text:
Military history of Portugal

The military history of Portugal is as long as the history of the country, from before the emergence of the independent Portuguese state.

Before Portugal
Before the emergence of Portugal, between the 9th and the 12th centuries, its territory was part of important military conflicts – these were mainly the result of three processes.

Roman expansion

 * The conflict between Ancient Rome and Carthage for the dominion of the western Mediterranean sea mainly occurred in Iberia (the Roman Hispania) during the Second Punic War from 218 to 201 BC.
 * The Roman conquest of Hispania, a long process from 218 BC (in the context of the Second Punic War) to 17 BC (already during Emperor Augustus), had three major confrontations regarding modern Portuguese territory:
 * The Lusitanian War from 155 to 139 BC, between the Romans and the Lusitanians, namely during the period these were led by Viriatus.
 * The expedition and conquest of Gallaecia (north of Portugal and Galicia), from 135 and 132 BC, led by Consul Decimus Junius Brutus Callaicus.
 * The Cantabrian Wars from 29 to 19 BC, in the last stade of Roman conquest, that, although not directed at populations in the present Portuguese territory, greatly involved military movements in what is now the north of Portugal.
 * The Roman republican civil wars that took place, wholly or partially, in Hispania, even if in interaction and connection to the process of conquest, namely:
 * Sertorius' revolt in Hispania, from 83 to 72 BC, under the leadership of Sertorius.
 * Caesar's Civil War, from 49 to 45 BC, between Julius Caesar and the optimates (conservative republicans), initially led by Pompey.

Germanic expansion

The invasions during the Migration Period and the Decline of the Roman Empire, in the beginning of the 5th century, and the subsequent conflicts between conquerors (until the 8th century), namely:
 * Invasion of Roman Gallaecia by the Germanic Suebi (Quadi and Marcomanni) under king Hermeric, accompanied by the Buri in 409.
 * Invasion of Hispania by the Germanic Vandals (Silingi – established in Baetica, and Hasdingi – established in interior Gallaecia, near the Suebi) and the Sarmatian Alans (established in Roman Lusitania), in 409.
 * Invasion of Hispania by the Germanic Visigoths led by King Theodoric, expanding from Aquitaine and under request by the Romans, in 410, establishing the Visigothic Kingdom of Hispania.
 * The war between The Suevi and the Hasdingi Vandals, where the first resisted with Roman aid, in 419.
 * The war between the Alans and the Suevi and Romans where the last two are defeated at the Battle of Mérida, in 428.
 * The war between the Visigoths and the Vandal–Alanic alliance, that ended in 429, with most of the Vandals and Alans moving to North Africa.
 * The on and off continuous dynastic disputes between the Suevi.
 * The on and off continuous war between the Suevi and the Visigoths, that ended when the Visigothic king, Liuvigild, conquered the Kingdom of the Suebi in 585.
 * The war between the Visigothic Kingdom of Hispania and the Byzantine Empire in its southern Iberian province of Spania, from 552 until 624.
 * The dynastic and civil war in the Visigothic Kingdom between the supporters of Achila II (controlling most of eastern Hispania) and Roderic (controlling most of western Iberia).

Islamic expansion and Christian standoff

 * The Moorish Umayyad conquest of Hispania, from 711 to 718, taking advantage of the civil war, and that established the Islamic Al-Andalus.
 * The Reconquista started as an insurgency in Asturias in 722. Currently Historians and archaeologists generally agree that Northern Portugal, between the Minho and the Douro rivers, kept a significant share of its population, in social and political Christian area that until the late 9th century there were no acting political powers. However, in late 9th century, the region is part of a structure of powers, the Galician–Asturian, Leonese and Portuguese power structures. The county of Portugal slowly grew in power and territory forming a separate Kingdom of Portugal which expanded at the expense of the Moorish states of Al-Andalus, finishing its Reconquista in 1249.

County of Portugal and Kingdom of Portugal and Galicia
The county of Portugal slowly grew in power and its counts started to style themselves as dukes, one of which became regent of the Kingdom of León between 999 and 1008. In 1070, the Portuguese count Nuno Mendes wished the Portuguese title and the Battle of Pedroso was fought on February 18, 1071, the count was killed in combat led by Garcia II of Galicia. The later annexed the county and started to styled himself as "King of Portugal and Galicia" (Garcia Rex Portugallie et Galleciae). Garcia's brothers Sancho II of Castille and Alfonso VI of Leon united and annexed Garcia's Kingdom during that same year who agreed to split it among themselves, however the king of Castille was killed by a noble in that same year and Alfonso took Castille for himself and Garcia recovered his kingdom of Portugal and Galicia, but in 1073 the Alfonso VI gathered all power and started to style himself as Imperator totius Hispaniæ (Emperor of All Hispania) since 1077. When the Emperor died, the Crown was left for his daughter Urraca, while Teresa inherited the County of Portugal.

County of Portugal

 * Battle of Ourique

Kingdom of Portugal

 * Battle of Valdevez - 1140/1141 (vs. Kingdom of Léon)
 * Siege of Lisbon - 1142
 * Conquest of Santarém - 1147
 * Siege of Lisbon - 1147
 * Siege of Santarém - 1184
 * Siege of Silves - 1189
 * Almohad campaign against Portugal (1190–1191) - 1190-1991
 * Siege of Alcácer do Sal - 1217
 * Siege of Faro - 1249

Military history in modern-day Portugal at the Reconquista time outside the Kingdom of Portugal

 * Murīdūn - 1140 (Sufi revolt in Almoravid-occupied Mértola)
 * Alvor massacre - 1189 (Christian crusaders during the Third Crusade against Almohad-occupied Alvor)

Imperial expansion

 * Portuguese–Mamluk war
 * Persian–Portuguese war
 * Portuguese intervention in Abyssinia
 * Portuguese conquest of Jaffna Kingdom
 * Dutch–Portuguese War
 * Battle of Alcácer Quibir
 * Ottoman–Portuguese conflicts
 * Conquest of Tunis (1535)
 * Ottoman–Portuguese conflicts (1538–57)
 * Ottoman–Portuguese conflicts (1558–66)
 * Ottoman–Portuguese conflicts (1580–89)
 * Ottoman–Venetian War (1714–18)
 * Kongo-Portuguese conflicts
 * Battle of Mbumbi
 * Battle of Mbanda Kasi
 * Battle of Mbwila
 * Battle of Kitombo
 * Guaraní War
 * Portuguese conquest of the Banda Oriental
 * Japanese-Portuguese conflicts

Conflicts with Spain

 * War of the Portuguese Succession
 * Portuguese Restoration War
 * War of the Spanish Succession
 * Spanish–Portuguese War (1735–37)
 * Spanish–Portuguese War (1761–63)
 * Spanish–Portuguese War (1776–77)

Other European conflicts

 * Seven Years' War
 * Fantastic War

Riots of Campo de Ourique and conspiracy of the Marquis of Alorna (1803)
On 24 and 25 July 1803, in Campo de Ourique, Lisbon, a regiment of infantry commanded by liberal army man Gomes Freire de Andrade and the Legion of Light Troops commanded by the also liberal-leaning Marquis of Alorna mutinied against the state authorities, entering in confrontation with the then recently created Royal Guard of the Police. The end of the mutinies, of forcing political liberalism on Portuguese government, did not succeed.

Conspiracy of Mafra (1805)
In 1805, then Princess regent (soon afterwards Queen) Carlota Joaquina promoted a conspiracy in Mafra with the objective of removing her husband Prince João from regency by claiming him to be mentally incapable, assuming regency on her own in his place, being aided in the attempted coup by the Count of Sabugal, the Marquis of Ponte de Lima, the Count of Sarzedas, the Marquis of Alorna and Francisco de Melo. The attempted conspiracy did not succeed, but it did increase the tension between the couple to the point of a divorce or separation being considered, which was never advanced due to the damage that it would bring to the Portuguese state, and the couple still had two children after the attempted conspiracy of Carlota (Maria da Assunção, born in 1805, and Ana de Jesus Maria, born in 1806), although there are suspicions about the possibility of the four children of the couple born after 1801, including the 1802-born Miguel, were not children of João but of one or several of the lovers of Carlota Joaquina).

Riots of Saint Torcato (1805)
The riots of Saint Torcato was a popular uprising in the Portuguese country side with a strong mixture of religious influence and zealotry.

First invasion
During the Napoleonic Wars, Portugal was, for a time, Britain's only ally on the continent. Throughout the war, Portugal maintained a military of about 200–250 thousand troops worldwide. In 1807, after the Portuguese government's refusal to participate in the Continental System, French troops under General Junot invaded Portugal, taking Lisbon. However, a popular revolt against Junot's government broke out in the summer of 1808 and Portuguese irregulars took up arms against the French. This enabled a British army under Arthur Wellesley to be landed in Portugal where, aided by Portuguese troops, they defeated Junot at the Battle of Vimeiro; this first French invasion was ended by the Convention of Sintra negotiated by his superiors, which allowed Junot's men to withdraw unmolested with their plunder. Meanwhile, the general revolt against the French in Spain led to the landing of Sir John Moore in the north of that country, forcing Napoleon himself to lead an army into the Peninsula. Though Moore was killed, the British managed to extricate themselves from the Peninsula in the Battle of La Coruña. Portugal itself, however, remained independent of the French, and Napoleon left things in the Iberian Peninsula in the hands of Marshal Soult.

Second and third invasions
Soult proceeded to invade Portugal in the north. However, the Portuguese held on, giving the British the impetus to send Wellesley back with additional regiments of troops to help recover the Iberian peninsula. Wellesley, aided by the remaining Portuguese regiments hastily scraped together, liberated Portugal. A third invasion took place, led by Marshal André Masséna. The Anglo-Portuguese Army managed to halt the French advance at the fortifications of Torres Vedras and successfully defeat Masséna's troops, and slowly recovered the Iberian peninsula. Wellesley was made Duke of Wellington in recognition of his services. The Portuguese army was put under the command of Marshal Beresford and was most heavily engaged under his leadership in the bloody Battle of Albuera. Portuguese forces also formed part of Wellington's advance into southern France, in 1813–14.
 * Lines of Torres Vedras

Persecutions of the Setembrizada (1810)
The Setembrizada was the arrest and deportation of a group of personalities connected to the Portuguese Freemasonry, Jacobinist currents and following of the ideals of the French Revolution who had collaborated with the French occupation during the First Invasion, with the first detentions occurring between 10 and 13 September 1810 (hence the name setembrizada), after the entry of the Second Invasion led by general Jean-de-Dieu Soult. By 1814, King João VI gave an amnesty to all the former collaborationists.

Martinhada (1820)
On 11 November 1820 (day of St. Martin, hence the name of the revolt, also known in slang as "o imbróglio", "the plot" or "a pavorosa", "the dreadful one"), a group of military leaders known as exaltados (exalted ones), who challenged the civilian rule in which the 1820 liberal Provisional Junta of Supreme Government of the Kingdom was falling and also what they considered to be the moderate proposals of a constitutional being drawn under influence of the liberal orator Manuel Fernandes Tomás, defending instead the immediate adoption of the Cádiz Constitution or even a more advanced liberal one. These groups rose up in a paradoxical wide informal coalition with conservative military and politicians and radical bourgeois people. It had a brief success, but by 17 November of the same year a counter-coup restores Manuel Fernandes to leadership of the Junta, forcing some Martinhada leaders, like Gaspar Teixeira de Magalhães e Lacerda, António da Silveira Pinto da Fonseca and Bernardo de Sá Nogueira, forced to exile, and only the sections of the Constitution relating to electoral instructions are adopted, at 22 November 1820, with the first elections after the 1820 Revolution (the elections for the General Extraordinary and Constituting Courts, that is, the Constitution writing constituting assembly) occurring under those instructions between 10 and 27 December 1820.

The Vilafrancada (1823)
The Vilafrancada was the first of two uprisings of Prince D. Miguel's uprisings supported by several other people of traditionalist and absolutist leanings, against the liberalism adopted by his father D. João VI in the later phase of his rule.

The Abrilada (1824)
On 30 April 1824, Prince D. Miguel rose again against his father. The King took refuge aboard the British ship Windsor Castle, with the aid of the Portuguese diplomatic corp, while grandes of the kingdom like the Duke of Palmela were arrested in Belém, being then moved to imprisonment in Peniche, with the then intendent-general of police Baron of Rendufe being persecuted by the Miguelist rise-up, which then turned its attentions to the Count of Vila Flor (later more famous for his future title of Duke of Terceira) and the Count of Paraty. The reactionary philosopher José Agostinho de Macedo was one of the leaders of the rallying up of support among the masses for the movement, denouncing the prisoners the movement made at political rallies. On 13 May, D. Miguel was finally forced to leave for exile on board the frigate Pérola towards France, while on the following day D. João returned to Bemposta, and impeached the brutal pro-Miguelist Minister of Justice José António de Oliveira Leite de Barros, replacing him by Friar Patrício da Silva, and the Duke of Palmela was promoted to Minister of the Kingdom.

Disturbances of 1826–27

 * Riots of Trás-os-Montes
 * Sublevation of the Royal Police Guard
 * Rebellion of Algarve and Alentejo
 * Archotada
 * Miguelite riots in Coimbra

The Liberal Wars (1828–34)
After the Napoleonic War, the British ruled Portugal in the name of the absent king in Brazil, with Beresford as de facto Regent, until the Liberal Revolution of 1820 when they were driven out and the king was forced to return as a constitutional monarch. Over the next 25 years the fledgling Portuguese democracy experienced several military upheavals, especially the Liberal Wars fought between the brothers Dom Pedro, ex-Emperor of Brazil and the absolutist usurper Dom Miguel. To assert the cause of the rightful Queen, his daughter Maria da Glória, Pedro sailed from Terceira in the Azores with an expeditionary force consisting of 60 vessels, 7500 men including the Count of Vila Flor, Alexandre Herculano, Almeida Garrett, Joaquim António de Aguiar, José Travassos Valdez and a volunteer British contingent under the command of Colonels George Lloyd Hodges and Charles Shaw and effected a Landing at Mindelo on the shores north of Porto. On 9 July Porto was taken by the liberal forces, and after an inconclusive result at the Battle of Ponte Ferreira on 22–23 July were besieged in the city by the Miguelites for nearly a year until, in July 1833, the Duke of Terceira (as Vila Flor had now been created) was able to land in the Algarve and defeat Miguel's forces at the Battle of Almada. Meanwhile, Miguel's fleet was comprehensively defeated by Pedro's much smaller squadron, commanded by Charles Napier, in the fourth Battle of Cape St. Vincent. The Miguelites were driven out of Lisbon but returned and attacked the city in force, unsuccessfully. Miguel was finally defeated at the Battle of Asseiceira, 16 May 1834, and capitulated a few days later with the Concession of Evoramonte. He was exiled, though his supporters continued to plot for his return and cause trouble up to the 1850s.
 * Liberal revolt in Porto (1828)
 * Belfastada (1828)
 * Revolt of the Royal Navy Brigade (1829)
 * Revolt of Lisbon (1831)
 * Revolt of the 2nd Infantry Regiment (1831)
 * Siege of Porto and civil war (1832–33)

Other guerrillas
In the period of instability after the end of the Portuguese Civil War, several guerrillas happened between pro-governmental and anti-governmental local groups and between local groups and government forces, both by forces of the defeated Miguelites who kept the guerrillas and between different factions of Portuguese liberals. Among these were included:
 * Guerrilla of Jorge Boto (a Miguelite guerrilla in the Beira Alta region just after the end of the Civil War and also in the last years of given war )
 * Guerrilla of Dom Manuel Martinini (a liberal guerrilla in the last days of the Civil War and first years right after its end led by a former Spanish Army officer around Marvão, Alentejo
 * Guerrilla of Galamba (a liberal guerrilla in coastal Alentejo led by António Manuel Soares Galamba, a liberal politician, MP and guerrilla )
 * Guerrilla of Father Góis (a guerrilla in Alentejo led by Priest Francisco Romão de Góis )
 * Guerrilla of Milhundos (a guerrilla led by Lieutenant Milhundos)
 * Guerrilla of the Marçais
 * Guerrilla of the Garranos (one of the many inner Beiras guerrillas in the 1830s and 1840s right after the Civil War)
 * Guerrilla of the Brandões (the 1834–1869 guerrillas of the Brandão family, first united but soon divided in two branches, the Chartist and the Septemberist one. The most famous leader of the Brandões guerrillas was João Brandão)
 * Several Miguelite guerrillas throughout Portugal besides the Remexido one, lasting some until the Regeneration Coup of 1850

Revolt of Pinotes (1846)
The Revolt of Pinotes was the uprising at Viana do Castelo within the bigger Patuleia revolution.

Montaria (1847)
A failed badly planned attempt of revolt against the government in the afternoon of 29 April 1847, which ended with the imprisonment of several of the involved members.

Conspiracy of the Hidras (1848)
A conspiratorial movement in Lisbon and Coimbra in August 1848, inspired by the popular and students' uprising of Paris from 22 to 24 February 1848 (which led to the fall of King Louis Philippe I and the proclamation of the Second Republic). It was controlled by the government of the Duke of Saldanha (with detaining of some of the heads of the conspiracy, the remaining ones falling in clandestinity), with the name by which the conspiracy became known deriving from the term used by Saldanha to define the organization ("revolutionary hydra")

Colonization of Africa
In the 19th century, Portugal became involved in the scramble for Africa, enlarging its territories in Portuguese Angola, Portuguese Mozambique, Portuguese Cabinda, and Portuguese Guinea.

First Republic (1910–26)
After the revolution that would establish the First Portuguese Republic, the Republic would suffer many coup attempts, see Portugal enter World War I and end 16 years later with the 28 May 1926 coup d'état.

German incursions in Mozambique
A raid by Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck's remaining troops evaded British troops and managed to penetrate relatively far into Portuguese Mozambique, seizing arms, capturing troops, and sparking unrest among the population (African and European).

Europe
Portugal sent an Expeditionary Corps of two reinforced divisions (40,000 men) to France and Belgium, which fought alongside the British XI Corps. German offensives in the British sector hit the Portuguese hard, with one division destroyed in the Battle of La Lys, April 9, 1918, as it became known in Portugal, or Operation Georgette or the Battle of Estaires to the British. In the Treaty of Versailles, the Portuguese acquired the territory of Kionga from what was once German East Africa.

Involvement in the Spanish Civil War (1936–39)
Salazar gave material and diplomatic aid to Francisco Franco's nationalist forces while maintaining a formal neutrality. A special volunteer force of 18,000, called Os Viriatos (in honour of Lusitanian leader and Portuguese national hero Viriatus), led by regular army officers, was recruited to fight as part of Franco's army, even if unofficially. When the civil war ended in 1939, Portugal and Spain negotiated the Treaty of Friendship and Nonaggression (Iberian Pact). The pact committed the two countries to defend the Iberian Peninsula against any power that attacked either country and helped to ensure Iberian neutrality during World War II.

World War II (1939–45)
Although Portugal proclaimed neutrality in the conflict, the Japanese Imperial Army invaded the Portuguese Timor colony in distant Oceania, killing thousands of natives and dozens of Portuguese. In response, the Portuguese civilians joined Australia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States against the Japanese. See Battle of Timor.

Portuguese–Indian War (1961)
The Portuguese–Indian War was a conflict with the Republic of India's armed forces that ended Portuguese rule in its Indian enclaves in 1961. The armed action involved defensive action against air, sea and land strikes by a numerically superior Indian force for over 36 hours, and terminated in Portuguese surrender, ending 451 years of Portuguese rule in Goa. Thirty-one Portuguese and thirty-five Indians were killed in the fighting.

Portuguese Colonial War (1961–74)
Portugal remained steadfastly neutral in World War II, but became involved in counterinsurgency campaigns against scattered guerrilla movements in Portuguese Angola, Portuguese Mozambique, and Portuguese Guinea. Except in Portuguese Guinea, where the revolutionary PAIGC quickly conquered most of the country, Portugal was able to easily contain anti-government forces through the imaginative use of light infantry, home defense militia, and air-mobile special operations forces, despite arms embargoes from other European countries. During the counterinsurgency campaigns in Angola and Mozambique, Portugal was significantly aided by intelligence provided by native residents who did not support revolutionary forces. However, the ideology of the guerrillas, especially the PAIGC, had a profound impact on the officers of the Portuguese armed forces and a left-wing military coup in Lisbon by Portuguese military officers in 1974 toppled the Caetano government and forced a radical change in government attitudes. Faced with international condemnation of its colonial policies and the increasing cost of administering its colonies, Portugal quickly moved to grant the remainder of its African colonies independence.

International involvement (1991 to present)
Portugal was a founding member of NATO, and, although it had scarce forces, it played a key role in the European approaches. After 1991, Portugal committed several infantry and air-landing battalions to international operations. The Portuguese Army keeps soldiers in Iraq, Jordan, Mali, Central African Republic, Somalia, Mozambique, São Tomé and Príncipe, Kosovo and Baltic states.

Since 1991, Portuguese Armed Forces have participated in the following missions;

missions:
 * NATO intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina;
 * Implementation Force in Kosovo;
 * Stabilisation Force in Bosnia and Herzegovina;
 * Operation Sharp Guard;
 * Kosovo Force in Kosovo;
 * NATO bombing of Yugoslavia;
 * Operation Active Endeavour in Mediterranean;
 * Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan;
 * International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan;
 * NATO Training Mission in Iraq;
 * Operation Enduring Freedom – Horn of Africa;
 * Standing NATO Maritime Group 1 since 2005;
 * Baltic Air Policing since 2007;
 * Operation Ocean Shield;
 * Icelandic Air Policing since (2012 and 2022)
 * Standing NATO Maritime Group 2 (2012 and 2014);
 * NATO Assurance Measures in Romania;
 * Operation Sea Guardian since 2016;
 * Resolute Support Mission in Afghanistan;
 * Standing NATO Mine Countermeasures Group 1;
 * NATO Assurance Measures in Lithuania (2019 and 2021);
 * NATO Assurance Measures in Poland (2019 and 2020);
 * NATO Tailored Forward Presence in Romania (2021).

🇺🇳 missions:
 * United Nations Protection Force
 * Operation Provide Comfort
 * United Nations Angola Verification Mission II
 * United Nations Operation in Mozambique
 * United Nations Confidence Restoration Operation in Croatia
 * United Nations Angola Verification Mission III
 * United Nations Mission in Bosnia and Herzegovina
 * United Nations Mission of Observers in Prevlaka
 * United Nations Confidence Restoration Operation in Croatia
 * United Nations Mission for the Referendum in Western Sahara
 * International Force East Timor
 * United Nations Transitional Administration in East Timor
 * MONUA
 * United Nations Mission of Support to East Timor
 * United Nations Observer Mission in Liberia
 * United Nations Operation in Côte d'Ivoire
 * United Nations Operation in Burundi
 * United Nations Interim Administration Mission in Kosovo
 * United Nations Office in East Timor
 * United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon
 * United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees in Algeria
 * MONUSCO in Democratic Republic of the Congo
 * United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan
 * United Nations Multidimensional Integrated Stabilization Mission in Mali
 * UN Verification Mission in Colombia
 * United Nations Integrated Peacebuilding Office in Guinea-Bissau
 * MINUSCA in Central African Republic

🇪🇺 missions:
 * Operation Sophia
 * Operation Althea
 * Operation Atalanta
 * European Union Training Mission in Mali
 * European Union Training Mission in Somalia
 * European Union Training Mission in the Central African Republic
 * Frontex
 * Operation Irini
 * European Union Training Mission in Mozambique

title: Military history of Portugal


text:
Talk:Senryū

Untitled
I am planning on making some additions to this senryu page, such as explaning where the word senryu came from and some of the history of senryu. While I'm thinking of what I want to add, and how I want to word it, I want to make a suggestion. I think the entire second paragraph ("Much modern haiku...") should be removed from the senryu entry. It really doesn't say a whole lot about senryu, while at the same time denigrating the more conservative 5-7-5 English-language "Yuki Teikei" style of haiku. I will concede that 5-7-5 haiku written by beginners often seem very wordy and are marred by obvious filler words, but when a 5-7-5 haiku has been written by a knowledgeable haiku poet, that is no longer true. Thus it violates the NPOV principle for the Wikipedia.

gK 9 Oct 2004 6:22 AM PST

 * I wouldn't just remove that paragraph outright. Its important point, that English (and, from what I understand, Japanese as well) poets frequently no longer adhere strictly to the 5-7-5 rule, instead preferring a "one deep breath" rule, is true and should certainly be mentioned.  I think it would be NPOV to say what you just said above: that the 5-7-5 rule may be a distraction for beginners, but that an experienced poet will know how to work with it.

 * I do think that the first sentence of that paragraph is a little confused. It might be better to say that modern non-Japanese poets, either intentionally or due to ignorance, abandon some of the traditional rules of haiku, instead writing a poem that's closer to a senryu.   —Triskaideka 15:03, 11 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't think filler words are a problem. The idea is for you to think about an image or a situation that isn't temporal or that recurs for eight seconds. I hav a haiku that could simply be trimmed--given an early period--at thirteen syllables to mean the same thing (the tune doesn't end naturally at 13, though). It might be worth working out which rules are the most difficult. I think it's the one about indicating the season, but exactly seventeen is naturally difficult, too. So, perhaps what I should do is write *anything* about this season, and then maybe after ten tries I'll just happen upon something that's exactly seventeen.

Senryu, due to their dark and introspective side I think are naturally going to be less popular than haiku; they hav fewer standards, so they're more temporal. BrewJay (talk) 18:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Moved from article, hokku vs haiku
The content below should be properly integrated into the article. I've also taken the liberty of reverting the hokku-into-haiku thing, please see Talk:Haiku for discussion. Jpatokal 03:23, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Additional History
Long before the proto-haiku and proto-senryu parted ways, the world of early haikai (shoki-hakkai) had room for both. In the Enoko collection (1633), we find poems on nature and poems that are vulgar if not obscene. As senryu began to coalesce into a separate genre (this before the first Mr. Senryu began his above-noted series of anthologies), some characteristics which differentiate it from hokku became clear:

1) There is a tendency to create and play with stereotypes, which might be seen as the senryu equivalent of the kigo, or seasonal theme in hokku, though the gross content of the senryu leads one to think of the way black humor in the USA. The presence of such themes allows the poets to compete if it were to add novel twists and this contributes to reader enjoyment.  Once themes are well developed, many senryu are opaque to the outsider who might not know that, say, a beautiful wife steeping herbal medicine that doesn't work (ii nyoubo kikanu kusuri o senjiteru) describes a man with jinkyo, a wasting disease where the sufferer has trouble rising from bed while his singular part insists upon standing and spending his limited energy (no, we are not talking about an aphrodisiac, but, if anything, the opposite.).  We also might not have any idea why a beautiful wife is throwing sand at her husband's corpse (It would be magic to get said semper paratus partus to bend) according to another senryu.

2) The third-person (vs modern haiku, which tends to be first-person) or, less commonly a general perspective similar to the English "you" when "you" means no one in particular ("one" sounds too formal) is common. For someone versed in old senryu, the presence of the "I," which personalizes the poem and contradicts 1) above, creates something altogether different, which in many cases might better be called a haiku. To this (old-fashioned) writer, modern senryu that use the first-person might better be called modern poems in 5-7-5.

3) Senryu in its mid-18-early 19c heyday included material that equals the dirty-dozens or the most obscene of Martial's Epigrams. As Blyth put it (and both his books of senryu are recommended), the best senryu would not make it past the censor. At this time (2005), we have no official censor for the printed word, but, as far as I know, none of this XXX stuff has been translated (Even Makoto Ueda's fine introduction to senryu shortchanges us in that respect.) It will before 2008: Look out for THE MULLET IN THE MAID.

4) Because senryu, as all humor, thumbs its nose at power, it includes poems that might be described as the op-ed cartoon in words. This is rare, though not completely absent, in haiku.

5) Today, the personal life of the poet – family or work – plays a far larger role in senryu than it once did. The topical scope is so broad there is less stereotype.  However, because Japanese can use active verbs without specifying the subject/person, it is possible to be personal and direct yet universal.

6) There is not always a difference, in modern writing, between senryu and haiku. As is the case for music, where the singer claims that whatever he sings is enka, or country, because he is an enka-singer or country singer, there are poems found in collections of senryu that would not be questioned as bona fide haiku if they were found in a collection of poems by a known haijin (haiku poet) and poems in collections of haiku that would fit right into a collection of senryu.

Case by case explanations of why a particular ku is a haiku or senryu can be helpful. You might search inside of Fly-ku! and/or Rise, Ye Sea Slugs! (both books by robin d. gill) at Google Print or Amazon for "senry" (the "u" has a mark over it that might not work for a search).

Deep Breath
lol is "one deep breath" a wise rule I wonder. As a drama student I was taught to recite entire sonnets in a single breath

I agree. No. If I speak softly ...many more syllables than seventeen. If I sing out, though...eight seconds. BrewJay (talk) 18:36, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

Zappai
Zappai≠Senryū and so the current Zappai -> Senryū redirect is inappropriate. I propose to create a Zappai stub. Any help in expanding it appreciated. Meanwhile any comments/objections? --Yumegusa (talk) 11:43, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Is it necessary to include the literal translation of Senryu?
While it's true that Senryu/川柳 literally translates to "River Willow", I worry that it is misleading to tell readers that. Senryu is derived from a name, not a reference to the poetry style (unlike, say, Haiku/俳句). OK to delete? OsFish (talk) 03:33, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Senryū


text:
Talk:Military history of Portugal

Template
Is this supposed to be a template? Mike H 13:36, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)

Stub
My understanding is that this is a stub page with a (partial) list of Portugal's wars. It is in dire need of expansion and greater detail. A portal page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Historyguy (talk • contribs)

Expansion
I'm doing a major expansion of this article. As of today it is still quite unfinished - wait and see, but fell free to participate! The Ogre (talk) 21:46, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Help
I have several books on the Penninsula War and Portuguese Empire and will help the expansion in any way I can, just ask. Omgtkk (talk) 02:06, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Military history of Portugal. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110522065452/http://bndigital.bn.br/redememoria/joaovi.html to http://bndigital.bn.br/redememoria/joaovi.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131107005456/http://www.cm-santiagocacem.pt/viver/Cultura/EspacosCulturais/ArquivoMunicipal/Documents/Arquifolha14.pdf to http://www.cm-santiagocacem.pt/viver/Cultura/EspacosCulturais/ArquivoMunicipal/Documents/Arquifolha14.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:23, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Military history of Portugal


text:
Berberis

Berberis, commonly known as barberry, is a large genus of deciduous and evergreen shrubs from 1 – tall, found throughout temperate and subtropical regions of the world (apart from Australia). Species diversity is greatest in South America and Asia; Europe, Africa and North America have native species as well. The best-known Berberis species is the European barberry, Berberis vulgaris, which is common in Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and central Asia, and has been widely introduced in North America. Many of the species have spines on the shoots and all along the margins of the leaves.

Description
The genus Berberis has dimorphic shoots: long shoots which form the structure of the plant, and short shoots only 1 – long. The leaves on long shoots are non-photosynthetic, developed into one to three or more spines 3 – long. The bud in the axil of each thorn-leaf then develops a short shoot with several normal, photosynthetic leaves. These leaves are 1 – long, simple, and either entire, or with spiny margins. Only on young seedlings do leaves develop on the long shoots, with the adult foliage style developing after the young plant is 1–2 years old.

Many deciduous species, such as Berberis thunbergii and B. vulgaris, are noted for their attractive pink or red autumn colour. In some evergreen species from China, such as B. candidula and B. verruculosa, the undersides of the leaves are brilliant white, a feature valued horticulturally. Some horticultural variants of B. thunbergii have dark red to violet foliage. Such as B. thunbergii f. atropurpurea 'Admiration', and B. thunbergii f. atropurpurea 'Atropurpurea Nana'.

The flowers are produced singly or in racemes of up to 20 on a single flower-head. They are yellow or orange, 3 – long, sepals are usually six, rarely three or nine and there are six petals in alternating whorls of three, the sepals usually coloured like the petals. The fruit is a small berry 5 – long, ripening red or dark blue, often with a pink or violet waxy surface bloom; in some species, they may be long and narrow, but are spherical in other species.

Some authors regard the compound-leaved species as belonging to a different genus, Mahonia. There are no consistent differences between the two groups other than the leaf pinnation (Berberis sensu stricto appear to have simple leaves, but these are in reality compound with a single leaflet; they are termed "unifoliolate" ), and many botanists prefer to classify all these plants in the single genus Berberis. However, a recent DNA-based phylogenetic study retains the two separate genera, by clarifying that unifoliolate-leaved Berberis s.s. is derived from within a paraphyletic group of shrubs bearing imparipinnate evergreen leaves, which the paper then divides into three genera: Mahonia, Alloberberis (formerly Mahonia section Horridae), and Moranothamnus (formerly Berberis claireae); it confirms that a broadly-circumscribed Berberis (that is, including Mahonia, Alloberberis, and Moranothamnus) is monophyletic.

Ecology
Berberis species are used as food plants by the larvae of some Lepidoptera species, including the moths barberry carpet moth (Pareulype berberata), and mottled pug (Eupithecia exiguata).

Berberis species can infect wheat with stem rust, a serious fungal disease of wheat and related grains. Berberis vulgaris (European barberry) and Berberis canadensis (American barberry) serve as alternate host species of the rust fungus responsible, the fungus (Puccinia graminis). For this reason, cultivation of B. vulgaris is prohibited in many areas, and imports to the United States are forbidden. The North American B. canadensis, native to Appalachia and the Midwest United States, was nearly eradicated for this reason, and is now rarely seen extant, with the most remaining occurrences in the Virginia mountains.

Some Berberis species have become invasive when planted outside of their native ranges, including B. glaucocarpa and B. darwinii in New Zealand (where it is now banned from sale and propagation), and B. vulgaris and green-leaved B. thunbergii in much of the eastern United States.

Japanese barberry is considered an invasive plant in 32 US states. It is deer-resistant because of its taste and is favoured as a shelter for ticks capable of transmitting lyme disease.

Cultivation
Several species of Berberis are popular garden shrubs, grown for such features as ornamental leaves, yellow flowers, or red or blue-black berries. Numerous cultivars and hybrids have been selected for garden use. Low-growing Berberis plants are also commonly planted as pedestrian barriers. Taller-growing species are valued for crime prevention; being dense and viciously spiny, they are effective barriers to burglars. Thus they are often planted below vulnerable windows, and used as hedges. Many species are resistant to predation by deer.

Species in cultivation include:
 * B. darwinii
 * B. dictyophylla
 * B. julianae
 * B. thunbergii
 * B. verruculosa

The following hybrid selections have gained the Royal Horticultural Society's Award of Garden Merit:
 * B. 'Georgei'
 * B. × lologensis 'Apricot Queen'
 * B. × media 'Red Jewel'

 * B. × stenophylla 'Corallina Compacta'
 * B. × stenophylla (golden barberry)

Culinary uses
Berberis vulgaris grows in the wild in much of Europe and West Asia. It produces large crops of edible berries, rich in vitamin C, but with a sharp acid flavour. In Europe for many centuries the berries were used for culinary purposes much as citrus peel is used. Today in Europe they are very infrequently used. The country in which they are used the most is Iran, where they are referred to as zereshk (زرشک) in Persian. The berries are common in Persian cuisine in dishes such as pilaf (zereshk polo) and as a flavouring for poultry. Because of their sour flavour, they are sometimes cooked with sugar before being added to Persian rice. Iranian markets sell dried zereshk. In Russia and Eastern Europe, it is sometimes used in jams as a source of pectin (especially with mixed berries). An extract of barberries is a common flavouring for soft drinks, candies, and sweets.

Berberis microphylla and B. darwinii (both known as calafate and michay) are two species found in Patagonia in Argentina and Chile. Their edible purple fruit are used for jams and infusions.

Traditional medicine
The dried fruit of Berberis vulgaris is used in herbal medicine. The chemical constituents include isoquinolone alkaloids, especially berberine. A full list of phytochemicals was compiled and published in 2014. The safety of using berberine for any condition is not adequately defined by high-quality clinical research. Its potential for causing adverse effects is high, including untoward interactions with prescription drugs, reducing the intended effect of established therapies. It is particularly unsafe for use in children.

Other uses
Historically, yellow dye was extracted from the stem, root, and bark.

The thorns of the barberry shrub have been used to clean ancient gold coins, as they are soft enough that they will not damage the surface but will remove corrosion and debris.

The acidic young leaves are sometimes chewed for refreshment by parched hikers.

title: Berberis


text:
Coconut Grove station

Coconut Grove station is a station on the Metrorail rapid transit system on the western end of the Coconut Grove neighborhood of Miami, Florida. The station is located at the intersection of South Dixie Highway (US 1) and West 27th Avenue/Grapeland Boulevard (SR 9), opening to service on May 20, 1984.

In 2018, there were plans to make the station entirely solar-powered.

Station layout
The station has two tracks served by an island platform, with a parking lot just north of the platform.

title: Coconut Grove station


text:
Talk:Input–output model

Untitled, Marked 2008-07-03
This article is based on class notes developed by William Lewis Garrison, and edited by User:DavidLevinson and used with permission.

aaa I want to insert the equation $$ X = \left[ {\matrix {x_1 } \\ {x_2 } \\ {x_3 } \\ {x_4 } \\

\endmatrix } \right]\quad C = \left[ {\matrix {c_1 } \\ {c_2 } \\ {c_3 } \\ {c_4 } \\

\endmatrix } \right]\quad I = \left[ {\matrix 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\    0 & 1 & 0 & 0  \\    0 & 0 & 1 & 0  \\    0 & 0 & 0 & 1  \\

\endmatrix } \right]\;A = \left[ {\matrix {a_{11} } & {} & {} & {a_{14} } \\ {} & {} & {} & {} \\    {} & {} & {} & {}  \\    {a_{41} } & {} & {} & {a_{44} }  \\

\endmatrix } \right] $$

but the software can't parse. dml 13:38, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yes they should be merged, but I suspect that in time both shall be supplanted with deeper more thorough entries.

MikelahrMike Lahr

Support merge JQ 23:06, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Table of Regional Flows
A) why is it empty, B) where is it referred to? Lycurgus (talk) 16:17, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

title should be changed
title should be:

Input-output model (economics)

Grave error in explanation of concept?
I was reading the following paragraph to try to get a grasp of the concept: Each row of the input-output matrix reports the monetary value of an industry's inputs and each column represents the value of an industry's outputs. Suppose there are three industries. Row 1 reports the value of inputs to Industry 1 from Industries 1, 2, and 3. Rows 2 and 3 do the same for those industries. Column 1 reports the value of outputs from Industry 1 to Industries 1, 2, and 3. Columns 2 and 3 do the same for the other industries.

Comparing that to my other source (a 10 page copy from a book with a chapter called "Foundations of Input-Output analysis", i don't know what the book is called but it looks like it's quite credible) the whole paragraph above seems to be opposite of what is correct.

Here is one example from the book:

X     1         2

1   0.15    0.25

2   0.20    0.05

And the text says: "To produce one dollar worth of goods from sector 2 one needs as interindustry ingredients 25cents worth of good 1 and 5cents worth of good 2."

I would translate that to: Column 2 reports the value of inputs to Industry 2 from Industries 1 and 2.

Opposite of what the paragraph in the wikipedia article says.

Can someone correct me or verify this? I'm new to this whole concept.

Mariux 17:50, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Marius

I agree regarding "Grave error"

Funny that we should stumble upon this at about the same time. I agree that the text in the first section is reversed. The proposed correction is: Row 1 reports the output from Industry 1 used as inputs in Industries 1, 2, and 3; that is, Row 1 describes the use of output from Industry 1 as an input in other industries. Column 1 reports the value of inputs to Industry 1 that were produced in Industries 1, 2, and 3; that is, Column 1 describes the use as inputs to Industry 1 of outputs from other industries.

I don't feel confident enough to make the change myself, but I hope that someone else will. (It's obviously pretty easy to get tripped up here.)

The table in the section Key Ideas is correct. Note that Labor, an input, has its own row and Final Demand an output, has its own column.

Michaelaoash 09:08, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Is there a way we atleast could mark the passage with 'disputed' or something?

Mariux 17:56, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

 * not quite a "grave error", it is just definitional, what is a row and what is a column, what I think you are questioning, is arbitrary, and different expositions use different customs. Just as putting price on the Y-axis and quantity and the X-axis in economics is customary, but sometimes reversed. However the article should be internally consistent, so I reversed row and column in introduction as suggested. dml 18:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Style issues
1. The crucial concept of the Leontief coefficient aij is not explained. Is it the amount of input i needed for a unit of output j, or the other way round?

2. It is pretentious to refer to the Nobel Prize for Economics by its full legal title, which is given in the relevant Wikipedia page.

--JamesWim 17:18, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

The lower part (especially from Further_research) doesn't really read like an encyclopedia.

The part with additional vectors in Measuring input–output tables) is confusing; showing it in a table like above would make it clearer.

A remarkable single sentence (in Example): "... it might be challenging to actually compute the inverse matrix, given that some input–output tables are in excess of hundreds of sectors." Is this just very outdated (My cheap desktop computer can invert a 10,000x10,000 matrix in less than two minutes) or should that be "many thousands" instead of "hundreds"?

(I have read this page to get information and with few prior knowledge, so I can't fix it myself, sorry.) --149.148.63.51 (talk) 16:32, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Example mistake?
Perhaps I overlooked something in the text that could explain this, but the "example" problem for the article, contained in the Basic Derivation has the matrix of coefficients, A, an the vector of final demand, D. Yet, the output vector supposedly solved for in the example leads to absurdly low numbers of 1.9 for good A and 2.2 for good B. Even at face-value this is absurd as the outputs should be at least as large as the final demands, since you are taking the sum of required input for that commodity plus the final demand for it! Checking with the formula (I-A)X = D confirms that it must have been written wrong in the article.

The correct answers I got, inverting the (I-A) matrix and multiplying it by the demand vector would have the output vector at approx. (19.189, 12.97) rather than the current (1.9 , 2.2).

If I am wrong please let me know but if I am not it would be good to see this changed. Thank you. 76.199.149.227 (talk) 01:36, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Disreputable source
Footnote 6, which links to: http://www.economictheories.org/2009/06/quantity-directed-socialism.html is a disreputable source. The name of the blogger links to a spam page. The entire paragraph, to which this reference applies, should be held suspect. We must always be on the lookout for parties attempting to use Wikipedia to spread propaganda by linking to fake pages; this is but one fortunately innocuous example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.5.1.71 (talk) 02:58, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Input–output model. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070826172321/http://sb.iub.edu.bd/Dr_Mohammad_Osman_Gani.html to http://sb.iub.edu.bd/Dr_Mohammad_Osman_Gani.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:32, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Input–output model


text: Category:Mayors of Auckland

title: Category:Mayors of Auckland


text: Category:Mayors of Wellington

title: Category:Mayors of Wellington


text:
CJS

CJS may refer to:
 * Certified Journeyman Safecracker, an American trade qualification awarded to members of the National Safeman's Organization
 * Corpus Juris Secundum, an encyclopedia of U.S. law
 * Collège Jeanne-Sauvé, a high school in Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
 * Ciudad Juárez International Airport, IATA airport code: CJS
 * Callejeros, Argentine rock band
 * Cairo Japanese School
 * Casi Justicia Social, Argentine Rock band
 * Criminal justice system
 * Captain Jack Sparrow, the protagonist of the Pirates of the Caribbean film franchise
 * CommonJS, a standardization project for JavaScript module ecosystem outside web browsers

title: CJS


text:
Sphere of influence (astrodynamics)

A sphere of influence (SOI) in astrodynamics and astronomy is the oblate-spheroid-shaped region where a particular celestial body exerts the main gravitational influence on an orbiting object. This is usually used to describe the areas in the Solar System where planets dominate the orbits of surrounding objects such as moons, despite the presence of the much more massive but distant Sun.

In the patched conic approximation, used in estimating the trajectories of bodies moving between the neighbourhoods of different bodies using a two-body approximation, ellipses and hyperbolae, the SOI is taken as the boundary where the trajectory switches which mass field it is influenced by. It is not to be confused with the sphere of activity which extends well beyond the sphere of influence.

Models
The most common base models to calculate the sphere of influence is the Hill sphere and the Laplace sphere, but updated and particularly more dynamic ones have been described. The general equation describing the radius of the sphere $$r_\text{SOI}$$ of a planet: $$r_\text{SOI} \approx a\left(\frac{m}{M}\right)^{2/5}$$ where
 * $$a$$ is the semimajor axis of the smaller object's (usually a planet's) orbit around the larger body (usually the Sun).
 * $$m$$ and $$M$$ are the masses of the smaller and the larger object (usually a planet and the Sun), respectively.

In the patched conic approximation, once an object leaves the planet's SOI, the primary/only gravitational influence is the Sun (until the object enters another body's SOI). Because the definition of rSOI relies on the presence of the Sun and a planet, the term is only applicable in a three-body or greater system and requires the mass of the primary body to be much greater than the mass of the secondary body. This changes the three-body problem into a restricted two-body problem.

Table of selected SOI radii
The table shows the values of the sphere of gravity of the bodies of the solar system in relation to the Sun (with the exception of the Moon which is reported relative to Earth):

An important understanding to be drawn from this table is that "Sphere of Influence" here is "Primary". For example, though Jupiter is much larger in mass than say, Neptune, its Primary SOI is much smaller due to Jupiter's much closer proximity to the Sun.

Increased accuracy on the SOI
The Sphere of influence is, in fact, not quite a sphere. The distance to the SOI depends on the angular distance $$\theta$$ from the massive body. A more accurate formula is given by $$r_\text{SOI}(\theta) \approx a\left(\frac{m}{M}\right)^{2/5}\frac{1}{\sqrt[10]{1+3\cos^2(\theta)}}$$

Averaging over all possible directions we get: $$\overline{r_\text{SOI}} = 0.9431 a\left(\frac{m}{M}\right)^{2/5}$$

Derivation
Consider two point masses $$ A$$ and $$ B$$ at locations $$ r_A$$ and $$ r_B$$, with mass $$ m_A$$ and $$ m_B$$ respectively. The distance $$ R=|r_B-r_A|$$ separates the two objects. Given a massless third point $$ C $$ at location $$ r_C $$, one can ask whether to use a frame centered on $$ A$$ or on $$ B$$ to analyse the dynamics of $$ C $$.

Consider a frame centered on $$ A $$. The gravity of $$ B $$ is denoted as $$ g_B $$ and will be treated as a perturbation to the dynamics of $$ C $$ due to the gravity $$ g_A $$ of body $$ A $$. Due to their gravitational interactions, point $$ A $$ is attracted to point $$ B $$ with acceleration $$ a_A = \frac{Gm_B}{R^3} (r_B-r_A) $$, this frame is therefore non-inertial. To quantify the effects of the perturbations in this frame, one should consider the ratio of the perturbations to the main body gravity i.e. $$ \chi_A = \frac{|g_B-a_A|}{|g_A|} $$. The perturbation $$ g_B-a_A $$ is also known as the tidal forces due to body $$ B $$. It is possible to construct the perturbation ratio $$ \chi_B $$ for the frame centered on $$ B $$ by interchanging $$ A \leftrightarrow B $$.

As $$ C $$ gets close to $$ A $$, $$ \chi_A \rightarrow 0 $$ and $$ \chi_B \rightarrow \infty $$, and vice versa. The frame to choose is the one that has the smallest perturbation ratio. The surface for which $$ \chi_A = \chi_B $$ separates the two regions of influence. In general this region is rather complicated but in the case that one mass dominates the other, say $$ m_A \ll m_B $$, it is possible to approximate the separating surface. In such a case this surface must be close to the mass $$ A $$, denote $$ r $$ as the distance from $$ A $$ to the separating surface.

The distance to the sphere of influence must thus satisfy $$ \frac{m_B}{m_A} \frac{r^3}{R^3} = \frac{m_A}{m_B} \frac{R^2}{r^2}$$ and so $$ r = R\left(\frac{m_A}{m_B}\right)^{2/5} $$ is the radius of the sphere of influence of body $$ A $$

Gravity well
Gravity well is a metaphorical name for the sphere of influence, highlighting the gravitational potential that shapes a sphere of influence, and that needs to be accounted for to escape or stay in the sphere of influence.

title: Sphere of influence (astrodynamics)


text:
Talk:Animal (disambiguation)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Animals (Pink Floyd album) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 18:31, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

"Animals (2023 film)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Animals_(2023_film)&redirect=no Animals (2023 film)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 15:45, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Animal (disambiguation)


text:
Death of Lisa McPherson

Lisa McPherson (February 10, 1959 – December 5, 1995) was an American Scientologist who died in the care of the Church of Scientology in Clearwater, Florida. After a minor traffic accident where McPherson seemed unharmed, she removed her clothes in the street and paramedics transported her to a local hospital. In order to avoid psychiatric intervention, local Scientologists convinced her to leave the hospital and seek care at the nearby Church of Scientology Flag Service Organization (FSO). There she was held against her will for 17 days without any medical care, while her physical and mental condition rapidly deteriorated and she died. Following the report by the state medical examiner that indicated that McPherson was a victim of negligent homicide, FSO was indicted on two felony charges, "abuse and/or neglect of a disabled adult" and "practicing medicine without a license." The charges were dropped after the state's medical examiner changed the cause of death from "undetermined" to an "accident" on June 13, 2000. A civil suit brought by McPherson's family was settled on May 28, 2004.

Background
In 1994, Lisa McPherson, who became a Scientology adherent at age 18, moved from Dallas, Texas, to Clearwater, Florida, with her employer, AMC Publishing, which was at that time owned by Bennetta Slaughter and operated and staffed primarily by Scientologists. During June 1995, the Church of Scientology placed McPherson in an "Introspection Rundown" due to perceived mental instability. McPherson completed the process, and she attested to the state of "Clear" in September.

On November 18, 1995, McPherson was involved in a minor car accident. Paramedics initially left her alone because she was ambulatory, but after she began to remove her clothes, the paramedics decided to take her to the hospital. McPherson remarked to the paramedics that she had taken off her clothes in hopes of obtaining counseling. Hospital staff agreed that she was unharmed, but recommended keeping her overnight for observation. Following intervention by fellow Scientologists, McPherson refused psychiatric observation or admission at the hospital and checked herself out after a short evaluation. Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge Frank Quesada concluded: "Lisa McPherson refused psychiatric observation or admission at the hospital; she expressly stated her desire to receive the religious care and assistance from her fellow congregants that she and they wanted her to have."

McPherson was then taken to the Fort Harrison Hotel, also known as the Flag Land Base, where she was put under the care of staffers belonging to the Church's Flag Service Organization (FSO). According to Scientology, McPherson was brought to the Fort Harrison Hotel for "rest and relaxation". However, sworn statements demonstrate that she was brought there for another Introspection Rundown. Mark McGarry, an attorney with the Florida Office of the State Attorney, characterized McPherson's care under the FSO as an "isolation watch": "My understanding now is, from talking to many, many witnesses, the purpose of her being there in the Church, correct me if I'm wrong, she was experiencing some mental problems, and you guys were going to stabilize her through an isolation watch. And after that watch occurred, there was going to be a procedure run on her, and the procedure was an introspection rundown."

Scientology accommodated McPherson in a cabana and kept a "24 hours' watch" over her. Detailed logs were kept on her day-to-day care. These logs were handwritten on plain white paper. Most of these logs were kept, but the logs for the last three days were summarized from the originals and the originals were shredded. Brian J. Anderson, the then Commanding Officer of the Church's Office of Special Affairs (OSA) in Clearwater, said in his sworn statement:

"I saw the handwritten notes, gave a cursory look to see if the summary—see if they matched and matched, and I threw the handwritten reports in my shred basket, and I had the report, kept the report."

McPherson's "care logs" narrate the last seventeen days of her life: she was incoherent and sometimes violent, her nails were cut so she would not scratch herself or the staff, and she bruised her fists and feet while hitting the wall. McPherson was given natural supplements and the drug chloral hydrate to help her sleep. A Church staffer noted that she "looked ill like measles or chicken pox on her face." On repeated occasions, McPherson refused food and protein shakes that the staff offered. On November 26 and 30 and December 3 to 4, Church staff attempted to force feed her, noting that she spat the food out. McPherson was noted to be very weak, not standing up nor on some days moving at all. Scientologists who questioned this handling were told to "butt out".

On December 5, 1995, Church staffers contacted David Minkoff, a Scientologist medical doctor who twice prescribed McPherson Valium and chloral hydrate without examining her. They requested for him to prescribe an antibiotic to McPherson because she seemed to have an infection. Minkoff refused, stating that she should be taken to a hospital and he needed to see her before prescribing anything. They objected, expressing fear that McPherson would be put under psychiatric care. Dr. Janice Johnson, a senior medical officer at the Fort Harrison Hotel who was assigned to care for McPherson, stated that she had been gasping and had labored breathing while en route. However, they passed a total of four hospitals along the way to their ultimate destination.

When they arrived at Minkoff's hospital forty-five minutes north of Clearwater, McPherson exhibited no vital signs. Hospital staff attempted to resuscitate her for twenty minutes before declaring her dead.

Scientologists called McPherson's family to say that she had died of meningitis or a blood clot while at the Fort Harrison Hotel for "rest and relaxation". A suspicious death investigation began the next day and an autopsy was performed. One year later, in response to a Clearwater Police Department website request for information on her death, Clearwater media began speculating about the causes of McPherson's death. Regular pickets have taken place outside Scientology offices on or around the anniversary of her death in the years since.

First coroner's report
On December 5, 1995, McPherson's autopsy was conducted by assistant medical examiner Robert Davis. Davis never completed McPherson's autopsy report because he was asked to resign from his position. The report identified McPherson's cause of death as a thromboembolism of the left pulmonary artery caused by "bed rest and severe dehydration", ruling the manner of death as "undetermined". The report also identified multiple bruises, an abrasion on the nose, lesions and insect bites that appeared consistent with that of a cockroach. The autopsy report was completed by Davis’s supervisor, medical examiner Joan Wood.

On January 21, 1997, Wood appeared on the news program Inside Edition and stated that the autopsy showed McPherson's condition had deteriorated slowly, going without fluids for five to ten days, was underweight, had cockroach bites and was comatose from 24 to 48 hours before she died. Scientology's legal team proceeded to sue Wood to gain access to her files; including tissue, organ and blood samples from McPherson's body. The lawsuit argued that Wood waived any right to keep her records on the case closed when she spoke openly about the case with news reporters. Scientology alleged that the records were needed to start their legal defense. These records were previously denied to the Church because they were part of an ongoing criminal investigation.

Independent opinion
The St. Petersburg Times contacted five medical experts for their opinions about the report, and they confirmed Wood's opinion. Scientology responded that the five doctors should have been given the entire autopsy report, not just the vitreous fluid tests, which pathologists use to determine the composition of blood at the time before death.

Scientology hired forensic pathologists
Scientology hired its own team to oppose Wood's findings, including two nationally known forensic pathologists: Dr. Michael Baden, a former chief medical examiner for New York City; and Dr. Cyril Wecht, a county coroner from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Baden and Wecht concluded that McPherson died suddenly and unpredictably of a blood clot in her left lung that originated from a knee bruise she suffered in the minor car accident seventeen days earlier.

This scientific evidence was then sent to Wood for review. The scientific evidence sent to Wood included:
 * Research on compounds known as ketones, which people produce when they are dehydrated, starving or even fasting. Tests of McPherson's bodily fluids showed no ketones according to the pathologists.
 * Findings from a body measurement expert hired by the church. The Church-hired expert compared autopsy photos of McPherson with those taken shortly before the accident. The expert concluded from the photographs there was "no appreciable weight loss", countering the prosecution's view that McPherson lost 20 lb to 40 lb while in Scientology's care.
 * A report by a Morton Plant Hospital doctor and Church officials who saw McPherson just before she entered the Fort Harrison Hotel, stating McPherson was already thin with protruding cheek bones.
 * A report by Robert D. Davis, the pathologist who conducted the autopsy for Wood's office, concluded McPherson's body was of average nutritional status.
 * Medical literature and sworn testimony gathered by the church that it says proves the eye fluid samples were improperly handled by Wood's office, incompetently tested at an independent lab and ultimately contaminated.

The plaintiff's response was that the chain of custody of evidence was not broken (also corroborated by assistant State Attorney Douglas Crow's memo to State Attorney Bernie McCabe).

Due to the vitreous fluid tests, Baden and Wecht maintained that McPherson was dehydrated. Chemical pathologists Calvin Bandt and Werner Spitz concurred with the initial coroner's report in their affidavits. Plaintiff witness Dr. Alan Wu also testified that ketones need not be present for dehydration in a special case like McPherson where she was fed proteins and therefore didn't create measurable ketones. The plaintiffs maintained that McPherson did lose water weight to result in 108 lb with respect to the vitreous fluid.

Final coroner's report
In light of the new scientific evidence provided by Scientology, a review was mandated. The policy stated that the medical examiner will "readdress key issues" in a case if "credible new evidence is presented, regardless of its source." After the review, Wood changed the cause of death from "undetermined" to an "accident." Wood stated that McPherson's psychosis and auto accident were major factors to the development of the fatal pulmonary embolism.

Criminal case review
Wood's revised report caused the review and subsequent dismissal of the criminal case concerning McPherson's death. The review was done by assistant State Attorney Douglas Crow and was outlined in the 31-page memo that he sent to State Attorney Bernie McCabe, with a recommendation to drop the criminal case against Scientology.

The initial autopsy
Crow stated that there were credibility issues with the original autopsy, including that Wood signed the autopsy herself, five months after Davis's departure, she failed to examine tissue samples and did not consult clinical experts before reaching her conclusion. He also pointed out two other mistakes made by Wood, such as, she released the autopsy report on an active-criminal case and went public on national media.

Robert Davis's testimony
Davis changed his testimony from a 1997 deposition given in the civil case to strongly disagree that McPherson was severely dehydrated. He also made a series of accusations against the Medical Examiner Office's handling of the case and questioned its motive. Davis stated that Wood was not present during the autopsy and did not consult him when she signed the autopsy.

Destruction of evidence
Crow noted that Wood's credibility would be attacked due to the Medical Examiner Office's failure to follow its own policies; to preserve evidence, for the release of the body for cremation before a cause of death had been determined, and for the destruction of Davis’s autopsy notes.

Wood's explanation of the autopsy changes
The primary reason Wood gave for changing her findings was her realization that the microscopic slides of the popliteal vein and the photographs of muscle tissue in the surrounding area provided evidence of trauma which could explain the thrombus formation. She could not explain why she had not seen this before. Crow was highly critical of Wood in his memo, stating: "Her explanations concerning the reasoning behind the changes have been illogical and inconsistent. She vacillated in her conclusions even as she prepared the amended certificate. After talking to Joe Davis she executed a notarized change in the death certificate to accident and removed dehydration and bed rest as causative factors. She then reconsidered that decision and resolved to change the manner of death to homicide with dehydration listed as one of multiple factors and then again changed her mind the next morning, deciding to follow Joe Davis' initial advice."

Crow also mentioned a unique set of circumstances that put Wood under tremendous pressure and might have affected the quality of her judgment. These being:
 * 1) Wood's appearance on Inside Edition left her more vulnerable to litigation and committed her to a forensic position that would make any modification professionally embarrassing.
 * 2) The fact that Davis, the forensic examiner that actually did the autopsy, was critical of her conclusions.
 * 3) The defense suggestion that if forced to litigate it would reveal information extremely damaging to Wood's office and her career.

Conclusion
Crow concluded that even though there was probable cause, the actions and testimony of Wood had so muddied the facts that there wasn't enough credible evidence to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and recommended the dismissal of all charges.

"While nothing in the review has caused me to believe that the central premises behind the prosecution are erroneous, our ability to establish these necessary facts beyond a reasonable doubt has clearly been compromised. While Dr. Wood is an extremely intelligent and knowledgeable expert who is a formidable witness when defending a valid position, her inability to coherently explain her decision even under benign questioning by me is completely perplexing. Because of Wood's admission of a serious forensic error, her illogical and unfortunately inconsistent justifications of her decision to change the death certificate and autopsy report, the inconsistency between the changes made in the death certificate and the forensic basis for our charges, her continuing equivocation on issues central to the criminal case, and the very real possibility that the cause of death listed by the Medical Examiner's Office is incorrect, I have come to the conclusion that presentation of the Medical Examiner's current testimony to a jury will create a reasonable doubt on crucial forensic issues. When combined with existing problems in the case, it is my recommendation that we should not continue to pursue the prosecution."

Timeline

 * 1995
 * December 5 – Lisa McPherson died while in the care of Flag Service Organization (FSO), a branch of the Church of Scientology.

 * 1997
 * February 19 – McPherson's family sued the Church of Scientology and the individuals involved for wrongful death, while the Church claimed it did nothing wrong toward McPherson.

 * 1998
 * September 15 – Dr. David Minkoff settled his portion of the wrongful death suit by having his malpractice insurance pay $100,000 to the estate.
 * November 13 – Scientology was indicted on two felony charges in McPherson's death; abuse or neglect of a disabled adult, a second-degree felony, and unauthorized practice of medicine, a third-degree felony; the first criminal charges ever filed in the U.S. against Scientology. These charges were brought against Scientology as a corporation, not against any individuals, and the maximum penalty, had the charges been pursued and the Church found guilty, would have been a $15,000 fine plus costs.

 * 1999
 * December 6 – Florida State Attorney Bernie McCabe presented a response to Scientology's attempt to get the case dismissed.

 * 2000
 * February 23 – Wood changed McPherson's cause of death to an "accident". "Gone from the new report is the original reference to the bed rest and dehydration. Wood still traces the death to a blood clot behind McPherson's knee. But she lists McPherson's psychosis and a minor auto accident as major factors."
 * March 8 – A group of more than 200 Scientologists moved to have the criminal case dismissed on the claim that it had "chilled the religious rights of every Scientologist" and that other Scientologists were now being treated with concern, suspicion or ridicule by non-Scientologists. A central point of the motion was that McPherson had undergone the Introspection Rundown, which the brief putting forth the motion called an "entirely religious" practice.
 * April 4 – Scientology moved to have the entire criminal case dismissed. "The entire basis for the state's prosecution of this case has now collapsed," begins one of the many Scientology legal briefs arguing the case should be dismissed.
 * June 12 – On the advice of Assistant State Attorney Douglas Crow, State Attorney Bernie McCabe dropped the criminal charges against the Church. According to a memo by Crow, medical examiner Joan Wood could not be counted on to confidently testify.

 * 2001
 * August 3 – Minkoff had his license suspended for one year and was fined $10,000 for prescribing medicine to McPherson at the request of her FSO caretakers without having ever seen her.

 * 2002
 * April 29 – Scientology accused McPherson attorney Ken Dandar of professional misconduct and perjury and tried to get him removed from the case.
 * June 22 – Pinellas-Pasco Circuit Judge Frank Quesada dismissed the count alleging that McPherson was falsely imprisoned on the McPherson's civil suit.

 * 2003
 * August – Scientology sued Dandar for breach of contract, for having added Church leader David Miscavige to the wrongful death lawsuit despite a mutual agreement not to add additional defendants. In a 2003 jury trial, Scientology asked for over $2 million in damages, but received only $4,500 in attorney fees and no punitive damages.

 * 2004
 * May 28 – Under terms undisclosed to the public, the civil suit was settled out of court.

 * 2009
 * June 22 – Mark Rathbun, a former member of Scientology, admitted that he had instructed the Church to destroy files related to the case.

 * 2012
 * October 31 – Dandar filed a federal lawsuit against Scientology and its attorneys, asking for injunctive relief from the church's litigation, which he claimed was a violation of his civil rights.
 * November 17 – In support of Dandar's lawsuit, Rathbun claimed in sworn testimony that Scientology spent $30 million to influence Florida judges and defame Dandar during the criminal and civil lawsuits concerning McPherson's death. Rathbun also claimed that Scientology influenced Wood's ruling of McPherson's death as "accident" by bribing her lawyer, Jeffrey Goodis, with Super Bowl tickets and other gifts. Goodis denied the charges.
 * November 24 – Dandar added Miscavige as a defendant in his federal lawsuit against Scientology.
 * November 28 – Mat Pesch, the former treasury secretary of the FSO, claimed that he witnessed the OSA dumping $20 million in FSO reserves into Scientology's legal defense over McPherson's death.

Memorial brick
In 2001, a group called Citizens for a Better Clearwater decided to renovate an unused alley owned by the City of Clearwater. They called the project Cleveland Street Gas Light Alley, and their fundraising efforts included soliciting donations for engraved paver bricks that would be laid in the walkway. The alley abutted the Coachman Building, owned by the Church of Scientology. Several Scientology critics ordered bricks, including a memorial brick for Lisa McPherson ordered by staff members of the Lisa McPherson Trust, an advocacy organization dedicated to "expose the deceptive and abusive practices of Scientology and help those victimized by [the Church of Scientology]". The committee reversed their initial decision to reject the brick donations from the critics and the bricks were placed. However, over the years, the Lisa McPherson brick has been vandalized many times and replaced.

Lisa McPherson Clause
As a result of the controversy surrounding McPherson's death, the Church of Scientology now requires members to sign a general release form each time they register for a new service, whereby they make certain agreements, such as acknowledging that Scientology is a religion and not intended to treat medical issues, promising not to sue the Church for any reason unless criminal negligence is assured, or disavowing psychiatric treatment. In the event a Scientologist is involuntarily placed into a psychiatric ward or institution, the form also grants permission to allow the Church to intervene on their behalf and have them released into the care of other Scientologists in order to undergo the Introspection Rundown or any other Scientology services deemed necessary.

Injunction against the film The Profit
During the civil suit against Scientology brought by McPherson's family members, an injunction was sought and obtained to keep the Scientology-critical film The Profit from being shown to avoid prejudicing the jury pool against Scientology.

title: Death of Lisa McPherson


text:
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log/October 2004

This is an archive of discussions about articles that were promoted to featured status. This archive covers articles discussed in October 2004. The discussions are organized in chronological order. Newer discussions go to the bottom of the page.


text:
Douglas Road station

Douglas Road station is a station on the Metrorail rapid transit system just southwest of Coconut Grove, in Miami, Florida. It is the southernmost Metrorail station in Miami city limits, although it has a Coral Gables address. The station is located at the intersection of Douglas Road (West 37th Avenue) and South Dixie Highway (US 1), three blocks south Bird Road (SW 40th Street). It opened to service May 20, 1984.

Station layout
The station has two tracks served by an island platform, with a parking lot northwest of the platform.

title: Douglas Road station


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The War of Africa (1961-1974)

The War of Africa (1961-1974)
This seems to me to be a completely unedited copy from some other source. ClockworkTroll 13:50, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Delete, copyvio. The source is the Google translation of this page from a history of Portugal.  Too bad, because we should have an article on the Angolan War of Independence, a lengthy struggle that's now blown off in one uninformative paragraph in the History of Angola. JamesMLane 13:57, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Question - I listed it here because I couldn't find its source. Now that we know it, should I move this to copyvio, or leave it here? ClockworkTroll 14:47, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I say move to copyvio. -- Jmabel 21:34, Oct 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Leave it here. Now that a proper article's been started (see below), I would favor deleting this one even in the unlikely event that its author were to produce appropriate permission from the copyright owner. JamesMLane 23:00, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Hey JamesMLane, just so you know, I started an article with the title you suggested -- Angolan War of Independence. I pulled data from all over the place, but there's a lot more to write on the topic. Would you be interested in helping me make it into the article it should be? Thanks --Improv 22:48, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I think it's great that you've started an article under the proper title, but I'm afraid I won't be able to lend a hand anytime in the foreseeable future. JamesMLane 23:00, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)