text:
HMS Indefatigable (1784)

HMS Indefatigable was one of the Ardent-class ship of the line 64-gun third-rate ships-of-the-line designed by Sir Thomas Slade in 1761 for the Royal Navy. She was built as a ship-of-the-line, but most of her active service took place after her conversion to a 44-gun razee frigate. She had a long career under several distinguished commanders, serving throughout the French Revolutionary Wars and the Napoleonic Wars. She took some 27 prizes, alone or in company, and the Admiralty authorised the issue of four clasps to the Naval General Service Medal in 1847 to any surviving members of her crews from the respective actions. She was broken up in 1816.

Construction
Indefatigable was ordered on 3 August 1780 (long after Slade's death), and her keel was laid down in May 1781 at the Bucklers Hard shipyard in Hampshire owned by Henry Adams. She was launched in early July 1784 and completed from 11 July to 13 September of that year at Portsmouth Dockyard as a 64-gun two-decked third rate for the Royal Navy. She had cost £25,210 4s 5d to build; her total initial cost including fitting out and coppering was £36,154 18s 7d. By that time, she was already anachronistic for the role of a ship of the line as the French only built the more powerful 74-gun ships, and was never commissioned in that role.

Design modification
In 1794, she was razéed; her upper gun deck was cut away to convert her into a large and heavily armed frigate. The original intention was to retain her twenty-six 24-pounder guns on her gundeck, and to mount eight 12-pounder guns on her quarterdeck and a further four on her forecastle, which would have rated her as a 38-gun vessel. However, it was at this time that the carronade was becoming more popular in the Navy, and her intended armament was altered on 5 December 1794 with the addition of four 42-pounder carronades to go on her quarterdeck and two on her forecastle. Indefatigable was thereafter rated as a 44-gun fifth-rate frigate, along with HMS Magnanime (1780) and HMS Anson (1781), which were converted at about the same time. The work was carried out at Portsmouth from September 1794 to February 1795 at a cost of £8,764. On 17 February 1795, a further two 12-pounder guns were added to her quarterdeck, though her official rating remained unchanged.

Captain Sir Edward Pellew
Indefatigable was first commissioned in December 1794 under Captain Sir Edward Pellew. He commanded her until early 1799.

On 9 March 1795, Indefatigable, HMS Concorde (1783), and HMS Jason (1763) captured numerous French prizes: Temeraire, Minerve, Gentille, Regeneration, and a brig and sloop of unknown names. In October, the Dutch East Indiaman Zeelilee was wrecked in the Isles of Scilly with the loss of 25 of her 70 crew. Indefatigable rescued the survivors.

On 20 March 1796, Indefatigable and her squadron chased three French corvettes, of which the Volage of 26 guns ran ashore under a battery at the mouth of the Loire. Volage lost her masts in running ashore, but the French were later able to refloat her. Her two consorts FRENCH CORVETTE Sagesse and Eclatant escaped into the river. In this action, HMS Amazon (1795) had four men wounded.

Between 11 and 21 March Indefatigable's squadron captured the vessels Favorite Sultana, Friends, Providence, Four Marys, Aimable Justine, and Nouvelle Union. They also destroyed two unnamed brigs and a chasse maree. The vessels sharing in the prize money were: Indefatigable, Concorde, HMS Révolutionnaire (1794), Amazon, HMS Argo (1781), and the hired armed cutter Dolly and hired armed lugger Duke of York.

On 13 April 1796, Indefatigable was in pursuit of a French frigate. Pellew signalled to Révolutionnaire to cut her off from the shore. Révolutionnaire then captured the French frigate Unité after having fired two broadsides into her. Unité had nine men killed and 11 wounded; Révolutionnaire had no casualties. The Royal Navy took the frigate into service as HMS Unite.

On the morning of 20 April 1796, Indefatigable sighted the French 44-gun frigate FRENCH FRIGATE Virginie off the Lizard. Indefatigable, Amazon, and Concorde chased Virginie, with Indefatigable catching her just after midnight on 21 April after a chase of 15 hours and 168 mi. After an hour and three quarters of fighting, she still had not struck and had somewhat outmaneuvered Indefatigable when Concorde arrived. Seeing that she was outnumbered, Virginie struck.

Virginie carried 44 guns, 18 and 9-pounders, and had a crew of 340 men under the command of Citizen Bergeret, Capitaine de Vaisseau. She had 14 or 15 men killed, 17 badly wounded, and 10 slightly. She also had four feet of water in her hold from shot holes. Indefatigable had no casualties. Pellew sent Virginie into Plymouth under the escort of Concorde, and followed the next day with Amazon, which had sustained some damage. The Royal Navy took Virginie into service as HMS Virginie (1796).

In July 1796, there was an initial distribution of £20,000 of prize money for the capture of Unite and Virginie. Indefatigable shared this with Amazon, Révolutionnaire, Concorde, and Argo. Apparently, Duke of York also shared in some or all of the prize money. In 1847, the Admiralty authorised the issue of the Naval General Service Medal with clasp "Indefatigable 20 Apl. 1796".

On 12 June, Indefatigable, Amazon, Concorde, Revolutionaire, and HMS Phoebe (1795) took two French brigs off Ushant – the Trois Couleurs and the Blonde (alias Betsey) – after a chase of 24 hours. Trois Couleurs carried 10 guns and a crew of 70. Blonde had 16 guns and a crew of 95 men. Each was under the command of an ensign de vaisseau and both vessels had left Brest two days earlier for a six-week cruise, but had not yet taken any prizes.

In September 1796, Indefatigable, Phoebe, Révolutionnaire, and Amazon captured five Spanish ships.

On 1 October, Indefatigable, Amazon, Révolutionnaire, Phoebe, and Jason shared in the capture of the Vrow Delenea Maria. The next day, Pellew and Indefatigable captured the privateer schooner Ariel of Boston off Corunna. Earlier, Pellew had recaptured the brig Queen of Naples, which had been sailing from Lisbon to Cork. From her, he learned that there were two privateers around Corunna, one of which had captured a brig from Lisbon with a cargo of bale goods two days earlier. Pellew immediately set off towards Corunna and was able to intercept the Ariel. She had 12 guns and a crew of 75 men. She was 14 days out of Bordeaux. Her consort, the schooner Vengeur, was of the same strength, and Pellew yet hoped to catch her, too. The brig from Bristol, however, had made it into the port of Ferrol, where Pellew had earlier chased two French frigates.

In January 1797, Indefatigable and Amazon captured the packet Sangossee. On 7 January, Indefatigable and Amazon captured the Emanuel. Later that month, Indefatigable fought her most famous battle.

The Action of 13 January 1797 was an engagement off the Penmarks involving the two frigates Indefatigable and Amazon against the French FRENCH SHIP Droits de l'Homme, a 74-gun ship of the line. The battle ended with Droits de l'Homme being driven onto shore in a gale. Amazon also ran onto the shore; still, almost her entire crew survived both the battle and the grounding and were captured. Despite being embayed and having damaged masts and rigging, Indefatigable was able to repair the damage and beat off the lee shore, showing excellent seamanship. She had only 19 officers and men wounded, with most of those not being serious. This action resulted the award of the Naval General Service Medal with clasp "Indefatigable 13 Jany. 1797" for any crew surviving in 1847.

On 18 January Indefatigable was at Falmouth. There she saved all on board when a fire destroyed the American merchantman Indian Chief.

Subsequently, Indefatigable or Pellew's squadron took more vessels, including privateers, primarily in the Channel. Thus, Pellew reported that, on 30 April 1797, "we" captured the French brigantine privateer Basque. She was armed with eight guns and carried a crew of 50 men.

On 11 May, Indefatigable in company with Phoebe, HMS Cleopatra (1779), HMS Childers (1778), and Duke of York captured Nouvelle Eugénie. She was a razee privateer of 16 guns and carried a crew of 120 men. She was four days out of Nantes on a 30-day cruise, but had taken no prizes. The Royal Navy took her into service as HMS Eugenie (1797).

On 21 July, the Duke of York returned, having chased a French privateer lugger into the hands of Lieutenant Bray, who commanded the Revenue Cutter Hind. Hind also recaptured a sloop that the privateer had captured. The lugger was armed with two guns and carried a crew of 25 men.

On 14 October, Indefatigable arrived at Teneriffe. There at midnight she captured the French brig corvette FRENCH CORVETTE Ranger. Ranger was armed with 14 guns and carried a crew of 70 men. She had been carrying dispatches to the West Indies, which she was able to destroy before capture. The next day, Pellew captured a Spanish schooner carrying a cargo of fish. Indefatigable was short of water, so he put the crew of Ranger on board the schooner (though not Ranger's officers) and sent them ashore at Santa Cruz.

Ten days after that, Indefatigable captured the privateer Hyène after a chase of eight hours. She was armed with twenty-four 9-pounder guns and had a crew of 230 men. She was two weeks out of Bayonne but had not captured anything. Hyène had apparently mistaken Indefatigable for a vessel from Portuguese India. Pellew estimated that, had she not lost her foretopmast in the chase, she might have escaped. She had been the post-ship HMS Hyaena (1778) until her capture in 1793; the Royal Navy took her back into service under her original name.

Indefatigable returned to the Channel. On 11 January 1798, she was in company with HMS Cambrian (1797) and Childers when they captured the French privateer schooner Vengeur. Vengeur was a new vessel of 12 guns and 72 men. She was eight days out of Ostend but had taken no prizes. Pellew sent her into Falmouth.

Five days later, in the evening of the 16th, Pellew's squadron captured the French privateer Inconcevable. She was armed with eight guns and had a crew of 55 men. She was 10 days out of Dunkirk and had taken nothing. Prize money was paid to Indefatigable, Cambrian, and HMS Success (1781).

On 28 January, Indefatigable and Cambrian captured the privateer Heureuse Nouvelle. She was armed with 22 guns and had a crew of 130 men. She was 36 days out of Brest and, during that time, had captured only one ship, a large American vessel named the Providence which had a cargo of cotton and sugar. Pellew sent Cambrian in pursuit. Duke of York also shared in the capture.

On 30 April 1798, Indefatigable captured the brigantine privateer Basque. She was armed with eight guns and had a crew of 50 men. Indefatigable and Cleopatra captured the Hope on 11 July.

At daylight on 4 August, Indefatigable sighted the privateer Heureux together with a prize and gave chase. The two separated, with the prize heading directly for Bayonne. After a chase of 32 hours on a great circular route, Indefatigable and her quarry found themselves off Bayonne where Indefatigable intercepted the prize and captured her. The privateer was the Heureux, of 16 guns and 112 men. Her prize was the Canada, John Sewell Master, which had been sailing from Jamaica to London, having stopped in Charlestown, with a cargo of sugar, rum, and coffee. Pellew exchanged prisoners, taking off the crew of the Canada and putting on her the crew of Heureux. He then drove Canada on shore where he hoped that her cargo at least would be destroyed.

Indefatigable captured the French corvette Vaillante while cruising in the Bay of Biscay on 8 August, after a chase of 24 hours, which was under the command of Lieutenant de Vaisseau La Porte. The corvette fired a few shots before she struck. She was armed with twenty-two 9-pounder guns and had a crew of 175 men. She had left Rochefort on 1 August, and the Île de Ré on the 4th, where she had picked up 25 banished priests, 27 convicts, and a Madame Rovere and family, all of whom she was taking to Cayenne. She was only 18 months old, coppered, and a fast sailer. The British took her into service as HMS Danae (1798). On 15 November 1798, Indefatigable captured Mercurius.

At dawn on 31 December 1798, Indefatigable captured the Minerve, five leagues off Ushant. She was armed with 16 guns and carried a crew of 140 men. She was four weeks out of Saint-Malo and was waiting to enter Brest when captured. She had taken several prizes, one of which, the Asphalon, Indefatigable captured on 1 January 1799. Aspahalon, a Newcastle vessel, had been sailing from Halifax to London with a cargo of sugar, coffee, and tobacco. Other vessels which Minerve had captured included Martinus (Bremen brig), Tagus (Portuguese brig ), Minerva (English snow), and Ann and Dorothea (aka Beata Maria, Danish schooner).

On 14 January 1799, Indefatigable recaptured Argo, Rich, master, which had been sailing from Gothenburg for Boston when a French privateer had captured her. After her recapture Argo arrived at Falmouth.

More captures or recaptures of merchantmen followed. Indefatigable, HMS Melpomene (1794), and HMS Nymphe (1780) recaptured the Providence on 10 January 1799, the Pomona on 5 February, and the Wohlfarden on 9 February.

Subsequent commanders
From March 1799 until the end of 1800 Indefatigable was under the command of Captain Henry Curzon. On 31 May she captured the brig Vénus. Venus was armed with twelve 4-pounder guns and two 9-pounders, and carried a crew of 101 men. She was nine weeks out of Rochefort and had captured two prizes, the schooner Clarence, sailing from Lisbon to London, and a ship from Lisbon sailing to Hamburg with a cargo of salt. Indefatigable was apparently also in company with Fisgard and Diamond.

On 9 October 1799 Indefatigable, Diamond, Cambrian, HMS Stag (1794), Nymphe and HMS Cerberus (1794) shared in the capture of the Spanish brig Nostra Senora de la Solidad. Then on 7 November Nymphe, Indefatigable and Diamond shared in the recapture of the ship Brailsford.

Then on 6 January 1800 Indefatigable shared with HMS Defiance (1783), HMS Unicorn (1794), HMS Sirius (1797) and Stag in the capture of the French brig Ursule. On 11 February Indefatigable captured the Vidette.

On 12 June 1800, Indefatigable captured the French privateer brig Vengeur. She was armed with six long 4-pounders and ten 18-pounder carronades, and carried a crew of 102 men. She was two days out of Bordeaux and sailing for the coast of Brazil. Vengeur was sailing in company with three letters of marque – a ship, a brig and a schooner – that were bound for Guadeloupe. On 11 June Vengeur had captured the Jersey-privateer lugger Snake. Indefatigable shared the prize money with Sirius.

On 3 July Indefatigable recaptured the brig Cultivator, from the French. Eleven days later, Indefatigable and Sirius captured the French ship Favori. The next day Bordelais (or Bourdelois) captured the Phoenix. Indefatigable, Sirius and HMS Boadicea (1797) shared with Bordelais by agreement, and HMS Shannon (1799) further shared with Bordelais.

Indefatigable then was with Sir John Borlase Warren's squadron at Ferrol. She apparently did not participate in the attack on a fort at the bay of Playa de Dominos (Doniños) on 25 August 1800.

On 22 October Indefatigable, took the French 28-gun frigate FRENCH CORVETTE Vénus off the Portuguese coast. Indefatigable had been chasing Venus from the morning when in the afternoon Fisgard came in sight and forced Venus to turn. Both British vessels arrived at Venus at almost the same time (7pm). Venus was armed with 32-guns and had a crew of 200 men. She was sailing from Rochefort to Senegal. Indefatigable and Fisgard shared the prize money with Boadicea, Diamond, HMS Urania (1797), and the hired armed schooner HIRED ARMED SCHOONER Earl St Vincent.

In January 1801 Indefatigable was under Captain Matthew Scott. Indefatigable was part of the squadron that shared by agreement in the prize money from the Temeraire, which HMS Dasher (1797) had captured on 30 May. Similarly, the same vessels shared by agreement in Dasher's capture of Bien Aimé on 23 July 1801. Indefatigable was then paid off later that year. Indefatigable was laid up in ordinary at Plymouth in March to April 1802, as a result of the peace of October 1801.

Napoleonic Wars
Following the resumption of hostilities, Indefatigable was fitted out for sea between July and September 1803. She was recommissioned under Captain Graham Moore, younger brother of Sir John Moore of Rifle Brigade and Corunna fame.

On 9 August 1804 Indefatigable was in sight when HMS Nautilus (1804) recaptured the West Indiaman William Heathcote off Bayonne.

Action of 5 October 1804
Indefatigable, with Moore as commodore, and frigates HMS Medusa (1801), HMS Lively (1804), and HMS Amphion (1798) intercepted four Spanish frigates off Cadiz under the command of Rear-Admiral Don Joseph Bustamente, Knight of the Order of St. James, on 5 October 1804. They were carrying bullion from Montevideo, South America to Spain. Spain was a neutral country at the time, but was showing strong signs of declaring war in alliance with Napoleonic France. Acting on Admiralty orders, Moore required the Spaniards to change their course and sail for England. Admiral Bustamente refused and a short engagement ensued.

First Mercedes blew up. Then Indefatigable captured Medée, and Lively captured Clara. After a further chase, Lively and Medusa captured Fama.
 * Medée the flagship was armed with forty-two 18-pounder guns on her main deck and had a crew of 300 men. She lost two men killed and 10 wounded.
 * Fama, the Commodore's ship, was armed with thirty-six 12-pounder guns on her main deck and had a crew of 180 men. She lost 11 killed and 50 wounded.
 * Clara was armed with thirty-six 12-pounder guns on her main deck and had a crew of 300 men. She lost seven killed and 20 wounded.
 * Mercedes was armed with thirty-six 12-pounder guns on her main deck and had a crew of 280 men. After she exploded, the British were only able to rescue her second captain and 40 men.

Indefatigable had no casualties. Amphion had five men wounded, one badly. Lively had two killed and four wounded. Indefatigable and Amphion escorted Medée and Fama to Plymouth. Medusa and Lively brought in Clara. The Royal Navy took Medea into service as HMS Iphigenia (1804) and Clara as HMS Leocadia (1804).

The value of the treasure was very large and, if it had been treated as Prize of War, then Moore and his fellow captains would have become extremely wealthy. As it was, the money and ships were declared to be "Droits of Admiralty" on the grounds that war had not been declared. Hence the captains and crew shared a relatively small ex gratia payment of £160,000 for the bullion, plus the proceeds of the sale of the hull and cargo.

Normal operations
In October 1805 Indefatigable, now under Captain John Tremayne Rodd (−1809), was part of the blockade of Brest. One boat each from the ships of the line of the squadron, plus three boats each from Indefatigable and HMS Iris (1783) entered the Gironde on 15 July 1806 to attack two French corvettes and a convoy. A change in the wind permitted all but one corvette to escape. The British captured the French corvette César (or Caesar), which the Royal Navy took into service as HMS Cesar. She was armed with 18 guns, had a crew of 86 men, and was under the command of Monsieur Louis Francois Hector Fourré, lieutenant de vaisseau. The French were expecting the attack and put up a strong resistance. The British lost six men killed, 36 wounded and 21 missing. Indefatigable alone lost two killed and 11 wounded. The 21 missing men were in a boat from HMS Revenge (1805); a later report suggested that most, if not all, had been taken prisoner. Most of the boats in the attack were so shot through that the British later abandoned them. The vessels claiming prize money included HMS Pilchard (1805) and the hired armed lugger HIRED ARMED LUGGER Nile, in addition to the various ships of the line and frigates. This cutting out expedition resulted in the participants qualifying for the Naval General Service Medal with clasp "16 July Boat Service 1806".

About a year later, on 19 October 1806, Indefatigable, HMS Hazard (1802), and HMS Atalante (1797) captured the chasse marees Achille, Jenny, and Marianne. On 5 December 1807 Indefatigable captured the Pamelia. Then on the day after Christmas, Indefatigable and HMS Tribune (1803) captured the American ship Eliza.

On 7 January 1808 Indefatigable and Tribune captured the French galiot Fanny and her cargo.

Then on 31 July, Indefatigable, in company with the gun-brig HMS Conflict (1805), captured the letter of marque Diane, which was on her way to Île de France, carrying naval stores, as well as letters and dispatches that she threw overboard during the chase. She was six years old, had a burthen of 482 tons (bm), was armed with fourteen 9 and 6-pounder guns, and had a crew of 68 men. She had left the Gironde the evening before on this, her second voyage, to India.

On 19 August Indefatigable, still in company with Conflict, captured Adele. In December a distribution of £10,000 was payable for the proceeds from Diane and Adele. On 1 and 9 September 1808 Indefatigable captured two American ships, Sally and Peggy. HMS Theseus (1786) and HMS Impeteuex (1794) were in company with Indefatigable at the time. On 1 November Indefatigable captured Bonne Louise.

On 14 January 1809 Indefatigable captured French privateer lugger Clarisse in the Channel. She was pierced for 14 guns but had only three mounted. She had left Saint-Malo the evening before and had not made any captures. At the time of the capture, Amazon, Iris, HMS Raleigh (1806), and Goldfinch were in sight. They shared with Indefatigable in the proceeds for the hull, but not the bounty money for the captured crew. On 20 February HMS Statira (1807) captured the French schooner Matilda. Indefatigable was in company.

Indefatigable arrived at the Basque Roads on 25 February. While there she captured two vessels, the Danish ship Neptunus on 24 March and the French ship Nymphe on 28 March. For the capture of Neptunus, Indefatigable was in company with the sloops HMS Foxhound (1806) and HMS Goldfinch (1808). Foxhound was also in company for the capture of Nymphe.

In April 1809 Indefatigable participated in the battle of the Basque Roads. The action earned her crew another clasp to the Naval General Service Medal: "Basque Roads 1809".

In October 1809 Indefatigable was under Captain Henry E. R. Baker. Captain John Broughton succeeded him in December 1809 and remained in command until 1812.

On 11 January 1810, Indefatigable captured Mouche № 26 near Cap de Peñas. Under the command of Enseigne de vausseau provisorie Fleury, she had sailed from Pasajes with despatches for Île de France. The next day Mouche № 26 foundered near the Penmarks. Fleury, presumably among others, was drowned.

Four months later, on 6 May Indefatigable captured two French chasse marees, Camilla and Bonne Rencontre; HMS Scipion (1805) and HMS Piercer (1804) were in company. Next, Indefatigable recaptured Flora on 13 June. On 20 October Indefatigable re-captured the Portuguese brig Intrigua.

On 15 January 1811, HMS Dryad (1795) captured Matilda and her cargo. Indefatigable and HMS Lyra (1808) were in sight.

Then in June 1812, under Captain John Fyffe, Indefatigable was on the South American station, where she visited the Galápagos Islands. During this cruise she gave the second largest island, now known as Santa Cruz island, its English name – Indefatigable.

By July Indefatigable was back in Portsmouth. When news of the outbreak of the War of 1812 reached Britain, the Royal Navy seized all American vessels then in British ports. Indefatigable was among the Royal Navy vessels then lying at Spithead or Portsmouth and so entitled to share in the grant for the American ships Belleville, Janus, Aeos, Ganges, and Leonidas seized there on 31 July 1812.

On 17 September Indefatigable, HMS Hearty (1805), HMS Desiree (1800), HMS Drake (1808), HMS Primrose (1810), and Cretan shared in the capture of Dankbarheide. When the gun-brig Hearty detained the Prussian vessel Friede on 29 September, Indefatigable, Desiree, Primrose, Cretan, Drake, were either in company or sharing by agreement.

Indefatigable was reported to have been at Lima on 11 July 1815, about to sail for the Galápagos Islands.

Fate
Indefatigable was finally paid off in 1815. She was broken up at Sheerness in August 1816.

Legacy
Indefatigable is the namesake of Indefatigable Island, the alternative English name of Santa Cruz Island in the Galapagos Archipelago.

title: HMS Indefatigable (1784)


text:
Al-Rashid Billah

Abu Ja'far al-Mansur ibn al-Faḍl al-Mustarshid bi'llah (أبو جعفر المنصور بن الفضل المسترشد بالله; 1109 – 6 June 1138) usually known by his regnal name Al-Rashid bi'llah (الراشد بالله) was the Abbasid caliph in Baghdad from 1135 to 1136. He succeeded his father al-Mustarshid in the year 1135. He ruled for just one year from 1135 up to his deposition on 17 August 1136 when the populace of Baghdad rose in revolt against him.

Biography
Al-Rashid bi'llah was the son of caliph Al-Mustarshid and his mother was one of Al-Mustarshid's concubines was called Khushf. She was from Iraq, and was the mother of his son Mansur, the future Caliph Al-Rashid Billah. His full name was Mansur ibn al-Faḍl al-Mustarshid and his Kunya was Abu Jaʿfar. He was nominated as heir by his father al-Mustarshid. As a prince, he spend his life in magnificent city of Baghdad. His name was minted on coins of Baghdad also on Seljuq coins along with the Caliph. When his father was mysterious killed in 1135, he smoothly ascended to the throne.

Like his father, al-Mustarshid, al-Rashid made another failed attempt at independence (militarily) from Seljuk Turks. To avenge his father's death, he insulted the envoy of sultan Ghiyath ad-Din Mas'ud who came to demand a heavy largess, incited the mob to plunder his palace, and then, supported by Zengi, who was equally hostile to the sultan because of the murder of Dubais ibn Sadaqah, set up a rival sultan. Mas'ud hastened to the rebellious capital and laid siege to it. Baghdad, well defended by the river and its canals, resisted the attack; but in the end the caliph and Zengi, hopeless of success, escaped to Mosul. The sultan's power restored, a council was held, the caliph deposed, and his uncle al-Muqtafi was appointed as the new caliph.

Al-Rashid fled to Isfahan where he was assassinated by a team of four Nizari Ismailis (Assassins) in June 1138. This was celebrated in Alamut for a week.

Death
Ar-Rashid was assassinated by a team of four Nizari Shia Ismailis (Assassins) in June 1138.

A Mausoleum was built on his last resting place known as Al-Rashid Mausoleum is a historical mausoleum in Isfahan city. It dates back to the Later Abbasid era of Seljuqs and is located on the northern bank of Zayanderud beside the Shahrestan bridge. This structure is the burial place of Al-Rashid the 30th Abbasid Caliph, who left his palace and fled from Baghdad to Isfahan, when Mahmud captured Baghdad. Two years later, Al-Rashid was stabbed and killed by Hashshashins in 1138. The only decorative element of the mausoleum is a stucco Kufic inscription.

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

title: Al-Rashid Billah


text:
Al-Muqtafi

Abu Abdallah Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Mustazhir (أبو عبد الله محمد بن أحمد المستظهر; 9 April 1096 – 12 March 1160), better known by his regnal name al-Muqtafi li-Amr Allah (المقتفي لأمر الله), was the Abbasid caliph in Baghdad from 1136 to 1160, succeeding his nephew al-Rashid, who had been forced to abdicate by the Seljuks. The continued disunion and contests between Seljuk Turks afforded al-Muqtafi opportunity of not only maintaining his authority in Baghdad, but also extending it throughout Iraq.

Birth and background
The future caliph al-Muqtafi was born on 9 April 1096 as Abu Abdallah Muhammad, the son of the Abbasid caliph al-Mustazhir ((r. 1094 – 1118)). His mother was Ashin, a slave girl from Syria. After his father's death his half-brother al-Mustarshid succeeded him on 6 August 1118. Al-Mustarshid (r. 1118–1135) ruled for sixteen years as Caliph but the last three years of his reign were occupied with war against Seljuq sultan Mas'ud (his deputy). Not long after the siege of Damascus, al-Mustarshid launched a military campaign against Seljuk sultan Mas'ud, who had obtained the title in Baghdad in January 1133 by the caliph himself. The rival armies met near Hamadan. The caliph, deserted by his troops, was taken prisoner, and pardoned on the promising not to quit his palace. Left in the caliphal tent, however, in the sultan's absence, he was found murdered while reading the Quran, as is supposed, by an emissary of the Assassins, who had no love for the caliph. Modern historians have suspected that Mas'ud instigated the murder although the two most important historians of the period Ibn al-Athir and Ibn al-Jawzi did not speculate on this matter. Physically, al-Mustarshid was a red-haired man with blue eyes and freckles.

Al-Mustarshid was succeeded by his son and heir apparent, Al-Rashid Billah on 29 August 1135. Like his father al-Mustarshid, al-Rashid Billah made another attempt of military independence (forming his own military) from the Seljuks. To avenge his father's death, he insulted the envoy of sultan Ghiyath ad-Din Mas'ud who came to demand a heavy largess, incited the mob to plunder his palace, and then, supported by Zengi, who was equally hostile to the sultan because of the murder of Dubais ibn Sadaqah, set up a rival sultan. Mas'ud hastened to the rebellious capital and laid siege to it. Baghdad, well defended by the river and its canals, resisted the attack; but in the end the caliph and Zengi, hopeless of success, escaped to Mosul. The sultan's power restored, a council was held, the caliph deposed, and his uncle al-Muqtafi succeeded as the new caliph. Al-Rashid Bi'llah fled to Isfahan where he was assassinated by a team of four Nizari Ismailis (Assassins) in June 1138. This was celebrated in Alamut for a week.

Reign
Al-Muqtafi was proclaimed caliph on 17 September 1136. He was able to use the infighting of the Seljuks to safeguard his own control over Baghdad, and even gradually extend his rule over much of Iraq.

In 1148, he successfully fought off a group of Seljuk generals who rebelled against Sultan Mas'ud and marched on Baghdad. According to some sources, a similar attempt followed in the next year, and was likewise defeated by the caliph's troops. Following the death of Mas'ud in October 1152, and the ensuing contest for the sultanate among the Seljuks, al-Muqtafi played an active role. In the months after Mas'ud's death, he seized Wasit and al-Hilla. In the Seljuk succession struggle, he supported Mas'ud's brother, Suleiman-Shah, against Mas'ud's nephew, Muhammad II, extracting from the former a pledge not to interfere in Iraq.

After Muhammad defeated Suleiman-Shah, however, the Seljuks marched on Baghdad and forced the caliph to take refuge in the eastern quarter, initiating the Seljuk siege of Baghdad of 1157. The siege was eventually abandoned as Muhammad faced the rebellion of Malik-Shah III in Hamadan, and over time al-Muqtafi restored good relations with Muhammad. During his last years, al-Muqtafi attacked Tikrit twice in vain, but captured the town of Lihf.

Awn al-Din ibn Hubayra was appointed as the vizier of the Caliph, a post he kept for sixteen years until his death on 27 March 1165, commonly attributed to poisoning through his physician, who was in the pay of his rivals.

During his caliphate, the Crusades were raging and Zengi, the atabeg of Mosul and founder of Zengid dynasty, obtained high distinction as a brave and generous warrior. At one time hard pressed, Zengi made urgent appeal for help to Baghdad. The sultan and the caliph dispatched 20,000 men in response. But in reality neither the Seljuks, nor the caliph, nor their emirs, had any enthusiasm for war against the Crusaders.

Al-Muqtafi is praised by contemporary Muslim historians as virtuous, capable and brave. During his caliphate of twenty-five years, he conducted many minor expeditions against enemies throughout Iraq and Syria.

A charter of protection granted by al-Muqtafi in 1139 to the Nestorian patriarch Abdisho III was published in 1926 by the Assyrian scholar Alphonse Mingana.

Family
One of his wives was Fatimah Khatun, the daughter of Sultan Muhammad I Tapar and his wife Nistandar Jahan. They married in 1137. She died in September 1147. One of his concubines was Thawus, a Greek. She was the mother of Al-Mustanjid, who became his successor. Another concubine was Umm Abu Ali. She was the mother of his son Abu Ali. She wanted her own son to succeed and after her husband's death in 1160, She gained over many amirs to her side, and had their slave-girls armed with daggers to kill the new caliph. Al-Mustanjid discovered the plot and placed the rebel son and mother in prison.

One of his daughters was Zubaydah. She was the wife of sultan Ghiyath ad-Din Mas'ud. They married in 1140. Her dowry was one hundred thousand dinars. The wedding procession was delayed for five years because of her young age. However, the marriage was never consummated because of Masud's ultimate death in 1152. Another daughter was Kerman Khatun. She was wife of sultan Muhammad II. They married towards the end of 1158 or in early 1159. He was, however, unable to consummate the marriage owing to his illness. After his death, she married Arslan-Shah in November 1160.

Death
Al-Muqtafi died on 12 March 1160 at the age 64. He was succeeded by his son Yusuf better known by his regnal name al-Mustanjid. He was born in 1124, and assumed the throne at the age of 36 after the death of his father al-Muqtafi.

title: Al-Muqtafi


text:
Palmerston, New Zealand

Palmerston is a town in the South Island of New Zealand. Located 50 kilometres to the north of the city of Dunedin, it is the largest town in the Waihemo Ward of the Waitaki District, with a population of 890 residents. Palmerston grew at a major road junction: State Highway 1 links Dunedin and Waikouaiti to the south with Oamaru and Christchurch to the north, while State Highway 85 (known colloquially as "The Pigroot") heads inland to become the principal highway of the Maniototo. The Main South Line railway passes through the town and the Seasider tourist train travels from Dunedin to Palmerston and back once or twice a week. From 1880 until 1989, the town acted as the junction between the main line and a branch line that ran inland, the Dunback and Makareao Branches.

Palmerston stands near the banks of the Waihemo / Shag River, five kilometres inland from the Pacific coast. Between it and the sea stands the lone hill of Puketapu (Māori for sacred hill, known by Southerners as Holy Hill), crowned with a monument to the 19th century Otago politician Sir John McKenzie. An annual race takes place up to the memorial and back, which is called the Kelly's canter, dedicated to Albert Kelly who ran up Puketapu as a constable in the Palmerston police force every day during World War II. This cairn is the second around Palmerston dedicated to MacKenzie – an earlier cairn was built on a hill to the north of the town, near Shag Point, but collapsed owing to the unstable geology of the site.

Many people confuse the town of Palmerston with the much more populous North Island city of Palmerston North, whose residents often call their home simply "Palmerston". Otago's town has the earlier claim to the name, however – its surveying dates from 1862, whereas the northern city did not receive its name until 1871. Both towns take their names from Lord Palmerston, the 19th-century British Prime Minister.

The nearby Shag River is named for the cormorant, a sea bird that ventures a little inland, colloquially known as a 'shag'. The river's Māori name, 'Waihemo', has been translated as 'Dwindle River'. It is thought to arise from the river's tendency to reduce in summer to a small stream. Palmerston used to be the capital of the Waihemo County, the surrounding district, before it was amalgamated with the Waitaki District in 1989.

History and legend
The area is rich in history and legend. Modern archaeology favours a date for the first settlement of New Zealand by Polynesian people about 1150 AD when population was concentrated on the east coast of the South Island. There is a substantial early settlement site of the Archaic or moa hunter phase of Māori culture near Palmerston on the sea coast at the mouth of the Shag River. It has been known to Europeans since the 1840s and was investigated from an early time by archaeologists. In 1987 and 1989 it was very thoroughly re-excavated by a team including Professor Atholl Anderson. It was determined it had been in permanent, year round occupation 'for a period of perhaps 20–50 years in the 14th century AD'. (Anderson and others, 1996, p. 67.)

The area is also the traditional site of the wreck of the Arai Te Uru canoe. There are several versions of the tradition but they tell of the arrival of Rākaihautū from the ancestral homeland Hawaiki who met the Kahui Tipua people who were already here. He showed them kumara, or sweet potatoes, and they built canoes including Arai Te Uru to go to Hawaiki and bring back this new and valuable food. However, on its return the vessel became waterlogged off the Waitaki River mouth. It spilled food baskets on Moeraki and Katiki beaches and was wrecked at Shag Point / Matakaea, where it turned into what is now called Danger Reef. Its steersman, Hipo, sits erect at the stern. After this the crew explored the southern South Island giving many place names. Kahui Tipua are 'ghost or giant people' with mythic or magical attributes, although they are also the real ancestors of people living now. (Anderson, 1983, p. 7.) If the explorers didn't get back before dawn they turned into hills and other natural features. One of them was a woman Puketapu who got as far south as Owaka in South Otago. When she got back to the Waihemo Valley dawn broke and she was turned into the hill Puketapu overlooking Palmerston.

The story is seen as an allegorical explanation of the fact that kumara won't grow south of Banks Peninsula. Arai Te Uru is an ancestral canoe of the Kati Mamoe people who came to the south before Kai Tahu (Ngāi Tahu in modern standard Māori) but were preceded by earlier peoples. The Arai Te Uru tradition reflects this with its reference to the preceding Kahui Tipua. It is tempting to identify the occupants of the river mouth archaeological site with the people of Arai Te Uru but that can only be speculation.

In 1814 an open boat from the Matilda, Captain Fowler, under the first mate Robert Brown, with two other Europeans and five lascars, or Indian seamen, came up the east coast past Palmerston and camped for the night ashore north of Moeraki. They were seen and attacked by Māori because of a feud started four years earlier by the theft of a shirt. According to the Creed manuscript, discovered in 2003, two men 'escaped through the darkness of the night & fled as far as Goodwood Bobby's Head' a little south of Palmerston on the coast. They were two days and nights on the way and the Māori people there fed them. However '30 Natives went to the place & massacred them – eat them.' One of the Europeans put up a grim struggle and the mere or club which dispatched him was long remembered. There was a dispute about killing these men after they had been entertained but those bent on vengeance prevailed.

In May 1826 Thomas Shepherd, (1779–1835), passing this coast in the Rosanna, made a sketch of it which still survives in the Mitchell Library, Sydney.

There were European visitors in the 1840s, such as Edward Shortland. Charles Suisted took up land in the area in the 1850s and Palmerston came into existence as a camp site in 1862 as the beginning of a route by the Shag Valley to the Central Otago gold diggings. It was surveyed and named in 1864. There is a handsome Presbyterian Church made of a local sandstone, designed by David Ross in 1876. A marble statue of Zealandia by Carlo Bergamini in the centre of the town is a Boer War memorial.

A few kilometres inland, at the Shag Valley Station, Frank Bell made the first New Zealand to England radio contact on 18 October 1924, an event which attracted international media attention as the first round-the-world radio broadcast.

Demographics
Palmerston is described by Statistics New Zealand as a rural settlement. It covers 8.75 km2 and had an estimated population of as of  with a population density of  people per km2.

Palmerston had a population of 948 at the 2018 New Zealand census, an increase of 57 people (6.4%) since the 2013 census, and an increase of 27 people (2.9%) since the 2006 census. There were 429 households, comprising 468 males and 480 females, giving a sex ratio of 0.97 males per female. The median age was 50.9 years (compared with 37.4 years nationally), with 147 people (15.5%) aged under 15 years, 114 (12.0%) aged 15 to 29, 399 (42.1%) aged 30 to 64, and 291 (30.7%) aged 65 or older.

Ethnicities were 91.8% European/Pākehā, 14.6% Māori, 1.3% Pasifika, 1.9% Asian, and 1.9% other ethnicities. People may identify with more than one ethnicity.

The percentage of people born overseas was 8.9, compared with 27.1% nationally.

Although some people chose not to answer the census's question about religious affiliation, 51.9% had no religion, 38.9% were Christian, 0.3% had Māori religious beliefs, 0.3% were Buddhist and 1.6% had other religions.

Of those at least 15 years old, 72 (9.0%) people had a bachelor's or higher degree, and 246 (30.7%) people had no formal qualifications. The median income was $22,800, compared with $31,800 nationally. 87 people (10.9%) earned over $70,000 compared to 17.2% nationally. The employment status of those at least 15 was that 291 (36.3%) people were employed full-time, 138 (17.2%) were part-time, and 27 (3.4%) were unemployed.

St Mary's Anglican church
St Mary's Anglican church is situated on Stromness street and was built in 1872 and designed by architect RA Lawson. It was built in a gothic style out of local sandstone.

St James Presbyterian church
St James Presbyterian church was built in 1876 and is located on Tiverton street. The church was designed by Dunedin architect David Ross and built out of local Waihemo stone.

Education
Palmerston School is a contributing primary school catering for years 1 to 6 with a roll of students. Palmerston School was operating in 1866.

East Otago High School is a school for years 7 to 13 with a roll of students. It was preceded by Palmerston District High School in 1877, with a new building constructed in 1886. East Otago High School opened as a replacement in 1969.

Both schools are coeducational. Rolls are as of

title: Palmerston, New Zealand


text:
Al-Mustanjid

Abu al-Muẓaffar Yusuf ibn Muhammad al-Muqtafi (أبو المظفّر يوسف بن محمد المقتفي; 1124 – 20 December 1170) better known by his regnal name al-Mustanjid bi-llah (المستنجد بالله) was the Abbasid caliph in Baghdad from 1160 to 1170. He was the son of previous Caliph al-Muqtafi.

Biography
Al-Mustanjid was born in 1124. He was the son of caliph al-Muqtafi and his mother was an Umm walad named Thawus. His full name was Yusuf ibn Muhammad al-Muqtafi and his Kunya was Abu al-Muzaffar. When Yusuf was a young prince his father became Caliph in 1136. His father ruled for almost twenty-four years until his death in 1160. When his father died, he ascended to the throne. He continued the policies of his father and he also confirmed Awn al-Din ibn Hubayra as his vizier. Awn al-Din had previously served as the vizier to his father. Awn al-Din's Tenure marked the final decline of the Seljuq influence in the Abbasid court (cf. Abbasid–Seljuk war), and saw a flowering of Hanbali learning in Baghdad. Ibn Hubayra was also involved in the conquest of Fatimid Egypt by Nur ad-Din Zangi. One of al-Muqtafi's wives, al-Mustanjid's stepmother, wanted her own son to succeed. She gained over many amirs to her side, and had their slave-girls armed with daggers to kill the new caliph. Al-Mustanjid discovered the plot and placed the rebel son and mother in prison.

Around this time, Fatimid dynasty was at last extinguished, having lasted for 260 years. Their conqueror, Saladin, though himself an orthodox Muslim, initially didn't proclaim the Sunni faith in the midst of a people still devoted to the tenets and practice of the Shi'a sect. But he soon found himself able to do so; and thus the spiritual supremacy of the Abbasids again prevailed, not only in Syria, but throughout Egypt and all its dependencies.

There is little else to say than that this caliph continued to occupy a more or less independent position, with a vizier and courtly surroundings, and supported by only a small force sufficient for an occasional local campaign.

title: Al-Mustanjid


text:
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gzornenplatz, Kevin Baas, Shorne, VeryVerily

Case Closed on 22 Dec 2004

Please do not edit this page directly if you are not a participant in this case. Comments are very welcome on the Talk page, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at /Evidence. Evidence is more useful than comments.

Arbitrators will be working on a proposed decision at /Proposed decision.

Statement of complaint

 * Note: Kevin Baas voluntarily joined this case as a party after the request was made, so the discussion below does not specifically deal with his participation.

All of the users named above have engaged in multiple revert wars recently on various pages. Each of them has appeared before the Arbitration Committee in the past or is presently under consideration by them. Requests for comment or requests for mediation have been attempted for each of these users, but their excessive reverting continues nevertheless. Gzornenplatz and VeryVerily have openly stated that they do not intend to abide by the three revert rule (see for example Requests for comment/Gzornenplatz).

These tactics lead to needless protection of pages, clutter page histories, flood recent changes, and interfere with the efforts of other editors. Often these revert wars are conducted without any real attempts at discussion on talk pages. Instead of negotiating over disputed changes, these users often have the attitude that they can state their position once and then enforce it, rather than debating the merits of their edits with others.

In the past month alone, these users have precipitated protection of the following pages (participants in the revert war are indicated, but the parties other than these three users generally abided by the three revert rule):

 * 1) George W. Bush (talk, history) - Gzornenplatz and VeryVerily (see page history for 28-29 Sep, 2-3 Oct, and 8-9 Oct)
 * 2) Project for the New American Century (talk, history) - VeryVerily and Christiankavanagh, plus single reverts by Gzornenplatz and Get-back-world-respect
 * 3) Anti-American sentiment (talk, history) - VeryVerily, Get-back-world-respect, and Tuomas
 * 4) Khmer Rouge (talk, history) - Shorne, VeryVerily, Ruy Lopez, Adam Carr, Stargoat, TDC, and Ambi
 * 5) Empire of Atlantium (talk, history) - VeryVerily and Gzornenplatz
 * 6) Nagaland (talk, history) - Gzornenplatz and Simonides
 * 7) Pila (talk, history) - Gzornenplatz and Emax
 * 8) Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (talk, history) - VeryVerily, TDC, and Get-back-world-respect
 * 9) Henry Kissinger (talk, history) - VeryVerily, Shorne, Ruy Lopez, and Turrican; also an earlier revert war from September 1st involving Gzornenplatz, VeryVerily, Node ue, and LegCircus
 * 10) Enclave (talk, history) - Gzornenplatz and Gene Poole
 * 11) Template:Sep11 (talk, history) - VeryVerily, Gzornenplatz, Neutrality, plus isolated reverts by several others including anons
 * 12) Great Purge (talk, history) - Shorne, VeryVerily, Boraczek, and Fred Bauder
 * 13) India (talk, history) - Gzornenplatz, Simonides, and Nichalp (VeryVerily edited but did not revert)
 * 14) Gwangju (talk*, history) - VeryVerily and Ruy Lopez
 * 15) History of South Korea (talk*, history) - VeryVerily and Ruy Lopez
 * 16) Communist state (talk, history) - Gzornenplatz, Shorne, VeryVerily, Fred Bauder, Mikkalai, Boraczek, and Ruy Lopez
 * 17) Pol Pot (talk, history) - VeryVerily, Shorne, Ruy Lopez, and Turrican
 * 18) People's Republic of China (talk, history) - Shorne, VeryVerily, Ruy Lopez, Fred Bauder, Boraczek, and Ran
 * 19) Human rights in the United States (talk, history) - VeryVerily, Shorne, and Gazpacho
 * 20) United States (talk, history) - Shorne, VeryVerily, and Cantus
 * 21) Bystrzyca Klodzka (talk, history) - Gzornenplatz, Space Cadet, and Halibutt
 * 22) Poznan (talk*, history) - Gzornenplatz, Radomil, and Halibutt
 * 23) September 11, 2001 attacks (talk*, history) - Gzornenplatz, VeryVerily, and 198

Note: talk* means the talk page was not even used during the dispute that led to page protection. In many of the other instances, the discussion that did take place was inadequate or inappropriate. For those keeping score, VeryVerily is listed here 17 times, Gzornenplatz 11+ times, and Shorne (a newer participant in the revert wars on Wikipedia) 8 times.

Since October 1st, 42 of the 149 total entries on the protection log (28%) relate to these articles. And that's without counting several pages that had to be protected when several IPs believed to be User:Turrican began systematically reverting VeryVerily, or the mediation pages Bcorr protected while trying to deal with the proposed mediation between Shorne and VeryVerily. Nor does this list include various pages on which these users engaged in revert wars that did not result in page protection. Dealing with this problem would significantly reduce the number of locked pages.

I find this comment by Tuomas on Requests for comment/VeryVerily2 insightful:

 * Unfortunately, his methods are very much in conflict with Wikipedia's written guidelines, and as his methods are seen as successful by a host of POV-pushers, more and more seem to follow his bad example. Wikipedia's reluctance to deal with this kind of problem pushes Wikipedia in the direction of the Usenet Newsgroups.

I think it is time to send the message to revert warriors of all POVs that this conduct is unacceptable. The vast majority of Wikipedians enforce the three revert rule against themselves through respect for community norms, willingness to engage in discussion, and ultimately by their own self-control. For those who lack these qualities, I ask the Arbitration Committee to quickly and expeditiously allow enforcement in appropriate cases. This has been largely successful in restricting similar behavior by Wik and Cantus, although unfortunately Wik was unable to abide living with the restrictions placed on him.

The case presented is very simple. It should not take the Arbitration Committee long to decide. I ask for only these things:

 * 1) Affirmation that the three revert rule is Wikipedia policy.
 * 2) A finding that each of the users named here has violated the rule repeatedly and excessively without adequately discussing matters on the appropriate talk page.
 * 3) A ruling that each of these users is placed on revert parole, to be enforced by 24-hour blocks for violations.

The proposed remedy is narrowly focused on the objectionable behavior. I ask the Arbitration Committee not to dally with broader remedies (like banning these users from certain types of articles) at this time. If revert paroles prove insufficient, such remedies can be considered at a later date. --Michael Snow 05:13, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Complaint by Shorne and Ruy Lopez against VeryVerily
(From the case "Users Ruy Lopez, Shorne, and VeryVerily" which has been merged with this case)

I request arbitration with User:VeryVerily for the matter described below at "VeryVerily and reversion" (entry "User:VeryVerily") and, most fully, at Requests for mediation/VeryVerily. My request for mediation, now in its third day, has gone ignored by VeryVerily, who has failed to accept or decline mediation despite several requests. I believe that arbitration is the only appropriate avenue at this point, and I request quick action, as VeryVerily is riding roughshod over numerous articles.

Since there are already two other cases involving VeryVerily, it has been suggested that this one be merged with one or both of the others. I am willing to merge it with the case filed by User:Christiankavanagh, listed below.

As user Ruy Lopez added his name to the request for mediation, I have taken the liberty of listing him as a party to this request as well. Thank you for your attention. Shorne 10:45, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I also call upon Fred Bauder to recuse himself on the grounds of a personal interest in this matter, specifically the fact that he has taken VeryVerily's part, as can be seen on the talk pages of VeryVerily and certain other users. Shorne 11:27, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * My recusal is necessary in this case as I am a party to this matter. Many of VeryVerily's reverts involved edits which I had made which either Shorne or Ruy Lopez had reverted. I was happy to have his help in restoring work which those two POV warriors had removed, but am not happy with VeryVerily's neglect to attempt to engage in productive dialogue with them. It would probably make sense to combine this matter with Users Shorne and Fred Bauder as many of the same underlying issues are present especially with respect to the systemic point of view editing of Shorne and Ruy Lopez. Fred Bauder 11:40, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

 * Thank you for having the integrity to recuse yourself. This matter, however, must not be combined with the one that you raised, for the issue at hand is the behaviour of VeryVerily, and nothing else. I refuse to allow anyone to cloud the issue with ad hominem attacks on me or other distractions. This is a very straightforward case, and I wish to have it treated as such. Shorne 11:52, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * "I was happy to have his help in restoring work which those two POV warriors had removed" - the work he was happy to have restored on Great Purge was itself POV - he called the works on the Great Purge by a former intelligence officer of what a US historian calls an anti-Soviet propaganda agency "definitive" and all those who disagree with it "revisionists". Who are the POV warriors, them or us?  At least Fred Bauder usually follows Wikipedia rules - "attempting to engage in productive dialogue" (even if it is just to bump Shorne from mediation to arbitration in a matter of minutes - if only the case of other users against VeryVerily happened so quickly).  VeryVerily continually breaks rules he's been banned for breaking before, like keeping to the three revert rule.  It gets to me only being able to revert three times, knowing he will come in and do four, and knowing any demand that he follow Wikipedia rules will happen never or a few minutes before then, but I will follow the Wikipedia rules unlike him.  It's hilarious that he comes in here babbling his nonsense while he is running around every day breaking the three revert rule, while I am following all of the Wikipedia rules and guidelines that I'm aware of.  Shorne and I think VeryVerily and Fred Bauder are POV (although at least Fred Bauder follows Wikipedia rules).  TDC pops in once in a while and is POV as well.  Aside from them, everyone else on the pages I've seen is fine.  And even the problems with Fred Bauder would be fixed but for VeryVerily's antagonism. Ruy Lopez 08:24, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * . Very Verily 10:49, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

User:VeryVerily has refused to agree to mediation, while engaging in an edit war with me over the name of the mediation subpage where I moved the request (see Requests for mediation/VeryVerily and Shorne, Ruy Lopez and User talk:Bcorr''). ''

 12:47, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * See what I actually wrote, not Bcorr's distorted report. I asked with no answer what he intended by mediation. Very Verily  18:19, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Shorne
For the ninth or tenth time, I demand to know why my own request for arbitration has not yet received any votes when this one and others that were filed later have been voted on. No one on the committee has yet spoken to this question. I charge the committee with bias and abuse of power. Shorne 18:36, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Update:
The case that I brought against VeryVerily, which Ruy Lopez subsequently joined (with my approval), was "merged" with this one. I had agreed to let it be merged with the case brought by Christiankavanagh, but evidently the "arbitration" committee (which hasn't tried to arbitrate anything; there has been no discussion at all from them, not even in response to repeated procedural questions) failed to notice this offer or simply disregarded it so that it could effectively lose my complaint in this larger and more complex one, thereby nullifying it.

Michael Snow's complaint requested only the following actions:

 * Affirmation that the three revert rule is Wikipedia policy.
 * A finding that each of the users named here has violated the rule repeatedly and excessively without adequately discussing matters on the appropriate talk page.
 * A ruling that each of these users is placed on revert parole, to be enforced by 24-hour blocks for violations.

Snow specifically denied that he was requesting bans on specific types of articles, to say nothing of bans from the entire site. Yet that is the sort of action that this committee is taking. Again, I have repeatedly endorsed the position taken by Snow and asked again and again that those conditions be imposed on all of us, myself included. Shorne 01:11, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

If unjustly banned, I will never come back.
No self-respecting person could accept such an affront with equanimity. Shorne 01:07, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Kevin Baas
I would like this to go more quickly. The sooner the better. I'm willing to accept whatever the arbitrators choose, provided that it is sufficiently punitive and applied consistently and proportionally. Kevin Baas | talk 22:55, 2004 Nov 2 (UTC)

 * So would I. This is a clear-cut case. We all admit to violations of the three-revert rule; there's no dispute of fact. With the sole exception of VeryVerily, we have also agreed to accept the decision of the arbitrators. Just make a decision and apply it fairly. (Incidentally, I have been complying with the three-revert rule, even on pages edited by VeryVerily, despite my earlier statement that I would not do so until he was forced to comply as well.) Shorne 08:08, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Ruy Lopez
In proposed decision it says "For failing to discuss reverts, Shorne, Ruy Lopez, and Gzornenplatz are banned for one week; VeryVerily for two weeks."

 * With the exception of VeryVerily, I almost always discuss reversions. I've only had a lack-of-discussion problem with one other user: VeryVerily.
 * My introduction to VeryVerily was him going through my edit history and reverting several edits to several articles [], [], []. No user page discussion, no article discussion, and only a short comment in edit summaries, which after the initial batch of reversions simply became replaced by "rv, rv, rv, rv" in the days and weeks that followed.  This kept happening over and over.  Of course, I'm not the only one who has complained about this.  With someone going through your edit history and reverting everything with not a word about it, and refusing to discuss things on article discussion pages, eventually I came to a logical conclusion that discussing this on article discussion pages was pointless as this would have to be discussed on VeryVerily's user discussion page.  Which I did on October 11th, three days after he began reverting my edits by going through my edit history[].  I did not receive any non-sarcastic type reply to this.
 * Since, as I stated, he never engaged in article discussions, when I saw someone discussing VeryVerily's article edits on VeryVerily's talk page, I joined in the conversation as I was editting that article as well.  VeryVerily immediately removed my comment[] and said "get off my talk page" in the edit summary.  I also saw he was telling Shorne to not write on his talk page.  I decided to not be provocative and abide by his wishes, I have not posted to his talk page since.  Since he ignores article discussions, and didn't even have any edit summaries other than "rv" until this arbitration picked up steam recently, he cut off all communication between me and him.  On heavily editted articles where users aside from VeryVerily are involved, although VeryVerily is involved I engage in discussion for the benefit of the other editors.  When he goes through my edit history and reverts articles no one else is editting, yes, I gave up on trying to have a discussion in the article page.  It takes me an hour to do six ten minute edits to a page.  It take him half a minute to revert all of that with "rv, rv, rv, rv, rv, rv".  Should I then waste more time asking what he meant by rv in the article discussions of all those pages, discussions which he will ignore?  All of this combined with his abuse of the three revert rule, problems with other users and so forth and whatnot.
 * I feel the crux of this is he goes through my edit history, the place to discuss this is on his user talk page, and he threw me off his user page. I feel he cut off communication between us on October 25th, 2004.  I thought ignoring his wishes and posting to his talk page against his will would be provocative.  If this was an error in judgement, and I should be banned for a week, fine.  Perhaps Wikipedia should have a guide for how to deal with completely uncooperative, rule-breaking users.  Because I certainly had no idea what to do except hope the arbitrators would eventually straighten this all out. Ruy Lopez 20:26, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * The arbitration cabal committee doesn't give a toss about any of this. They just do what they damn well feel like doing, ignoring the mountain of evidence that people like us have taken care to compile, and certainly ignoring discussion from us. At another time and place, these people would have nailed us to a cross or thrown us into a gas chamber. Shorne 20:32, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm being arboppressed!!!!!!!11111!12! J. Parker Stone 00:39, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Response by VeryVerily to complaint by Ruy Lopez and Shorne
Brief response: Ruy Lopez is an incarnation of Richardchilton. See Requests for comment/Richardchilton. This user should have been banned long ago, if only for his declarations of war and subsequent implementation, if not his vandalism, subvandalism, unilateralism, and persistent whitewashing of communist regimes. Shorne went on the attack on a huge number of articles pertaining to communism and began deleting everything unfavorable he could get his hands on, while writing flagrant POV attacks on the US on other articles. If you don't want to believe me, glance at Fred Bauder (a respected arbcom member)'s description below, which should settle the matter. I prevented these users from running wild on Wikipedia and wrecking our good articles. Not that I'm expecting gratitude. Very Verily 03:20, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Correctamundo. El Ruydinista has constantly editted in rationalizations for Communist actions and weasel words like "it is alleged" for facts accepted by all except the likes of the PLP, while at the same time blatantly distorting info on articles such as Economy of the United States. J. Parker Stone 00:14, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Comments and votes by Arbitrators

 * 1) Absolutely accept. →Raul654 05:20, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Accept -- I was about to vote accept on the other two cases, but I think this case has the merit of identifying the three important combatants.  Furthermore, a preliminary look at the evidence suggests that all 3 have done something worth investigating, and therefore a 3rd party request for arbitration seems wisest to me.  I will vote to accept the other cases if there is any evidence in them that will not be presented in this case, but I would rather resolve this issue first. Jwrosenzweig 14:06, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) Recuse Fred Bauder 14:50, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) Accept. --Delirium 20:03, Oct 15, 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) Accept. James F. (talk) 16:26, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 6) Accept. The Cunctator 05:57, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) Why is Kevin Baas in here?
 * 7) Accept -- piling on. the Epopt 04:22, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Comments and votes by arbitrators "Ruy Lopez, Shorn, VeryVerily"

 * 1) Recuse Fred Bauder 11:40, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)
 * 2) Merge with VV case below --the Epopt 13:17, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 3) I agree with Epopt on the merge -- any evidence here should already be going to the evidence in that case. Jwrosenzweig 19:05, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * 4) Merge that sucker! The Cunctator 23:20, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * 5) Merge with VV. James F. (talk) 12:32, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)
 * 6) Merge. Martin 16:24, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Request for temporary injunction
Users Shorne, VeryVerily, Gzornenplatz continue to wage wasteful edit wars pending resolution of this matter, see page history for an example of Shorne and VeryVerily at work. If you check the talk page you will find a great deal of argumentation from Shorne, but little or no checking of references provided by others or presentation of references on behalf of his own edits, while VeryVerily dispenses even with talk. For Gzornenplatz see the page history of Katowice, another example of the German names for Polish cities nonsense. Again no substantial discussion by Gzornenplatz on Talk:Katowice. Fred Bauder 14:42, Nov 13, 2004 (UTC)

 * I would support an injunction whereby those users would be subject to 24 hour blocks for violating the three revert rule while arbitration is on-going. Attempts to game the ruling would be dealt with another injunction if needed. --mav 18:02, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * I would support an injunction prohibiting them from editing any article having to do with German or Polish subjects while arbitration is on-going. "Having to do with German or Polish subjects" would be interpreted broadly, and any violation will enhance the penalties the Committee awards. --the Epopt 18:51, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

There are proposed temp. orders being voted for at /Proposed decision. Martin 02:19, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * I, and very likely several other editors, would much appreciate it if Gzornenplatz was also blocked from all India-related articles, at least temporarily. A more detailed complaint can be found on the Evidence page, here. -- Simonides 00:39, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Temporary injunction
1) Gzornenplatz and VeryVerily are banned from editing any article having to do with German or Polish subjects whilst Arbitration is on-going. Sysops may use their discretion in determining what falls into these areas, and are hereby authorised to enact 24 hour blocks for violations of this.

2) Gzornenplatz, Kevin Baas, Shorne, and VeryVerily are banned from reverting any article more than twice in one 24 hour period whilst Arbitration is on-going. Sysops are hereby authorised to enact 24 blocks for violations of this.

3) Shorne and VeryVerily are banned from editing any article having to do with the Cold War or communism whilst Arbitration is on-going. Sysops may use their discretion in determining what falls into these areas, and are hereby authorized to enact 24 hour blocks for violations of this.

Principles
1) Contributors are expected to obey Wikipedia policies, including the three revert rule.
 * Accepted 7-0

2) When disagreements arise, users are expected to discuss their differences rationally rather than reverting ad infinitum.
 * Accepted 7-0

3) When reverting, users are expected to give their reasons in the edit summaries.
 * Accepted 7-0

4) When disputing the accuracy or neutrality of an article, users are always expected to give a reason on the article's talk page.
 * Accepted 7-0

5) Editors are expected to be cooperative with other users and to assume good faith on the part of others.
 * Accepted 6-0-1

6) Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point.
 * Accepted 7-0

7) Although discussion is always encouraged, the Arbitration Committee does not expect users to compromise in all circumtances; doing so would serve only to support cranks and POV pushers.
 * Accepted 5-1

8) In cases where compromise cannot be reached, users are expected to follow the Dispute resolution process.
 * Accepted 5-2

Findings of Fact
1) Gzornenplatz, Shorne, and VeryVerily have all violated the three revert rule on numerous occasions during numerous disputes. Kevin Baas has as well, but not nearly to the extent of the others. Gzornenplatz refused to follow it even after being asked by Jimbo himself.
 * Accepted 5-0

2) During many of those disputes, Gzornenplatz, Shorne, Ruy Lopez, and especially VeryVerily made no attempt at a dialogue.

Random sampling of non-use of talk page:
 * VV - Great Purge - Nov 13 dispute
 * VV/Shorne - History of Modern Greece - Nov 16 dispute
 * Ruy Lopez/Shorne/VV - Communist state - Nov 9 dispute
 * Shorne/VV - Human rights in the United States - Nov 9 dispute
 * VV - Collectivisation in the USSR - October 24 dispute
 * VV/213.56.68.29/Ruy Lopez - October 24-25, Opposition to U.S. foreign policy
 * Gzornenplatz/Space Cadet - Usti nad Labem - November 6
 * Gzornenplatz/Space Cadet - Walbrzych - November 5
 * Gzornenplatz/Space Cadet - Wambierzyce - October 25 - Nov 9
 * Accepted 5-0

Remedies
1) For failing to discuss reverts, Shorne, Ruy Lopenz, and Gzornenplatz are banned for one week; VeryVerily for two weeks.
 * Accepted 5-1

2) For making personal attacks on Arbitration pages and trying to disrupt the process of Arbitration, Shorne is banned for one week.
 * Accepted 6-0

3) VeryVerily, Shorne, and Gzornenplatz are hereby limited to one revert per page per day (this includes any page editable on the English Wikipedia).
 * Accepted 6-0

4) Gzornenplatz, Shorne, and VeryVerily, and Ruy Lopez are required to discuss all reverts on the relevant talk page, with the goal of finding mutually acceptable compromises.
 * Accepted 6-0

5) If Gzornenplatz, VeryVerily, or Shorne can demonstrate good behavior (abiding by wikipedia policies and generally sociable editing habits), in 6 months, they may each request that the Arbitration Committee reduce or lift the revert parole against them.
 * Accepted 6-0

6) For repeated violations of the three revert rule, VeryVerily and Shorne and Gzornenplatz are placed on a 3 month general probation. If during this period they violate the other remedies passed in this case, then they can, at the discretion of the Committee, be ordered to serve the rest of their probation period banned from editing the English Wikipedia.
 * Accepted 5-0

Enforcement
1) If Gzornenplatz, Shorne, or VeryVerily should revert a page more than once per day, an administrator may ban him for up to 24 hours.
 * Accepted 5-0

2) If Gzornenplatz, Shorne, or VeryVerily should revert a page without discussing it on the relevant talk page, an administrator may ban him for up to 24 hours.
 * Accepted 5-0


text:
Talk:Sofya Kovalevskaya

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 10 March 2020 and 4 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Rduncan123.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:44, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

German article
It would be useful to translate de:Sonja Kowalewski (which is about 4 times longer) and merge it into this article. Pyrop 04:45, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I am a German native and would be happy to assist. However I just joined Wikipedia yesterday, so I am now very sure on how to merge articles. I could try though, if you wanted to. TheFibonacciEffect (talk) 10:45, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

First female professor
The first female professor in Europe? We have som contradicting pages here... Maria Gaetana Agnesi in 1750 or Sofia in 1881? I did a small search and there are sources claiming Sofia as the first, others say she was the third, naming Maria Gaetana Agnesi and Laura Bassi as earlier female professors. Ellipse 23:43, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

It seems she was in fact the third. Laura Bassi was the first in 1732, Maria Gaetana Agnesi the second in 1750. Changed in text. Ellipse 00:13, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Category Swedish scientists
The user Muriel Gottrop removed the category Category:Swedish scientists on the premis that "she was not swedish". I think any professor of Stocholm University can be includend in the category. The removal is highly POV. -- Petri Krohn 23:25, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Mathematics professor should be more precise. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.222.85.17 (talk) 21:33, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Possible vandalism
This article was modified on 11 October 2005 by 24.22.177.7. The anonymous user seems to be on a vandalization spree. The changes seem plausible, so I am not reverting. Please check the facts! -- Petri Krohn 23:25, 11 October 2005 (UTC)

Marriage and child
Sofia had a husband and child, too. I found the story of her marriage to a liberal geology student named "Vladimir Kovalevsky" to be quite relevant to her development as hhe travelled with her initially to Heidelberg, and later she travelled back to Moscow to be with him for a few years. Initially this was a marriage "on paper" to ally herself with somebody who would let her make more of her own decisions than her family did, but during the Moscow years (in 1878) they had a daughter, Sofia. Vladimir entered business and then killed himself.

Not sure how to work this content in so I leave it to somebody else. 67.161.46.163 15:52, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Can this article be cleaned up?
Much of the material here seems poorly presented. As someone observed above, the German article would be a good model to follow.

To examples of problems with content:

(1) On her mother: "...had more education and 'appreciation of the finer things' than her husband." This could be at best a quote (of Sofia??) but in any case is POV by essence.

(2) The whole thing about the wallpaper. This is probably lifted straight from a biography by someone who forgot to present it as a musing (by whom?).

I think this article is worth the work. Kovalevskaya is an important figure in the history of gender in mathematics.

 * I agree: This article needs some grammar-checking, e.g. "Some came from her father, accidentally;" among others.  In response to the above comment, I do recall point #2 (re. wallpaper anecdote) very clearly from my research for a brief biography I wrote in high school.  I'll try to find some reliable sources.  In addition, I think it should be mentioned that there is a crater named after her ("Kovaleskaya") on the far side of the moon.  It seems the Russians got there first. :-) Eccl.7.12

 * As an addendum, I seem to recall that Kovalevskaya made some significant contributions to mathematical series. Again, I'll try to do some research in this area. Eccl.7.12 02:46, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi there, I have completed a major copyedit of this article. I did not address any issues of fact or missing citations. --killing sparrows 00:04, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

movies and books about Sofia kovalevskaya
I think it could be added the following information about S.K.

there is a swedish film called:

> "Berget på månens baksida (1983)" (something like: "the mountain in the backside of the moon") about the years of Sofia Kovalevskaya in sweden and her love relation with Maxim Kovalevksy. (It has an entry the IMDB)

Besides there is a good biography of her written by

> Don H. Kennedy: Little Sparrow: A Portrait of Sophia Kovalevsky. Ohio University Press 1983.

Bye

Juan —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.42.60.221 (talk) 03:09, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Usage of surname
"There are many alternative spellings used for her names; she herself used Sophie Kowalevski (or occasionally Kowalevsky), the family name of her husband, paleontologist Vladimir Kowalevski. She used it in her publications without indication of her gender, perhaps to hide her gender from other Russians." I think she used it that way to adapt her surname for Western European langauages. She could not hide her gender that way because of female first name Sophie, and there was no point of hiding her geneder from Russians solely, prejudices against women were common in Western Europe as well. 85.249.167.223 (talk) 13:31, 31 March 2009 (UTC)

Tributes portion
In keeping with other articles on mathematicians, I don't think the partial listing of past award winners is apropo.--Billymac00 (talk) 04:59, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Prize rigged?
I removed this statement from the page:

 * It is believed that the topic chosen for the prize was intended to favor her, as she was known to be preparing a significant paper in that field.

as it is uncited and defamatory, who believes? the people who lost?

The statement was added by User:KarlJacobi. Cheers, — sligocki (talk) 07:27, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Her grandmother
"Her grandmother was Romani" seems to mean Sofia's grand-mother, not Velizaveta's grand-mother. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.177.171.194 (talk) 11:30, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Several different Versions of Kovalevskaya's Autobiography
There are atleast 3 different versions of her autobiography available as free PDFs on Archive.org, (Search- Kovalevskaia). The Macmillan and T. Fisher Unwin versions are in the form of an autobigraphical novel, while the Century Co version is a straight first-person autobiography.

I'd like to mention 1 of them in the article, but which? -- I NEVER CRY'' 09:29, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Died of Influenza
According to the Swedish Wiki article, Sofia died of Influenza and "complications from pneumonia". Perhaps worth mentioning. Fred26 (talk) 18:06, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

List of Biographies
I removed the work by von Adelung from the list, because it's an article, not a book-length biography; it's no more significant than several other memoirs by friends and relatives; and it's not available in English. I also added a reference to the English translation of Polubarinova-Kochina's book. NightHeron (talk) 15:04, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * What are the "several other memoirs" you mention? Sophie von Adelung's was surely one of the first to be published after her death? Deb (talk) 08:57, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Works by Elizaveta Litvinova, F. V. Korvin-Krukovskaia, I. I. Malevich, Maria Jankowska-Mendelson, Ellen Key, and Anna Carlotta Leffler. Most are, like the work of von Adelung, personal reminiscences that do not seem to be available in English. NightHeron (talk) 11:02, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Sentence about Dress Reform
I removed the sentence about dress reform for two reasons. First, the source is a conference talk rather than a peer-reviewed journal, and it doesn't seem to comply with WP:RS. In the case of Kovalevskaia it's particularly important to have RS, since there were many rumors circulating about her, especially in the years following her death. Secondly, even if she did join with her friends who supported dress reform in Sweden, as far as I'm aware she never wrote about it or gave evidence that it was a major issue for her, in which case it's not significant enough to appear in a short biographical article, per WP:NPOV. In contrast, she wrote widely-read articles about Swedish peasant education, French medical practice regarding women, and Russian literature, but those interests of hers, which seem to have been more significant than the dress reform, are not in the article. NightHeron (talk) 01:48, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

 * Ok for me; I just wanted to indicate that some source for the statement could be provided. I'm not even fully sure that the Swedish text supports the sentence in the Wikipedia article (however, I guess it does). - Jochen Burghardt (talk) 09:44, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

Translation of the titles of the publications
Hi, I can speak German (native). Should I translate the titles of her publications? TheFibonacciEffect (talk) 10:42, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

Lack of evidence for "romantic" claim
There's no evidence that SK had a lesbian relationship with Leffler or any other woman. Concerning her relationship with Lefler, this is what one of the full-length biographies says: "Although her teaching was successful, Sofia was finding life in Stockholm more lonely and humdrum than she had thought it would be. She found no Swedish equivalent of Maria Jankowska-Mendelson or Iulia Lermontova or her sister Aniuta; no friend to whom she could express her thoughts. Her relationship with Anna Carlotta [Leffler] did not satisfy the need for a confidante, although it came the closest. Leffler was too aloof, too afraid of submerging her own weaker personality in that of her friend, to be a completely congenial companion to Sofia." NightHeron (talk) 20:03, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I do take your point, the cited source was the only one I could find referencing the relationship in this way as well (the reason I put that it was McFadden's phrasing in particular in my edit). I had a look at McFadden's article, which was the citation given for the original sentence, to find a more specific page number and made the change after finding that she characterised the relationship a bit differently from how it was stated on SK's page. I think, by the sounds of it, the Koblitz biography might make a better citation for that sentence and it would make sense to either include both or to use it instead of McFadden.
 * I didn't mean to suggest that the citation to McFadden has to change (although the books by Koblitz, Cooke, and Polubarinova-Kochina are more authoritative). I don't think it's necessary to give more details about the relationship between the two women. They did collaborate on two plays, and this is mentioned a little later in the article. It would probably be undue emphasis to say more about their relationship, especially because some women whom Kovalevskaia regarded as confidantes (Lermontova, Jankowska-Mendelson, and Anna Evreinova) are not mentioned in the article. NightHeron (talk) 23:18, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

First woman to have been awarded a doctorate at a European university
I don't think this claim is true - there are examples here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_women_who_obtained_doctoral_degrees_before_1800 Does it need to be more specific in some way? Kathryn EB (talk) 14:34, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, you're correct. I changed the wording so that it's now accurate. In mathematics, the only women who received comparable recognition earlier were in Renaissance Italy, where an original work of research was not required, so that was not a doctorate in the modern sense. NightHeron (talk) 15:59, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Country of birth
I changed the infobox country of birth from "Russian Empire" to "Russia" with the edit summary Russia is the country; we don't say that T. H. Huxley was born in "London, British Empire". This was reverted by an editor who claims that "Russian Empire" is the name of the country. First of all, that's wrong. The Russian Empire was an empire that existed from 1721 until the February revolution of 1917. It's not the name of a country. In the second place, identifying her birth place as being in the Russian Empire is misleading, because that would normally be done only if it was in a country other than Russia that was under the control of Russia at the time (such as Finland or Poland). But Kovalevskaia was born in Moscow, and you can't be more in Russia than that. NightHeron (talk) 01:15, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Removed incorrect categories
First, Kovalevskaya was not Swedish, although she worked in Sweden. She remained a Russian citizen and always regarded herself and was regarded by others as Russian. Second, she was never a student (and hence not an alumna) of Stockholm University. Third, she could not have died from the 1889-90 flu pandemic, since she died the following year. Fourth, she was not a 20-th century writer, since she died before the 20th century. So I removed those 6 categories. NightHeron (talk) 17:12, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Lesbian
At my school when I attended it (though this may be biased due to the school's strong support of LGBT), I have seen a fact file about her on a wall with other "LGBT people who changed the world", that mentions her as an open lesbian. Is there any truth to this or is it just from the *rse of the f*cking sodomic propaganda machine? 2A00:23C7:5882:8201:A116:4C34:EF8:5947 (talk) 21:54, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

 * Please see the earlier thread on this page "Lack of evidence for "romantic" claim". NightHeron (talk) 23:24, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sofya Kovalevskaya


text:
Al-Mustadi

Abu Muhammad Hasan ibn Yusuf al-Mustanjid (أبو محمد حسن بن يوسف المستنجد; 1142 – 27 March 1180) usually known by his regnal title al-Mustadi (المستضيء بأمر الله) was the Abbasid Caliph in Baghdad from 1170 to 1180. He succeeded his father al-Mustanjid in 1170 as the Caliph.

Biography
Al-Mustadi was the son of caliph al-Mustanjid and his mother was Ghaddha, an Armenian concubine. He was born in 1142. His full name was Hasan ibn Yusuf al-Mustanjid and his Kunya was Abu Muhammad. He was named after 5th caliph al-Hasan. When his father al-Mustanjid died on 18 December 1170, he succeeded him.

Al-Mustadi's reign is noted in general for its extensive building activities. He is said to have rebuilt al-Taj palace in Baghdad which was first constructed by 10th-century Abbasid caliph al-Muktafī (r. 902–908) and there was a great construction project of mosques, schools, religious endowments in his reign. His two spouses Sayyida Banafsha and Zumurrud Khatun, where especially prolific in these efforts. Banafsha was the follower of Hanbali school of thought, ordered the construction of a bridge in Baghdad in 570 AH/1174 CE, that was named after her.

Like his predecessor, he continued to occupy a more or less independent position, with a vizier and courtly surroundings, and supported by only a small force sufficient for an occasional local campaign. During his reign, Saladin ended the Shia Fatimid Caliphate, became the Sultan of Egypt and declared his allegiance to the Abbasids.

Towards the end of 1169, Saladin, with reinforcements from Nur ad-Din, defeated a massive Crusader-Byzantine force near Damietta. Afterward, in the spring of 1170, Nur ad-Din sent Saladin's father to Egypt in compliance with Saladin's request, as well as encouragement from the Baghdad-based Abbasid caliph, al-Mustanjid, who aimed to pressure Saladin in deposing his rival caliph, al-Adid. Saladin himself had been strengthening his hold on Egypt and widening his support base there. He began granting his family members high-ranking positions in the region; he ordered the construction of a college for the Maliki branch of Sunni Islam in the city, as well as one for the Shafi'i denomination to which he belonged in al-Fustat.

After establishing himself in Egypt, Saladin launched a campaign against the Crusaders, besieging Darum in 1170. Amalric withdrew his Templar garrison from Gaza to assist him in defending Darum, but Saladin evaded their force and captured Gaza in 1187. In 1191 Saladin destroyed the fortifications in Gaza build by King Baldwin III for the Knights Templar. It is unclear exactly when, but during that same year, he attacked and captured the Crusader castle of Eilat, built on an island off the head of the Gulf of Aqaba. It did not pose a threat to the passage of the Muslim navy but could harass smaller parties of Muslim ships and Saladin decided to clear it from his path.

According to Imad ad-Din, Nur ad-Din wrote to Saladin in June 1171, telling him to reestablish the Abbasid caliphate in Egypt, which Saladin coordinated two months later after additional encouragement by Najm ad-Din al-Khabushani, the Shafi'i faqih, who vehemently opposed Shia rule in the country. Several Egyptian emirs were thus killed, but al-Adid was told that they were killed for rebelling against him. He then fell ill or was poisoned according to one account. While ill, he asked Saladin to pay him a visit to request that he take care of his young children, but Saladin refused, fearing treachery against the Abbasids, and is said to have regretted his action after realizing what al-Adid had wanted. He died on 13 September, and five days later, the Abbasid khutba was pronounced in Cairo and al-Fustat, proclaiming al-Mustadi as caliph.

During the reign of the caliph, al-Mustadi, Ibn al-Jawzi began to be recognized "as one of the most influential persons in Baghdad." As this particular ruler was especially partial to Hanbalism, Ibn al-Jawzi was given free rein to promote Hanbalism by way of his preaching throughout Baghdad. The numerous sermons Ibn al-Jawzi delivered from 1172 to 1173 cemented his reputation as the premier scholar in Baghdad at the time; indeed, the scholar soon began to be so appreciated for his gifts as an orator that al-Mustadi even went so far as to have a special dais (Arabic dikka) constructed specially for Ibn al-Jawzi in the Palace mosque. Ibn al-Jawzi's stature as a scholar only continued to grow in the following years.

By 1179, Ibn al-Jawzi had written over one hundred and fifty works and was directing five colleges in Baghdad simultaneously. It was at this time that he told al-Mustadi to engrave an inscription onto the widely venerated tomb of Ibn Hanbal (d. 855) – the revered founder of the Hanbali rite – which referred to the famed jurist as "Imām."

Benjamin of Tudela, who traveled to this area between 1160 and 1173, noted: "Two days from Akbara stands Baghdad. The large metropolis of Calif Emir-al-Mumenin al Abassi Amir al-Mu'minin, of the family of their prophet, who is chief of the Mahometan religion. All Mahometan kings acknowledge him, and he holds the same dignity over them which the Pope enjoys over the Christians. The palace of the Caliph at Baghdad is three miles in extent. It contains a large park filled with all sorts of trees, both useful and ornamental, and all kinds of beasts, as well as a pond of water carried thither from the river Tigris; and whenever the Caliph desires to enjoy himself and to sport and carouse, birds, beasts and fishes are prepared for him and for his courtiers, whom he invites to his palace. This great Abassid is extremely friendly towards the Jews, many of his officers being of that nation; he understands all languages, is well versed in Mosaic law, and reads and writes the Hebrew tongue. He enjoys nothing but what he earns by the labor of his own hands, and therefore manufactures coverlets, which he stamps with his seal, and which his officers sell in the public market..."

In 1180, Caliph Al-Mustadi died and was succeeded by his son Al-Nasir.

Family
One of Al-Mustadi's concubines was Zumurrud Khatun. She was a Turkish, and was the mother of the future Caliph Al-Nasir. She died in December 1202 – January 1203, or January–February 1203, and was buried in her own mausoleum in Sheikh Maarouf Cemetery. Another of his concubines was Al-Sayyida Banafsha. She was the daughter of Abdullah, a Greek, and was Al-Mustadi's favourite concubine. She died on 27 December 1201, and was buried in the mausoleum of Zumurrud Khatun in Sheikh Maarouf Cemetery. Another concubine was Sharaf Khatun. She was a Turkish, and was the mother of Prince Abu Mansur Hashim. She died on 27 December 1211, and was buried in the Rusafah Cemetey. Some other concubines were Khtalj Khatun and al-Abbasah. Both of them were Turkish.

title: Al-Mustadi