text:
Wikipedia:WikiProject Cities/German names

Ok, here's the problem: so far we had an agreement (so-called Talk:Gdansk compromise) that the German names need to be mentioned and that the correct formatting is the following:
 * Name (German Name, Polish Nazwa) is a...

..and so on. This is currently being turned into w Wikipedia policy at the WikiProject Cities/Names issues page. However, lately User:Gzornenplatz started to argue that the German names listed are no longer German names and that they have changed lately. So, he suggests that the current German name of Wrocław is Wrocław and not Breslau, Nysa has been renamed from Neisse to Nysa, Świebodzice has been renamed from Freiburg in Schlesien to Świebodzice - and so on.

I tried to reach some terms with Gzornenplatz or at least understand his reasoning, but I failed. To me it seems that the German names are still the same. That's the version supported by the German wiki and the simple Google test. Perhaps the community could help us reach some compromise. I guess it would help the WikiProject Cities/Names issues and could spare the articles now being under attack from Gzornenplatz and in danger of being blocked.

Both mine and his arguments can be found at Talk:Piła. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 21:06, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

 * Indeed, I urge everyone to check out the arguments on Talk:Pila. In essence, Halibutt thinks a Google search for Pila Polen without quotes, which finds any page where the two words appear, even in totally separate contexts, is somehow more significant than a search for "Pila Polen" with quotes, which restricts the search to this specific term, which in 99% of cases will indeed refer to the current (Polish) city, and which, when compared to the search for "Schneidemühl Polen", allows a clear determination as to what the prevailing usage in German is. The word Polen makes sure it is a German-language page (you could even add "site:de" to the search to avoid the few non-German languages in which Poland is also called Polen, but it doesn't change the numbers significantly), and tying the words together with the quotes makes sure the reference is to the modern, not the historical, city (Halibutt's search will obviously find pages that may say something like "Schneidemühl war eine Stadt in Deutschland, die heute in Polen liegt" ["Schneidemühl was a city in Germany which now lies in Poland"] - you have the words Schneidemühl and Polen, but the reference is historical). Gzornenplatz 22:15, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I said nothing about Nysa, which is of course still Neisse in German, as it is not exclusively within Poland. Gzornenplatz 22:18, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

I do not find your methodology acceptable for the reasons I stated at the Talk:Pila page. But even using it, the results are against your claims. ,, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ... Need more? --[[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 22:50, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

 * And I have refuted your reasons. And here you are again coming with the old diacritic charade. If you look for the names without diacritics (which naturally are ignored by people writing in German), you find of course "Torun Polen" more frequent than "Thorn Polen" etc. The only exception is Malbork/Marienburg, I gladly give you that if you otherwise agree to my methodology. Gzornenplatz 23:08, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * we have this discussion on the German Wikipedia as well since User:Gzornenplatz thinks he knows what is right. So far he is the only one who thinks in the German Wikipedia that the German names are only the former German names ... there was an edit war about this (mostly with de:Benutzer:AHZ ) in which end he was banned for 24h (before already for 4 h) i dont see a reason why german names are not the german names anymore ... some names are not used that often anymore but they still exist as german names ...Sicherlich 23:17, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * And a name that is not regularly used anymore is... a former name. Gzornenplatz 23:18, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * but it is used ...Sicherlich 23:31, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Only by a minority, and a shrinking one, like all former names do not suddenly completely stop being used. Gzornenplatz 23:38, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * if you speak german see as well de:Benutzer Diskussion:Gzornenplatz, you might see his contributions in the german wikipedia here ... the moving of the Page de:Posen to Poznan is as well against the "rule" (de:Wikipedia:Namenskonventionen) but so far he is unfortunately not interested in a discussion to find a solution as he sad on his page "there is wrong and right and i will make sure the right will be" ...Sicherlich 23:17, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Usage in German differs: some use only the official Polish namnes, some only the German ones, most mix them up and several people write Polish names but use in oral communication the German ones because they are easier to pronounce. I agree with Sicherlich and you Halibutt: As long as there is a significant number of Germans who use the German name (and there is) it is still a valid German name; maybe in some cases you could talk about an "outdated form" but it still exists. Why can't people simply write articles instead of arguing about names and names and names... -- Zeitgeist 23:35, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Former names still exist too. They are just, well, former names. "Outdated form" is saying the same thing. No longer generally used, that's the point. If only a minority uses it, it is not "the" German name as Halibutt and Sicherlich want to suggest. If you prefer to write "outdated form" instead of "former name", I can agree to that. But not simply "German", which is misinformation. There is a very clear difference between a real German name like Warschau and a mere historical name like Schneidemühl. Gzornenplatz 23:45, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

 * But former names are not used anymore while outdated forms are. I admit "oudated" is a step on the way down to "former" but it is not the same. The problem with Pila/Schneidemühl is that hardly anybody German talks about the town anyway, but of these a significant number uses the German name. Maybe this will become extinct somewhere in the future but by now it is not. (and by the way "Schneidemühl Polen" is awful German grammar, because a verb or pronomina belongs between these two words - I don't think many German speakers would use this term regardless of the town-name. -- Zeitgeist 00:02, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I disagree. Former names always keep being used by some. See Bombay or Calcutta. Those were clearly renamed at specific dates some years ago, so they are former names now; still significant minorities use them. And those Polish cities were effectively renamed in 1945, and the usage of the old names has gone downhill since then. We don't have to wait until no one at all ever uses them before we can call them former names. The other argument is irrelevant, since "Schneidemühl Polen" is the same grammar as "Pila Polen", so it doesn't affect the relation, and it's perfectly correct with a comma in between (commas are ignored by Google). Gzornenplatz 00:11, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * No, Bombay or Calcutta were officially renamed, Schneidemühl was never officially changed. For example I say Ljubljana and not Laibach and most people I know do the same. But Laibach is still the German name, I (and many people) simply choose to use the Slovenian name instead of the German one. Schneidemühl is still used by a signifcant number of speakers and therefore it still exists. IMHO even "Pennsylvanien" is the German name for "Pennsylvania" although it is hardly ever used except by a small minority in private conversations. -- Zeitgeist 00:24, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * The names were changed when the Polish administration took over; it started to use the Polish name, the German name ceased to have any official status. But however you define "the German name", don't you think the fact that a name is hardly ever used is relevant to convey in a Wikipedia article? If you just write "German Schneidemühl" the implication is that everyone calls the city Schneidemühl is German. Gzornenplatz 00:29, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * "So, he suggests that the current German name of Wrocław is Wrocław and not Breslau," - The official Website of the german Embassy in Breslau: http://www.gk-breslau.de/ : "Willkommen beim Generalkonsulat in Breslau" 217.82.23.150 04:37, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) (AN)

As per your request at the Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cities/Names_issues page:
 * If you insist:
 * The expression "Pila Polen" (or any other name, for that matter) is rare in Geman since in German no one is supposed to add a name of the state after the name of the town. German language differs from the American English. So, if one searches for an unusual expression - he gest unusual results.
 * The search term "Pila Polen" will not show any links to the articles that state that "Schneidemuehl, which is currently known in Polish as Pila", or any other longer term.
 * Search for "Pila Polen" (or "Piła Polen", for that matter) will not show any links to German language encyclopedias, not even the German Wiki.
 * The term "former German name" is just as ambiguous as "former name". It might denote three different things, each of them highly disputable or misleading.
 * Your proposals are acceptable to you yourself only, there are countless wikipedians who find them wrong (it's not only me and Emax who at some point reverted your changes)
 * Your proposals are equally unacceptable to the German wikipedians (despite revert wars), see, , , , , , , , , , , , , [
 * The German state uses Danzig, Breslau and Oppeln rather than Gdańsk, Wrocław and Opole
 * Are these "shameless lies", as you call it?

--[[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 05:18, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)

No, those are irrelevancies. Gzornenplatz 11:09, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * 1) Already answered above. If "Pila Polen" is rare, so is "Schneidemühl Polen". It doesn't affect the relative frequency of the two, and it still gives a large enough sample.
 * 2) Same fallacy as 1.
 * 3) So? What is your fascination with the German Wikipedia anyway? It does not carry any particular authority.
 * 4) The term is quite clear. A former German name is a name that was formerly used in German.
 * 5) We discuss things by arguments first, not by force of numbers (though we may later have a poll).
 * 6) "The German Wikipedians" here being three revisionists named AHZ, AN, and Sicherlich.
 * 7) The German state is not consistent about what names it uses. This government webpage, for example, speaks explicitly of "Wroclaw, the former Breslau". (And even if the government would always use the old names, it has no authority to define the names of foreign cities, and thus would be just one voice, not carrying more weight than other German speakers whose representative usage is indicated by the Google search.)

Most german wiki users don't read the english wikipedia. I don't think that the using of german names for cities in Poland will indicate a political statement. So don't call other users "revisionsts". Your edits in the german wikipedia causes a lot of trouble you was banned for 24h for that. The agreement in the german wikipedia is to use the german names. MatthiasKabel 16:32, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry about the statements Gzornenplatz gives here. In the german languge the german names are still used and will be used in future. The way you go to add a german name is better than to ignore the reality. You'll find no german in a normal talk, who would use the new names. sorry for my english ;-) --Steschke 17:44, 2004 Oct 20 (UTC)

 * I see our revisionist friends are mobilizing. Unfortunately the Google results make it clear to everyone that it is you who is ignoring the reality. Gzornenplatz 17:47, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * My statement to the expression of Gzornenplatz: I still select my friends myself. And whom does he mean with our revisionist friends? He might have a splited personality when he talks in majority. I don't need to defend myself, but be insured I'm not a revisionist. The problem is the personal structure of Gzornenplatz. There is a reason, why he became locked out in the German Wikipedia. I would like to excuse to our colleagues from the english Wikipedia for his behavior. He isn't typical for german winipedians. --Steschke 17:16, 2004 Oct 21 (UTC)
 * Not that the goings-on in the German Wikipedia should be relevant here, but since Steschke brings it up, I will respond. His last sentence is true - I am not typical for German Wikipedians because I'm not a revisionist. The fact that I was blocked on the German Wikipedia almost immediately I went there while I have never been blocked for even an hour on the English one after over 6,000 edits on its own proves that something's rotten in the state of Denmark here. The German Wikipedia is largely controlled by a bunch of nationalists. Needless to say none of them has made the slightest attempt at honestly answering my points. They know very well they're wrong but are pushing their "expellee" POV, supported by the sysops there, who blocked me on a ludicrous charge of "vandalism". Everyone can check out my edits there - it's the same I did here, I correctly identified former German names as former German names. However people may disagree with those edits, it's by no stretch of the imagination even getting close to bordering on the slightest hint of "vandalism". What happened was that my edits were reverted without explanation, edit wars ensued, and although I obviously did nothing worse than the other side (on the contrary, I gave a reasoned explanation for my position, the other side didn't), it was me who was blocked. I want to condemn particularly sysop Elian here, who I privately talked to and who all but said "get lost, we're in control here". I asked her about ten times what I supposedly did differently from the other side that could possibly justify me and not the other side in the edit war being blocked, and she could not answer it. Gzornenplatz 17:36, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the prompt confirmation of my description. ;-) --Steschke 17:54, 2004 Oct 21 (UTC)
 * Ditto. Gzornenplatz 18:18, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * The official Website Foreign Office of the Federal Republic of Germany calls the city also today still Schneidemühl --217.246.145.138 18:08, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC) (ahz)
 * See point 7 above. Gzornenplatz 18:31, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * It does affect relative frequency, since uncommon statements can show different numbers than those used in everyday language. Also, the ratio changes from case to case. So far you support the absurd statement that "Name Polen" shows the correct ratio while all other searches show bad ratio. You base it on the fact that many of the searches refer to the current city and not the historical one. However, your logic is somehow flawed since on one hand you say that the usage in German language has shifted towards using the Polish names, but on the other hand you don't accept that the webmasters use the German names more frequently in all instances, regardless of the period in history. Apparently the German usage of German names is more common, just compare with . The webmasters do refer to Breslau rather than to Wrocław or Wroclaw. The context is not important since they do refer to the town now, and not before WWII. I hope you understand that there were no web pages before WWII. Also, there are more people referring to Breslau without explaining that the city is now called Wrocław than those who use the Polish name without explaining the German name. The ratio is roughly 2:1 here. Also, there are significantly more links for "Aachen Niemcy" than for "Akwizgran Niemcy", although that does not mean that the Polish name of that city is Aachen.
 * It's not my fascination with German Wikipedia in particular, it's simply that the usage in other encyclopaedia proves your statements wrong. Compare your version of Gdansk/Danzig with: a)Probert Places of the World; b) Brittanica; c) Polish wikipedia; d) German wikipedia; e) MSN Encarta; f) Brockhaus; g) Fact Monster...
 * "former German name Schneidemuehl" (almost like "formerly Schneidemuehl") could mean or suggest any of the following: a) The name was used in German, but currently it's not (which is IMO not true and not supported by anything but your Google search); b) The town was named Schneidemuehl while in Germany, but the German name was changed (which is partially true since indeed there is a growing number of people who use the Polish instead of German name, but this is still a minority in most cases); c) The town was named Schneidemuehl up to certain point in history, but then the name was changed (which again is only partially true since the name was there before the German name was invented in most cases). Perhaps there are more German language encyclopaedia on the web, I simply know only the two. However, I won't quarrel for the former or no former as long as the statement is true. Your claims are not.
 * We discuss things by common sense, that's why it's you vs. all the rest so far. I'm afraid that you won't accept neither my arguments nor the common sense so discussion with arguments might be fruitless, but it's worth a try, perhaps this would let us avoid a revert war.
 * So far the commonly accepted version is the one supported by those guys, it's you who would like to revise it. So who is the revisionist here?
 * The government has indeed no authority, but the fact that it has its consulates in Breslau, Oppeln and Stettin and not in Wroclaw, Opole and Szczecin should give you some hint at least.

--[[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 21:54, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * 1) You - just - don't - get - it :( If I search for "Pila Polen" then virtually all, not just some, of the hits will refer to the Polish city. With your search format, you get lots of historical hits. The result will say nothing as to what the current name is. And a "city, country" format is not at all uncommon in German. There is no conceivable reason why this would skew the results in terms of the relation between the two names. It can be assumed to be a representative subset of all mentions of the current city. And what is that bizarre argument about there being no Internet before WWII? Tons of sites still refer to the historical city. In the German language, in fact, those historical references may easily be a majority because while there are many "expellees" talking about those former German cities, there is comparatively little to report from the modern cities. Today's Piła is rarely in the news in Germany - but when it is, it will usually be called Piła, not Schneidemühl, and that's the point. And as far as I can see, Aachen is indeed the name usually used in Polish for that German city. The Google result suggests that Akwizgran is at best an antiquated form, like the English Ratisbon for Regensburg.
 * 2) Can't you think for yourself? Do you think other encyclopaedias have some magic philosopher's stone where they get the Real Truth from, which is unreachable to us? You're committing the fallacy of argument by authority here. Any encyclopaedia can be wrong, and if a claim by them is challenged with hard data like the Google figures, you better find actual counterarguments. "These encyclopaedias can't be wrong" is not a valid one. (And the German Wikipedia in particular has no credibility whatsoever; I discovered the revisionists are firmly in control there, which is not surprising as differently-minded people tend to concentrate on the English Wikipedia anyway; probably most of the non-English Wikipedias have disproportionate numbers of narrow-minded nationalists.)
 * 3) Bizarre statements again. "Not supported by anything but your Google search"? Well, the Google search is primary data, and therefore more convincing than some individual secondary opinions. "Still a minority in most cases"? The numbers prove you wrong. And as to your options, c) does not apply to "former German name", and I don't see the difference between a) and b).
 * 4) Your resort to personal attacks is noted...
 * 5) It's them who want to revise reality. I want to revise articles to reflect the reality.
 * 6) It gives the hint of nothing more or less than that one (1) government website uses the old names. As opposed to hundreds or thousands in my representative Google searches. Gzornenplatz 22:55, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)

 * I do get your statements yet I happen to oppose. Your argument is that the more popular name is the German name. If it is so, then there should be no difference between historical and current times. The city is primarily referred to as Schneidemuehl and Google shows just that. And why is searching for "Pila Polen" any better than searching for "Pila 2002" or Pila Polen? According to your theories the ratio should be the same - while it's not.
 * I do think for myself. Other encyclopaedias mention the most common usage usually and in my honest opinion some of them are credible. If you find all encyclopaedia not credible then why do you waste your time on Wikipedia? Indeed, an encyclopaedia can be wrong. But you are basically claiming that most of encyclopaedia are wrong.
 * Why is your google search better than mine? And Google is not a primary data, it only gives a hint as to the usage of certain words (and, less commonly, constructions). Depending on the criteria you chose it gives you results you want.
 * None intended, I have no idea what made you understand just that.
 * If a) encyclopaedias use their version b) more webmasters use their version c) German government uses their version d) even most of Poles know their version as right - then what is it here to revise? This is the most common version used since ages, so far it's you who is trying to revise it. Official municipal webpage and.
 * The official web page of that country's embassy, to be precise. There's also a webpage of that country's Foreign Office. Or perhaps those embassy links refer to the pre-war cities?

--[[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 05:33, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * Huh? Why should there be no difference between historical and current times? Your arguments are now getting more abstruse by the minute. "Pila Polen" is better because it refers to the current city, which is what we're talking about. "Pila 2002" does not even ensure it is about the city at all. And Pila Polen without quotes as I explained a thousand times already will find pages where the two words are completely unrelated.
 * Most of them may be wrong on this specific question, yes. That doesn't mean "encyclopedias are not credible". The difference is I can think for myself and if all evidence indicates an encyclopedia is wrong, I will not think that I must be wrong because the encyclopedia can't be.
 * I have explained this only a thousand times, eh? Probably not enough... And yes, when it comes to how words are used, Google is primary data.
 * Sure.
 * No matter how often you repeat the lie, "more webmasters" use Pila when referring to the current city. Your insistence on this idiotic claim, which is based on a search that includes historical references, makes me truly question your mental state. Encyclopedias cannot negate the raw data here. If you agree that encyclopedias don't have magical sources unattainable to us, then you should be able, instead of appealing to authority, to use the sources which must have informed the encyclopedias. Why can't you find them? Personally I believe none of the encyclopaedia editors has spared much thought on this question; Britannica once (probably shortly after the war) changed from "Schneidemühl, Polish Pila" to "Pila, German Schneidemühl" (at a time when Schneidemühl was indeed still more commonly used in German). And then it just never occurred to them later to verify if this usage is still common. And Encarta may just have copied Britannica's usage etc.
 * Again, for the who knows how manyth time, the German embassy is not defining German names of foreign cities. This would be like saying that because the U.S. government uses the term "homicide bombing", that "the English name" for suicide bombings becomes "homicide bombing", regardless of whether the general population follows the government in its usage. Gzornenplatz 14:21, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * I've had enough, Gzornenplatz. Your language is unacceptable and I won't participate in any more discussions with someone who considers me to be an "idiot", "dense", or questions my "mental state". I'm afraid it is a waste of time and nerves. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 22:08, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)

 * Oh, no offense intended, I have no idea what made you understand just that. Anyway, if you end the discussion, I expect you now to leave the articles alone. Gzornenplatz 22:13, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)

IMO, Gzornenplatz is just a nit-pick-er, with little regard (or is it capability) for reasonableness. Who cares what the "current German name" for a Polish town is? It doesn't belong in any article that we've been talking about. The references to the German names in the first line of articles about towns that are now in Poland, but once were part of Germany and it's predacessor Prussia is there due to the long-standing and recent historical importance of the name in former times. If Gzornenplatz insists on using revert wars to keep pressing his own narrow and unsupported viewpoint, we'll get him banned, and then three or four of us will take turns reverting what he changes while using another or no user name. Bwood 02:06, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Hm? You're confusing things. I agree the current German name shouldn't matter to the English Wikipedia. But it's Halibutt and others who, by calling them simply "German names", want to include the implicit claim that those names are still the current German names. I agree the importance of those names is the historical importance in former times; accordingly, I want to call them "former German names" which is what they are. The fact that they are no longer regularly used in German is eminently supported by the exact Google searches, and does not need Halibutt's agreement. We are not deciding facts by voting, and the idea of getting me banned is accordingly absurd. I have every right to revert based on facts, unless arguments are presented against the facts. So far no one has explained what's supposedly wrong about the Google searches, or, if the searches are right and the names can no longer be considered "the German names", what supposedly should be wrong in calling them "former names". Gzornenplatz 02:30, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * Actually, I am in favor of using "former" or the even the more lengthy variant that I last proposed to try to satisfy every camp, but unlike you, I am also willing to go without using "former" if that's the group consensus, because unlike you, I am not a nit-picker in matters like this where it doesn't really matter. Those who want to read the worst possible conotations into the text are hindering the progress. I could have been so much farther along in adding material to articles. I'm willing to abandon former because the reader can readily see why the German name was listed in the first line when they glance through the article and see the history. Also, the shorter the text the better, there's no need to include a lengthy arguement-based nit-picked, satisfy every sensability item in the first line. The only reason that I would insist on using "former" in the first line, is to try to head off the mis-informed that aren't aware of the history of this struggle, who come in late and feel they have to "correct" it by either deleting the German reference or some other edit. Leaving the "former" out, does not necessarily imply that the German version is *the* current German version. It just means it's *a* version. To claim that the Polish spelling is the current German version is just plain ludicrous. Just because today's Germans are most (and correctly) using the Polish spelling, doesn't mean that the Polish spelling is a German version, current or otherwise. Any use of the German spelling is German. Any use of the Polish spelling is Polish, whether done by Poles or Germans or Americans. So "German: Schneidemühl" just means that the German spelling is "Schneidemühl", without making any claims to currency. Bwood 20:57, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"German: Schneidemühl" definitely implies that that is the name Germans use today, and that is plain wrong, as the Google data indicates it is used only in 11% of the cases. That is not nit-picking, nor has it anything to do with "sensibilities", only with accuracy. Gzornenplatz 22:35, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * There is a point where increasing accuracy hinders usability and function. You are just plain wrong in saying " "German: Schneidemühl" definitely implies that that is the name Germans use today". It can mean many things, and the typical reader is likely to assume that it means that it is the German spelling. Let's hire a polling firm to find out how the typical English speaking user, who would be browsing articles like this, would interpret the wording. I'll bet 6 large pizzas, that you are wrong. But, seriously, find 2 or 3 Wikipedia authors to support your position, and I'll reconsider. Until then, I suggest that you lay off the edit wars, and try to make positive contributions to the Names Issue discussion. Bwood 19:49, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * How does "former German name" hinder usability and function? "Schneidemühl" is obviously not just the German "spelling" of Pila. It is of course a German word, but the article suggests that it is the German name for the city, which implies the city is regularly called that (that's what a name is) in the German language. If that's no longer the case, the reader would expect a qualifier like, well, "former". Why would you reconsider when others support my position? Does that mean you don't form your own opinion and your present opposition is just based on the opposition you see from Halibutt and others? That's regrettable. I haven't bothered to cart in supporters as my arguments stand on their own, and I don't think the mere repetition or affirmation of them by other users would or should make a difference to the arguments. But you may note that a reasonable user like John Kenney favours "formerly", which I would agree with. As to edit wars I'll lay them off when the other side does. Gzornenplatz 22:20, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

 * Bwood, why can't I put the things as straight and simple as you do? You'll have to teach me that one day. In other words - I couldn't agree more. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 22:37, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * just to say again more to this discussion; please check Talk:Gdansk and Talk:Pila as well;
 * example Danzig vs. Gdansk;

 * the German dictionary (Duden - www.duden.de) knows Danzig and says it is a german name
 * the German government is using Danzig on its page (www.auswaertiges-amt.de)
 * the city Danzig itself is using on its official page for the German translation the name Danzig
 * and finally just to use the same "prove" for the german name as Gzorenplatz is always doing google; result 141,000 pages, search for Gdansk  66.400 ... i searched for German pages only...even i dont believe in google to much; you can prove everything ...Sicherlich 20:33, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC) ... and as halibutt asked for .. the search only for pages updated within last 3 month; http://www.google.de/search?as_q=&num=10&hl=de&btnG=Google-Suche&as_epq=Gdansk&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=lang_de&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=m3&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=] = 54.800 and Danzig  105.000
 * and please as german to say Danzig does not mean anything more then to say the name of the city; or to make it maybe more cleare; what do english native talking people think when they say Munich and not (like the official name is) München? - greetings from Germany ...Sicherlich 22:04, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Like Halibutt, Sicherlich is incapable of reading and/or understanding, as I have disproved all those points about a hundred times on this very page and on other pages. How intellectually-challenged must you be not to grasp that a search simply for "Gdansk" versus "Danzig" says absolutely nothing about how the current city is called in German, even if you restrict the search to recently-updated German pages. Obviously if you write about the historic Danzig, it doesn't matter when you write the text, if you refer today to the pre-1945 city, Danzig remains the correct name to use. But if you refer to today's city, Gdansk is generally used. And to prove that, you obviously have to restrict the search to references to today's city, for which the immediate addition of the word Polen to the search term is the easiest method. Gzornenplatz 22:32, Oct 27, 2004 (UTC)

 * oh yeah i forgot; you proved it with your google search .. i mean with the one and only best ever google search ... and of course; the german government is wrong because they are all revisionist, the Duden is wrong because they probably forgot to update it since 1945, the google-search is wrong because google is not a good way to prove (i mean it is but only with your perfect search of course), and the city ... ah of course; the people of the city are afraid of Germans and thats why they put the German name ... i start to like the discussion it´s so funny to watch how many people start a discussion because of you and specially that you probably really believe what you say and that you are so sure that everybody is wrong ! .. excellent fun!! really only the edit wars at the german wikipedia are a bit disturbing but there are so many reverting you that it is no big thing ...Sicherlich 05:52, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * I have rarely seen anyone as eager to make an idiot out of himself as you. But congratulations, you are doing it with great success. Gzornenplatz 06:28, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

 * wow that makes me really happy!!! ... at least you learned one thing ;o)...Sicherlich 16:11, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Really funny to see who's calling who an idiot here. Very entertaining watching you beat a dead horse here Gzornenplatz.  Laura Scudder 21:04, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Gzornenplatz, I said I won't discuss anything with you and believe me, I had no intention to. It is not a pleasure to listen to your offensive language and tone. However, I decided that you need a word of advice: offending people is not the way to go. So far the English wiki is very liberal and does not ban people so easily. However, your language and incivility might make you banned one day, just like you were banned in the German wiki. I believe that it's high time you understood that people do not have to be blind, "stupid", "idiotic", "dense" or "dumb" not to agree with you. I do not want you to reply to this note, I want you to understand it. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 16:38, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)

 * No, they don't have to be blind, stupid, idiotic, dense, or dumb to deny the undeniable, such as that a word search simply for "Danzig" and "Gdansk" includes historical references and thus cannot say anything about how the present city is called. They may just simply be bullshitting, i.e. deliberately saying things they don't believe themselves. Anyway, it's either of the two. Gzornenplatz 22:20, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * yeah and the german government, the duden, the press, the homepage of the city ,.. everything historical .. sure ... ;o) ...Sicherlich 22:46, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * You know, it would help if you could speak in full sentences, and ... maybe ... with ... less ... ellipses ... Gzornenplatz 22:52, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * It would also help if you could address the points he mentioned before, instead of dismissing him as an idiot. CohenTheBavarian 15:49, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I don't see any sense in discussion with gzornenplatz (in fact, he does not discuss anything, he just repeats his opinion again and again). Today's Germany has some people of his kind, who, in a mix of political pseudo-correctness and national self-hate, think that anyone on earth will have a happier life if germans learn how to pronounce Szczecin correctly. As it happened here, their reflex to people who do not share their bizarre opinion is calling them revisionists if not fascists. I have no idea how to cope with these people. Hating their own nation is the most typical of all typical german behaviors. And, to confirm the above statements, *nobody* speaks of Gdansk or Sczcecin, not even my (polish) friends who grew up in what they (speaking german to me) call Stettin. --Magadan 09:25, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * who could really say if the German name ist still the german name? ... Duden and german government are worth nothing ... hmm the google search done by me is wrong ... so .. the only one who could say .. is ... the City itself ... yes but Gdansk sad so on his homepage but it was not good as well for Gzornenplatz ... but maybe (only maybe!) the Polish government itself is allowed to say it? ... by accident i went to the page of the polish embassy in germany (i wrote about Kapuściński and they had informations) ; http://www.botschaft-polen.de/index.htm ... and when you click around there; e.g. "Kultur" you see they use the german names .. they write the polish as well ... but they dont write "the former german name Breslau ... not they wrote: "in Breslau (Wroclaw)" .. or: "New York und Krakau gewidmete", "Sammlungen der Eremitage in Marienburg (Malbork)" ... and a lot more you might check by yourself...  and; it is about the time after the WW ... Sicherlich 22:33, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I hesitate to get involved in this discussion, if I may use such a neutral word, in part because my views presumably are well known from the various city entries. But in my opinion as a) a journalist and editor, and b) an amateur historian, the key issue in all of this is not the present-day usage in various countries. What makes these entries confusing and misleading for the audience Wikipedia supposedly is intended to serve is the history of these territories.

For centuries, they were inhabited by Germans, and for centuries, the cities in question were known (outside of Poland) by their German names, which indeed were the names by which they knew themselves during those centuries. (I do wonder whether Stettin, at least, really was commonly known as Szczecin in Poland during those centuries, but that's another topic.)

To speak of them in a historical context by their present Polish names on an English-speakers' page will lead the casual user to assume that the cities in question always have been (ethnically) Polish, which is not true.

Also, a casual user -- particularly an American -- who does not know the history may wonder why a "German philosopher," to use the example of Schopenhauer, was born in "Gdansk, Poland." In a newspaper story, such an anomaly would be termed an "unanswered question" by an editor, and the reporter would be directed to explain.

As a native English speaker, and as an American, I think it's important and logical to use the "formerly" or "formerly known as" or "formerly known by its German name as" approach. That gives the reader some inkling that the ethnicity of the place has changed. If he wishes to find out how or why, he can consult a relevant city entry, or read further into the history section of the city entry he already is reading.

This approach implies no value judgments about the transformation of the territories ethnically in 1945-49. It simply explains that a change occurred. While from the Polish (and German) point of view "everyone knows" about that change and how it came about, the English-speaking world -- particularly America -- does not; it's simply not been a major part of whatever history most Americans gleaned from their school years.

I fail to see how this approach offends Poland, or is in any sense "revisionist." It's history.

Sca 20:16, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * haie sca; thanks for your explanation; I'm not so active on en so i was wonder why to take the german name into the article anyways ;o) .. now i know and agree that it makes sense ;) ... but i dont think you should use the term "formerly" .. because a lot of cities are in Germany still known by there german name (compare it to Munich --> München, not the same but no american says München i think? ;o) ) ... different reasons for this .. of course specially for small cities the use is getting less .. still there are a lot people in Germany who know and use this name .. so i think it should be handled like it is done on pl and de; just say "German: XYZ" .. as it is used on de and pl .. and nobody has any problems with this (okay besides GZ but he never visited wikipedia.pl as it seems he does not speak polish [but knows what is right]) .. the explanation that had been German you can then find in the history part of the article ...Sicherlich 21:29, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Another approach I'ven seen on several websites – including The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition, 2001 – is: "It's German name was ...." This, too, would be acceptable.

Sca 19:46, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Vote on Talk:Gdansk/Vote
Hi. I would invite you to vote on Talk:Gdansk/Vote to settle the multi-year dozens-of-pages dispute about the naming of Gdansk/Danzig and other locations. The vote has two parts, one with questions when to use Gdansk/Danzig, and a second part affecting articles related to locations with Polish/German history in general. An enforcement is also voted on. The vote has a total of 10 questions to vote on, and ends in two weeks on Friday, March 4 0:00. Thank you -- Chris 73 Talk 07:13, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)


text:
The Congos

The Congos are a reggae vocal group from Jamaica which formed as the duo "Ashanti" Roy Johnson (tenor) (b. Roydel Johnson, 1947, Hanover, Jamaica) and Cedric Myton (falsetto) (b. 1947, Saint Catherine Parish, Jamaica), later becoming a trio with the addition of Watty Burnett (baritone) (b. early 1950s, Port Antonio, Jamaica), and have been active on and off from the mid-1970s until the present day. They are best known for their Heart of the Congos album, recorded with Lee "Scratch" Perry.

History
Myton had previously been a member of The Tartans in the late 1960s (along with Prince Lincoln Thompson, Devon Russell and Lindburgh Lewis), and Ras Michael's group, and had recorded with Thompson's Royal Rasses in the mid-1970s. He formed the Congos, initially as a duo with Johnson, recording the single "At the Feast" for Lee "Scratch" Perry. Perry expanded the group to a trio with the addition of Burnett, this line-up recording the classic roots reggae album Heart of the Congos in 1977 at Perry's Black Ark studio. The album featured illustrious backing singers such as Gregory Isaacs, The Meditations, and Barry LLewellyn and Earl Morgan of The Heptones. The album has been described as "the most consistently brilliant album of Scratch's entire career".

Perry's previous productions by Max Romeo and Junior Murvin had been huge commercial successes thanks to a deal with Island Records, but Perry was in dispute with Island at the time the Congos' album was finished, so it was released on his own Black Ark label, limiting its success overseas, and causing a rift with the group. The Congos went their own way, organising a limited pressing of the album themselves. United Kingdom label Go Feet eventually reissued the album in 1980, and although the group had recorded new material since leaving Perry, Heart of the Congos proved a hard act to follow and their other releases suffered as a consequence. Albums such as Congo Ashanti were sparser and sounded ordinary compared to Perry's kitchen-sink-and-all massive productions.

Burnett quit the group, soon followed by Johnson, who embarked on a solo career. Myton continued to record as The Congos with various other musicians until the mid-1980s.

In the mid-1990s, The Congos reformed, with Myton and Burnett joined by Lindburgh Lewis, several albums following in subsequent years. In 2005 Myton recorded Give Them the Rights with a host of backup singers and star session players such as Sly and Robbie and Earl "Chinna" Smith, very much in the spiritual 70s roots vein. In 2006, the UK reggae revival label Blood and Fire released the album Fisherman Style featuring a remixed version of the classic cut "Fisherman" from Heart of the Congos plus such legends as Horace Andy, Big Youth, Dillinger, Prince Jazzbo, Luciano, Freddie McGregor, Gregory Isaacs, Max Romeo, Mykal Rose, Dean Fraser, Sugar Minott, and U-Roy doing their own new versions over the original rhythm.

In 2002, they appeared on the album The Slackers and Friends by the ska/reggae band The Slackers.

In 2008, The Congos appeared in the independent feature film, Wah Do Dem which captures them performing "Fisherman," and "Congoman Chant," under a full moon at Helshire Beach outside Kingston.

In 2009, Myton, Burnett, and Johnson reunited with Perry to record the album Back in the Black Ark, which, despite its title, was recorded at Myton's studio in Portmore and at Mixing Lab, Kingston.

Discography

 * Albums
 * Heart of the Congos (1977) Black Ark
 * Congo aka Congo Ashanti (1979) Congo Ashanty/CBS
 * Image of Africa (1979) Congo Ashanty/Epic/CBS
 * Heart of the Congos(1981) Go-Feet Records
 * Best of Congos vol. 1 (1983) Tafari
 * Natty Dread Rise Again (1997) RAS
 * Revival (1998) VP
 * Live at Maritime Hall: San Francisco (2000) 2B1
 * Lion Treasure (2001) JDC/M10
 * Give Them the Rights (2005) Young Tree
 * Fisherman Style (2006) Blood and Fire
 * Cock Mouth Kill Cock (2006) Explorer Music also issued as Feast (2006) Kingston Sounds
 * Swinging Bridge (2006) Mediacom/Nocturne
 * Back in the Black Ark (2009) Mediacom
 * ''We Nah Give Up" Pura Vida & The Congos(2011), Lost Ark Music 001
 * Dub Feast (2012) Jamaican Recordings
 * FRKWYS Vol. 9: Icon Give Thank (2012), RVNG Intl – with Sun Araw and M. Geddes Gengras
 * Morning Star (2018), Lost Ark Music – with Pura Vida

 * Contributing artist
 * The Rough Guide to Reggae (1997) World Music Network

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

title: The Congos


text:
User talk:4556

Next time you vandalize, I will block you from editing. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 21:07, Oct 19, 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:4556


text:
File talk:Girlwithapearlearringpainting.jpg

This image here is before the 1994 restoration (you can read about it here: ), I think it should be replaced with a more recent one, like the one that's here. I don't know anyway, since on the site the copyright disclaimer says that "All images of the Girl with a Pearl Earring are copyright of the Mauritshuis in The Hague". Does anybody know better? Lazarus Long 21:09, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)


text:
Coombe, Gwennap

Coombe (Komm) is a settlement in Gwennap civil parish, Cornwall, England, United Kingdom. It is situated approximately three-and-a-half miles (6 km) southeast of Redruth at.

The name 'Komm' in Cornish means 'small valley, dingle'. Compare the Welsh 'cwm'.

title: Coombe, Gwennap


text:
Talk:Earthworm organic cycle

Earthworm organic cycle was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was REDIRECT WITHOUT MERGING. 1 vote to delete, 2 votes to redirect, 1 vote to merge and redirect. This translates into 3 to 1 in favor of keeping as a redirect, but 3 to 1 in favor of not merging any content with the redirection target. Postdlf 03:51, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Earthworm organic cycle

 * Delete Redundant - material already covered in Earthworm --Cje 21:10, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Earthworm. Topic is notable enough that people may search for it by name. --Improv 17:53, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge anything not included in Earthworm, and redirect — siro  χ  o  19:43, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Redirect to earthworm. I have to add, when I was originally scanning the Contents list at the top of VfD, my eyes conflated this heading with the next one down, so for a few seconds I thought somebody had actually written an article on the earthworm emotional cycle. I'm feeling better now. Bearcat 17:48, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

title: Talk:Earthworm organic cycle


text:
Ijahman Levi

Ijahman Levi (born Trevor Sutherland: 21 June 1946) is a Jamaican-British reggae musician. In his early years, Levi was tutored by musician and vocal teacher, Joe Higgs. His first album, Haile I Hymn, was released on Island Records in 1978. He became Ijahman Levi after a religious conversion to Rastafari when he was in prison between 1972 and 1974. It and his following records preach Rastafari movement as well as Twelve Tribes of Israel doctrine.

Biography
Levi moved with his parents to the United Kingdom in 1963. In 1966 and 1969, he released two singles under the name of The Youth. The first one was in 1966 for Polydor 56121 "As Long As There is Love" c/w "Your One and Only Man", both covers of Jimmy Ruffin and Otis Redding songs. Ijahman has mentioned he is a great Otis Redding fan. They were cut in a typical mod R&B soul style. His second single was for Deram 226, released 17 January 1969, and featured "Meadow of My Love" c/w "Love Me or Leave Me". The B-side was self-written, being credited to 'Sutherland'. He recorded 'Fire Fire' c/w 'Jesus Keepeth My Soul' as The Youth on Pama in 1971. His next three singles were 'I'm A Levi' and 'Jah Heavy Load' on Concrete Jungle followed by 'Chariot Of Love' on Organisation all produced by Dennis Harris in 1976 before signing to Island Records. In 1985 Levi released "I Do", a duet he recorded with his second wife, Madge. The song performed well on the British reggae charts, reaching top position. Ijahman’s most famous composition is "Jah Heavy Load" recorded and released in 1976.

Discography

 * 1978 - Haile I Hymn (Chapter 1)
 * 1978 - Haile I Hymn (Chapter 2)
 * 1979 - Are we a Warrior
 * 1982 - Tell it to the Children
 * 1984 - Lilly of my Valley
 * 1985 - Africa
 * 1986 - I Do (Ijahman and Madge)
 * 1987 - Forward Rastaman
 * 1987 - Culture Country
 * 1988 - Ijahman and Friends
 * 1988 - Over Europe Live
 * 1989 - Inside Out
 * 1991 - On Track
 * 1991 - Love Smiles
 * 1992 - Kingfari
 * 1993 - Entitlement
 * 1993 - Gemini Man
 * 1994 - Two Double Six
 * 1994 - Black Royalties
 * 1995 - Home Free by Madge
 * 1995 - Live in Paris 1994
 * 1995 - Ijahman Sings Bob Marley
 * 1996 - Ijahman & Bob Marley in Dub
 * 1997 - Live at Reggae on the River
 * 1997 - Beauty and the Lion
 * 1997 - Lion Dub Beauty
 * 1998 - Crocodile Man
 * 1998 - Monkey Man
 * 2000 - Arkart
 * 2001 - The Roots of Love
 * 2006 - Versatile Life

title: Ijahman Levi


text: Category:Loving County, Texas

title: Category:Loving County, Texas


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pat Lee

Pat Lee was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. 8 votes to delete. Postdlf 04:00, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Pat Lee
Very likely fiction, or at the very most extremely non-notable, as far as I can discern. Also, this article was created by the same anonymous user that created the Joel allan article, which is currently here on VfD, with only delete votes. Lachatdelarue [[User talk:Lachatdelarue|(talk)]] 21:17, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Why are you guys trying to get rid of my article? I made it at school, as did my friend, who made the Joel Allan article. Every word is the truth. This explains why the IP address is the same.
 * Delete and ban: Does it also explain why you deleted my vote? DCEdwards1966 00:31, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - hoax. There's nothing on Amazon.com or Google about Pat Lee or any association with Ringo Starr. The history of this VfD reeks of vandalism. Ian Pugh 00:37, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Abstain slithering towards Delete. If I knew country music better, I'd say it was a hoax. — Bill 22:01, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete unless verified. We need cites to generally respectable sources here. Average Earthman 13:22, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Definitively fails the google test. --Improv 17:56, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: School prank. Woo-hoo. Geogre 01:08, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * D Wolfman 17:43, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Prank.   — Gwalla | Talk 23:24, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pat Lee


text:
Llancillo Church

Llancillo Church (also spelled Llancilo) is a Grade II*-listed redundant church in Herefordshire, England, near the Welsh border at.

Situated amongst trees and fields, it was dedicated to Saint Peter and alternatively to St Tysilio. The church was built in the 11th century and has been revised and restored since, including a Victorian restoration in the 1890s.

It contains a font from the 13th century and 17th century pulpit. One of the bells is believed to have been cast in the 13th century or earlier.

History
It is thought that the remote site was first used by a hermit in the 6th century but that the current chancel dates from the 11th century and the rest of the church was substantially rebuilt in the 17th century. It underwent Victorian restoration in the 1890s.

Despite being situated in Herefordshire, on the English side of the border, the church lay within the Welsh Diocese of St David's until 1852 when it was transferred to the Diocese of Hereford.

On 22 December 2006, the building was closed for regular public worship and, in 2007, passed to the Friends of Friendless Churches to maintain and restore. Whilst Llancillo remains a civil parish, it now falls within the Church of England parish of Rowlestone and Llancillo.

Architecture
The sandstone building has a slate roof, and tufa dressings. It consists of a 442 x chancel and nave which is 1128 x and has a porch on the south side. One of the bells in the bellcote was cast possibly in the 13th century or earlier.

There is a Tudor doorway and, inside, a 13th-century baptismal font. The oak pulpit is from 1632.

In the churchyard are the remains of a 14th century preaching cross with an octagonal base. Nearby is mound which is the site of a motte castle.

The church lies on the Walterstone ley line described by Alfred Watkins in his book, The Old Straight Track.

title: Llancillo Church


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Howdershelt

Ed Howdershelt was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. 7 votes to delete, 1 vote to keep. Postdlf 03:47, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ed Howdershelt
Another deadender. This article states, pretty by way of an excuse for the non-notability of its subject, that it was inserted into Wikipedia as a reciprocal link for some website. Izzis something Wikipedia does, or are we being snookered? — Bill 21:15, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. We don't do reciprocal links this way. Not notable. Note that there was not VfD text, so I added one. --Improv 17:51, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: promo. Wile E. Heresiarch 18:47, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, as evidenced by the many different references to him on Google, He seems to be very notable in some circles, the article probably can become encyclopedic with a little work.  — siro  χ  o  19:48, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: It is against policy to trade links. We don't need to, and we don't, and we can't and maintain integrity.  If someone makes him notable, fine.  Not like this, though. Geogre 01:04, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Notice: I expanded the entry a bit from what I could find on the net. — siro χ  o  11:11, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete not-notable author of vanity-press books Wolfman 17:40, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, article does not establish notability. Gamaliel 09:25, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Electronic publication does not generally make one notable. Isomorphic 23:23, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Category:Historical Indian regions

These are mainly the former Princely states of India, but not limited to it.

title: Category:Historical Indian regions


text:
Coombe, Morwenstow

Coombe (Komm) is a hamlet in northeast Cornwall, England, United Kingdom.

Combe is situated in the civil parish of Morwenstow three miles (5 km) north of Bude. Most houses in the settlement are owned by the Landmark Trust.

Combe lies within the Cornwall Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB). Almost a third of Cornwall has AONB designation, with the same status and protection as a National Park.

Coombe Mill
Coombe Mill, a disused mill built on four levels, lies at the bottom of Coombe Valley. It is a Site of Special Scientific Interest, noted for its various species of bat that inhabit the mill's buildings.

title: Coombe, Morwenstow


text:
Communist Party of Sweden (1995)

The Communist Party of Sweden (Sveriges kommunistiska parti) is a Marxist–Leninist communist party in Sweden and continuation of Workers' Party – The Communists (Arbetarpartiet kommunisterna, APK).

History
The Flamman group, an orthodox pro-Soviet section within Left Party – The Communists (Vänsterpartiet Kommunisterna), emerged as an internal fraction when C.-H. Hermansson took over as party leader and distanced the party from Moscow. The group was centered on the party newspaper Norrskensflamman ('The Flame of the Aurora Borealis'; usually just called Flamman), the regional party publication in Norrbotten County. The fraction worked as a parallel party centre, and relations between it and the party leadership soured.

At the party congress in 1975, when Hermansson stepped down as party leader, the Flamman group launched Rolf Hagel as its candidate for the party leadership. Hagel was defeated by Lars Werner with 162 votes against 74. In the same year the Flamman-sympathizers were expelled from Kommunistisk Ungdom (Communist Youth), the youth league of the party.

The group broke away in 1977, and formed Arbetarpartiet Kommunisterna ('Workers Party – the Communists', abbreviated APK). A founding congress took place in the Swedish Riksdag. A large number of foreign delegates attended the congress, indicating that APK had strong moral support from CPSU and the orthodox sector of the World Communist Movement. Two MPs (and party central committee members), Rolf Hagel and Alf Löwenborg, led the split. Hagel was elected party president. Norrskensflamman became the central party organ.

Entire VPK party units joined APK in many places, including Malmö, Gothenburg and Mälardalen. The foremost stronghold of the new party was Norrbotten County. In total, up to 25% of the entire VPK party membership (other sources claim between 10% and 15%) joined APK. To a large extent it was the trade union cadres of VPK who joined APK. Shortly thereafter, a large section of the KU district in Gävleborg County joined APK.

Sveriges Kommunistiska Ungdomsförbund ('Young Communist League of Sweden', abbreviated SKU) was created as the youth league of the party. A student wing, Marxistiska Studenter ('Marxist Students'), was founded although it never attained any importance.

APK failed to make any electoral breakthrough, and gradually the party declined. The fall of the Soviet Union had a very negative impact on the party; many members left, either to leave politics completely or to rejoin the Left Party. SKU broke away in 1990, and had a short-lived period as an independent communist youth organization.

In 1995, APK was declared financially bankrupt by state authorities, the first political party in Sweden to suffer that fate.

Directly after the bankruptcy of APK, the core around Hagel regrouped and reconstituted their party as Sveriges Kommunistiska Parti (Communist Party of Sweden). In 2000 SKU was reorganized as the party youth league.

European Parliament
The party was represented in a municipal council until 2013 when their representatives were expelled from the party.

title: Communist Party of Sweden (1995)


text:
RAF Daws Hill

RAF Daws Hill was a Ministry of Defence site, located near High Wycombe and Flackwell Heath, in Buckinghamshire, England, close to the M40 motorway.

The station was established in 1942 on land owned by Wycombe Abbey School, for use by the United States military. Initially used by the United States Army Air Forces, RAF Daws Hill was used in its later years by the United States Navy. It became an important part of US defence in the United Kingdom during the 1980s, housing a nuclear bunker with a control centre for the direction of nuclear bombers and cruise missiles. As a result of this and the wider presence of US nuclear weapons on British soil during the 1980s and 1990s, the site became home to a peace camp between 1982 and 1985.

Following a review of Ministry of Defence properties in the south-east of England, the station closed in 2007 and the site was sold to a property developer in 2011. The station's nuclear bunker received Grade II* listed status from English Heritage in October 2013, and much of the remaining site was cleared for redevelopment as housing during 2015.

Establishment
American military forces were first stationed at High Wycombe in 1942, shortly after the United States' formal entrance into the Second World War. So urgent was the action that Wycombe Abbey School, situated on the land that would become the station, was given three weeks to find new facilities; failure in this effort led to the school's closing, until the independent girls' school was returned by the US in 1945. An underground bunker, which later became a nuclear-reinforced bunker was built within the grounds of the school and was codenamed "Pinetree".

The VIII Bomber Command Headquarters was at RAF Daws Hill and known as USAAF Station 1101.

In 1952, the station, formerly known as Daws Hill House, welcomed US forces again. From 1952 to 1965 the station appears to have housed a command bunker for the 7th Air Division, the UK-based elements of Strategic Air Command. The following years of the Cold War saw fluctuation in the station's importance.

Approximately 800 personnel were stationed there when, in 1969, their numbers were reduced, so that, in the early 1970s, only a small group remained for upkeep of facilities.

Then, in 1975, activity escalated, revitalising the station's importance to the American military in Europe. Its nuclear bunker, with 23,000 square feet (2,100 square meters) of space, housed high-tech equipment for the direction of nuclear bombers and guided missiles.

Between 1982 and 1985 there was a peace camp outside the base protesting against the bringing of United States cruise missiles to the United Kingdom.

Use of the station was reduced with the end of the Cold War; by 1992, US Defense personnel at RAF Daws Hill numbered fewer than 350.

Closure and redevelopment
In 2002, the UK Ministry of Defence proposed to close RAF Daws Hill some years in the future, turning the 50 acre of land over to other public and private use and relocating American Naval personnel and activities to other locations near London, particularly RAF Uxbridge. The plan apparently fizzled, however, when the US Navy voiced its preference to remain. High Wycombe, desiring to build at least 400 new houses by 2011 for its growing population, considered the land ideal for up to 600 houses; but nearby residents also rejected the proposal because of the changes that it would entail, including increased traffic on relatively quiet roads.

During 2007 the US Navy staged a withdrawal from the greater London area, leading to the facilities at RAF Daws Hill becoming surplus to operational requirements. Station facilities including the shops, workshops and petrol station closed in August 2007, followed by the remainder of the station later that year.

In June 2011, the site was placed up for sale by the Ministry of Defence. Taylor Wimpey subsequently bought the site, planning to build a housing estate of around 500 homes. Some personnel and their families remained on the site, occupying the housing while alternative accommodation was found. The Ministry of Defence continued to rent the 67 bungalows from Taylor Wimpey until September 2011. Local residents formed the Daws Hill Residents' Association in light of the proposals for redeveloping the site, following concerns over the impact it could have on the area.

In March 2012, the Ministry of Defence sought permission from Wycombe District Council for the demolition of the station's Cold War bunker by the summer. However, in September 2014 it received Grade II* protected status listing from English Heritage. By January 2015 demolition of the bungalows was underway and by February 2017, 50 homes had been completed out of a projected 444. As of March 2022, all 444 homes are complete. The estate is called Pine Trees and roads have been given names such as Kennedy Avenue, Arizona Way and Eisenhower Lower Close to reflect US Forces having been previously based there.

London Central Elementary High School
The station was home, between 1971 and 2007, to London Central Elementary High School, part of the Department of Defense Dependents Schools, with pupils in grades K–12. Also at Daws Hill were 70 housing units for American personnel and their families. Other facilities include warehouses and those for vehicle maintenance, as well as support buildings for persons who lived and worked at the station, such as a bank, a post office, a bowling alley, sports grounds and buildings, a small exchange, an automobile refuelling station, and a social club.

The school's final class graduated in 2007 when the school closed.

title: RAF Daws Hill


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Emotional Freedom Techniques (0th nomination)

Emotional Freedom Techniques
Emotional Freedom Techniques was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was to keep, but fixup the article so it doesn't look so much like an advertisement.

1 vote to delete (original submitter), 2 votes to keep, 2 votes to abstain. Of the votes to abstain, one expressed an interest in the topic.

I'm going to list this on cleanup. - Ta bu shi da yu 14:05, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Non-notable advert. — Bill 21:19, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's probably quackish, but it's also notable because of its popularity. --Improv 17:55, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, this could certainly become encyclopedic. — siro  χ  o  19:43, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Abstain. However, the existing article is certainly an advertisement, mostly for Carrington who owns two of the three domains in the external links section. She is just one of what appears to be many practitioners of this EFT (whatever it is). Ben James Ben 02:23, 2004 Oct 25 (UTC)
 * Abstain. While I think it'd be an interesting topic to write about, the way this one is written really is little more than an ad.  Mo0 02:27, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete - Agree with the originator of the VfD request. --French Tourist 15:43, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Beverage-can stove

A beverage-can stove, or pop-can stove, is a do it yourself, ultralight, alcohol-burning portable stove. It is made using parts from two aluminium beverage cans. Basic designs can be relatively simple, but many variations exist.

Total weight, including a windscreen/stand, can be less than one ounce (28 g). The design is popular in ultralight backpacking due to its low cost and lighter weight than commercial stoves. This advantage may be lost on long hiking trips, where a lot of fuel is packed, since alcohol has less energy per gram than some other stove fuels.

Of the available fuels, methanol delivers the least energy, isopropyl alcohol delivers more, butanol is hardly ever used, and pure ethanol the most. Denatured alcohol and rubbing alcohol are frequently used for this purpose, as it often contains a mixture of ethanol and other alcohols. All but isopropyl alcohol burn with a smokeless flame; it can provide both light and heat.

History and design

The basic design dates back more than a century. It consists of a double-wall gas generator, a perforated burner ring, and an inner preheat chamber. A similar design was patented in 1904 by New York coppersmith J. Heinrichs. Trangia has been selling a commercial version of the design since 1925, and Safesport marketed a stainless-steel stove in the 1990s. The Trangia stove burner is made from brass, although all the other associated parts that come with it are aluminium.

In the unpressurized open-top design the double wall acts as a gas generator, transferring heat from the flame to the fuel. This effect enhances combustion, producing more heat than other passive designs. The inner wall also creates a convenient preheat chamber for starting the stove. Once the fuel has warmed up, its vapor will travel up the hollow wall, pass through the perforations, and form a ring of flame. This improves air/fuel mixing and therefore combustion. Vapor also rises from the center of the stove and burns when passing through the ring of flame as long as a pot is over the stove.

Pressurized designs have no cut-out in the top. They are filled with alcohol by separating the two halves of the burner, by opening a plug to a smaller hole in the center of the top side or by filling through the gas-jet holes.

A wick may be inserted into the hollow wall, where it will draw fuel upwards closer to the hot parts of the burner. Evaporating fuel from the wick removes heat from the top parts of the burner and subsequently the fuel at the bottom receives less heat. This slows down evaporation through the center while increasing the gas pressure inside the wall, spreading the ring of flame outwards, inwards, or vertically depending on the jet directions, while the center of the burner produces almost no flame, leading to a more controlled burn and faster starting. Suitable wick materials include fiberglass or cotton cloth. The wick will not burn because the evaporating fuel keeps it cool; also the pressure inside prevents oxygen from entering the hollow until the burner can no longer produce enough gas to support a flame. Cellulose cigarette filters wick fuel efficiently upwards but melt and burn in all but the least powerful designs. Other wick materials in use are Kevlar and other aramid fibers, carbon felt, fiberglass, and even toilet paper.

Aluminium-can construction
The stove is made from two aluminium can bottoms. An inner wall is cut and rolled from the can material. A ring of holes is pierced into the top with a pin. Parts can be glued with silicone sealant, high-temperature epoxy, or sealed with aluminum (thermal) foil tape, although this is not necessary. Total height is less than two inches (50 mm), though dimensions may be increased to hold more fuel or decreased to take up even less space.

The choice of aluminium has several advantages—light weight, low cost, and good thermal conductivity to aid vaporization of fuel. Modifications to the surface such as inking or painting a dark color increase the amount of radiant thermal energy captured by the stove body and change the stove's burn profile as a function of time, fuel load, and ambient temperature. Many designs require priming to get started and most are regenerative and stable during operation. Alternative construction materials have been used, including stoves made of tin cans such as cat food tins, tuna cans, and juice cans — the basic design is very similar. Windscreens/stands can be fabricated from tin cans, cut to size with ventilation holes added. Steel beverage cans of the classic 12 ounces design are still in limited use and while they are heat resistant, their coating will burn off and they will rust if not cared for.

Operation and performance
Each stove works well to supply one or two people. When used to cook larger meals (greater than 2 cups (0.5 litres)), it is less efficient than a more-powerful stove which delivers more heat to a pot. This is because a longer time is required to reach the boiling temperature, during which more heat is lost to the surroundings.

To use the stove, a small amount of fuel is poured into the stove and ignited. The pot is then placed above the stove, on a windscreen or stand. The flame is small at first, only burning from the inner chamber. Once the fuel has warmed up (requiring about one minute) its vapor will pass through the perforations and form a ring of flame. Enough heat from the flame is passed to the fuel to maintain full combustion until the fuel runs out.

Ratings

 * Time to boil 2 cups (500 mL): ~4–12 minutes (45 mL of fuel)
 * Time to boil 4 cups (1 L): ~10–24 minutes (90 mL of fuel)
 * Burn time: ~10–20 minutes (60 mL/4 tablespoons of fuel)

Boil times can be significantly reduced by using a pot of the appropriate diameter (to reduce heat loss on the sides of the pot) and especially by a wind screen which maximizes efficiency.

 * Time to boil 2 cups (500 mL): ~5 minutes at 6500 ft (2000m) altitude with ambient temp of ~45F (7C) and water temp of ~55F (13C).

Comparison with other stoves
The stove can outperform some commercial models in cold or high-altitude environments, where propane and butane canisters might fail. Roland Mueser, in Long-Distance Hiking, surveyed hikers on the Appalachian Trail and found that this stove was the only design with a zero-percent failure rate.

Fuel usage (by weight) is about fifty percent greater than a butane/propane stove. Can stoves weigh less than an ounce, compared with three ounces for the lightest gas stoves. Many commercial stoves also require special fuel canisters, adding to overall stove weight. No such canisters are necessary in a can stove; denatured alcohol can be carried in virtually any lightweight container, such as a plastic soda bottle. The weight advantage of the beverage-can stove is diminished by the greater fuel consumption (especially on longer hikes), but may still be offset by its reliability and simplicity.

Other attributes of the beverage-can stove are its nearly silent operation and its suitability as an emergency backup.
 * Denatured alcohol is a (relatively) environmentally-friendly fuel that does not leave a residue or soot. Denatured alcohol is commonly available at camping outfitters and hardware stores. Denatured alcohol is toxic to drink.
 * Non-toxic pure ethanol is rarely used as stove fuel in the United States, since it is usually subject to a liquor tax. However it also has some medicinal use in treating stings and bites, as a coolant, and antiseptic.
 * These stoves operate marginally on 90% isopropyl alcohol, poorly on 70% and not at all with 50%. Water typically cannot be boiled with isopropyl rubbing alcohol, but if the more rarely found (still inexpensive) laboratory grade or "gas drier" is used, and the sooting is dealt with by applying a little soap solution to the pot, the fuel value of the alcohol will reduce boiling times, not increase them.

Variations

 * Standard : The classic ultra-lightweight backpacking stove. Designed for one person, lighter than commercial models of the same design
 * Inverted two-piece : Smaller and lighter than the standard version; difficult to fill
 * Side-burner : Doubles as its own pot stand (holes are in the side). A tight-fitting pot can increase fuel pressure
 * Pressurized : A more powerful version. A hole in the top of the stove is sealed with a thumbscrew after filling with fuel; this allows the stove to control the rate of heat output. An additional base is used to hold fuel for preheating
 * Back-pressured : Back-pressured stoves simplify the pressurized design by eliminating the thumbscrew and the base needed for preheating, while still controlling the rate of energy output
 * Insulated : A variation on the standard design, with an inner wall and insulated with fiberglass
 * Other : Numerous designs in use
 * Multiple-unit : More than one unit can be used under the same pot when cooking for a larger number of people

Safety issues
Alcohol stoves are inherently dangerous, since spilling is possible and the fuel burns with a nearly invisible flame. If a spill occurs the best course of action often is to step back and let the alcohol burn up.

A stove with a deep well is wind and blow-out resistant — blowing into it can send burning alcohol flying. A stove with a small, shallow well, or a central wick may or may not be blown out to stop it from burning. A safe and lightweight snuff cap or simmer ring is added to some stove designs. Yet alcohol remains safer than most camping fuels. An alcohol fire can be extinguished with plain water, and alcohol fumes are mostly non-explosive.

Fuel must never be added when the flame is still burning. The Trangia fuel bottles do not automatically shut off, nor do they prevent flashback. While the valve does close if released, human reflex is not fast enough to release the valve if flashback occurs.

The Boy Scouts of America prohibits "equipment that is handcrafted... due to legal concerns. Examples include alcohol-burning 'can' stoves..." The nearly invisible flame and the risk of spilling burning fuel can cause burns.

title: Beverage-can stove


text:
John Hewson (regicide)

Colonel John Hewson, also spelt Hughson (died 1662), was a shoemaker from London and religious Independent who fought for Parliament and the Commonwealth in the Wars of the Three Kingdoms, reaching the rank of colonel. Considered one of Oliver Cromwell's most reliable supporters within the New Model Army, his unit played a prominent part in Pride's Purge of December 1648. Hewson signed the death warrant for the Execution of Charles I in January 1649, for which he reportedly sourced the headsman, while soldiers from his regiment provided security.

During the 1649 to 1660 Interregnum, he served as Governor of Dublin and MP for County Dublin until 1656. He then returned to England and was MP for Guildford before being elevated to Cromwell's Other House in 1658. As one of the surviving Regicides of Charles I, he was exempted from the Indemnity and Oblivion Act after the 1660 Stuart Restoration. He went into exile in the Dutch Republic, and is thought to have died in Amsterdam in 1662.

Personal details
Very little is known of Hewson's life prior to 1642, other than that he worked as a shoemaker in Westminster during the late 1620s and 1630s. In February 1628, he is recorded as having sold eight pairs of shoes to the Massachusetts Bay Company; this suggests he was born prior to 1604, since doing so required him to be a freeman of the Worshipful Company of Cordwainers, and at least 24 years old.

Hewson himself later testified he had lived as a "child of wrath" in a "wicked and profane family" in London, before being converted through the influence of a godly preacher. He was later accused of being an Anabaptist, a sect viewed as radical revolutionaries, and in consequence persecuted by Catholics and mainstream Protestants alike.

Hewson was married twice; his first wife died in Dublin in January 1652, and he quickly remarried. The names of his partners, and whether either marriage produced children, are unknown, although one source claims he had three unrecorded "Anabaptist" sons.

First English Civil War
Prior to the outbreak of the First English Civil War in August 1642, Hewson probably served in the Westminster Trained Bands, which fought at Turnham Green. He subsequently joined the Parliamentarian field army, and is thought to be the "John Huson" listed in November 1642 as a captain in the Earl of Essex Regiment. At some point in 1643, he transferred to the army of the Eastern Association, commanded by the Earl of Manchester, and in March 1644 was appointed Lieutenant colonel of a new infantry regiment raised by John Pickering. This unit fought at Marston Moor in July, then Second Newbury in October.

Pickering's Regiment was incorporated into the New Model Army in April 1645 as one of its twelve authorised infantry formations, with Hewson as Lieutenant Colonel. Like Hewson, Pickering was a religious Independent with strong Anabaptist sympathies, while other officers included Major John Jubbes, a Leveller who resigned his commission in 1647, and Daniel Axtell, a Baptist and future regicide. Their appointments had to be approved by Parliament, whose moderate Presbyterian majority viewed the growth of religious and political radicalism in the army with considerable unease. The House of Lords originally replaced Pickering and all of his company commanders, including Hewson, with officers from another regiment, before pressure from the House of Commons led them to approve the original list by one vote.

Seen as particularly close to Oliver Cromwell, in June 1645 Pickering's was described as one of the 'chiefest praying and preaching regiments in the army'. Hewson fought at Naseby in June 1645, then took part in the offensive against Royalist strongholds in South West England, including Sherborne Castle, Lacock Abbey, Bridgwater, Bristol and Basing House. While besieging Exeter in November, Pickering died at Ottery St Mary and was replaced by Hewson as colonel, with Axtell as his deputy. The regiment then joined the forces besieging the Royalist wartime capital of Oxford, whose surrender in June 1646 brought the First Civil War to an end. While stationed in the area, Hewson confirmed his reputation as a religious radical by illegally preaching in a local church, having first denounced its minister as an agent of the Antichrist.

Second English Civil War and Cromwellian Conquest of Ireland
Despite victory in the First Civil War, the period that followed saw increasing conflict between the moderate majority in Parliament, and more radical elements within the New Model Army. By early 1647, its soldiers were owed more than £300,000 in wages, an enormous sum for the period, while Parliament was struggling with a shattered economy, an outbreak of the bubonic plague, and the refusal of Charles I to agree a peace settlement. Hewson acted as one of the army's representatives in negotiations with Parliament over their arrears, and in November 1647 Sir Thomas Fairfax ordered his regiment into London to seize money for paying the troops.

When the Second English Civil War began in April 1648, Hewson helped suppress the rebellion in Kent, including the storming of Maidstone, where he was commended for his bravery. The renewed fighting convinced Cromwell and others that Charles must be removed, and Hewson played a prominent part in bringing this about. His regiment supported Pride's Purge of December 1648, where MPs who opposed putting the king on trial were forcibly excluded or arrested. In January 1649, he served on the court that approved the Execution of Charles I, signed the death warrant and reportedly sourced the headsman, while soldiers from his regiment under Daniel Axtell provided security during the trial and execution.

Despite his religious radicalism, Hewson was an authoritarian in matters of army discipline. When 300 men from his regiment refused in May 1649 to serve in the proposed Cromwellian Conquest of Ireland, they were swiftly dismissed, after which Hewson helped Cromwell crush the Banbury mutiny. In late August, he arrived in Ireland as part of Cromwell's expeditionary force and was present at the Siege of Drogheda, where he allegedly set fire to a church containing nearly 100 Irish and English Royalist refugees. Shortly afterwards, Hewson replaced Michael Jones as Governor of Dublin, then participated in the relief of Arklow and the Siege of Kilkenny in March 1650, where he lost an eye.

The Interregnum and death
After the capture of Clonmel in May 1650, Cromwell returned to England, leaving Henry Ireton in charge of reducing the remaining pockets of organised Irish resistance. Hewson continued as Governor of Dublin, and joined the Gathered church founded there by John Rogers, a leading Fifth Monarchist preacher, putting him at odds with the majority of the Dublin Castle administration, who were either Presbyterians or members of the mainstream Protestant Church of Ireland. Recalled to London for consultations in 1652, he was nominated MP for Ireland in the 1653 Barebones Parliament; unlike many of his army colleagues, he supported its dissolution, and backed Cromwell's appointment as Lord Protector, albeit allegedly with great reluctance.

Returning to Ireland, Hewson was elected MP for County Dublin in the First Protectorate Parliament of 1654, but later fell out with Henry Cromwell, the new Lord Lieutenant of Ireland. Ordered back to England in 1656, he represented Guildford in the Second Protectorate Parliament, in which role he opposed Parliamentary moves to offer Cromwell the crown. In 1658, he was created Lord Hewson and took his place in Cromwell's Other House, a body equivalent to the House of Lords abolished in 1649. The Puritan Earl of Warwick reportedly refused to attend the House in protest at the elevation of a man with Hewson's low social origins.

Cromwell died in September 1658 and was succeeded as Lord Protector by his eldest son Richard. He proved incapable of controlling the competing factions within the New Model and Parliament, and resigned in May 1659, bringing the Protectorate to an end. The Rump Parliament dismissed in 1653 was reseated, and Hewson was appointed commander of the infantry in Ireland, but was back in London in October as a member of the Committee of Safety, set up by the army to assert its authority over Parliament. In December, the Council ordered Hewson to suppress demonstrations in London demanding a free Parliament, during which several people were killed. This destroyed their authority, and Hewson was cashiered, although he escaped further punishment.

By April 1660, the Stuart Restoration was imminent which meant regicides like Hewson were liable to arrest and execution; he escaped to Amsterdam in May, where he is thought to have died in 1662. However, this is not known for certain, while other sources claim he died in Rouen in 1663.

title: John Hewson (regicide)