text:
Talk:Chabad/Archive 1

From the article body
To the one who keeps on changing this entry: Two points I'd like to make: #1- there are not three groups in Chabad, there is one group. Though there are certainly differences of opinion on what to PUBLICIZE and what not to. Also, there is no 'G-d' group- show me a list of names and I'll verify it. I am IN CHABAD and there are NO SUCH PEOPLE! (Even if there is ONE in Tzfat, isnt there at least ONE Satmar Jew who loves Zionism? That does put him as a 'sect' in Satmar!) #2- If you will bring down Bergers book, bring down the other books as well- ones that counter his arguments. Why link to a book written by someone who HIMSELF AKNOWLEDGES HAVING NEVER REALLY BEEN WITH CHABAD PEOPLE, as a description of Chabad, when there are other books like 'The Rebbe's Army', or books from Chaim Dalfin that directly respond to Bergers allegations. It is simply dishonest and disgusting to place a biased report in an online encyclopedia. A professor of christian-Jewish relations should tell you how to look at Moshiach- something that is purely a Halachic issue???!

Another point- look up the meaning of 'messianist' in the dictionary- it has a meaning, and it is not the same at all as 'Meshichist', LHavdil. 68.161.149.229.

 * Please do not insert comments about an article into the article body. The talk page exists for this purpose. I will revert any edit that includes more websites into the Chabad article. Too many clowns have popped along to insert links, add apologetics about the Rebbe and pretend there is no controversy. You're invited to this (or my personal) talk page to discuss the issue.
 * If you don't like Berger's book, please add Dalfin's and his criticism of Berger, and don't remove mention. Pages are reverted because edits are partisan, and I feel yours certainly are. JFW | T@lk  09:11, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * Regarding your first statement, I know of prominent Lubavitch Rabbis who insist Rav Schneerson a"h was not the Messiah; are you claiming they don't exist, or merely that they are lying to the public? Regarding your argument regarding worshipping Rav Schneerson a"h is "There are NO such people; ok maybe there are, but they're not very many".  Well, that's what the article says.  Regarding Berger's book, if you have counterviews from other authors, please bring them.  As for whether or not Berger's arguments are correct, Wikipedia is not the place for deciding these debates, but rather the place for presenting the opposing positions. Finally, regarding the meaning of the word "Messianic", I have indeed looked it up in a dictionary:
 * mes·si·an·ic also Mes·si·an·ic
 * adj.
 * 1. Of or relating to a messiah: messianic hopes.
 * 2. Of or characterized by messianism: messianic nationalism.
 * Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
 * Don't you (and you claim all Lubavitchers) believe Rav Schneerson a"h is the Messiah? Jayjg 16:16, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I think there is some unfair snide-ness in written tone here to the good Lubavitchers who have been kind enough to offer inside views on the movement. NPOV can ony be acheived through unbiased neutral language reportage of all relevant POVs. 68.161.149.229 makes a very good point that views on messiah are purely Halachic issues.Zestauferov 23:59, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I disagree. The messiah question is the political bomb under Chabad, and it has ceased being a purely halachic issue. The article can be toned down, but too many anonymous editors have been coming here to suppress some very basic facts about Chabad. JFW | T@lk  00:24, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

 * I feel that JFW has treated these anonymous editors with far more respect than they have ever treated Wikipedia or the editors here. In my entire history on Wikipedia I have only encountered one Meshichist Lubavitcher who was willing to state his views, the one above.  Note I say state, and not discuss, as I have yet to encounter one who will discuss anything.  And, in fact, the article already provides "unbiased neutral language reportage of all relevant POVs", which is precisely what these meshichist editors are trying to suppress.  Their M.O. is hit-and-run insertions of Messianic links and POVs into articles relating to Lubavitch and Judaism, in the process deleting any non-Messianic Lubavitch POVs and links.  They do not provide the Lubavitch viewpoint, or even a summary of the differing Lubavitch viewpoints, but merely promote the viewpoint of one section of Lubavitch, their own.  And one part of that viewpoint, that views on the messiah are "purely Halachic issues", I'm sure appeals to someone who is continually claiming that Netzarim are Orthodox Jews, but nevertheless is highly over-simplified at best. Jayjg 02:49, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Most -> many
I changed "most" to "many" in regards to the amount of people that believe Rebbe Schneerson was the messiah

There is no proof that more than 50% of the Chabad Jews believed that Rebbe Schneerson was the Messiah. I'm sure there was a handful of them, but "most" isn't accurate. Rather, "many" will agree with both sides.

 * How familiar are you with Lubavitch Jews? Jayjg 04:02, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

AFAIK, no poll has been conducted amongst professed Chabad adherents as to their belief in the Messiahbility of the Rebbe. Therefore, I think "many" is a reasonable alternative, and "most" is premature. JFW | T@lk  15:42, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

PS I've had to protect the Menachem Mendel Schneerson page due to incessant vandalism. I have the feeling the vandals will shift their attention to this page in the near future. JFW | T@lk

162.84.234.246
First of all the real problem that ppl have with Chabad stems from the old Misnagid issue about there being a true leader of the Jewish people- someone who is truly on the level of Moshe Rabeinu in each generation. If this is accepted then the rest is not an issue: the Rebbe stated that the leader of the generation is the Moshiach of the generation and that THIS generation IS the generation of Moshiach. WE are going to be the ones greeting Moshiach and the Geula! All we have to do is add in Torah study, particularly relating to Moshiach and Geula, and add in Mitzvos and acts of goodness and kindness and this will hasten his arrival all the more quickly.

If this is accepted (and it has been the central issue for those who were against Chabad long before Gimmel Tamuz), then it is clear who Moshiach is. This is not my own personal belief that I put together- it is directly from the words of the Rebbe. If one has issue with this then they should study the words of the Rebbe directly.

Regarding the fact that the Rebbe is alive just as before, this is also the reality. It is based on the words of the Rebbe himself. It is not 'made up'. It is also based on many Torah sources. I can quote some of them if the moderator of this site allows room.

Being that the Rebbe is the only one who can speak in the name of Chabad, one must look at what he himself has said in order to know what Chabad is. If there is a Chabad Chassid who says otherwise, this is his own personal belief and not 'the' belief of Chabad. But in the larger picture, the Rebbe doesnt want people to just 'learn' about Chabad; he wants them to be affected by the message of Chabad: to get ready for Moshiach! To get things together and help others around to do the same; to add in acts of Mitzvos and Torah study (especially relating to Moshiach and Geula)

Regarding 'what' the Rebbe is, I'd like to clarify this. If someone were to walk into an operation for the first time in his life, and see five people with knives and masks and a sixth person lying on a table all cut up and bleeding, what would he think? Murderers! Likewise in many of the things here: one must study Chassidus in order to understand what the terminology is relating to the Rebbe. G-d is most certainly One and not comprised of other parts, Chas Vshalom (as is one of the 'thirteen principles of faith' that are broughts down by the Rambam) However from the 'creations' perspective, there is 'division' and this division and unity is what Chassidus is all about. It explains the entire picture. Now if one wishes to take it out of context, one most certainly can. However if studied in its source its clear intention is explaining the unity of G-d, and mans role in His creation (among other things.)

As stated above, I'm sure that there are some Satmar who support Israel, but why is it that these people are not given mention to in an encyclopedia? Why is it that Satmar 'stands' for anti-Zionism? The answer is clear: this is what the leader of Satmar taught and this is what they stand by. Just because there are some who disagree, doesnt make them 'the' Satmar view- or even 'a' satmar view, because it is their own personal view. If there are one or two people who say crazy things and they are part of Lubavitch, does that give them a 'group' on their own within Lubavitch? The answer is no.

Again regarding the current state of the Rebbe: based on the Rebbe's words himself, he is fully alive in the physical sense just as before- and even more than before. This may sound hard to digest, but this is what the Rebbe has said about the previuos Rebbe and this is most certainly the case. It is also based on many sources in Torah.

Relating to the word 'Messianism': surely you can use this word and get away with it completely logically, however it would be more befitting to use the word 'Meshichist' because not one Lubavitcher calls it 'Messianism'. The only point in using the word 'Messianist' is if one wishes to shock the reader into linking Chabad with, LHavdil, xtianity. If one has respect for his fellow Jew, he would not use words that are linked to things that offend people or label Jews in a bad way. In addition, according to the description of the word given above, it would then be fitting to use this word for ALL Jews! If one looks at any prayer book one will find literally hundreds of mentions of Moshiach and requests for him throughout the Siddur. In addition, one finds countless mentions of Moshiach throughout the Torah.

The bottom line is this: the belief of Chabad is based on the words of the Rebbe, and the Rebbe alone. Not myself or another Lubavitcher has the right to speak in the name of Chabad. The fact that the Rebbe is physically here (even if I dont see him- this is because of my own 'coarseness') or that he is Moshiach, these things are not open for discussion if one is going accroding to the Rebbe's words. Now one may ask 'but arent there many in Chabad who disagree?' the answer is that many who held (and still hold) positions of leadership in various areas felt and still feel a very strong problem with proclaiming these things outright. And I dont blame them: I would not explain these things if they were not being thrown out in the wrong way already! THe first approach to any Jew is Torah and Mitzvos and that Moshiach is coming now. If the person studies the words of the Rebbe and learns Chassidus, they will be certain about the identity of Moshiach as well. And this is 100% according to Halacha and TOrah sources- not at all outside of Halacha, Chas VShalom. The main point is for a Jew to be a good Jew and 'live with Moshiach'- to truly be a spiritual light to the physical world, until the physical world is one with the spiritual and there is not a difference between the two. This is the main point. However this cannot be realized and WOULD not be realized if not for the Rebbe (the Moshe Rabeinu of this generation.)

What seems to have happened is that many who, for whatever reason, are not in the position to voice this have been a reason for others to go a step further and say that 'I dont know'. And then for people who have not studied the words of the Rebbe directly to even proclaim that they 'dont think' that he is Moshiach. Those who claim this are very few (and there are some who are Torah scholars as well, but it seems that in this area, they simply are not paying attention to the clear words of the Rebbe. I honest to goodness cannot understand how someone who studies the words of the Rebbe could say anything different- I'd like to speak with one of them! I personally dont know of even ONE around me who is learned and holds this way.)

Are you getting a one-sided opinion here? Of course. This is simply me writing my objective view on what I see and know. The only truly objective view that you'll be getting is from G-d Himself. Even a moderator for the encyclopedia will be a biased view- he is not educated in Chabad and does not neccessarily know the teachings of the Rebbe.

In short: I am not going to come in here and correct the page every day. But I am stating here a fact: many points in this page's description of Chabad are simply WRONG. The view that you are attributing to some in Chabad about whether the Rebbe is alive... is simply incorrect. This argument may exist, but not in Chabad; it may exist between Berger and Lubavitch. In addition, several other things are incorrect, but when I change it, the moderator changes it back.

As a side note, however much I think Berger is wrong and is truly acting on ignorance and arrogance (and I hope he'll study some Chassidus along the way in his journey through Lubavitch), I think that he has inevitably bumped into some truth along the way- here is a link: http://www.moshiachlisten.com/jun_26_04.html

I'd like to stress once again: why on earth wont an 'objective' encyclopedia place a link to counter arguments to a person who is not at all qualified in this field to begin with? If a true Rav who people already respected from a Torah standpoint, wrote a book, then this is one thing (though if there are couter-arguments they should be included as well...) all the more so if the person has ZERO qualifications to even speak about Chabad...?! Place a link or two to books that respond to his accusations, or dont place any links or referrals to him in the first place. You cannot just speak about him and call that 'objective'. Maybe link to 'The Rebbe's Army' or Dalfins books or one of the many other online resources that explain the issues involved here. (Maybe if a person doesnt have an objective reality and a definite future in their own life, they try to make sure that no one else has one either. According to the Rebbe (and he is the Rebbe to all Jews, not just Lubavitchers) first of all, G-d is everywhere- for real. Also, every single minutest thing that happens in this universe is by divine plan. Everything is being created anew each moment. Also, we are living in/immediately preceding the era of Moshiach and must prepare for the complete Redemption. These are absolute and definite realities. With these 'beliefs' in mind, one does not need to put down other people in order to feel ok. If Dr Berger were to take these things as fact, then I dont see why he would feel the need to put down and ridicule an entire group of Jews.)

The main point is that each one of us decide to take upon ourselves an extra Mitzva and to add in Torah study- and help those around us in this direction as well. It is through this that we will merit the immediate revelation of Moshiach with the complete Geula, may it be immediately! (and we'll spend Yom Kippur in the Beis Hamikdash with Moshiach!)

PS- I dont think that there is a single Lubavitcher who does not pray to see the Rebbe with their own physical eyes in a plain and simple way, just as every Jew requests and asks by HaShem to bring Moshiach each and every day. The Rebbe taught (and this is directly from other Torah sources as well) that the mere request and 'demand' by G-d to bring the Geula (The Final Redemption) hastens its arrival. This is part of what G-d wants from us: to demand and ask by Him to bring about the goal of all of Creation- the times of Moshiach, may it be now.

PPS- Another point that is incorrect in the article is that 'no Rabbinic authority outside of Chabad accepted his Messiahship' (or something like that) This is incorrect. There are hundreds (I believe over a thousand) of signatures of Rabbonim who signed proclaiming the Rebbe as BeChezkas Moshiach- many of them non-Lubavitchers. In addition, there's a letter from Rabbi Soloveitchik A'H that I saw- here is the link (towards the middle of the page): http://www.rabbiyess.com/Is_This_Kosher.html

Also, this is what the former chief Rabbi of Israel (R' Mordechai Eliyahu) had to say after his visit with the Rebbe: "I saw that no secret is hidden from him, and I mean that simply and explicitly. He knows all of the Talmud, Poskim (legal precedents) and in the Mystical works his understanding is VERY VERY deep. He is the master of light. He is a master of all the Torah. And is an expert on everything that is happening in Israel. His face shines like an angel of G-d and he himself is higher than any angel. He is the greatest Torah master in our generation and no one is even close to him. And together with this he worries for every Jew in the world."

Another point is that the life of a Tzaddik is to begin with not a physical one- his entire being is a spiritual existence. In this case, 'after' and 'before' are not relevant relating to his 'being here'. IN addition, the Rebbe is not a person per se; he is a 'Living Torah', so to speak. His entire existence and every movement, thought, and spoken word, are completely divinely intended and guided. In this case, that would mean that his entire existence is sort of an instruction to each one of us. The Rebbe would not accept someone to merely say 'hi' and 'bye'- he always made sure to look at the persons soul and reveal something. On the other hand the Rebbe did not usually just tell people what to do, but rather looked at them and spoke with them in a way that revealed something so deep that a flame has been ignited inside, and the actions that result afterwards are a product of this meeting. It is not a earthly expierience (or possibly the MOST earthly expeience.)

http://Chabad.co.nr has some videos of the Rebbe, as does Chabad.org ( http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media.asp?AID=132863 ) and several other sites. While it states in Talmud that 'no two minds are alike' (and therefore no two Jews are expected to be exactly the same in their thoughts and opinions...) nonetheless, it would be beneficial for each person to see the Rebbe (in this period, one of the ways is through a video)- to see a truly holy person and a role model to look to for important matters pertaining to life in general and particularly regarding matters dealing with one's heart and soul. Merely looking at the face of a Tzaddik has an impact on a person. Unsigned by User:162.84.234.246.

 * 162.84.234.246, if you feel this way, please rewrite (or rather edit) the article in a way that incorporates the view of both Chabad and the outside critics/skeptics. The general public has a poor understanding of the whole concept of ruchnius (or metaphysics, for that matter), so you'll have to rely on much metaphor to bring your points accross.
 * I admit not having read your entry closely, and I also admit to not looking at the Rebbe's video.
 * I will not state my views here on whether the Rebbe is Moshiach or not. You are free to represent this point-of-view in this article, but the encyclopedia will only be truly objective if you tolerate that other people's view is also recorded, namely that he was a creature of flesh and blood who may have been a superb leader but departed from this world in 1994. JFW | T@lk  19:29, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This 'simple fact' that you state about who and what he is and was, is a completely subjective statement and is in no way any more 'absolute' that the most vocal Meshichist. If one were to write an article on a religion that claimed that this world does not exist and that human beings are not real, then I believe it would not be honest reporting to state events that occur within their group in a Western factual way. If, suppose, they believed that cows fly when no one is looking, would the report go 'and they believe that when the cows are sleeping in the locked barn, the cows are really flying...' or would the article read 'they believe that the cows fly at night'. The latter is more objective while the former is more 'comfortable' to the Western ear- though not at all more accurate. Does a single human being on this planet KNOW what will happen in a single moment from now? Even if they predict it a million times over, and it occurs exactly as they perdicted, does that mean that they KNOW what will happen? GOing even further, does anyone really know ANYTHING? A person can CLAIM to know something, and his fellow can choose to hold this way or not. However even a statement so basic as 'what goes up must come down' is not at all 'absolute' or 'objective'. Rather, we know that based on our senses when we perform action x, then y is what happens. We dont know WHY this happens (and even quantum mechanics and the deepest of string theory etc. cannot say anything for certain- they are merely trial and error, as well as theoretical logic.) This is the basis of all science- both physical and mental. The basis is simply logical deductions based on our senses. This is in no way reliable to anyone who thinks for a moment what we're doing: beings that are limited to bodies and are extremely small and fragile, are deciding what things are and how things work... Not to say that we're getting nowhere, but the basic point of trusting the Western G-d (ie. the science of cause and effect, pleasure, and a general nihilist perspective) is truly not at all what anyone in their right mind could call 'objective'.

Not to drift way out there, but the point that I'm trying to make is that it seems that the goal of this encyclopedia is to allow true objectivism- as true as humans can get to it on their own- through having input from everyone. If this is the goal, then to ridicule ANY belief is by default not being objective- even if the idea sounds completely laughable to the Western ear.

After rereading what you wrote, it seems that you are not meaning to state a fact, but rather asking that all views be stated. If this is the case, then how can I possibly speak for those who ridicule Chabad? I can try to say that they simply do not understand, or that they are acting on impulse and not on logic, but how can I, as someone who is trying to follow the Rebbe and Chabad, write about views that make no sense to me (and I honestly do not understand a single one of the arguments that are made, being that with a little Torah study it is very clear and not a question at all...)? From another perspective, why do these views have to be presented in the first place? Look at it objectively: the article is on Chabad, not humanity. THe article should speak about Chabad, and not about what people think of Chabad- this is up to the reader to decide. However if it must be presented for whatever reason, then the least I would expect is to bring things from a semi reliable source, and not from a professor of xtian history- how can he comment on Chabad??? And as I tried to mention before, is you must bring him down, then at least place links to articles that refute his accusations etc. Also, some books of praise for Lubavitch couldnt hurt either- 'The Rebbe's Army' (by Sue Fishkoff) is supposed to be a good book (and was meant to be an 'objective' view from her experiences...), among others.

Regarding the issue of what other people 'hold', this is self understood- the majority of the world seems to be partially deeply stuck in Golus and sees things in and expects the future of things, to behave in an independant physical order. In reality, we are at the threshold of the Redemption and at this time one should try to get over these limitations and these boundaries. So when someone is told that a certain person is more than a regular Jew, but a prophet and the leader of the generation- the Moshiach of the generation, this surely comes as a surprise to someone who is unfortunately still in the Golus state of mind. I truly hope that if anyone reads this that they will go and study about Moshiach and Geula and/or ask their local Rabbi for a class in it. They should also add in their own Mitzvos and good deeds and actions with their fellow man. Also, if one has many non-Jews in their surroundings, they should try to help them by explaining the Seven Noahide Laws and the purpose of Creation etc.

I'd like to add another very important thing: contrary to what xtianity has been preaching for the past 2000 years, Judaism, LHavdil, does not believe Moshiach to be G-d, Chas VShalom. Judaism does not even hold him to be anything on his own- he is simply 'the annointed one'- someone who is truly at the highest of levels, but not independantly from G-d. It is G-d's complete Redemption that we await, with our righteous Moshiach as the leader. Therefore when one speaks of Moshiach, people seem to automatically link it to the xtian view, and they shy away from the concept altogether (or at least shy away from taking the 'concept' a step into reality.) In truth it is a Jewish concept from the begining- where did the xtians get it from in the first place? Therefore, when discussing anything relating to Moshiach, it must be truly based on Torah and not ones own preconceived notions. (These notions are possibly the product of ones childhood thoughts on the subject, or maybe based on other things that one heard throughout the years- but often times it is mostly not based on true Torah sources.)

 * Your post-modernism is striking. We can't actually know anything for sure, according to your opening lines. I never said that. I only stated, and will state again, that if you remove mention of the "general opinion" that the Rebbe was a mortal, you are violating the principles of a neutral encyclopedia.
 * Please note that you really should be more concise in your postings. A point that cannot be expressed in a few lines will generally not be taken. JFW | T@lk  09:04, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, so I dont want to be writing too short...

In answer to your post: That principle of us, as whoever we are, not knowing anything for sure, is what I would think is the driving force and the logic behind a website such as this: ie. that no one, on their own, neccessarily has the full perspective, and input is needed from others... Although if one takes that just a little bit further, it is apparent that if one needs information from another person to fill a picture, then one can never be certain of the picture- ever, being that humanity and individuals are dynamic and changing, and most importantly- limited to what they can see, hear, smell, touch, think etc.

This leads to a personal quest of what is real and what is not- or rather what is important and what is not. And ultimately to a choice of what one wishes to view in his or her reality. The result is that a venue such as this website can serve as 'food' for ones understanding, but in no way represents a complete reality.

Therefore, in any article- and especially ones relating to 'absolutisms', one should be careful to realize that this is merely a human 'report' and not 'information' per se. It is 'what I observe' or 'what I think' etc.

However being that it is trying to be as 'objective' as possible, it should make sure to try and take as much of the 'I' out of the report.

Relating to the article on Lubavicth, I have to say that were this a state-run media where a certain view is encouraged, then it is proper to write an article in a way that belittles a belief that may seem foreign to ones habitual views on the world. However if you want a true picture, it is not as its stated there...

The truth is this: based on the words and actions of the Rebbe, and based on various sources in Torah, it is a very simple conclusion to a Chabad Chassid. Now this conclusion does not have to be forced down anyones throats, but it is nonetheless the 'reality on the ground'. If you ask a Chabad Chassid about what they thought 10, 20, 30 years ago, I can guarantee you that it was a common 'knowledge' even way back then (I dont recall that far back, but from what I have heard and seen... and from what I know of the bond between a Chassid and his Rebbe, it is simply not possible any other way- not with this Rebbe for sure)

Being that we are in the final moments of this exile and the final Redemption of Jews and mankind is truly imminent, it is also a time of confusion and suffering. It is the darkest point before the true light. (Though a portion of the 'True Light' is already breaking through)

The arguments that exist are not on the core of the issue, but on the surface of it: for a Chabad Chassid to claim that he is waiting for someone else to come along, is simply not a perspective based on the teachings of Chabad or the Rebbe. Sure one is always free to think as he wishes, but it cannot be said in the name of Chabad (or even a 'sect' inside of it) The bond that the Rebbe demands from those who wish to have something to do with him, is a bond and a dedication that is beyond what can be explained without study of the Rebbe's words oneself.

If it must be 'labeled' then the label is like this: according to the Rebbe's words and actions, it is clear where we are, what we are facing and who the human being is that is annointed by G-d. There are many who dont feel at this level yet (or feel that we are not 'fit' to make our own proclamations), or who feel that such talk will 'turn people off', and they have their reasons and I am not going to judge them for what they dont feel they can say. However every Chassid that is connected with his Rebbe, by default looks at him as the leader of the generation and the Moshiach of the generation (and this is the generation of the Redemption) From a Halachik standpoint and a Torah standpoint there are many instances where such events and situations are mentioned, so it is not outside the scope of Judaism at all, Chas VShalom.

Regarding how others might look at it? This must vary: there are probably those who have never liked Chabad, and this is just another thing on the list that they can show around (in other words a baseless dislike- no true reasons, only that it showed up somehow and was fostered...) Then some are probably just afraid of such talk and wish to keep their distance until something can be resolved that everyone agrees on. And still others are genuinely curious about it and wish to learn what Moshiach is about etc... Then there is someone like Berger, who for some reason decided that he has become a big Rabbi and knows all Torah sources and knows what is or is not part of Torah-true Judaism... I honestly dont know what drives his desire to write what he does/has, but if the end result is not in the spirit of Ahavas Yisroel and growth amongst Jews, then there is definitely something wrong there.

May all Jews have a good and a sweet year, and may this year be a year of goodness and open Brachos for all Jews, in a way of truth and true happiness, from the Source of all goodness- Hashem Himself. And most importantly, may this be the year that we merit Moshiach with the complete Geula (Redemption)- may it be now! (As we say at the end of Yom Kippur- 'LShana Haba BYerushalayim!')

 * Other Chabad chassidim feel that their understanding of the words and nature of Rav Schneerson a"h are correct, and that your understanding is incorrect. And, of course, many other people besides Chabad chassidim have their own undestandings of these matters, which they believe are correct as strongly as you believe that you are correct.  Merely asserting that you know the "Truth" and that therefore all others are mistaken is not good enough. Jayjg 04:20, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Being that I am in Chabad and try to be a Chabad Chassid, I can tell you this: I have yet to speak with one Lubavitcher that I know who will argue with what I said above. If you study the words and actions of the Rebbe, and study topics in Torah relating to Moshiach and Geula, the conclusion is not too difficult (even though the CIRCUMSTANCES are difficult, and no one disagrees with this- it is described all over how the times of Moshiach will be a time of absolute confusion...) Again, if you personally know a Lubavitcher who claims otherwise, please let me know what they say- and not out of their own 'feelings', but based on what Lubavitch is- the words, actions and instructions of the Rebbe.

I would strongly recommend that anyone who wishes to understand this issue should sit down and study the topics dealing with Moshiach from Torah sources, and not just judge it based on what they have always felt was 'the Torah way'. Feelings and ideas on what Moshiach is are often times based on ideas that developed on their own during ones younger years, and do not neccessarily reflect Torah-true sources at all. In addition, if one wishes to learn more about the Rebbe, the best way is through studying his words- and there are many books now available in English with talks and letters by the Rebbe. Also, videos of the Rebbe are helpful as well (as is known about the impact of simply looking at the face of a Tzaddik- how much more so the Moshe of the generation)

May we merit the complete revelation of Moshiach with the Final Redemption, immediately! (Then we wont have to go into discussions on what when where who how etc., because the truth will be visible to all- as it says that in the days of Moshiach '...the knowledge of G-d will fill the land just as water covers the sea')

 * Amen to that, and Good Mo'ed. Your views have been logged. You may care to wonder if anyone will take any notice, though. JFW | T@lk  00:59, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

All I can say is that at this point is that no one should edit this article until they have read The Rebbe, the Messiah and the Scandal of Orthodox Indifference, by Rabbi David Berger. Anon's messianic comments are just the tip of the iceberg. There are a great many rabbis who feel that most of Chabad is longer Hasidic Judaism, it is no longer Orthodox Judaism. The Chabad Hasidic Judaism we knew in the 1930, 50s and 70s simply no longer exists. It has been replaced by a cult of personality that is turning into a carbon-copy of early Christianity, complete with the growing belief that the their late Rebbe actually was God incarnate. Fascinating, from a historical point of view. RK 13:09, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)

 * Anon was hoping to inspire us by making us watch a video of the Rebbe. Quod non. Lots of people have been trying to eliminate the Berger paragraph, claiming that "he can't speak because he's never met any Chabadniks".
 * By the way, Robert, The Chabad Hasidic Judaism we knew in the 1930, 50s implies that you were around at the time - I thought you weren't quite as old! JFW | T@lk  13:29, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Um, well "knew" through books, and adults in my congregation when I was a kid. I'm only 36. My personal involvement, rather superficial I'm afraid, with Chabad Lubavitch was from 1991-1998. I originally based my undertanding of the movement on what I saw, and what people older than me spoke about.  This led me to perceive Chabad as one form of Hasidic Judaism, just as Orthodox as any other group. The articles I read about it demonstrated Chabad to be a regular Orthodox group, with a few interesting features.  However, after the Rebbe's stroke I paid more attention to the differences between Chabad and other Hasidic groups, and found that it had slowly diverged from Hasidism, almost imperceptibly, until it had become its own new form of Orthodoxy.  With the passing of the Rebbe and the rise of second-coming messianism, I read with grave concern about the parallels between it and early forms of Christianity.  I then totally ignored all the concerns and kept on going to Chabad, because I really liked it, and they had so much to offer.  Only after I saw advertisements in The Jewish Week, proclaiming that the rebbe was the messiah, did I stop going to Chabad.  I realized then that Chabad had already changed even before I started going to Chabad, but I just had not noticed. RK 14:37, Oct 3, 2004 (UTC)

If I may ask, do you judge Israel solely based on the New York Times and other American and Western sources, or do you endeavor to read from sources that are possibly more aware of the reality there? In this case, for one to read articles in the paper and Bergers book and stand on 'the top of a mountain' claiming that they now understand what Chabad is, is absolutely ridiculous. Again, it is very very sad that people cannot look at Judaism as Judaism, but rather need to compare it to xtianity (which unfortunately many are more familiar with in our society) in order to gain perspective. Imagine that there were never a concept called xtianity and you grew up with the Torah, and you see numerous instances in black and white where Moshiach can come in this way- though he doesnt 'have' to, it is nonetheless one of the 'ways' that can be. The trouble is that people now ask 'then why not go with xtianity?' and this is truly a question based on lack of knowledge in Torah sources relating to Moshiach, because the reason Jews have never believed that the person they worship is Moshiach is because he not only did not fulfill any of the requirements as written clearly in Tanach, but the result of him and those after him who created the religion was actually the exact opposite of the predictions of that which Moshiach will help bring about (for example freedom for the Jewish ppl- look at the freedom that we recieved because of that religion... and much much more)

Another important point is that some people have the idea of Moshiach from xtianity completely- that he is more than a man, that he is a G-d in and of himself, Chas Vshalom. In fact, the word 'Moshiach' means 'annointed one' and the very meaning of annointed implies that he is given something from someone else, in this case G-d is annointing him to be the leader to take the Jews out of Exile and help usher in the era of the final redemption. However many people either believe Moshiach to be like the xtians claim- only that he will be a live person etc. OR they believe that our Moshiach is simply 'not like theirs'- that anything they claim about him, is by us the exact opposite. Both of these perspectives are incorrect. The correct perspective, if one wills to gain it, can only come from study of the sources inside their original texts (or the many English books about the Torah perspective on Moshiach,) and I dont think that anyone would disagree with this.

I dont think that this is the forum to bring down all the sources relating to the core of the issue, but I am merely trying to point out some very apparent flaws in the judgement that people seem to be quick at making regarding Chabad.

The Torah way is this: do and learn as G-d wants. Work on helping others around oneself in this way as well. And in these days, it is vital to study areas in Torah relating to Moshiach and the Final Redemption, and to help ones family and friends in this as well. Rambam says that we do not know the details of what will occur in the days of Moshiach, and we most certainly are in those days. One thing is clear though: they will be/are not smooth days in the plain sense of the word when it comes to belief. I forget who said this (it may have been R' Elimelech) but it certainly rings true today, he said that in the days of Moshiach there will be two angels on either side of the world, each holding a rope, and they will be swinging this rope from one side to the other; this rope is the rope of Emuna, and only those who cling on very tight will be able to hang on. (I dont recall the full details of the parable...)

If one is serious in wanting to understand this very central issue (-read the translation of any prayer book- practically the whole prayer is about the Redemption and returning to Eretz Yisroel...) then one must study the Torah sources and not rely on an expert in xtian history (Berger) to tell you what to think. Nor should one rely on their instincts alone when it comes to something as central to Judaism as Moshiach. Objectively speaking, if the climax of Creation is the era of Moshiach, why would we be so shallow as to try and compare it to something in the past- we should look at that which is written in the Torah and look to the future! There are many jokes about how when Moshiach comes what will happen- some will say 'ah I dont like his nose' others will say 'a Litvak? No way, I'm not with him', some will say 'Messiah? Thats a xtian concept, not a Jewish one' and still others will say 'I'm just fine in my little exile...' All these things have some truth to them- we must get out of our man-made boundaries and realize what is upon us- not some theoretical 'state of mankind', but a practical reality that is unfolding in front of our eyes, and with our actions in our own lives and help to those around us, it will be very soon that G-d will allow Moshiach to take us out of exile and bring the final Geula! May it be now! (The Rebbe said as a prophesy that the redemption is happening now! That any moment now we will merit the complete Geula! He didnt say it as a hope or a dream, but as a prophesy! All we have to do is to do our part in our own lives and help those around us and this will speed it up in a good way (as it is known that many bad things are related about the generation of Moshiach- but they do not HAVE to occur if the people are in the proper state, as we most certainly are- the Jews are in the loftiest state today (though not neccessarily out of our own choice, but this is what we were given...,) we most certainly deserve Moshiach in a peaceful way...)

I guess in short: if someone is turned off by what Chabad holds, then they should learn the sources and strive to be on an even HIGHER level than Chabad in their desire and preparations for Moshiach. There is no excuse to just belittle a group of Jews based on fragmented information- or even first hand experience, if it is not based on serious prior research in the area. If Chabad is wrong, then fight fire with fire- be better in this area! Go out and spread the word that Moshiach is coming and we must prepare; help Jews be better Jews; help family members in their Torah observance; treat a fellow Jew as the G-dly soul that he is; be a light to yourself and those around you!

Best wishes, and a Gmar Chasima Tova to all Jews for a good, happy and successful year, with the ultimate success of the bringing of Moshiach!

PS- If a non-Jew wants info on Moshiach etc. there is a lot of information online on this subject- Moshiach is not only for the Jews but rather for mankind as well. One site is Moshiach.com - its a pretty good site with a lot of articles. This site is good for Jew and, LHavdil, non-Jew, alike.

EDIT: 20 Tishrei, 5764

I'd like to add that the bond between a Chossid and the Rebbe existed 10-20 years ago, in a certain sense, on an even stronger level than today. Its only that today this bond is open and known to all, whereas before it used to be something that 'wasnt anyones business' outside of Chabad (although there were certainly some who spoke against it back then as well, but they were not given any credibility- after all, who is going to claim to know better than the Rebbe?) In truth, the concept that I hear people raising about 'G-d centered or Rebbe centered?' is truly based on ignorance. A similar argument existed at the time of the Baal Shem Tov, and unfortunately this argument matches very closely to the argument of Korach and his friends. The concept of a Rebbe (stands for 'R osh B nei Y isroel') is central to Judaism and is something that many people dont realize is really part of our Torah. Moshe Rabeinu, the leader of the Jewish people, was more than just a leader- he was on a state where he was the intermediary between G-d and the nation, and in addition, his concern was completely for the Jewish people and nothing else- it superceded his dedication even to Hashem! (Though in truth this bond and love for the poeple, according to Kaballa, is actually an expression OF G-d in Moshe, and therefore he was merely embodying a will of G-d that was concealed...) We are taught that there is a Moshe Rabeinu in each generation. In our generation it is the Rebbe. There is not a single individual who can even come anywhere close to him when it comes to caring about each and every single Jew that exists- regardless of their standing or actions. To him, each Jew is a treasure and a complete world (speak with anyone who has gone to see him- at the moment you look at his eyes, all that exists is you; all that matters is your present and future) In addition, the Rebbe's knowledge and understanding of Torah truly surpasses in an immeasurable way anyone alive today. And to top it off, we are speaking of someone who has spoken countless prophesies that have fully materialized (almost everyone I know has had a 'miracle story' that occured either with themselves or a family member) All these things point to the fact that he is the Moshe Rabeinu of the generation, who is by default the Moshiach of the generation as well.

Again I'd like to point out that I am only mentioning all this because the topic has already been raised. Were I to have a choice on the topic, I'd wish to dwell on study in Torah about Moshiach and Geula, as well as practically speaking adding in practice of Mitzvos and Ahavas Yisroel. This is the best way to bring Moshiach.

May we merit the coming of Moshiach, with the complete Geula with each and every single Jewish man and woman, boy and girl, together with Avrohom Yitzchok and Yaakov and all the others, together as one, to the Third Beis Hamikdosh in Yerushalayim, immediately!

 * Dear user, may I politely ask you to stop preaching. I hope you realise that Wikipedia is not a messaging board, and you certainly not influencing anyone's opinion by writing what you do. We are actually writing an encyclopedia, and you are fully entitled to contribute provided that you adhere to neutral point-of-view and several other very basic policies.
 * Most Jews contest that the Rebbe was the Moshe Rabbeinu of the generation. The Lithunanian mitnagedim would reserve that title for any of the Roshei Yeshiva, and the Sefardim may prefer to nominate Rabbi Ovadia Yosef or Rabbi Kaduri.
 * RK correctly observes that Chabad has some very important differences from other forms of Chassidus.
 * The talk page is now >46 kilobytes, filled mainly with your epistles. I suggest you stop editing this page and direct your attention to the writing of an encyclopedia. JFW | T@lk  08:45, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I was under the impression that this was a 'discussion board' on the topic at hand, so I figured that if changing the article myself to reflect the reality of the situation was not going to work (because it was changed back twice) then all I can do is give over the perspective as best as I can (-and not just in summary,) and whoever is in charge of writing this article for the encyclopedia can see where the article is off and what should be changed. Or if they wish to keep it as is, then at least a person should be able to read this discussion board and see the points that I've tried to raise about the accuracy of the article.

In case you dont understand my point, I have been trying hard to explain why Berger is not a source to be quoted, and I've been trying to explain that there are no two ways about it in Chabad (and several other things, like the fact that the term 'messianists' in incorrect.) While these points are important to point out, it is equally important (if not more important) to point out what the Rebbe has said about our time and our mission.

With regards to watching a video of the Rebbe- a person is free to do as they wish (and I'm not trying to convince anyone to become a Lubavitcher- not in the slightest bit,) but I am suggesting that as it is said in Torah, to see the face of a Tzaddik (-all the more so the Rebbe-) is good for oneself, that it would be good for a person to see some clips (besides for the purely informational aspect.)

Just as a side point, in reference to the concept of 'Moshe Rabeinu of the Generation', I brought a quote from Mordechai Eliyahu about the Rebbe above (way up.) In addition, I'm sure you know that Rav Kaduri has visited the Rebbe in Crown Heights (one of the visits is online at htt://chabad.co.nr ) And with regards to Misnagdim to Chabad etc. all I'm trying to point out is that its not a new dislike but an old one which is based on lack of information; only now Chabad is a much easier target. (In other words its not like 'oh now those Chabad have taken it waaay too far, NOW we have to get rid of them...' but rather its 'look at what they are not embaressed to say, now we can prove who they really are...' And the solution to all this is: Moshiach)

Besides, if one watches any video of the Rebbe giving out dollars [for Tzedaka], one will find that possibly the majority of those on line are either from other Chassidim, Litfish (ie. 'Misnagdim') or someone who just identifies himself as 'Jewish' (and then there were many who werent Jewish either) The types of people who went there to see him is anyone from the President and PM of Israel (and all other positions in Israel that you can think of,) to big Rabonim, to regular Jews, to non-Jews, Mayors, Senators, and the list includes just about every type of person around! The outcome of this information is simple: while there is surely a remnant of the Misnagdik dislike for Chassidism (and thus for Chabad), nonetheless there are countless Jews and [LHavdil] non-Jews from all walks of life who would easily call the Rebbe the 'Moshe Rabeinu of the generation' (how about Yitzchok Rabin? http://www.chabad.org/multimedia/media.asp?AID=132863 ) - Unsigned by User:151.204.128.16

 * This is, indeed, a discussion board on the article Chabad Lubavitch. Your point is that David Berger's book should not be quoted. Most Wikipedia contributors agree that it should, and you lose.
 * I agree the term "meschichist" should be used, rather than "messianic", to avoid confusion with proselytising sects, yemach shemam ve-zichram.
 * In my previous post I was not talking about anti-Chabad sentiment, while I'm sure there is plenty of it. I simply took issue with your claim that the Rebbe was the Moshe Rabbeinu (for the outsiders: Moses) of his generation. Most Jews, when asked who the Moshe Rabbeinu of the generation was, would not have answered: "The Rebbe". This concludes the issue.
 * As I stated, you are entitled to work on this article (and I encourage you to), but adherence to policy is an important requirement. Removal of the Berger book will land you in trouble, and so will insertion of endless external links. Would you object if I archived part of this talk page? JFW | T@lk  14:05, 6 Oct 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Chabad/Archive 1


text: Category:Liguria

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

title: Category:Liguria


text:
User:Ropata

Kia ora

title: User:Ropata


text:
User talk:Egils~enwiki

Please do not upload copyrighted images. Please see Talk:Rangers F.C.

Image:Raffy.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Raffy.jpg, has been listed at. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —MetsBot 18:55, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Egils. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Egils~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 23:40, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 12:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Egils~enwiki


text:
Rayagada district

Rayagada district is a district in southern Odisha, a state in India, which became a separate district in October 1992. Its population consists mainly of tribes, primarily the Khonds and the Soras. In addition to Odia, Kui and Sora are spoken by the district's indigenous population. It was founded by Maharajah Biswanatha Deba Gajapati of the Surjyabansha dynasty of Jeypore.

Rayagada covers an area of 7584.7 km2, and is divided into eleven blocks. Agriculture is the chief source of income, and paddy, wheat, ragi, green and black gram, groundnut, sweet potato and maize are the district's major crops.

Administrative setup
The 11 Blocks and Tahasils in Rayagada district under two administrative Sub-Divisions are listed in the following table.

There are 17 Police Stations under the three Police Sub-Divisions in Rayagada district are listed in the following table.

History
In the third century BC, during the reign of Ashoka, Odisha was part of the Kalinga empire. The hilly track between the Vamshadhara and Nagavali Rivers was known for its spices. The Rastriks were defeated by Kharvela, the emperor of Kalinga, during the battle of Chawpagada.

Vishwanath Dev Gajapati (1527 - 1571 CE), the suryavanshi king of Nandapur (later Jeypore) established his capital on the bank of Nagavali and named it Rayagada or Rai-gadh. Under his rule the place flourished economically which proved beneficial to the vast kingdom that stretched from the confines of Jharkhand and West Bengal to River Godavari in south. During his reign he fought a war with Quli Qutb Mulk, the first Qutb Shahi Sultan of Golconda and successfully stopped his advance towards his kingdom. However, he had to surrender the rich fertile land located in the middle of Godavari-Krishna Delta to execute a peace treaty which made Godavari the border of the two kingdoms. Rayagada remained under the Kingdom of Jeypore until the dissolution act of 1947.

During the British Raj, Rayagada was under the then-newly demoted Jeypore Samasthanam and was part of Koraput district; it was carved from the district on 2 October 1992 as part of Odisha's district-expansion plan.

Economy
The district is reportedly rich in bauxite and silicon. In 2006, the Ministry of Panchayati Raj named Rayagada one of the country's 250 most backward districts (out of a total of 640). It is one of the 19 districts in Odisha receiving aid from the Backward Regions Grant Fund (BRGF).

Constituencies
The district has three Odisha Legislative Assembly (Vidhan sabha) constituencies.

Rayagada district is part of the Koraput Lok Sabha constituency.

Rail transport
Rayagada railway station has direct service to Chennai, Kolkata, Hyderabad, Bhubaneswar, Raipur, Bengaluru, Ahmedabad, Mumbai, Jamshedpur, Jodhpur and New Delhi. Gunupur is also an important railway station; via Parlakhemundi, it is connected to Naupada on the main east-coast railway line from Kolkata to Chennai by a 90 km broad-gauge line which was converted from  narrow gauge in 2011. The 40 km narrow-gauge line (the Paralakhemedi Light Railway, or PLR) was established by Gajpatirajas of Paralakhemundi, the former raja of Paralakhemedi, to connect his capital with Naupada. The government authorized construction in 1898, and the line was opened to traffic two years later at a cost of ₹700,000.

The East Coast Railway began in 1893 with construction of the 96 km Cuttack-Khurda Road-Puri line, and its subsequent 1280 km link along the East Coast to Vijayawada (the junction of Southern Maratha Railway and Nizam's Guaranteed State Railway) was opened for traffic between 1893 and 1896. The railway brought service to Naupada in 1894.

Due to a policy change by the British government, the Bengal Nagpur Railway took over East Coast Railway's northern section from Vizianagaram to Cuttack, including the Puri branch line, by 23 January 1902. The PLR was also taken over by the Bengal Nagpur Railway that year. In its first few years, the PLR had incurred losses; after 1910 it began making a profit, which increased after 1924–25. This motivated the raja to extend the line to Gunupur in two phases in 1929 and 1931. There were now ten stations between Naupada and Gunupur: Tekkali, Paddasan, Temburu, Ganguvada, Patapatnam, Paralakhemedi, Kashinagar, Lihuri, Bansidhara and Palasingi. The standard PLR locomotive was a 20-ton 0-6-4 tank engine with 27 in coupled wheels and a 4.75-ton axle load.

Management of the BNR was taken over by the government of India in October 1944. On 14 April 1952, when Indian Railways was regrouped, it became part of the Eastern Railway. The merger was short-lived, however, and on 1 August 1955 it was merged with the new South Eastern Railway. A set of four postage stamps was released during the 1987 BNR centennial, one stamp featuring the PL 691 locomotive.

The foundation stone was laid for the Naupada-Gunupur gauge conversion at Naupada on 27 September 2002. On 1 April 2003, PLR became a part of the East Coast Railway. The line was closed for gauge conversion on 9 June 2004. Although the 290 km Khurda-Bolangir broad-gauge line was approved in 1995, only about half the work has been completed.

Demographics
Rayagada district had a population of 967,911 in the 2011 Census of India, roughly equal to that of Fiji or the US state of Montana. The district ranked 454th of India's 640 districts, and had a population density of 136 PD/sqkm. Its population growth rate from 2001 to2011 was 15.74 percent. Rayagada has a sex ratio of 1,048 females to 1,000 males, and a literacy rate of 50.88 percent. 15.18% of the population lives in urban areas. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes make up 14.41% and 55.99% of the population respectively.

At the time of the 2011 Census of India, 41.64% of the population in the district spoke Odia, 33.36% Kui, 10.43% Telugu, 8.37% Sora, 3.27% Kuvi and 0.66% Hindi as their first language.

The district's tribal population is 57.52 percent of the total. Its 11 blocks have been covered by a tribal sub-plan, with three micro-projects in operation for pre-literate indigenous tribal communities. Rayagada's topography helps the tribal communities maintain their cultural identity; 4785.36 km2 is forested, 777.27 km2 of which is reserved forest. Its predominant tribes are the Khonds and the Soras.

Points of interest

 * Majhighariani Temple in Rayagada
 * Jagannath Temple, at the market on the south side of Rayagada, is near Majhighariani Temple.
 * Laxminarayan temple was built by Indian Metals and Ferro Alloys in Therubali.
 * Paikapada, near Therubali, is known for its Pataleshwar Shiva temple.
 * Chatikona, a small village 48 km from Rayagada, is known for its Shiva temple and waterfalls.
 * Maa Markama Temple at Bissamcuttack is the only shrine (Shakti Peethas) of Devi Maa Markama and Maa karkama in the Indian state of Odisha and known for its history and also mentioned in Saraladas's Chandi Purana.
 * Minajhola, a village near Gudari, is known for its Shiva temple at the confluence of three rivers: the Vamsadhara, the Chauladhua and the Phalaphalia.
 * The Devagiri hill, 50 km from Rayagada, near Kalyan Singhpur, is 120 m and has 476 steps.
 * Kumudabali, a small village, is known for its Balunkeswar Shiva temple on the Vamsadhara River. The nearest railway station is in Muniguda, 60 km from Rayagada.
 * Padmapur, 90 km from Rayagada, is known for the Nilakantheswar Temple. According to historian Satyanarayana Rajguru, the temple housed the 6th- or 7th-century Buddhist philosopher Dharmakirti.
 * The Hanging Bridge at Chekaguda, over the Nagavali River, is Odisha's second simple suspension bridge.
 * The Bhimasankar temple in Bhimpur, 100 km from Rayagada and 30 km from Gunupur, is one of India's 12 Jyotirlingas.
 * The three-day Chaiti Festival, from 27 to 29 December in Rayagada, celebrates tribal art and culture.
 * Parsali, a habitat of Dangariya Kandha, a PVTG tribe. One has to take a diversion from Chatikona, before Bissam Cuttack. For serene and picturesque greenery Niyamagiri Hills.

Education
Govind Chandra Dev (Zilla) High School, founded in 1938, is one of the district's oldest high schools. Government Girls' High School, in Rayagada, was founded in 1964. A primary school was founded at the Thakkar Bapa Ashram in 1958 for tribal students. The Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya of Rayagada and Kendriya Vidyalaya Rayagada are two central government boarding school in Rayagada. There are many ODISHA ADARSHA VIDYALAYA [OAV] and walfare high schools and a EMRS strengthening district's eduacation system.

Rayagada Autonomous College,Model Degree College ,Rayagada and Gunupur College, Gunupur are main Degree Colleges in the district. The Utkal Gourav Madhusudan Institute of Technology is an engineering school. The Gandhi Institute of Engineering and Technology is in Gunupur. College of Nursing www.chbmck.org affiliated with Berhampur University, managed by the Christian Hospital, Bissam Cuttack offers B.Sc. Nursing program.

title: Rayagada district


text:
Dynablaster

Dynablaster or Dyna Blaster is a name that has been given to the European releases of four different games of the Bomberman franchise:

 * Atomic Punk (Game Boy)
 * Bomberman (TurboGrafx-16, MS-DOS, Amiga and Atari ST)
 * Bomberman (Arcade)
 * Bomberman II (NES)

Bomberman was renamed Dyna Blaster due to the European mainstream media associating the original name with terrorist bombings.

title: Dynablaster


text:
User talk:Plato/archive September 2004

Hello Mr. Plato!!! I'm Wilhelm Gustuv. I'm really new here, but I've been told that you are a wikipedian-communist. So I'd like to say hello to you, because I'm a wikipedian-communist also Comrade Plato. I'd also like to say I read Plato's republic also.--Gustuv 23:57, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Mr. Plato I seen your message on my talk page, I heard a story that Maria Jose was pro-Mussolini, but I'll take your word for it comrade because you look like an expert in Italian History. Also could you give me your e-mail address because I don't have aim. thanks comrade--Gustuv 23:49, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Plato/archive September 2004


text:
Modernismo

Modernismo is a literary movement that took place primarily during the end of the nineteenth and early twentieth century in the Spanish-speaking world, best exemplified by Rubén Darío, who is known as the father of Modernismo. The term Modernismo specifically refers to the literary movement that took place primarily in poetry. This literary movement began in 1888 after the publication of Rubén Darío's Azul.... It gave Modernismo a new meaning. The movement died out around 1920, four years after the death of Rubén Darío. In Aspects of Spanish-American Literature, the author writes (1963),

"Modernismo influences the meaning behind words and the impact of poetry on culture. Modernismo, in its simplest form, is finding the beauty and advances within the language and rhythm of literary works."

Other notable exponents are Leopoldo Lugones, Manuel Gutiérrez Nájera, José Asunción Silva, Julio Herrera y Reissig, Julián del Casal, Manuel González Prada, Aurora Cáceres, Delmira Agustini, Manuel Díaz Rodríguez and José Martí. It is a recapitulation and blending of three European currents: Romanticism, Symbolism and especially Parnassianism. Inner passions, visions, harmonies and rhythms are expressed in a rich, highly stylized verbal music. This movement was of great influence in the whole Hispanic world (including the Philippines), finding a temporary vogue also among the Generation of '98 in Spain, which posited various reactions to its perceived aestheticism.

Characteristics of Modernismo
Modernismo is a distinct literary movement that can be identified through its characteristics. The main characteristics of Modernismo are:

 * 1) Giving an idea of the culture and time that we live within, cultural maturity.
 * 2) Pride in nationality (pride in Latin American identity)
 * 3) Search for a deeper understanding of beauty and art within the rhetoric. Gives ideas of meaning through colors and images related to senses.
 * 4) Contains different metrics and rhythms. Uses medieval verses such as the Alexandrine verses from the French.
 * 5) The use of Latin and Greek mythology.
 * 6) The loss of everyday reality to which many of the modernismo poems are located within exotic or distant places.
 * 7) The cultivation of a perfection within poetry.

Rubén Darío
Rubén Darío was the father of Modernismo and trailblazed the path for future poets. Darío’s idea of modernistic poems was rejected by poets following World War I because many considered it outdated and too heavy in rhetoric. He developed the idea of modernism after following Spanish poets and being influenced by them heavily. Darío created a rhythm within his poetry to represent the idea of modernism. This changed the metric of Spanish literature. His use of the French method, Alexandrine verses, changed and enhanced the literary movement. Modernismo literary works also tend to include a vocabulary that many see as lyrical. Modernistic vocabulary drew from many semantic fields to impart a different meaning behind words in his literary work. Examples are items such as flowers, technology, jewelry, diamonds, luxury items, etc. This vocabulary often stemmed from Greek and Latin terms, if not the languages themselves. Darío often mentions the 'swan' in his literary works to symbolize the idea of beauty and perfection within his writing. The idea of beauty and perfection in poetry is a major characteristic of Modernismo. In his poem El Cisne, he wrote: His contributions to the movement of Modernismo created an opportunity for poets to use their words with meaning behind them within their poems. The swan represents perfection, and according to Darío in his poem, the swan was without flaw had the power to revive someone from the dead. This represents the Modernismo movement within literary works.

José Martí
José Julián Martí y Pérez was born on January 28, 1853, in Havana, Cuba- died May 19, 1895. He was a poet, essayist, and a martyr for Cuban independence from Spain. His dedication to a free Cuba made him a symbol of Cuba’s struggle for independence from Spain. He organized and unified the movement for Cuban independence and died on the battlefield fighting for it. Martí also used his writing ability to fight for independence. By the age of 15 he had published several poems, and by the age of 16 he founded a newspaper, La Patria Libre. This was his way of showing sympathy for the patriots during a revolutionary uprising in 1868. He was sentenced to six months of hard labor. Martí continued to use his talent to call attention to the problems plaguing Latin America. He is considered one of the fathers of Modernismo.

Enrique González Martínez
Enrique González Martínez was born April 13, 1871, in Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico. He died on February 19, 1952, in Mexico City, Mexico. Martínez is considered one of the last great Modernismo poets. While others consider him to be the first post-modernismo poet, he never completely abandoned Modernismo characteristics in his work. For the first time in Latin American literature, his works showed more of a local concern in literature. He was a medical doctor, professor, and diplomat to Chile (1920-1922), Argentina (1922-24), Spain, and Portugal (1924-1931). One of his poems, called Tuércele el cuello al cisne (Twist the Swan’s Neck), has often been seen as an anti-modernismo manifesto. However, this is far from the truth. Enrique González Martínez continued to be a Modernismo poet for the rest of his life. Tuércele el cuello al cisne is not a rejection of the Modernismo movement but should be seen as a rejection of surface rhetorical devices and frivolity rather than of the whole movement.

title: Modernismo


text:
Ditloid

A ditloid is a type of word puzzle in which a phrase, quotation, date, or fact must be deduced from the numbers and abbreviated letters in the clue. An example would be "7 D S" representing "seven deadly sins".

Common words such as 'the', 'in', 'a', 'an', 'of', 'to', etc. are not normally abbreviated. The name 'ditloid' was given by the Daily Express newspaper, originating from the clue "1 = DitLoID", to which the solution is 1 Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich.

History
The term was coined by William Hartston:

"For more than 50 years, crosswords were the only word puzzle that had a universally accepted name, but since the 1970s another has emerged and, in 1999, the new teaser was given a name. The word 'ditloid' is not yet in the Oxford English Dictionary, but a Google search for 'ditloid' produces tens of thousands of results. I am delighted by this, because it is a word I coined myself and is my only genuine contribution to the English language."

Will Shortz originated the current form of this puzzle and first published it in the May–June 1981 issue of Games magazine, calling it the Equation Analysis Test. In its annual 1981 issue of "What's hot and what's not", Us magazine named the Equation Analysis Test in the "what's hot" category – the only nonperson so recognized. Shortz reports:

"Some anonymous person had retyped the puzzle from Games (word for word, except for my byline), photocopied it, and passed it along. This page was then rephotocopied ad infinitum, like a chain letter, and circulated around the country. Games readers who hadn't seen the original even started sending it back to Games as something the magazine ought to consider publishing!"

Shortz based the puzzle on the Formula Analysis Test – Revised Form published in Morgan Worthy's 1975 book ''AHA! A Puzzle Approach to Creative Thinking'' (Chicago: Nelson Hall). Worthy's equations were in a different format, for example:

Worthy gives the source of his inspiration and speculates about the perennial popularity of this puzzle:

I got the idea for linguistic equations from graffiti someone had written in the form of an obscene formula on a restroom wall at the University of Florida. When the answer suddenly came to me, I realized the format was a good one for eliciting the "aha effect". After that I used such items as exercise material when teaching workshops on creative thinking.

My guess is that one reason a person enjoys linguistic equations is that the answer hits him or her all at once rather than being solved in an incremental fashion. It is similar to what happens when we suddenly see an embedded figure pop into focus; the satisfaction is visceral rather than just intellectual. My experience was that people often had the answer to an item come to them when they were not consciously thinking about the puzzles, but relaxed, such as in the shower or about to fall asleep.

Another factor is that with well-written items, success does not hinge on obscure information. Ideally, a person should never have to feel, "I could never have gotten that one no matter how long I worked on it." There is something ego enhancing about knowing you have the answer inside and just need to find it.

title: Ditloid


text:
Bonjour

Bonjour is a French word meaning (literally translated) "good day", and is commonly used as a greeting.

Bonjour may also refer to:

People

 * Laurence BonJour (born 1943), epistemologist and professor of philosophy at the University of Washington
 * Martín Bonjour (born 1985), Argentine professional footballer
 * Abel Bonjour, the Parisian cellist that the Bonjour Stradivarius was named after

Other

 * Bonjour (software), an Apple computer program which implements Zeroconf, a service discovery protocol
 * Bonjour Holdings, a Hong Kong-based retail company
 * Bonjour Stradivarius, a cello named after Abel Bonjour
 * Bonjour, a Weebl's cartoon about a French person
 * Bonjour (album), an album by French-Algerian singer Rachid Taha
 * Bonne Nuit, a 1999 made for TV horror movie starring Lucie Arnaz
 * Bonjour, a character of one half of identical twin duo Bonjour and Au Revoir in Let's Go Luna!

title: Bonjour


text:
Dan Petrescu

Daniel Vasile Petrescu (born 22 December 1967) is a Romanian football manager and former player who is currently in charge of Liga I club CFR Cluj.

As a player, Petrescu was deployed as a full-back or a winger and began his career at Steaua București, with which he played in the 1989 European Cup final. Abroad, he represented Serie A clubs Foggia and Genoa, before moving to the Premier League where he played for Sheffield Wednesday, Chelsea, Bradford City, and Southampton, respectively. With Chelsea, Petrescu won the 1998 UEFA Cup Winners' Cup. He earned 95 caps for the Romania national team, being selected in two World Cup squads, in 1994 and 1998, and in two European Championships, in 1996 and 2000.

Petrescu became player-assistant manager to Walter Zenga at Național București towards the end of his playing career, and has since had an extensive career as a head coach in Poland, Russia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, China, Turkey, and South Korea, in addition to his native country. His first job was at Sportul Studențesc, which he led to Liga I promotion. Petrescu has won domestic honours with Unirea Urziceni, Kuban Krasnodar, ASA Târgu Mureș, Jiangsu Suning, and CFR Cluj. He is the second-most successful manager in Romania, tied with Emerich Jenei, winning the league on six occasions (five times with CFR Cluj and once with Urziceni), and was also named Romania Coach of the Year a record five times, tied with Mircea Lucescu.

Club
After playing for Steaua București's youth teams, Petrescu was promoted into the first team in 1986 in a match played by Steaua just one month after winning the European Cup. He was loaned to Olt Scornicești for the 1986–87 season, but asked to return to Steaua in 1987.

Petrescu was part of the Steaua squad that reached the European Cup semi-finals (1988) and the final (1989).

In 1991, Petrescu was bought by Italian club Foggia in a period when the club saw promotion to Serie A. In 1993, he moved to Genoa.

Petrescu signed for Sheffield Wednesday in 1994 from Genoa, after a successful 1994 World Cup for Romania. After one season at Hillsborough, he signed for Chelsea and featured prominently there for the next five years. During his term at Chelsea, he was a member of the teams which won the FA Cup in 1997 and the League Cup and Cup Winners' Cup (both in 1998). After falling out with Chelsea manager Gianluca Vialli after a defeat to Manchester United (a game in which he scored), Petrescu never played for the club again and was not even selected as a substitute for the 2000 FA Cup final against Aston Villa.

Turning down a move to Southampton in August 2000, he instead moved to Bradford City for £1 million, scoring one goal, against West Ham United.

In January 2001, Petrescu's former Chelsea manager, Glenn Hoddle, eventually persuaded him to join Southampton for a "nominal" fee. He initially settled in well at The Dell, scoring against Leicester City and Manchester City in his first few matches. In March, Hoddle left the Saints to take up the managerial reins at Tottenham Hotspur and his replacement, Stuart Gray, dropped Petrescu, replacing him with Hassan Kachloul for the remainder of the season. After making only two substitute appearances in the 2001–02 season, Petrescu was released and returned to Romania.

Petrescu returned to his native Bucharest for a last season as a footballer, with Național București. His last match was the Cupa României final, on 31 May 2003; Național lost 1–0 to Dinamo București, during which Petrescu received much abuse from some of the Dinamo fans as he left the pitch at the end of 90 minutes, even though it was the last game of one of Romania's greatest footballers. Presumably, this was because he used to play for Dinamo's greatest rivals, Steaua.

International
Petrescu registered 95 caps for the senior Romania national team. He made his debut in 1989 and played at four major tournaments: the 1994 World Cup, UEFA Euro 1996, the 1998 World Cup (where the entire Romania squad famously dyed their hair blonde after losing a bet with head coach Anghel Iordănescu), and Euro 2000.

Petrescu missed the 1990 World Cup due to injury. In 1994, Petrescu played in his first World Cup, held in the United States. He scored the only goal in a win against the United States which saw Romania qualify for the second round as group winners. They were then handed a difficult game against Argentina which they managed to win, only to lose to Sweden on penalties in the quarter-finals, with Petrescu one of two Romanians to miss his spot-kick. The miss still haunts him today. "It will probably stay with me for the rest of my life", he said. After the World Cup, he flew to Saint Thomas and spent two weeks in the Caribbean region.

Euro 1996 was a disappointment for Romania, as they lost all three group matches and only managed to score one goal.

At the 1998 World Cup in France, Petrescu raced past his Chelsea teammate Graeme Le Saux and scored the winning goal against England, which effectively won them the group and ensured they would not have to face Argentina in the second round. He became the second Romanian player to score in two different World Cups after Ștefan Dobay. The Romanians, however, lost their second round match to Croatia, 1–0.

Petrescu was an important piece of the Romanian team at Euro 2000, where they survived a group with Portugal, Germany and England. A new victory over the English team was decisive to qualify for quarter-finals. Romania won all the matches where Petrescu scored.

Managerial career
After retiring in 2003, Petrescu pursued a career as a coach. He began his managerial career in July 2003 with second division side Sportul Studențesc, whom he led to promotion before taking over at Rapid Bucharest in December, but stepped down in April 2004, after only six games and four months at the helm. He then returned for a second spell at Sportul Studențesc, where he helped the club to a seventh-place finish in Diviza A.

Wisła Kraków
In December 2005, Petrescu agreed to manage 2004–05 Ekstraklasa champions Wisła Kraków in Poland, replacing caretaker manager Tomasz Kulawik. Wisła finished second in the 2005–06 championship. He was dismissed as manager of Wisła on 18 September 2006 after unconvincing results to begin the 2006–07 season. Petrescu accused the Wisła players for not wanting to train hard to improve their performances.

Unirea Urziceni
About one week after his termination, Petrescu was appointed as manager of Romanian Liga I newly promoted club Unirea Urziceni, with which he had considerable leading. Under his management, Unirea Urziceni was runner-up in the 2007–08 Cupa României and qualified for the 2008–09 UEFA Cup. He was considered for the vacant manager's position at his former club Steaua București after Marius Lăcătuș' resignation in October 2008. Dorinel Munteanu was appointed instead, but Petrescu has not ruled out a future role at the club. In May 2009, Petrescu won the Liga I title with outsiders Unirea Urziceni, the first title for both Petrescu and his club, and consequently achieving qualification to the 2009–10 UEFA Champions League, during which he led Unirea to a shock 4–1 victory at Ibrox against Rangers and a win against Sevilla at home, 1–0.

Petrescu resigned as manager of Unirea Urziceni in December 2009.

Kuban Krasnodar
On 28 December 2009, Russian First Division club Kuban Krasnodar hired Petrescu on a five-year contract. Petrescu managed to gain promotion to the Russian Premier League in his debut season, winning the 2010 Russian First Division with a total of 80 points, nine clear of second place. His team conceded only 20 goals in 38 matches.

On 14 August 2012, it was announced that Petrescu had resigned as Kuban Krasnodar manager, citing the need for a new challenge. Kuban later participated in the UEFA Europa League for the first time.

Dynamo Moscow
Shortly after his resignation, in August 2012 Petrescu signed a three-year contract reportedly worth €2.5 million per year to join Dynamo Moscow.

On 8 April 2014, his contract was terminated by mutual agreement after a heavy loss to outsiders Anzhi Makhachkala, 0–4. Dynamo Moscow director of sports Guram Adzhoyev stated, "Last year Dan drew the team from the complicated situation, lifted it to the certain level, but recently we have seen no progress."

Al-Arabi
In June 2014, Petrescu agreed to coach Qatari side Al-Arabi. On 1 December 2014, his contract with the club was terminated after a mutual agreement.

Târgu Mureș
On 10 June 2015, Petrescu was announced as the new manager of Liga I runner-up ASA Târgu Mureș. His first, and only, match in charge was in the Supercupa României against champions Steaua București ended with Târgu Mureș winning 1–0. He resigned the next day, to take up a lucrative contract with Chinese side Jiangsu Suning.

Jiangsu Suning
On 9 July 2015, Petrescu left Târgu Mureș, claiming his decision was due to the club's growing financial problems, though he was immediately hired as manager of Chinese Super League club Jiangsu Suning on a lucrative deal. Petrescu said in a statement, "It's very hard to leave the team in this moment. I don't how it'll be in China, I hope it will be like in Russia." In his first season in charge, Petrescu guided the club to victory in the 2015 Chinese FA Cup. On 3 June 2016, Suning announced that Petrescu will no longer be the manager of the club.

Kuban Krasnodar
On 14 June 2016, Petrescu signed a two-year contract with Kuban Krasnodar, after the club was relegated to the second-tier Russian National Football League. On 4 October 2016, with Kuban winning only 3 out of first 15 games and sitting in the 14th spot in the league instead of the expected fight for promotion, he left Kuban by mutual consent, stating that the club had not paid him.

On 29 October 2016, Petrescu was announced as the manager of Emirates Arabian Gulf League side Al-Nasr until the end of the season. He led the club to the final match of the UAE President's Cup but was defeated by Al-Wahda in his last game in charge. Al-Nasr appointed Cesare Prandelli as his replacement.

CFR Cluj
On 10 June 2017, he was appointed head coach of Liga I club CFR Cluj. On 20 May 2018, Cluj were crowned as Liga I champions for the 2017–18 season after a 1–0 victory over Viitorul Constanța.

Guizhou Hengfeng
On 7 June 2018, he was announced as the manager of Chinese club Guizhou Hengfeng to replace Gregorio Manzano.

Return to CFR Cluj
On 22 March 2019, Petrescu returned as manager of CFR Cluj after the club had experienced a string of poor performances in the league. He managed to win the 2018-19 Liga I title, successfully defending the trophy he won one year prior. The next season, CFR Cluj sought to have an ambitious European campaign, with the goal to qualify for the group stages of a European Competition. Petrescu guided his side to the 2019-20 Europa League group stage, after a loss in the 2019-20 Champions League playoffs against Slavia Praha, eliminating Scottish giants Celtic on the way. In the group stages, he faced Italian giants SS Lazio, Stade Rennais and meeting Celtic once again, proving to be an almost impossible challenge for CFR. However, with two wins over Stade Rennais and one win over Lazio and Celtic each, CFR finished second in the group stages and qualified for the knock-out phase of the Europa League. There, Petrescu met Spanish giants Sevilla and were eliminated after a 1-1 and 0-0 draws. The team's performance in Europe was praised by Romanian media, and Petrescu himself claims it was one of the highlights of his career.

Domestically, CFR were able to maintain their dominance, winning the regular season of the 2019-20 Liga I by a comfortable margin. However, the playoffs proved to be a much bigger challenge, as the COVID pandemic allowed Craiova to stabilize and pose a challenge to Petrescu's side. While Craiova lead the standings for most of the playoff phase, following a win on CFR's ground and CFR's draws against Astra Giurgiu and Gaz Metan Medias, CFR won the reverse fixture against Craiova on the last matchday, thus securing their third consecutive title.

On 19 August 2020, CFR restarted the European campaign against Maltese champions Floriana FC with a 2–0 victory but were eliminated in the second round by Dinamo Zagreb on penalties. After CFR was eliminated from the Europa League, and had begun to faltering domestically, Petrescu announced on 30 November that he and the club had agreed to terminate his contract.

Third spell at CFR Cluj
On 28 August 2021, after a weak European campaign which saw the club fail to qualify for the Europa League, CFR Cluj's owner Nelutu Varga dismissed Marius Sumudica, and after few days of negotiations, Petrescu signed a contract on 31 August for a third stint at CFR Cluj. On May 15, 2022, Petrescu won his 4th league, and CFR's 5th consecutive championship after a 2–1 win over Universitatea Craiova, establishing the Hegemony of CFR Cluj in Romanian football.

Jeonbuk Hyundai Motors
On 9 June 2023, Petrescu was appointed as the head coach of K League 1 club Jeonbuk Hyundai Motors. On 6 April 2024, he stepped down after a five-game winless start.

A fourth chapter at CFR Cluj
On 15 April 2024, Petrescu agreed to return to CFR Cluj on a three-year contract, with an effective start in the summer of 2024, citing desire to rest after his spell in South Korea. However, on 30 April, Petrescu announced his decision to cancel his break, and took charge of the club for the fourth time, replacing interim manager Ovidiu Hoban. He made his return to Romanian football on 5 May, leading Cluj to a 3–2 win over Rapid București.

Personal life
Petrescu was married to Daniela Carmen from 1992 to 2003, with whom he has two daughters: Rebecca (born 1994) and Beatrice Chelsea (born 1998). He named one of his daughters "Chelsea" in honour of one of his former clubs. In May 2007, he married Adriana Stan, a former athlete. The couple have a daughter together, Jennifer, born in 2008.

International

 * Scores and results list Romania's goal tally first, score column indicates score after each Petrescu goal.

Player
Steaua București
 * Divizia A: 1985–86, 1987–88, 1988–89
 * Cupa României: 1988–89
 * European Cup runner-up: 1988–89

Chelsea
 * FA Cup: 1996–97
 * League Cup: 1997–98
 * UEFA Cup Winners' Cup: 1997–98
 * UEFA Super Cup: 1998

Național București
 * Cupa României runner-up : 2002–03

Individual
 * Overseas Team of the Decade – Premier League 10 Seasons Awards (1993 to 2003)

Manager
Unirea Urziceni
 * Liga I: 2008–09
 * Cupa României runner-up : 2007–08

Kuban Krasnodar
 * Russian First Division: 2010

ASA Târgu Mureș
 * Supercupa României: 2015

Jiangsu Suning
 * Chinese FA Cup: 2015

CFR Cluj
 * Liga I: 2017–18, 2018–19, 2019–20, 2020–21, 2021–22

Jeonbuk Hyundai Motors
 * Korean FA Cup runner-up: 2023

Individual
 * Romania Coach of the Year: 2008, 2009, 2011, 2019, 2022

title: Dan Petrescu


text:
User:Togelius

I'm an associate professor at New York University, working on artificial intelligence for games. I've been on Wikipedia since forever, but rarely been very active.

I started the evolutionary robotics article, and I've done edits to various pages on different concepts and people in my research field.

Links:

The Wikipedia page about me us Julian Togelius

title: User:Togelius


text:
Front de Libération Nationale

Front de Libération Nationale may refer to:

 * National Liberation Front (Algeria), a socialist political party founded in 1954 for independence from France for Algeria
 * National Liberation Front (Burundi), an ethnically Hutu rebel group that sometimes functions as a political party in Burundi
 * National Liberation Front (Jammu Kashmir), the armed wing of Azad Kashmir Plebiscite Front founded in 1965.

title: Front de Libération Nationale


text:
European Court

European Court may refer to:

 * Court of Justice of the European Union, the judiciary of the European Union, based in Luxembourg
 * European Court of Justice (ECJ), the EU's highest court, established in 1952
 * General Court (European Union), established in 1989
 * European Union Civil Service Tribunal, established in 2005
 * European Court of Auditors, an institution of the European Union, established in 1977
 * European Court of Human Rights, an institution based in Strasbourg for the hearing of human rights complaints from Council of Europe member states; unrelated to the European Union; established in 1959
 * Royal courts in Europe

title: European Court


text: Category:Modernismo

title: Category:Modernismo


text: User talk:80.43.7.70

title: User talk:80.43.7.70


text:
Shahrokh (mythical bird)

Shahrokh, Shahrukh, or Shah Rukh is the name of a mythological bird in Iranian literature. It is built of two parts: Shah meaning a king, and Rukh (or Rogh, or Rokh), another enormous mythological bird. In the One Thousand and One Nights stories, Rukh helps Sinbad escape from a dangerous island.

Shah Rukh, therefore, means king of the Rokh. It may also be written as Shaahinrokh or Avestan Saeenrokh. (E.g., Iranian city of Shaahindezh or Saeendezh and also city of Sannadazh). This has been converted to saeem-rokh, then seem-rokh, seem-rogh and vulgarised as see-morgh. Seemorgh is also known in mystics’ ideas as the king of birds or God.

Soleiman Haim in his Persian-English Dictionary has translated Shahrokh as "The Great Rook" and according to "A Comprehensive Persian-English Dictionary" Shahrokh means "The horn of a rhinoceros; the rooks in chess; a title given to the sons of the nobility; name of a son of Timure."

title: Shahrokh (mythical bird)


text:
Ai Yori Aoshi

Ai Yori Aoshi (藍より青し) is a Japanese manga series written and illustrated by Kou Fumizuki. The manga was serialized in Hakusensha's Young Animal magazine from 1998 to 2005 and the chapters collected into 17 tankōbon volumes. It is a love story between two characters who have not seen each other in years, but were once childhood friends.

An anime television series adaptation was animated by J.C.Staff and directed by Masami Shimoda, with Kenichi Kanemaki handling series composition, Kazunori Iwakura designing the characters and Toshio Masuda composing the music. The anime was broadcast on Fuji TV in 2002. A second season titled Ai Yori Aoshi: Enishi (藍より青し ～縁～) was set two years later and aired in 2003. There are 37 episodes total, counting an alternate-continuity Christmas special. The anime was released in North America by Geneon and the manga was released in English by Tokyopop. Four visual novels were also released for the PlayStation 2 and Windows 98.

Plot
Kaoru Hanabishi, a university student, is the eldest son of Yūji Hanabishi, the head of the Hanabishi Zaibatsu, and was set to take over the zaibatsu after his father retired. His mother, Kumi Honjō, and his father never married, making life difficult for both him and his mother. Kaoru's father died when he was five years old. After that, Yūji's father, Gen'ichiro Hanabishi, took Kaoru under his wing and began educating him for the eventual succession. However, Kaoru never felt at home in the Hanabishi family and exiled himself after his mother's death. Day by day he felt alone, thinking that he was living life with no reason pushing him on.

There was, however, a person who loved Kaoru so much that she felt had to do whatever was necessary to be with him. Her name is Aoi Sakuraba. Aoi is the only daughter of the owner of the Sakuraba Dry Goods Store (later renamed to Sakuraba Department Store). Kaoru's family and Aoi's family had expected for Kaoru to marry Aoi, but after Kaoru left, the marriage was canceled. Both families had a friendly relationship, and unbeknownst to Kaoru, Aoi had been in love with him from the start. The Sakuraba family had already been searching for someone suitable, but Aoi was unwilling to marry someone else and walked out, chasing Kaoru.

Both were freed from their families' affairs but did not know how to make their living. Miyabi Kagurazaki, Aoi's caretaker, has Aoi live with her in a grand western-style summer mansion owned by the Sakuraba family, with Kaoru living in a house for servants next to it to prevent a scandal as with the previous. They are soon joined by Tina Foster, an American expatriate; Taeko Minazuki, a clumsy housekeeper; Mayu Miyuki, Kaoru's childhood friend; and Chika Minazuki, Taeko's cousin. The house is eventually converted to a dormitory and Aoi becomes its landlady.

Eventually, Miyabi helps Kaoru reconcile with the Hanabishis and patch up the original engagement. However, Kaoru's half brother attempts to gain control of the Hanabishi Zaibatsu by proposing to Aoi. After Kaoru foils the proposal, Aoi abandons her family name and Kaoru gives the ownership of Hanabishi Zaibatsu to his half-brother. Five years later, Kaoru and Aoi are married.

Manga
Ai Yori Aoshi began as a manga series written and illustrated by Kou Fumizuki. It was serialized in Hakusensha's Young Animal magazine from 1998 to 2005 and the chapters collected into 17 tankōbon volumes. The first volume was published by Hakusensha in Japan on May 28, 1999, and the last volume was released on December 20, 2005. The manga was released in English by Tokyopop. The first book was released in January 2004 and the last book was released in October 2007.

The series has also been licensed in Europe (Non English Releases), Asia, and Middle America. In Europe, the series was licensed in French by Pika Édition, in German by EMA, and in Spanish by Norma Editorial. For Asia the series was licensed in Chinese by Jonesky, in Korean by Daiwon CI, and in Russian by Sakura Press. In North America the series has been published in Mexico by Grupo Editorial Vid.

Anime
An anime television series adaptation animated by J.C.Staff, written by Kenichi Kanemaki, and directed by Masami Shimoda premiered on Fuji TV from April 10, 2002, to September 25, 2002, spanning twenty-four episodes. Most of the music for the series was composed by Toshio Masuda. Three pieces of theme music were used in the anime series. "Towa no Hana" (永遠の花) performed by Yoko Ishida is the opening theme. "Na mo Shirenu Hana" (名も知れぬ花) performed by The Indigo is the ending theme used for all the episodes except one; "I'll Be Home" performed by Satsuki Yukino is the ending theme for eighteenth episode. In Japan, it was released across eight Region 2 DVD compilation volumes. The anime was licensed by Geneon for an English-dubbed release in North America.

A second season titled Ai Yori Aoshi: Enishi (藍より青し ～縁～) aired from October 12, 2003, to December 28, 2003, spanning twelve episodes. The second season of anime adaptation uses three pieces of theme music. "Takaramono" (たからもの) performed by Yoko Ishida is the opening theme. "I Do!" is the first ending theme performed by The Indigo. "Presence" performed by The Indigo is the second ending theme. The series was released across three Region 2 DVD compilations in Japan. Geneon also licensed the second season in North America for an English-dubbed release.

A fifteen-minute OVA known variously as "Episode 00", "Beautiful Snow", and "Enishi Christmas Special" was released on September 26, 2003. The special was dubbed and released in English on the first North American Enishi DVD release.

At Anime Expo 2010, Funimation announced that they had licensed both seasons, and re-released them in 2011. Funimation released the complete series under the Anime Classics label in July 2012.

Video games
KID Corp. published a PlayStation 2 video game based on the series in 2003, and was released in English for Windows PCs by Hirameki International. That game was re-released in 2005 by SUCCESS Corporation with bonus footage and mini-games.

Reception
Ai Yori Aoshi did well with its English manga release, with book one ranking number 45 on the top 50 Manga's sold of that month. With an estimated 3,329 books sold, the series peaked at number 18 of 100 with Volume 6 but soon fell out of the top 100 list for the other releases. The last volume ended at number 66 out of 100 on the sales list.

As for reviews the manga has been described as "fun to read" and a "good solid romance story". Adam Beck of Advanced media Network anime pointed out however that some volumes lack dialogue but a good dialogue translation was done by tokyopop.

The first anime season had mixed reviews from people.

It has also been described however as a "split personality" anime as half of it wants to be a serious, dramatic romance with a dash of comedy and the other half wants to be a One Guy/Lots of Girls slapstick harem show. Despite that the anime has been labeled as "stunning" with its artwork and the theme music got a good review.

title: Ai Yori Aoshi


text:
Category:Scottish poets

This category lists poets who originated from Scotland or spent a notable part of their careers in Scotland.

title: Category:Scottish poets


text:
Category:Lallans poets

 * This category is for poets writing some or all of their verse in Lallans (Eng: lowlands), an alternative name for the Scots language used by Robert Burns in Address to the Deil in 1786. Lallans Poets was also used to describe the early 20th century Scottish Renaissance poets who followed Hugh MacDiarmid writing in Synthetic Scots known as Lallans. What this category refers to exactly is unclear.
 * See also Scottish literature.

title: Category:Lallans poets


text: Category:Radio by country

title: Category:Radio by country