-fascists. After the capitulation of Italy, there were whole Italian units in Yugoslavia which switched sides and continued to fight with partisans against Germans. That's why Italians which were not individually prosecuted for war crimes were not treated summarily. They were given a choice, in the Territory's Constitution, to either stay in the Free Territory and become its citizens or be asked to move to Italy. It's very much likely that some Italian Istrians were intimidated or forced into leaving, but there is also no doubt that there were many which prefered to stay and live in the socialist Yugoslavia. Also, let's not forget that many of the people who left Istria at the time were Slovenes or Croats.
 * To cut the long story short, Germans were expelled according to ethnic criteria (they were presumed to be collaborators, unless they could prove otherwise), while Italians left and were sometimes forced to leave according to individual political and ideological criteria. Not really comparable. Zocky | picture popups 13:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You said italians were not treated summarily. But excuse me, if appears the choise: to leave or to stay for peoples, no matter what their ethnicity or nationality is, who lived in the same place from generation to generation - it is clear discrimination and persecution.--Vulpes vulpes 12:42, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Numbers
The numbers we are presenting don't add up: we say that there were about 30,000 Italians in zone B, 14.000 of whom remained there, so about 16.000 emigrated. We alos say that 40.000 people emigrated, mostly Italians. How is 16.000 out of 40.000 "mostly"? Zocky | picture popups 06:31, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

 * It could be the largest single ethnic group -- though not a majority. Chesspride216.144.161.51 (talk) 20:09, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

German name?
Any particular reason for including the German name in the opening of the article? There wasn't a significant German population in the territory. --Jfruh (talk) 02:53, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, the main reason would probably be that it was in Austria-Hungary for few centuries... Other than that, none I think. Martin 18:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The Free Territory of Trieste was never in Austria-Hungary (that having stopped existing 27 years before FTT was formed). Not that Austria-Hungary itself existed for centuries... The only reason why we would need the German name is a source that says that German was an official language in FTT. In absence of that, I'll remove the German name for now. Zocky | picture popups 02:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

 * Recent history does not wipe out 550 years of Austrian (German) ownership and occupation. While the "Free Territory" of Trieste is a recent (artificial) post-war construction -- Trieste itself is a city with 550 years of Austrian rule.  Chesspride216.144.161.51 (talk) 20:11, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Official languages
To my knowledge Croatian was not an official language of the FTT. So i am removing it untill a source for that is provided. Regards 89.212.188.64 (talk) 13:15, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Article 7 of the Permanent Statute: The official languages of the Free Territory shall be Italian and Slovene. The Constitution shall determine in what circumstances Croat may be used as a third official language. Of course, the Constitution was never enacted, but Croat clearly was a de facto official language in the portion of Zone B south of the Dragonja river, and obviously the prevailing language there (particularly in the hinterland). I would therefore propose to mention Croatian again, particularly given the fact that the table does not speak of official language(s) or state language(s), but simply of language(s). --Alib (talk) 18:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
 * While I agree that Croatian should be included in the lead on the basis of its modern-day status, at the time it was absorbed into the Serbo-Croatian language. The territory of Zone B was (and is) populated by a majority of Croats, who at the time used Serbo-Croatian. On the basis of these facts, I believe it would be an oversight not to include a Serbo-Croatian entry in the lead. Thoughts? -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 14:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * An opinion: According to the Serbo-Croatian language and the Declaration on the Status and Name of the Croatian Literary Language, the unification of the Croatian and Serbian language was essentially a political act in the second Yugoslavia that happened after 1954 and was viewed by Croats as an attempt at Serbianisation. For the record, in 1944, AVNOJ declared Croatian, Serbian, Slovene, and Macedonian to be equal in the entire territory of Yugoslavia, the decision was re-published in 1945. Also, the official documents of the FTT use the name Croatian. Therefore, I can't agree that Croatian was absorbed into the Serbo-Croatian language in the FTT and can't see the exclusion of the Serbo-Croatian entry from the lead as an oversight. --Eleassar my talk 16:40, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The "political act" argument goes both ways. I've come across a significant number of sources that refer to the 1990s split into four languages (all based on Neo-shtokavian) as a "political act" caused by the recent wars and ethnic conflicts. We can go source-hunting but I hope you believe me that the majority of English sources refer to the contemporary (1950s) language of Yugoslavia spoken by Croats (and Serbs, Montenegrins, and Muslims) as Serbo-Croatian. Serbo-Croatian is even used today in a modern context, let alone in the context of a period when it was official.
 * I agree however, that if the official documents used "Croatian" we should go with that. The FTT is not Yugoslavia. Can you provide a source pls? -- DIREKTOR  ( TALK ) 16:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The Treaty of Peace with Italy (Paris, 10 February 1947) speaks about Croat not Serbo-Croatian language. We should stick with the terminology used by the reliable sources that deal specifically with the FTT. --Eleassar my talk 07:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Western Istria was under Austria after the defeat of Napoleon

 * OK Trieste was under Austrian rule since XIV century, but it is not the case of Western Istria (Zone B): Capodistria, Portorose, Buie, Cittanova d'Istria.--Deguef (talk) 17:11, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

January 1, 1957
I recall reading in a Rand McNally atlas from about 1958 a list of then recent international border changes, and one of those was the official incorporation of Trieste A into Italy and Triest B into Yugoslavia. I recall specifically it was the same date as the Saarland was incorporated into West Germany. Is there any historical significance to January 1, 1957 in Trieste?  Randall Bart    Talk   02:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

 * If the article and comments are correct -- 1954 was an annexation, not necessarily a fully recognized one. And the multi-level treaty that created the free state (1947) was not amended by the 1954 unofficial annexations or the 1975 bilateral treaties.  Nobody seems to care in 2022 -- but this is another example of a zombie territory that has not been officially reconciled by proper multi-level treaty action.  Chesspride216.144.161.51 (talk) 20:14, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

"Porto Libero Trieste" Movement
There should be section about Movement for renewal of Free Territory of Trieste: www.triestfreeport.org and also there's Movement for Istria, which is related region: Republic of Istria on Facebook 91.226.242.156 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:49, 28 May 2011 (UTC).

Coat of arms
It is mentioned in the text, that there existed two different types of coat of arms according to the two different zones. Therefore, I propose to delete the coat of arms. --ChryZ MUC 16:00, 27 Oct 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChryZ MUC (talk • contribs)

Geography Relative to Today
Can someone with expertise on this matter edit in a brief descriptions of what modern-day states the territory of Trieste overlapped with? That's pretty important basic information for an article like this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asasa64 (talk • contribs) 01:09, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

use of the past tense
On a practical level a state can be said to exist if it controls at least some territory and has at least some level of ongoing international recognition. While there are some grey areas the Free Territory of Trieste has neither and thus should be considered a former state for the time being.©Geni 20:22, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

A UN resolution and a Peace Treaty mean international recognition. EU and UN replies never mention any cancellation. Please notice that other countries have only administrative rights over it, no sovereignty. Which means that the Free Territory of Trieste is sovereign, yet administered. Neither cancelled, nor "unexistent". Your doubts are understandable, after decades of cold war and so on, but the facts are pretty clear. Aarska (talk) 20:59, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
 * The facts are that it has no government, no territory and no diplomats. UN resolutions only have significance in so far as those who have the strength to enforce them chose to to do so. So far France hasn't chosen to invade Italy over the issue.©Geni 21:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The Free Territory of Trieste is only under administration of Italy,Slovenia and Croatia. No one have cancelled the state or the Peace Treaty;the FTT is mentioned the last time by a internetional commision of the UE the  22nd january 2013 in Bruxelles, by On.Victor Boştinaru. So the FTT still exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markusdg (talk • contribs) 21:13, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

 * You don't have to cancel states. You simply have to prevent them from having any territory while making sure that no one of significance complains.©Geni

What about Tibet? Tibet IS or Tibet WAS? Poland did not existed from 1939 to 1945? Estonia did not existed from 1953 to 1992? So, about FTT: the nation does exist, even if under temporary italian administration. Franco.t (talk) 21:48, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

 * Tibet is a plateau region. Tibet was a country. Poland had significant diplomatic recognition between 1939 and 1945 as did Estonia between 1953 and 1992. The free Territory of Trieste doesn't have that kind of diplomatic recognition.©Geni 22:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

 * Tibet is not only a "plateau region", but it's all of these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibet_(disambiguation) and this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tibetan_sovereignty_debate
 * For FTT: being actually administrated by foreign countries, FTT's diplomatic functions are (badly) developed by these countries. It's nearly the same as for Somalia in 1950-1960 (it was a United Nations Trusteeship, administrated by Italy; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trust_Territory_of_Somalia). In Somalia Italy acted correctly, leading to Somalia's independence in a short time; for FTT, the problem is it's not a few thousands kms of distance from his administrator countries, so no effort was made by these to lead to his independence: the problem of FTT's independence and own government stopped in 1954. Being so complex the problem, maybe it would be better to make a page about FTT's sovereignity problem Franco.t (talk) 08:52, 28 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Please don't fool readers: sources are ridiculously self-referencing, the supposed debate is limited to a very strict circle of so-called "committees for TLT".--Vituzzu (talk) 16:51, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * --Markusdg (talk) 17:41, 11 March 2013 (UTC) the italian law and constitution aboaut de FTT: Article 21, paragraph 2 of Legislative Decree no. 1430, 28th November 1947 declare that: "The Italian sovereignty over the area constituting the Free Territory of Trieste, as it is defined above will cease with the entry into force of this Treaty."(Treaty of Paris, 1947)

In addition, the Legislative Decree 28th November 1947, n. 1430, ratified by Law no. 3054 of 25 November 1952: "The present law, with the seal of the State, shall be included in the official collection of laws and decrees of the Italian Republic. And oblige to respect and enforce it as law of the State. " Law no. 3054 of November 25th 1952 became enforceable by publication in the Official Gazette no. 10 of 01.14.1953, and is currently in force as law of the Italian Republic.

Constant vandalization
Any content should not be removed randomly, the editing (actually, mosly vandalizing) on this page is getting hysterical. I'd ask everyone to start ADDING informations and sources, instead of acting like vandals. Aarska (talk) 16:47, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There's an ongoing SPI case about you and the other users adding a nNPOV original research about the supposed independence of Trieste. Please stop vandalising this page, frankly, since these vandalisms has gone crosswiki, I'm about to make many global locks. --Vituzzu (talk) 16:49, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Being an italian administrator, it seems clear that you've been bringing a HUGE national POV over the whole matter with you :( unfortunately, if you just read the sources, including official UN and EU replies, you'd realize that the edits were all but POV-driven. As new informations on the matter arose, they've been added (together with many more features which have been removed as well by your POV-driven administration). The sources confirmed that the matter is all but settled, like it or not as an italian. In any case, many other parts of the page have been removed, which makes your actions... actual vandalizing, wasting others' effort. Not really a "free" behaviour... Aarska (talk) 16:55, 8 March 2013 (UTC) That shame will spread across the web, I promise you. Wikipedia should be a free encyclopedia and should have the Truth inside. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.117.94.229 (talk) 17:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't try fooling, it's not a nationalistic affair, you know. It's a matter of canvassing and of the original researches you're going on adding here since the only secondary sources (mis)interpreting primary source are related to these weird committees for "a free Trieste". --Vituzzu (talk) 17:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It would be helpful if editors would bring evidence and sources to the talk page as to the current status of the Free Territory. Consider opening an WP:RFC if the situation is confusing. If consensus is reached here, it would be reasonable to unprotect the article. Then anyone who reverts against the consensus could be sanctioned. EdJohnston (talk) 17:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * As I said is simply a pov-pushing and vandalism affair but ok, let's pretend it's not, so: which third-party reliable sources does claim the TLT still exist? --Vituzzu (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

 * for example, in GATT/WTO, in the most recent edition (1994) you can find special commercial provisioning about the commerce with FTT: "Advantages accorded to the trade with the Free Territory of Trieste by countries contiguous to that territory, provided that such advantages are not in conflict with the Treaties of Peace arising out of the Second World War." (pag. 791, http://www.wto.org/english/res_e/booksp_e/gatt_ai_e/art24_e.doc )Franco.t (talk) 14:43, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * another example: "3. USE OF THE ADJECTIVE "FORMER" TO MODIFY THE PHRASE "FREE TERRITORY OF TRIESTE" SHOULD BE AVOIDED. BEGIN FYI PERMANENT LEGAL REGIME FOR GOVERNANCE OF FREE TERRITORY OF TRIESTE CONTEMPLATED BY 1947 TREATY OF PEACE WITH ITALY WAS NEVER FULLY IMPLEMENTED. HOWEVER, 1954 MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN US, UK, ITALY AND YUGOSLAVIA DID NOT TERMINATE JURIDICAL STATUS OF FREE TERRITORY. 1954 MEMORANDUM PROVIDED FOR TERMINATION OF US-UK MILITARY GOVERNMENT OF ZONE A AND SUBSTITUTION OF ITALIAN CIVIL ADMINISTRATION, AND SIMILAR TERMINATION OF YUGOSLAV MILITARY GOVERNMENT AND SUBSTITUTION OF YUGOSLAV CIVIL ADMINISTRATION IN ZONE B. CONTINUING LEGAL CHARACTER OF FREE TERRITORY OF TRIESTE WAS NOT RPT NOT AFFECTED. END FYI." https://web.archive.org/web/20130901133310if_/http://aad.archives.gov/aad/createpdf?dt=2474&rid=61012&dl=1345 Franco.t (talk) 17:20, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

 * Please note that similar vandalization occurs in the Spanish version too! Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.216.240.13 (talk) 18:05, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

--Markusdg (talk) 01:38, 9 March 2013 (UTC)Various contents will be removed without a reason, overall contents with sources like UN council. The contents are changed (or removed) with personal opinions,in the english and spanish versions.
 * These are primary sources which cannot be used for supporting the misinterpretation which has been added by you. --Vituzzu (talk) 13:36, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
 * "primary sources which cannot be used" is an oxymoron. Can you pls specify what are the removed sources, in order to let anyone evaluate them on his own? Franco.t (talk) 14:48, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:PRIMARY. Oxymora got into policy! --Vituzzu (talk) 15:12, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * for example: the "assisted" migration of 20.000 (or more) triestini to Austrialia, Canada and Argentina is a historical fact:

http://www.ammer-fvg.org/_Data/Contenuti/Allegati/eng/francescofait.pdf chapter about triestini); a source like a australian book deleted(."Trieste goes to Australia", Cresciani Gianfranco, ISBN 10: 0646556312 / 0-646-55631-2 ISBN 13: 9780646556314) .This is a clear example of vandalism--189.195.128.121 --Markusdg (talk) 12:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * A source about Italian citizens migration from Trieste to Australia, so nothing related to the alleged current existence of TLT. --Vituzzu (talk) 14:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * a source about a "assisted" emigration of triestini(20.000 or more citizens 10% of the total poblation) was deleted; these triestini was "not so italian" or indipendentist, similar to ethnic cleaning. And is part of the history of TLT and is part of the vandalism on this page. --Markusdg (talk) 17:29, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * --Markusdg (talk) 17:40, 11 March 2013 (UTC) the italian law and constitution about de FTT: Article 21, paragraph 2 of Legislative Decree no. 1430, 28th November 1947 declare that: "The Italian sovereignty over the area constituting the Free Territory of Trieste, as it is defined above will cease with the entry into force of this Treaty."(Treaty of Paris, 1947)

In addition, the Legislative Decree 28th November 1947, n. 1430, ratified by Law no. 3054 of 25 November 1952: "The present law, with the seal of the State, shall be included in the official collection of laws and decrees of the Italian Republic. And oblige to respect and enforce it as law of the State. " Law no. 3054 of November 25th 1952 became enforceable by publication in the Official Gazette no. 10 of 01.14.1953, and is currently in force as law of the Italian Republic. Or this law dont exist? Or Italy is still in war agains USA, Great Britain and the allies powers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markusdg (talk • contribs)
 * Primary (misinterpreted) sources, again? --Vituzzu (talk) 18:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * That's an italian law; we have not to "interprete" it, we can only read it. And the literal meaning is obvious. A law is valid until another law delete it. If you can find another italian law which modified or canceled law n. 3054 11/25/52, I'll read it with great interest. But I didn't succeded in finding it...
 * What about the telegram of the USA State Dpt. I cite few rows above? "primary misinterpred sources" too? Franco.t (talk) 19:13, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Definitely. --Vituzzu (talk) 19:16, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * What do you mean with "definitely"? Definitely WHAT?!Franco.t (talk) 20:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * --Markusdg (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)Primary misinterpreted sources? is really clear!like these

Parliamentary questions 7 August 2012 E-006217/2012 Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission 1. Annex VIII to the Treaty of peace with Italy of 10 February 1947 stipulates in its Article 1 that the port of Trieste shall be a customs free port. Article 5(2) of Annex VIII provides that in connection with importation into or exportation from or transit through the Free Port, the authorities of the Free Territory shall not levy on such goods customs duties or charges other than those levied for services rendered. Under Union law, this position is assured through the operation of the port as a Free Zone in accordance with the EC law provisions referred to below.

2. The Free Zone of Trieste is operated as a free zone of control type I. In accordance with Article 166 of the Community Customs Code it is a part of the customs territory of the Community in which non-Union goods are not subject to customs duties.

All operations which may be carried out in the Free Zone of Trieste must be in line with the customs provisions.

By virtue of Articles 156 and 160 of the Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006(1) Member States can through their national legislation and under their responsibility regarding correct application, exempt from VAT the supply of goods which are intended to be placed under free zones and the supply of goods or services carried out therein. (1)	Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, OJ L 347, 11.12.2006. http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getAllAnswers.do?reference=E-2012-006217&language=EN

"the authorities of the Free Territory shall"(...) the european parliament speack about authorities of the FTT.if it dont exist,how is possible? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markusdg (talk • contribs)
 * Actually this sentence is quite misinterpreted too, but I won't deal with it because we are not a secondary source. Is definitely not up to us state if the TLT still exists, Wikipedia is not an international court. You'll be able to write anything you want about current existence of TLT when customs will be set up between TLT and its neighbouring Countries or when there will be high quality secondary sources. --Vituzzu (talk) 21:26, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Special:Contributions/Franco.t, Special:Contributions/Markusdg, Special:Contributions/Aarska, Special:Contributions/Dorje77 = Single-purpose account, that's the point. Their POV is evident and falls into WikiProject_Countering_systemic_bias. For sample Markusdg mixed up the Free Port of Trieste with TLT, but at present they are different things, as evident in a judgment that is beloved by the political lobby they refer to: D’altra parte, lo stesso Allegato VIII al Trattato di Pace del 1947 ha ammesso che il Territorio Libero di Trieste (cui è subentrato lo Stato italiano in conseguenza del Memorandum di Londra del 1954) => "On the other hand, the same Annex VIII to the Peace Treaty of 1947 acknowledged that the Free Territory of Trieste ( which was replaced by the Italian government as a result of the London Memorandum of 1954 )". But they see only what they want to see, because they decided time ago that a dead (or an unborn, see Cammarata's theory) thing is still alive; did you know the anecdote about a man who believed he was dead and his psychiatrist? --Shivanarayana (talk) 22:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
 * PS this edit make statements about its existance and consequences of treaties which could be referenced only by POV sources (belonging to "Movimento Trieste Libera" or similar local political movements), their intentionally misinterpretation of primary sources is glaring. A clear example about the actual policy of UE institutions is here, between The Commission considers that the province of Trieste as referred to by the petitioner is part of Italian territory and It has been implicitly confirmed by the 1975 Treaty of Osimo, so what are we talking about? --Shivanarayana (talk) 10:22, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * --Markusdg (talk) 16:33, 12 March 2013 (UTC)you are right Shivanarayana; when someone censure historical fact like this"20,000 Triestini, or 10 per cent of the population, left their city and the majority (more than 90 per cent) headed to Australia, mainly Melbourne and Sydney. This mass migration was also enforced by the new Italian administration: for years anyone who was not considered "Italian enough" was at risk of persecution.1."Trieste goes to Australia", Cresciani Gianfranco, ISBN 10: 0646556312 / 0-646-55631-2" is a Single-purpose account; is change the history to show only the italian nationalist version

Shivanarayana: the link you've posted confirms that Italy has only civil administration to TLT ("Italy has extended its civil administration to it"). There's no mentioned any kind of sovereignty at all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorje77 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * QED, an example of negative conclusion from affirmative premises. The petition was about tax collection, a civil matter, not about sovereignty. The fact that the document does not mention sovereignty doesn't mean "has only civil administration", it should be obvious. This is an intentional misinterpretation, as stated above, and it's the only way to support a claim that is contrary to all historical evidence: to the Commission's knowledge, the legitimacy of this situation has not been called into question by any State, including any party to the 1947 Peace Treaty, ever since. It has been implicitly confirmed by the 1975 Treaty of Osimo. BTW, about sovereignty, you know very well the TLT governor was never appointed, so TLT never exercised sovereignty (a point that led Cammarata to argue that Italy had never lost its sovereignty over these territories). Any matter involving the Free Port of Trieste and UE take for granted Italian sovereignty on it, except in the interpretations of local autonomists. You have not to submit here official sources that does NOT say this, or that, or the other thing, but official sources that say clearly that TLT exists at present as an autonomous entity (and no, this doesn't say it, it just mentions the origin of port's status, as it precedes Treaty of Rome. Are you able to find TLT in the list of member states?). Good luck. --Shivanarayana (talk) 18:24, 12 March 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shivanarayana (talk • contribs) 18:21, 12 March 2013 (UTC)
 * The official Source that says clearly that FTT exists is the Threaty Of Pace of the 1947. No other official document claims any kind of "annection" to Italy (or you can find it?). If you can, please forward that document to the people of FTT, so that they can surrender to this sad evidence. :)Dorje77 (talk) 17:17, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * QED (about SPA) 2nd part: some answers, e.g. The Commission considers that the province of Trieste as referred to by the petitioner is part of Italian territory, were already cited above. You don't like the way it happened? You can. You like to call yourself "Citizen of Free Territory of Trieste"? You can. It's not my business if you don't want to face facts (i.e. what happened after 1947, international treaties included). It's the same if you call yourself "Citizen of Hittite Empire", in both cases no one can give you a proof of citizenship at present. My business is to preserve neutrality and to avoid errors in verb tenses on Wikipedia: FTT was, because so sources not related to the local autonomist movement I've outlined say.
 * Hope User:EdJohnston and others have been convinced of the evidence (there's no possible dispute on current existence of FTT according to WP:RS), otherwise I'd like to know what point is not clear to them. PS anyhow I think the relation between The Free Port of Trieste and FTT should be present, it's not even mentioned in Port of Trieste, which exhibits a Pov --Shivanarayana (talk) 20:56, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

i hope that User:EdJohnston note that vituzzu and friends delete various information and send to black list site that they dont like, a intent to change the reality (for example:forced migration of more of the 10% of the population = some citizens)--Markusdg (talk) 23:12, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
 * We can deal separately with the issues, Istrian exodus is an historical fact, but it's no good reason to accept edits like this, which pretends autonomists POV claims (the existence of FTT as an autonomous political entity nowadays) that have no support in third-party sources to be real facts --Shivanarayana (talk) 08:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

i say again: the vandalization by some useras and administrators delete historical facts or change it...like the triestin forced migration, that is NOT the istrian exodus.--Markusdg (talk) 12:11, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * AFAIK, there's nothing (no treaty or other official document) that gives to Italy (and Yugoslavia) more than civil administration to FTT, after 1947 (and you have no linked any), even the Treaty of Osimo. But OK, the other point is: vituzzu didn't edit only the present tense (was instead is), he has deleted a lot of informations... Why?Dorje77 (talk) 16:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It seems you're looking for a recognition of your supposed state by Wikipedia's users, I'm sorry but regardless of anything we can say you'll go on paying Italian VAT, IRPEF, IRES, IMU, IRAP, IMU, TARSU, passo carrabile, bollo automobilistico and much more. It's definitely time to say Wikipedia is not a forum. --Vituzzu (talk) 18:09, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No. It's about neutrality. :) You know: I can understand that going against the mainstream thinking can be considered "not neutral". And I can understand that we can not have the same thinking about "FTT is" or "FTT was". But I think that wikipedia was build around the spirit of sharing knowledge and I think that an article like this can contain also our version. We can discuss on the correct form to spread informations, but I don't think that this kind of cuttings help wikipedia in any way. I feel it like some kind of censorship. And.... we are not vandals! If we are not welcome here, I think we can leave this talk and this article. :) Dorje77 (talk) 21:42, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * About your version: WP:WEIGHT. Personally I think we can mention autonomists theories (they seem to me encyclopedic enough, as evidenced by the existence of List for Trieste) but other users may have different opinions. Anyway they have to be exposed for what they are according to third-party sources.--Shivanarayana (talk) 22:15, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * We all know it's not about neutrality but it's simply the web side of an ongoing political activity in Trieste. Being a popular encyclopedia Wikipedia lays, by definition, upon mainstream. Being quite generous the relevancy, in terms of IF in historical literature, of such these theories justifies no more than 20 words about them. --Vituzzu (talk) 22:54, 14 March 2013 (UTC)
 * 20 words. :) Ok, nevermind. Have a nice day and - if you need something, you know where to find me. :) Dorje77 (talk) 05:40, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Citation about the 1910 census
In the section "History", where it is written:

"Italian-speakers have been predominant in most urban settlements and in the coast with strong minorities of Slovenes and Croats, especially in Trieste/Trst district where Slovenes represented a third of the population by the end of World War I.[citation needed]"

I would like that the following sites (or at least the first one) would be added at the end as citation:

http://www.kozina.com/premik/1910-02.pdf

http://www.kozina.com/premik/1910.htm

The first site represents a scanned document of the 1910 census.

Thanks and best regards.

151.51.234.105 (talk) 21:47, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

 * ✅ Thanks! Jguy TalkDone 00:37, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Edit
First of all, its the alphabetical order. Second, Croatian (= Serbo-Croatian) was the primary official language of Yugoslavia and was the language used by the administration authorities in Zone B (the vast majority of which indeed ended-up in NR Croatia). It was spoken by the (non-Slovene) administrators themselves. Croatia was granted the largest single chunk of the Free Territory after dissolution. -- Director  ( talk )  22:18, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Why alphabetical order? Any source? Why are you so used to ask sources just for edits which go against your POV-pushing? Finally why the "numerical relevance" criterion should be excluded only by your will? Here another source about ethnic percentages but I think you'll go on asking for a source stating 20% > 5% until you'll finally get a topic-ban. --Vituzzu (talk) 22:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I should immediately report these offensive personal attacks. Please explain why anyone should care about your own contemporary "numerical relevance criterion", as opposed to official languages and/or modern-day territory situation (the largest part of this territory is modern-day Croatia). Or indeed why you're badmouthing fellow users over a silly language order, with the article having sported a modern country infobox for months?? Thank goodness the "numerical relevance criterion" was maintained, though.. -- Director  ( talk )  23:34, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Please do not reverse the timeline of what did happen here, it's who started sort of an edit-war based on your POV and now it's probably up to me to solve this affair, as I already did with your counterpart Brunodam. --Vituzzu (talk) 12:23, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * "Solve the affair"?? :) My good man, I don't even know who you are, and I can't imagine what "affair" you're talking about. I think I remember "Brunodam" though.. wasn't he that guy who got banned five years ago for creating like fifty sockpuppets? I'm afraid that, as far as I know, he was "solved" by my old friend Al, not you.

 * While we wait for you to "purge the encyclopedia of the likes of me", would you please oblige me and explain why your language order, apparently based on historical population percentages, is the one we must go with. "It was there first" is no rationale. And can you please do so with a minimum of comedic threats? --  Director  ( talk )  13:24, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Brunodam was the guy who had been globally locked by me because of his continuous pov-pushing in Istria-related pages. --Vituzzu (talk) 13:40, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Good buddy, Brunodam was community banned from this project on 29 July 2008 by MaxSem for sockpuppeteering, on report by AlasdairGreen27, an ole Wikifriend of mine. Here's the thread. I supported the move myself as well, as you can see. You had nothing to do with it.

 * So I say again, would you please oblige me and explain why your language order, apparently based on historical population percentages, is the one we must go with? "It was there first" is a no rationale whatsoever. I hope edit-warring and threats are not the limit of your interest here? -- Director  ( talk )  15:48, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I didn't make reference to the BDA's case by mistake, he tries to push his pov as you're pushing yours the difference is a simple sign (in a mathematical sense) and, as I did as steward with him, it definitely needs a deeper investigation. For instance, this page had a simple list of language versions of an historical name, basing on your nationalistic view you changed it and then you started shifting the burden from you to me. :::::::So here the original question: why did you change the order of languages?
 * Furthermore, you edited the whole page so you had already read it states Croatians were the smaller national group in TLT, so why did you use [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Free_Territory_of_Trieste&diff=565865764&oldid=565861297 this edit summary] to justify your revert? If you truly believed it was a false claim why didn't you fix it in the lower sections too? --Vituzzu (talk) 16:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Begging your pardon, but kindly shut up about me - or get reported. I've had my full, thank you. You know as much about me as you do of how old Bruno was banned.

 * I changed the order of foreign language names on the basis that the lede translations are not based on historical (as in "what would be relevant in 1950"), but modern-day significance. And today, the largest chunk of the Free Territory is in Croatia. That's it. I will not be "interrogated" by you; besides, deductive logic is wanting if it is concluded that one "must" have read the entire article if he edited the infobox :). The silly, modern-country infobox. -- Director  ( talk )  17:40, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Why did you say you were imposing an alphabetical order while you're now dealing with a "current geography"-order? Again you're escaping from the main point: your nationalistic-driven strong POV and the way you fool the system to impose it. Don't try to fool even deductive logic, you didn't edit the sole infobox so why did you asked a false rhetorical question? Way the historical order, dealing with a former state, lack of significance? Finally you were already involved in [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Free_Territory_of_Trieste&diff=313351958&oldid=313219807 the same issue] and that's quite interesting. --Vituzzu (talk) 19:24, 27 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes, the order is accurate both alphabetically and in terms of modern-day territorial significance. And, yes, I edited the infobox and the first sentence. Clearly, I'm a lying bastard.

 * If my behavior is the supposed "main point", perhaps we should transfer this conversation over to an admin noticeboard? There you can continue to write as many barely-intelligible personal attacks as you like (this is an article talk page). Do you agree? -- Director  ( talk )  10:08, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't worry about moving anything by yourself, it's up to me though the issue seems to be global rather than simply local. You're probably confusing the lack of local admins willing to deal with these nationalistic matters with a supposed impunity. Anyway I didn't read "I'm afraid that, as far as I know, he was "solved" by my old friend Al, not you.", actually your nationalistic editing gave him the way to find some "allies" so I had to do [//meta.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&offset=&limit=500&type=globalauth&user=Vituzzu&page=&tagfilter=&hide_patrol_log=1 so many locks]. --Vituzzu (talk) 11:56, 28 July 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 15:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Content dispute
I am no expert on this matter. However, it appears to me that the consensus position (both amongst this article's previous editors and the international community) is that the Treaty of Osimo formally dissolved the Free Territory. The assertion that the UNSC still has responsibility for Trieste under UNSCR 16, let alone that it still exists as a sovereign state, appears to be a fringe theory that should at most be confined to a few sentences. It seems to be reliant on a hatch-patch of documents mostly taken out of context. I find it extremely unlikely that any international actor regards the Free Territory to still exist. If Wikipedia is to assert that the Free Territory still exists as a sovereign state, much wider consensus would need to be established than a single editor asserting it. I've flagged this issue in several of WikiProjects. Portwalrus (talk) 18:39, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

 * As an outsider simply reading the article and comments -- it seems that the world community ACTS as if the bilateral 1975 treaty ended the free state, but (per the way these things are supposed to be handled) it did not. Thus a revision of the original 1947 international treaty would be needed.  It has not occurred. Thus the free state might be seen as a dead issue...but legally one can argue it has de jure existence (but not defacto existence).  Nobody in the international community seems to care -- rather like the current situation win Spanish Sahara under (permanent??) Morocco occupation. The Great Powers seem satisfied with the status quo.  Chesspride216.144.161.51 (talk) 20:19, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Free Territory of Trieste. 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/20060721202106/http://cgi.stanford.edu/group/wais/cgi-bin/index.php?p=587 to http://cgi.stanford.edu/group/wais/cgi-bin/index.php?p=587
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060627095427/http://www.ashburtonguardian.co.nz/index.asp?articleid=5112 to http://www.ashburtonguardian.co.nz/index.asp?articleid=5112

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) 14:52, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Free Territory of Trieste. 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/20120621121851/http://www.docutren.com/congreso_palma/pdfs/com/Ses02/0208_Kreuzer.pdf to http://www.docutren.com/congreso_palma/pdfs/com/Ses02/0208_Kreuzer.pdf
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20130218091158/http://www.isdit.it/articoli/98-0047.htm to http://www.isdit.it/articoli/98-0047.htm

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) 03:20, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Free Territory of Trieste. 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/20140506172050/http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/973F5ACC5148F42B85257506007BDAC2 to https://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/973F5ACC5148F42B85257506007BDAC2
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140203114006/http://notizie.triestelive.it/2010/01/22/la-galleria-di-cintura-ora-corre-su-due/ to http://notizie.triestelive.it/2010/01/22/la-galleria-di-cintura-ora-corre-su-due/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20021001203319/http://images.google.com/images?hl=en to https://images.google.com/images?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22Trieste%2C+Yugoslavia%22+source%3Alife&btnG=Search+Images

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) 08:28, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Alarming lack of viewpoints
This article does not currently take into account the fact that several thousands of Triestines, as well as world-reknowned experts, do not agree with the POV that the Treaty of Osimo dissolved the Free Territory of Trieste. As admitted in earlier discussions even by contrarian (Italian) admins, this perspective needs to be clearly represented here. During the next few days, this perspective will be expanded by us (as, in all honesty, we are some of the most expert in this matter) in the article. It will be done in a clear, source-based and as balanced as possible manner, as well as with utmost respect for all viewpoints, of course. Any recommendation will be welcome. It is important, in any case, that admins do not just randomly delete all additions. Triest-ngo

Annexed from Austria-Hungary in 1921 ?
Wonder if this was possible, since Austria-Hungary ceased to exist in fall of 1918, splitting in several parts. --129.187.244.19 (talk) 09:30, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

 * I would say yes -- given that various peace treaties with the spin-offs and/or rump state remainder had to be signed. Italy and Austria were opponents in WW1 -- what over government could Italy have annexed the territory from?  Chesspride@aol.com 216.144.161.51 (talk) 20:23, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Example
 * Treaty of Trianon, (1920), treaty concluding World War I and signed by representatives of Hungary on one side and the Allied Powers on the other. It was signed on June 4, 1920, at the Trianon Palace at Versailles, France. Chesspride216.144.161.51 (talk) 20:26, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Another Example -- Austria as the primary government, ceding territories that other powers eventually annexed. The territories were not in limbo for two years.
 * Treaty of Saint-Germain, (1919), treaty concluding World War I and signed by representatives of Austria on one side and the Allied Powers on the other. It was signed at Saint-Germain-en-Laye, near Paris, on September 10, 1919, and came into force on July 16, 1920.
 * The treaty officially registered the breakup of the Habsburg empire, recognizing the independence of Czechoslovakia, Poland, Hungary, and the Kingdom of the Serbs, Croats, and Slovenes (Yugoslavia) and ceding eastern Galicia, Trento, southern Tirol, Trieste, and Istria Chesspride216.144.161.51 (talk) 20:29, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
 * And The Treaty of Rapallo 1920 -- which ceded Austrian Trieste and Istria to Italy. Chesspride216.144.161.51 (talk) 20:38, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Free Territory Sign
Quite near the centre of Trieste there's that says "FREE TERRITORY OF TRIESTE: USA & UK COME BACK!". Judging by Google Street View it seems to have come into being in prototype form somewhen between 2012 and 2014. Is it just the whim of a local eccentric, or is there an organisation behind it? It's quite nice that at least one person likes the USA and UK. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 17:48, 21 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Free Territory of Trieste


text:
FC WIT Georgia

FC WIT Georgia is a Georgian football team from Tbilisi. The team is sponsored by WIT Georgia Ltd (a subsidiary of the United States WIT, Inc.), a pet food, accessories, and human and veterinary pharmaceuticals import company. WIT stands for World Innovation Technologies. They play their home games at Mikheil Meskhi Stadium in Tbilisi.

In 2004, FC WIT Georgia won the Georgian Championship, qualifying them for the early stages of the UEFA Champions League. In 2009, they won the championship for the second time. In 2010, the team won the Georgian Cup for the first time. However, performance of WIT Georgia was faded after 2010–11 season and relegated to Pirveli Liga in 2014–15 season. In 2017–18, they finished second in the Erovnuli Liga 2 and secured promotion to the Erovnuli Liga.

History

 * 1997: Founded as FC WIT Georgia Tbilisi.

Honours

 * Erovnuli Liga
 * Winners (2): 2003–04, 2009
 * Georgian Cup
 * Winners (1): 2010
 * Georgian Super Cup
 * Winners (1): 2009

Current squad
As of 1 August 2023

Managers

 * Elguja Gugushvili (1997–199?)
 * Sergo Kotrikadze (March 8, 1999 – 2001)
 * Nestor Mumladze (2006 – August 2009)
 * Merab Kochlashvili (August 2009 – 2009)
 * Gela Gomelauri (2009–2010)
 * Merab Kochlashvili (July 16, 2010–??)
 * Zurab Beridze (April 20, 2011 – March 11, 2012)
 * Merab Kochlashvili (March 2012–1?)
 * Zurab Beridze (April 1, 2013–1?)
 * Merab Kochlashvili (June 1, 2013–)
 * Tengiz Kobiashvili (2015–)

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

title: FC WIT Georgia


text:
Ambedkar Samaj Party

Ambedkar Samaj Party (Ambedkar Society Party) is a political party in India, that fights for the rights of Dalits. The party is opposed to Hindu nationalism, which it sees as representing an upper caste minority. ASP claims that Bahujan Samaj Party has betrayed dalits through its alliance with Bharatiya Janata Party. The leader of ASP is Tej Singh.

Singh is also commander-in-chief of the Bahujan Swayam Sewak Sanghathan, a militant dalit organization. BSS was founded 1995.

In the Lok Sabha elections 2004 ASP had launched nine candidates from Uttar Pradesh. Tej Singh stood as candidate from Aligarh and got 1 054 votes (0,17%).

title: Ambedkar Samaj Party


text:
Distance matrix

In mathematics, computer science and especially graph theory, a distance matrix is a square matrix (two-dimensional array) containing the distances, taken pairwise, between the elements of a set. Depending upon the application involved, the distance being used to define this matrix may or may not be a metric. If there are $N$ elements, this matrix will have size $N×N$. In graph-theoretic applications, the elements are more often referred to as points, nodes or vertices.

Non-metric distance matrix
In general, a distance matrix is a weighted adjacency matrix of some graph. In a network, a directed graph with weights assigned to the arcs, the distance between two nodes of the network can be defined as the minimum of the sums of the weights on the shortest paths joining the two nodes. This distance function, while well defined, is not a metric. There need be no restrictions on the weights other than the need to be able to combine and compare them, so negative weights are used in some applications. Since paths are directed, symmetry can not be guaranteed, and if cycles exist the distance matrix may not be hollow.

An algebraic formulation of the above can be obtained by using the min-plus algebra. Matrix multiplication in this system is defined as follows: Given two $n × n$ matrices $A = (aij)$ and $B = (bij)$, their distance product $C = (cij) = A ⭑ B$ is defined as an $n × n$ matrix such that
 * $$c_{ij} = \min_{k=1}^n \{a_{ik} + b_{kj}\}.$$

Note that the off-diagonal elements that are not connected directly will need to be set to infinity or a suitable large value for the min-plus operations to work correctly. A zero in these locations will be incorrectly interpreted as an edge with no distance, cost, etc.

If $W$ is an $n × n$ matrix containing the edge weights of a graph, then $Wk$ (using this distance product) gives the distances between vertices using paths of length at most $k$ edges, and $Wn$ is the distance matrix of the graph.

An arbitrary graph $G$ on $n$ vertices can be modeled as a weighted complete graph on $n$ vertices by assigning a weight of one to each edge of the complete graph that corresponds to an edge of $G$ and zero to all other edges. $W$ for this complete graph is the adjacency matrix of $G$. The distance matrix of $G$ can be computed from $W$ as above, however, $Wn$ calculated by the usual matrix multiplication only encodes the number of paths between any two vertices of length exactly $n$.

Metric distance matrix
The value of a distance matrix formalism in many applications is in how the distance matrix can manifestly encode the metric axioms and in how it lends itself to the use of linear algebra techniques. That is, if $xi,j$ with $xj,i$ is a distance matrix for a metric distance, then

 * 1) the entries on the main diagonal are all zero (that is, the matrix is a hollow matrix), i.e. $M = (xij)$ for all $1 ≤ i, j ≤ N$,
 * 2) all the off-diagonal entries are positive ($xii = 0$ if $1 ≤ i ≤ N$), (that is, a non-negative matrix),
 * 3) the matrix is a symmetric matrix ($xij > 0$), and
 * 4) for any $i$ and $j$, $i ≠ j$ for all $k$ (the triangle inequality). This can be stated in terms of tropical matrix multiplication

When a distance matrix satisfies the first three axioms (making it a semi-metric) it is sometimes referred to as a pre-distance matrix. A pre-distance matrix that can be embedded in a Euclidean space is called a Euclidean distance matrix. For mixed-type data that contain numerical as well as categorical descriptors, Gower's distance is a common alternative.

Another common example of a metric distance matrix arises in coding theory when in a block code the elements are strings of fixed length over an alphabet and the distance between them is given by the Hamming distance metric. The smallest non-zero entry in the distance matrix measures the error correcting and error detecting capability of the code.

Additive distance matrix
An additive distance matrix is a special type of matrix used in bioinformatics to build a phylogenetic tree. Let $x$ be the lowest common ancestor between two species $i$ and $j$, we expect $1=Mij = Mix + Mxj$. This is where the additive metric comes from. A distance matrix $M$ for a set of species $S$ is said to be additive if and only if there exists a phylogeny $T$ for $S$ such that:

 * Every edge $xij = xji$ in $T$ is associated with a positive weight $duv$
 * For every $xij ≤ xik + xkj$, $Mij$ equals the sum of the weights along the path from $i$ to $j$ in $T$

For this case, $M$ is called an additive matrix and $T$ is called an additive tree. Below we can see an example of an additive distance matrix and its corresponding tree:

Ultrametric distance matrix
The ultrametric distance matrix is defined as an additive matrix which models the constant molecular clock. It is used to build a phylogenetic tree. A matrix $M$ is said to be ultrametric if there exists a tree $T$ such that:

 * $Mij$ equals the sum of the edge weights along the path from $i$ to $j$ in $T$
 * A root of the tree can be identified with the distance to all the leaves being the same

Here is an example of an ultrametric distance matrix with its corresponding tree:

Bioinformatics
The distance matrix is widely used in the bioinformatics field, and it is present in several methods, algorithms and programs. Distance matrices are used to represent protein structures in a coordinate-independent manner, as well as the pairwise distances between two sequences in sequence space. They are used in structural and sequential alignment, and for the determination of protein structures from NMR or X-ray crystallography.

Sometimes it is more convenient to express data as a similarity matrix.

It is also used to define the distance correlation.

Sequence alignment
An alignment of two sequences is formed by inserting spaces in arbitrary locations along the sequences so that they end up with the same length and there are no two spaces at the same position of the two augmented sequences. One of the primary methods for sequence alignment is dynamic programming. The method is used to fill the distance matrix and then obtain the alignment. In typical usage, for sequence alignment a matrix is used to assign scores to amino-acid matches or mismatches, and a gap penalty for matching an amino-acid in one sequence with a gap in the other.

Global alignment
The Needleman-Wunsch algorithm used to calculate global alignment uses dynamic programming to obtain the distance matrix.

Local alignment
The Smith-Waterman algorithm is also dynamic programming based which consists also in obtaining the distance matrix and then obtain the local alignment.

Multiple sequence alignment
Multiple sequence alignment is an extension of pairwise alignment to align several sequences at a time. Different MSA methods are based on the same idea of the distance matrix as global and local alignments.

 * Center star method. This method defines a center sequence $(u,v)$ which minimizes the distance between the sequence $i,j ∈ S$ and any other sequence $S_{c}$. Then it generates a multiple alignment $S_{c}$ for the set of sequences $S_{i}$ so that for every $M$ the alignment distance $S$ is the optimal pairwise alignment. This method has the characteristic that the computed alignment for $S_{i}$ whose sum-of-pair distance is at most twice the optimal multiple alignment.
 * Progressive alignment method. This heuristic method to create MSA first aligns the two most related sequences, and then it progressively aligns the next two most related sequences until all sequences are aligned.

There are other methods that have their own program due to their popularity:

 * ClustalW
 * MUSCLE
 * MAFFT
 * MANGO
 * And many more

MAFFT
Multiple alignment using fast Fourier transform (MAFFT) is a program with an algorithm based on progressive alignment, and it offers various multiple alignment strategies. First, MAFFT constructs a distance matrix based on the number of shared 6-tuples. Second, it builds the guide tree based on the previous matrix. Third, it clusters the sequences with the help of the fast Fourier transform and starts the alignment. Based on the new alignment, it reconstructs the guide tree and align again.

Phylogenetic analysis
To perform phylogenetic analysis, the first step is to reconstruct the phylogenetic tree: given a collection of species, the problem is to reconstruct or infer the ancestral relationships among the species, i.e., the phylogenetic tree among the species. Distance matrix methods perform this activity.

Distance matrix methods
Distance matrix methods of phylogenetic analysis explicitly rely on a measure of "genetic distance" between the sequences being classified, and therefore require multiple sequences as an input. Distance methods attempt to construct an all-to-all matrix from the sequence query set describing the distance between each sequence pair. From this is constructed a phylogenetic tree that places closely related sequences under the same interior node and whose branch lengths closely reproduce the observed distances between sequences. Distance-matrix methods may produce either rooted or unrooted trees, depending on the algorithm used to calculate them. Given $d_{M}(S_{c},S_{i})$ species, the input is an $S$ distance matrix $n$ where $n × n$ is the mutation distance between species $M$ and $M_{ij}$. The aim is to output a tree of degree $i$ which is consistent with the distance matrix.

They are frequently used as the basis for progressive and iterative types of multiple sequence alignment. The main disadvantage of distance-matrix methods is their inability to efficiently use information about local high-variation regions that appear across multiple subtrees. Despite potential problems, distance methods are extremely fast, and they often produce a reasonable estimate of phylogeny. They also have certain benefits over the methods that use characters directly. Notably, distance methods allow use of data that may not be easily converted to character data, such as DNA-DNA hybridization assays.

The following are distance based methods for phylogeny reconstruction:

 * Additive tree reconstruction
 * UPGMA
 * Neighbor joining
 * Fitch-Margoliash

Additive tree reconstruction
Additive tree reconstruction is based on additive and ultrametric distance matrices. These matrices have a special characteristic:

Consider an additive matrix $j$. For any three species $3$ the corresponding tree is unique. Every ultrametric distance matrix is an additive matrix. We can observe this property for the tree below, which consists on the species $M$. The additive tree reconstruction technique starts with this tree. And then adds one more species each time, based on the distance matrix combined with the property mentioned above. For example, consider an additive matrix $i, j, k,$ and 5 species $i, j, k$ and $M$. First we form an additive tree for two species $a, b, c, d$ and $e$. Then we chose a third one, let's say $a$ and attach it to a point $b$ on the edge between $c$ and $x$. The edge weights are computed with the property above. Next we add the fourth species $a$ to any of the edges. If we apply the property then we identify that $b$ should be attached to only one specific edge. Finally, we add $d$ following the same procedure as before.

UPGMA
The basic principle of UPGMA (Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Mean) is that similar species should be closer in the phylogenetic tree. Hence, it builds the tree by clustering similar sequences iteratively. The method works by building the phylogenetic tree bottom up from its leaves. Initially, we have $d$ leaves (or $e$ singleton trees), each representing a species in $n$. Those $n$ leaves are referred as $S$ clusters. Then, we perform $n$ iterations. In each iteration, we identify two clusters $n$ and $n-1$ with the smallest average distance and merge them to form a bigger cluster $C_{1}$. If we suppose $C_{2}$ is ultrametric, for any cluster $C$ created by the UPGMA algorithm, $M$ is a valid ultrametric tree.

Neighbor joining
Neighbor is a bottom-up clustering method. It takes a distance matrix specifying the distance between each pair of sequences. The algorithm starts with a completely unresolved tree, whose topology corresponds to that of a star network, and iterates over the following steps until the tree is completely resolved and all branch lengths are known:

 * 1) Based on the current distance matrix calculate the matrix (defined below).
 * 2) Find the pair of distinct taxa i and j (i.e. with) for which has its lowest value. These taxa are joined to a newly created node, which is connected to the central node.
 * 3) Calculate the distance from each of the taxa in the pair to this new node.
 * 4) Calculate the distance from each of the taxa outside of this pair to the new node.
 * 5) Start the algorithm again, replacing the pair of joined neighbors with the new node and using the distances calculated in the previous step.

Fitch-Margoliash
The Fitch–Margoliash method uses a weighted least squares method for clustering based on genetic distance. Closely related sequences are given more weight in the tree construction process to correct for the increased inaccuracy in measuring distances between distantly related sequences. The least-squares criterion applied to these distances is more accurate but less efficient than the neighbor-joining methods. An additional improvement that corrects for correlations between distances that arise from many closely related sequences in the data set can also be applied at increased computational cost.

Data Mining
A common function in data mining is applying cluster analysis on a given set of data to group data based on how similar or more similar they are when compared to other groups. Distance matrices became heavily dependent and utilized in cluster analysis since similarity can be measured with a distance metric. Thus, distance matrix became the representation of the similarity measure between all the different pairs of data in the set.

Hierarchical clustering
A distance matrix is necessary for traditional hierarchical clustering algorithms which are often heuristic methods employed in biological sciences such as phylogeny reconstruction. When implementing any of the hierarchical clustering algorithms in data mining, the distance matrix will contain all pair-wise distances between every point and then will begin to create clusters between two different points or clusters based entirely on distances from the distance matrix.

If N be the number of points, the complexity of hierarchical clustering is:

 * Time complexity is $$O(N^3)$$ due to the repetitive calculations done after every cluster to update the distance matrix
 * Space complexity is $$O(N^2)$$

Machine Learning
Distance metrics are a key part of several machine learning algorithms, which are used in both supervised and unsupervised learning. They are generally used to calculate the similarity between data points: this is where the distance matrix is an essential element. The use of an effective distance matrix improves the performance of the machine learning model, whether it is for classification tasks or for clustering.

K-Nearest Neighbors
A distance matrix is utilized in the k-NN algorithm which is one of the slowest but simplest and most used instance-based machine learning algorithms that can be used both in classification and regression tasks. It is one of the slowest machine learning algorithms since each test sample's predicted result requires a fully computed distance matrix between the test sample and each training sample in the training set. Once the distance matrix is computed, the algorithm selects the K number of training samples that are the closest to the test sample to predict the test sample's result based on the selected set's majority (classification) or average (regression) value.

 * Prediction time complexity is $$O(k * n * d)$$, to compute the distance between each test sample with every training sample to construct the distance matrix where:

This classification focused model predicts the label of the target based on the distance matrix between the target and each of the training samples to determine the K-number of samples that are the closest/nearest to the target.
 * 1) k = number of nearest neighbors selected
 * 2) n = size of the training set
 * 3) d = number of dimensions being used for the data

Computer Vision
A distance matrix can be used in neural networks for 2D to 3D regression in image predicting machine learning models.

Distance matrices using Gaussian mixture distance

 * * Gaussian mixture distance for performing accurate nearest neighbor search for information retrieval. Under an established Gaussian finite mixture model for the distribution of the data in the database, the Gaussian mixture distance is formulated based on minimizing the Kullback-Leibler divergence between the distribution of the retrieval data and the data in database. In the comparison of performance of the Gaussian mixture distance with the well-known Euclidean and Mahalanobis distances based on a precision performance measurement, experimental results demonstrate that the Gaussian mixture distance function is superior in the others for different types of testing data.

Potential basic algorithms worth noting on the topic of information retrieval is Fish School Search algorithm an information retrieval that partakes in the act of using distance matrices in order for gathering collective behavior of fish schools. By using a feeding operator to update their weights

Eq. A:

x_i(t+1)=x_{i}(t)- step_{vol} rand(0,1)\frac{x_{i}(t) - B(t)}{distance(x_{i}(t),B(t))}, $$

Eq. B:

x_i(t+1)=x_{i}(t)+step_{vol} rand(0,1)\frac{x_{i}(t) - B(t)}{distance(x_{i}(t),B(t))}, $$

Stepvol defines the size of the maximum volume displacement preformed with the distance matrix, specifically using a Euclidean distance matrix.

Evaluation of the similarity or dissimilarity of Cosine similarity and Distance matrices

 * * While the Cosine similarity measure is perhaps the most frequently applied proximity measure in information retrieval by measuring the angles between documents in the search space on the base of the cosine. Euclidean distance is invariant to mean-correction. The sampling distribution of a mean is generated by repeated sampling from the same population and recording of the sample means obtained. This forms a distribution of different means, and this distribution has its own mean and variance. For the data which can be negative as well as positive, the null distribution for cosine similarity is the distribution of the dot product of two independent random unit vectors. This distribution has a mean of zero and a variance of 1/n. While Euclidean distance will be invariant to this correction.

Clustering Documents
The implementation of hierarchical clustering with distance-based metrics to organize and group similar documents together will require the need and utilization of a distance matrix. The distance matrix will represent the degree of association that a document has with another document that will be used to create clusters of closely associated documents that will be utilized in retrieval methods of relevant documents for a user's query.

Isomap
Isomap incorporates distance matrices to utilize geodesic distances to able to compute lower-dimensional embeddings. This helps to address a collection of documents that reside within a massive number of dimensions and empowers to perform document clustering.

Neighborhood Retrieval Visualizer (NeRV)
An algorithm used for both unsupervised and supervised visualization that uses distance matrices to find similar data based on the similarities shown on a display/screen.

The distance matrix needed for Unsupervised NeRV can be computed through fixed input pairwise distances.

The distance matrix needed for Supervised NeRV requires formulating a supervised distance metric to be able to compute the distance of the input in a supervised manner.

Chemistry
The distance matrix is a mathematical object widely used in both graphical-theoretical (topological) and geometric (topographic) versions of chemistry. The distance matrix is used in chemistry in both explicit and implicit forms.

Interconversion mechanisms between two permutational isomers
Distance matrices were used as the main approach to depict and reveal the shortest path sequence needed to determine the rearrangement between the two permutational isomers.

Distance Polynomials and Distance Spectra
Explicit use of Distance matrices is required in order to construct the distance polynomials and distance spectra of molecular structures.

Structure-property model
Implicit use of Distance matrices was applied through the use of the distance based metric Weiner number/Weiner Index which was formulated to represent the distances in all chemical structures. The Weiner number is equal to half-sum of the elements of the distance matrix.

Graph-theoretical Distance matrix
Distance matrix in chemistry that are used for the 2-D realization of molecular graphs, which are used to illustrate the main foundational features of a molecule in a myriad of applications.

 * 1) Creating a label tree that represents the carbon skeleton of a molecule based on its distance matrix. The distance matrix is imperative in this application because similar molecules can have a myriad of label tree variants of their carbon skeleton. The labeled tree structure of hexane (C6H14) carbon skeleton that is created based on the distance matrix in the example, has different carbon skeleton variants that affect both the distance matrix and the labeled tree
 * 2) Creating a labeled graph with edge weights, used in chemical graph theory, that represent molecules with hetero-atoms.
 * 3) Le Verrier-Fadeev-Frame (LVFF) method is a computer oriented used to speed up the process of detecting the graph center in polycyclic graphs. However, LVFF requires the input to be a diagonalized distance matrix which is easily resolved by implementing the Householder tridiagonal-QL algorithm that takes in a distance matrix and returns the diagonalized distance needed for the LVFF method.

Geometric-Distance Matrix
While the graph-theoretical distance matrix 2-D captures the constitutional features of the molecule, its three-dimensional (3D) character is encoded in the geometric-distance matrix. The geometric-distance matrix is a different type of distance matrix that is based on the graph-theoretical distance matrix of a molecule to represent and graph the 3-D molecule structure. The geometric-distance matrix of a molecular structure $C$ is a real symmetric $C$ matrix defined in the same way as a 2-D matrix. However, the matrix elements $G$ will hold a collection of shortest Cartesian distances between $n x n$ and $D_{ij}$ in $i$. Also known as topographic matrix, the geometric-distance matrix can be constructed from the known geometry of the molecule. As an example, the geometric-distance matrix of the carbon skeleton of 2,4-dimethylhexane is shown below:

Time Series Analysis
Dynamic Time Warping distance matrices are utilized with the clustering and classification algorithms of a collection/group of time series objects.

Examples
For example, suppose these data are to be analyzed, where pixel Euclidean distance is the distance metric.

The distance matrix would be:

These data can then be viewed in graphic form as a heat map. In this image, black denotes a distance of 0 and white is maximal distance.

title: Distance matrix


text:
User:Regebro

This user has stopped being active. See talk page for explanation.

title: User:Regebro


text:
Wikipedia:MediaWiki order of page names

The MediaWiki software uses Unicode alphabetical order when ordering names of articles (and other pages), such as seen when presenting alphabetized lists of articles on Category pages. Unicode alphabetical order is different from standard English alphabetization. The part of Unicode alphabetical order which concerns us is:
 * Unicode

Note in particular that capital "Z" comes before lowercase "a", and "z" before "é". A blank space within a page name is treated as an underscore, and therefore comes after the capitals, and before the lower case letters. Sometimes a special character looks to the reader like a standard English-language Latin character, but has a special code anyway.

Since capital letters come before lower case letters, an article named "Happiness McGee" will come before "Happiness algorithm". They will both come before "Ātman (Hinduism)" which in turn will come before "δ-opioid receptor", unless ordering is altered by DEFAULTSORT within the article (which is commonly done for articles which start with diacritic-added Latin characters (e.g. "Ā") but not for non-Latin characters (e.g. "δ")).

Editors can control the alphabetical order of articles as they appear on Category pages (only) with the DEFAULTSORT template. Thus, for an article named "¡Basta Ya!", writing inside the article will cause it to be alphabetically ordered with "B" articles on Category pages. (But the actual native name ("¡Basta Ya!") will appear to the reader on the Category page, even though grouped in with the "B"s, as DEFAULTSORT cannot control that). Similarly, will cause the article "Ātman (Hinduism)" to be ordered under "A", and so forth.
 * Controlling with DEFAULTSORT

(DEFAULTSORT does not affect alphabetical ordering except on Category pages. Thus, on Special:Allpages, which displays all articles but is not a Category page, "¡Basta Ya!" will still be ordered as beginning with "¡"; and any other alphabetical ordering done by the MediaWiki software will also be done in Unicode order.)

The actual native names of articles cannot begin with a lowercase letter. The template lowercase title is written inside articles such as "eBay" to make the article title to appear to the reader as starting with a lowercase "e". But the article will be ordered on Category pages under "E", and will appear to the reader on Category pages under its true native name as "EBay".
 * Articles beginning with a lowercase letter

This page give no instructions for editors (except advice on using DEFAULTSORT), it exists simply to describe how the Mediawiki software orders pages. Don't consider sorting issues when deciding on article titles – whether an article name should begin with "A" or "Å" for instance should be determined by the WP:Manual of Style or other considerations.
 * This does not apply within articles

By common practice, editors do not use Unicode order within articles, such as when making lists. Z and z should be treated identically, and for non-standard characters, either standard English alphabetizing rules are used - O, Ö, and Ô are identical, for instance - or language-specific order is used (thus, since in Finnish "Å" comes after "Z", this order could be used in a list about Finnish entities); this choice is at the discretion of the editor, but individual articles should be internally consistent.

title: Wikipedia:MediaWiki order of page names


text:
Marian Otis Chandler

Marian Otis Chandler (July 1, 1866 – August 9, 1952) was the secretary and a director of the Times-Mirror Company, which published the Los Angeles Times.

Biography
She was born as Emma Marian Otis July 1, 1866, in Marietta, Ohio, to Harrison Gray Otis (publisher) and Eliza Ann Wetherby. Marian had three sisters, Mabel, Lilian, and Esther (who died in infancy),{ } and a brother, Harrison Gray (who died in infancy).{ }

In 1894, Marian married Harry Chandler, who later became publisher of the Los Angeles Times. Marian and Harry raised eight children together, two from Harry's first marriage, and six of their own. Norman Chandler (1899–1973), became publisher of the Times after his father's death.

After the death of her husband in 1944, Mrs. Chandler resigned as secretary; a month later she was elected chairman of the Times-Mirror board. She also was vice president of the Chandis Securities Company and vice-president of the Southwest Land Company and the Southwest Company. She was known for her numerous philanthropies.

She died on August 9, 1952, at her home in the Los Feliz foothills, Los Angeles, California., owned many years later by Father Yod. She was buried at Hollywood Forever Cemetery in Hollywood, California. She left seven children — Mrs. Roger Goodan (Alice May), Mrs. Earle E. Crowe (Constance), Mrs. John J. Garland (Helen), Mrs. James G. Boswell (Ruth), Norman Chandler. Philip Chandler and Harrison Chandler, as well as a sister, Mabel Otis Booth.

Legacy

 * The community of Reseda, California, was originally named Marian, after Mrs. Chandler.
 * A freighter ship built in 1917 (originally named War Flame but known as Empire Leopard when torpedoed and sunk November 2, 1942, by the German submarine U-402) was bought in 1929 by the Los Angeles Steamship Company and renamed Marian Otis Chandler, holding that name until it was sold again in 1939.

title: Marian Otis Chandler


text:
Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana

The Metropolitan Autonomous University (Spanish: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana) also known as UAM, is a Mexican public research university. Founded in 1974 with the support of then-President Luis Echeverria Alvarez, the institution aims to be closely linked to the social and human environment.

As an autonomous university, UAM is a public agency of the Mexican government. It has five academic units located in Mexico City and Greater Mexico City: Azcapotzalco, in north, Iztapalapa, in east, Cuajimalpa, in west, Xochimilco, in south, and Lerma in State of Mexico.),

The institution is among the top academic universities in Mexico. In 2019, it ranked first among both public and private institution, was second in the number of full-time research professors with doctorates, according to the Comparative Study of Mexican Universities (Estudio Comparativo de Universidades Mexicanas); having the second largest number of built in National and Research System (Sistema Nacional de Investigadores) the second in having researchers at Level 3 of the same researchers. One of the leading universities in Mexico to submit the highest number of research. And the second institution to have publications in refereed journals, such as the Institute for Scientific Information, Latindex and journals included in the Index of Mexican Journals of Scientific and Technological Research of the National Council of Science and Technology (Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología) and the second to have magazines within the Conacyt, it is also among the top four with the largest number of patents granted in Mexico.

History
After the historic 1968 Tlatelolco massacre in Mexico concluded, and after other subsequent movements in favor of education and claim social improvements, the need for comprehensive education reform in Mexico was evident.

In 1973, during the administration of President Luis Echeverria Alvarez, the National Association of Universities and Institutions of Higher Education (ANUIES), he presented a document to the President noting the need to establish a new university in the metropolitan area Mexico City, taking into consideration issues such as increasing student demand and the increasing failure of existing universities to admit more students.

It then proposed that the nascent university project also constituted an opportunity to modernize higher education in the country. The expected characteristics of the new university were it to be public, metropolitan, independent, innovative addition to its educational and organizational terms. It is under such expectations that the law comes into force for the creation of the Autonomous Metropolitan University, on 1 January 1974. On 10 January of that year, he was appointed first Rector of the UAM architect Pedro Ramirez Vazquez.

The University is established since its creation three units, which are located in Iztapalapa, Azcapotzalco and Xochimilco, with the idea of promoting decentralization and allow the full development of each. Empirically, scientific research in Iztapalapa (UAM-I) Unit is located, the traditional careers such as civil engineering and architecture at the Azcapotzalco (UAM-A) unit and the area of health in the Xochimilco Unit (UAM -X). Subsequently, it was decided that their internal organization would be composed of divisions and academic departments, creating a contrast with the Schools and Colleges of existing universities. Each division would group different areas of knowledge and related disciplines each department, in order to give a flexible structure that prevents the lag that education has suffered in relation to the progress of science. The first Rector of the Iztapalapa Unit was Dr. Alonso Fernandez González and began operations on September 30, 1974.

In turn, the Rector of the Azcapotzalco Unit was Dr. Juan Casillas García de León, which opened its doors 11 November 1974. For the Xochimilco was Rector Dr. Ramon Villarreal Perez, initiating teaching also the November 11, 1974. Recently, the possibility of creating a new unit of the UAM was analyzed. The April 26, 2005 the Academic College of the institution approved the creation of the Cuajimalpa campus, appointing in June of that year Dr. Fresán Magdalena Orozco as the first Rector. The activities of the Unit officially pulled the September 14, 2005, using different locations, at first at the Universidad Iberoamericana. Then he took three temporary facilities: Baja California, Artifice and Constituents Constituents adding a fourth in 647. His final location was achieved in 2014 on the grounds of "Scorpio", ancient land of the Zona Especial Forestal y de Repoblación Bosques Industriales La Venta, which had not been built by the lack of legal certainty and the opposition of local people to Ocotal forest development in the sale of Cuajimalpa.

Campuses
The university system has 5 units, with campuses located in different boroughs of Mexico City and in the adjacent state:
 * UAM Azcapotzalco — located in Azcapotzalco, northern Mexico City
 * UAM Iztapalapa — located in Iztapalapa, eastern Mexico City
 * UAM Cuajimalpa — located in Cuajimalpa, western Mexico City
 * UAM Xochimilco — located in Coyoacán, southern Mexico City.
 * UAM Lerma — located near Toluca, in the State of Mexico.

Main office
UAM Rectoría is the main office of the university system. It is located in the south of the city, on Canal de Miramontes street near Xochimilco.

title: Universidad Autónoma Metropolitana


text:
Talk:Parti Radical de Gauche

Shouldn't this article be merged with Left Radical Party Gangulf 11:55, 16 Jul 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Parti Radical de Gauche


text:
TCP Wrappers

TCP Wrappers (also known as tcp_wrappers) is a host-based networking ACL system, used to filter network access to Internet Protocol servers on (Unix-like) operating systems such as Linux or BSD. It allows host or subnetwork IP addresses, names and/or ident query replies, to be used as tokens on which to filter for access control purposes.

The original code was written by Wietse Venema in 1990 to monitor a cracker's activities on the Unix workstations at the Department of Math and Computer Science at the Eindhoven University of Technology. He maintained it until 1995, and on June 1, 2001, released it under its own BSD-style license.

The tarball includes a library named libwrap that implements the actual functionality. Initially, only services that were spawned for each connection from a super-server (such as inetd) got wrapped, utilizing the tcpd program. However most common network service daemons today can be linked against libwrap directly. This is used by daemons that operate without being spawned from a super-server, or when a single process handles multiple connections. Otherwise, only the first connection attempt would get checked against its ACLs.

When compared to host access control directives often found in daemons' configuration files, TCP Wrappers have the benefit of runtime ACL reconfiguration (i.e., services don't have to be reloaded or restarted) and a generic approach to network administration.

This makes it easy to use for anti-worm scripts, such as DenyHosts or Fail2ban, to add and expire client-blocking rules, when excessive connections and/or many failed login attempts are encountered.

While originally written to protect TCP and UDP accepting services, examples of usage to filter on certain ICMP packets exist too, such as 'pingd' – the userspace ping request responder.

1999 Trojan
In January 1999, the distribution package at Eindhoven University of Technology (the primary distribution site until that day) was replaced by a modified version. The replacement contained a trojaned version of the software that would allow the intruder access to any server that it was installed on. The author spotted this within hours, upon which he relocated the primary distribution to his personal site.

title: TCP Wrappers


text:
Talk:Radical Party of the Left

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Radical Party of the Left. 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/20120725204639/http://dev.ulb.ac.be/cevipol/en/elections_france_europeennes_1994.html to http://dev.ulb.ac.be/cevipol/en/elections_france_europeennes_1994.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120725175546/http://dev.ulb.ac.be/cevipol/en/elections_france_presidentielles_2002.html to http://dev.ulb.ac.be/cevipol/en/elections_france_presidentielles_2002.html
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20120604135939/http://www.generation-ecologie.fr/2011/12/14/bapt%C3%AAme-du-p%C3%B4le-radical-et-ecologique/ to http://www.generation-ecologie.fr/2011/12/14/bapt%C3%AAme-du-p%C3%B4le-radical-et-ecologique/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130730045546/http://www.planeteradicale.org/Creation-du-pole-radical-et.html to http://www.planeteradicale.org/Creation-du-pole-radical-et.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Radical Party of the Left