text:
Talk:Area and population of European countries

UK Dependencies and Danish Autonomous regions???
Would it be more logical for the UK dependencies, Greenland and the Faroe Islands to be placed in the the Constituent Nations, Regions and Provinces of Larger Countries with Distinctive Identities table and devote the first table to just fully independent and recognised countries??

--ClungeLover69 (talk) 13:34, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree there needs to be a 3rd List on this page for external European Territorys it would Include Greenland ,French guiana, Aruba or what ever else is ruled by a a european country out side of Europe .We could even include asiatic russia on that list for comparitive purposes. also we should exclude asiatic russia figures from europes totals. plus we should include European portion of Turkey .its called Turkish Thrace and it includes Istanbul. 76.244.154.251 (talk) 19:13, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Indeed. Its confusing to have (say) Jersey listed as "Jersey (UK)" since its not part of the UK. Francis Davey (talk) 20:09, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Turkey is not Europe
Turkey is not Europe and any references must be deleted from the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.34.12.208 (talk) 20:53, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

 * Turkey is partly in Europe. But what KAZAKHSTAN is doing here? That's Middle Asia!
 * --Profant (talk) 14:04, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

 * Probably because a significant part of Kazakhstan is situated in Europe (a large portion situated to the West of the Ural Mountains and Ural River). Similar to Turkey, Russia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan is a transcontinental country spanning both Asia and Europe. Iceland is also a transcontinental country spanning both Europe and North America. On the other hand, Cyprus is entirely located outside Europe. Their connection is entirely socio-cultural. Mac Tíre   Cowag  14:14, 16 November 2011 (UTC)

 * I've added to the article text some information on the European part of Turkey, East Thrace. I think it would be useful to put this detail into the table somehow, for ranking. To put in context, the population of the European part of Turkey is similar to Portugal or Czech Republic, and its size is between FYROM and Slovenia 60.240.207.146 (talk) 04:01, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Denmark?
Why is Denmark omitted from population density and from area? Greenland's area (but not its population density) is shown. Snezzy (talk) 22:27, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

 * Found the answer - insufficient rvv from the vandal who replaced Denmark, Netherlands, Russia, etc. with non-European countries. Intermediate editors may wish to restore changes I clobbered. Snezzy (talk) 22:42, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Denmark should be as Denmark proper. Faroe Island, Greenland and Denmark proper are different countries (the so called Rigsfællesskabet makes the Queen of Denmark Monarch at Greenland and Faroe Islands. Both areas has two MPs each in the Parliament. I doubt Greenland is European at all. Boeing720 (talk) 17:23, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Kosovo
I have reverted an edit of an anynomous user removing the entry of Kosovo. While I believe this is the correct thing to do, I do not know however whether there exists a consensus on the inclusion of Kosovo. Pietrow (talk) 12:46, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Armenian language is not recorded as one of European languages. 10 mln. people in the world speaks Armenian among which only 3 mln. in Armenia because of big diasphora. In Europe about 7 mln. speak Armenian. cut from the article and pasted here 79.244.126.152 (talk) 18:00, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Kosovo has been resolved on this artical its found its own Sub-list called Disputed along side transnistria and a few others. 76.244.154.251 (talk) 19:18, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

France
The population of France in 2007 was 63,601,002 ( and 65,031,022 if you count populations of the overseas departments and territories of France like Guadeloupe, Martinique, Reunion and French Guiana) and not 60,000,000 etc..and her density is 111 and not 109. so I have changed the numbers. You can see and read this french article for more information:
 * —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.92.63.148 (talk) 12:50, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

for statistical purposes french colonies outside of mainland France need to be excluded from France's totals. they need to be on sub-list called European areas outside of Europe. someone just needs to create this sub-list and then we have a complete list here.69.208.14.60 (talk) 18:22, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Languages section
The current languages section gives the lead "This is a list of 39 spoken languages (mother tongue) in Europe." The writing in bold is my emphasis. This list states there are 400,000 Irish mother language speakers. This is highly inaccurate. There are no census figures which state this. According to the 2006 census there were over 1 million speakers of the language, but this did not determine the fluency of those speakers, nor whether or not those speakers who were fluent had Irish as a mother language or learned it subsequently. According to estimates from sources such as Hindley there are approx. 25,000 fluent mother language speakers of Irish at a minimum and 75,000 at a maximum. There are many other fluent speakers of course, but not mother language speakers. Also, there are an estimated 600,000 mother language Welsh speakers but this is not included on the list. Neither is Breton with over 200,000 mother language speakers. Personally I believe this section belongs in the Demographics of Europe article and not here, with this page focussing solely on the population (number of people) rather than any of their characteristics. Anyone have any objections to the deletion of this section? Mac Tíre  Cowag  08:09, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

Russia and Turkey
Russia and Turkey are the two major transcontinental countries in this article. I've added details to the text about their European parts, European Russia and East Thrace. Most of the population of Russia is in Europe, but most of the area is in Asia. Most of the area and population of Turkey is in Asia. However, the population density in Europe is much higher.

The articles dealing with European population and Area make the distinction also with these countries and their 'European' part. Perhaps, the table could include the information on the European part only. 60.240.207.146 (talk) 04:08, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree Boeing720 (talk) 17:24, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

Automating population statistics
I noticed that the Netherlands population has commas, unlike the other countries, and started editing the source to fix this difference. There I noticed that their population comes from a macro formatnum: Data Netherlands|poptoday whereas other countries' populations are plain numbers. So it would seem best to automate the other countries' populations in the same way as the Netherlands, if their country articles allow. I'll try it with a few other countries to see if it works. Someone more skilled may need to clean up after me or finish the job.CharlesHBennett (talk) 02:12, 18 November 2015 (UTC) For some reason it didn't work when I tried it with Belgium, UK, and Germany.CharlesHBennett (talk) 02:18, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The number for The Netherlands population density (421 /km2) is incorrect, assuming the figures for its area (41,543 km2) and population (17,424,978) are correct.
 * 17,424,978 ÷ 41,543 = 419.444382929
 * I'm unsure if this has any significant relevance to this thread so, I thought it'd be best to mention it here instead of just correcting it without discussing it. Rickflair1017 (talk) 19:52, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Overall European population density
The currently displayed sum of the areas (26,680,676 km2) does not correspond to the sum of the listed country areas (24,110,455). The population sum is off too, but only by 480,000 (0.5%) and the overall density would be nearly 35/km2. These numbers are pretty meaningless anyway. Indeed, the introduction ends with "The aggregate for Europe excluding Russia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, the population density is 105 persons per km2 (including them it is 31, mostly due to the Russian Federation's vastness)." The table lists the latter. Neither number is right for the population density of physical Europe. Why not simply list the area, population, and density for the European parts of all countries. E.g. for European Russia that is 3,992,500 km2, 108,949,694 and 27.22/km2 (in 2015). For European Turkey that is 23,764 km2, 10,620,739 and an impressive 446.9/km2 (in 2012). Numbers for the Netherlands, Spain and Portugal are also straightforward to get (why do it this for France alone?), though they will have little impact on the total number. Only Kazakhstan will be hard (roughly 180,000 km2, <1,000,000 people west of the Ural). The density would be around 71 people/km2 (including or excluding all of the Caucasian countries and Cyprus has little impact) Afasmit (talk) 21:13, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

United Kingdom
It is misleading to speak of the UK as a country, when England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland are distinct nations.

When you separate them out, England soars up the chart with over 400 people per square Km, whilst Scotland and Wales drop down it. LeapUK (talk) 13:01, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

Done as of 2019-02-08, let's see if someone disagrees with this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rjbarbour (talk • contribs) 13:25, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Cheers. Seems to be good. LeapUK (talk) 09:10, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

 * This doesn't make any sense. England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are not (yet) independent countries, and should not be treated as such in maps unless other countries are similarly subdivided e.g. Catalonia, Bavaria, Sicily etc. Why has this been done? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaronmg2 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
 * England, Scotland and Wales are distinct countries and nations, it's more useful including them than Jersey and Faroe Islands, which similarly are not independent.
 * I have no objections to other areas being added if they are known as countries aswell. 2A04:4A43:8DBF:F3BB:25B7:AB20:DA9A:C9C (talk) 19:38, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Spain & Canary Islands
I don't think Canary Islands should be inculded, as the list is about Europe. Canary Islands are politically Spanish, but geographically African. Canary Islands isn't a part of the EU, but a free-trade area. Boeing720 (talk) 17:17, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

 * Does Spain's figure include Ceuta and Mellia, the African cities are Spanish, which might alter the statistics. 2A04:4A43:8DBF:F3BB:25B7:AB20:DA9A:C9C (talk) 19:40, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

About Turkey, France and Russia and their "parts in Europe"
If what matters in this article is purely geography, why are the entirety of Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia and Cyprus included? These countries either have no territory in the European continent or they are transcontinental countries. Plus if the question is purely geographical then the European part of Kazakhstan should also be included.

If what matters is being considered part of Europe in *some* way, whether that's geography, culture, being in the European Council or something else, then we have to include whole populations of Turkey, France and Russia.

Plus I saw some people wanting to remove Turkey because it is "not a European country" for the following reasons: 1)Turkey doesn't speak an Indo-European language 2)Turkey isn't Christian 3)Turkey has the majority of its population and land in Asia 4)Turkey doesn't have a "European culture"

The answers to these are pretty basic: 1)Neither does Finland, Hungary, Estonia 2)Neither is Bosnia, Albania, Kosovo 3)Armenia and Cyprus have no land or population whatsoever in Europe yet they are in the list 4)Most of the Turkish culture is a mixture of Ottoman and Byzantine heritage. The country, even in the current climate, is more western than any other Middle Eastern country (except maybe Israel), and the Ottoman heritage is found in many other countries as well anyways, mostly in Balkans.

Tl;dr my point is, we have to decide whether we are looking at the parts of countries that are in Europe, or countries that are considered as European as whole, and apply the same to all countries.

2601:240:8480:51C3:C597:D9C7:BABA:7D66 (talk) 18:05, 7 April 2019 (UTC)

 * Good points, I'd also like to add that Turkish Northern Cyprus is absent from the partially recognised territories list, while Cyprus which claims the area of the former is included. I know neither are in Europe, but it seems strange that the same area only counts as European under one regime's claim, but not the other's. 2A04:4A43:8DBF:F3BB:25B7:AB20:DA9A:C9C (talk) 19:56, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Shaded maps
The second of the two shaded maps (the one showing density in England, Scotland, and Wales as distinct nations), is misleading because it clumps all of the 200+ countries together. Is there any way of breaking out the 400+ countries into their own shade? LeapUK (talk) 09:00, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

Isle of Man
is in the list as "UK" but it isn't part of the UK. Could we change it to (British Isles)? Simon Grant (talk) 12:56, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

 * Why should it be Isle of Man (British Isles)? Jersey isn't listed as Channel Islands etc.
 * I think it should just be Isle of Man without the confused brackets. Also British Isles is a controversial term as Irish peoples often dislike it. 2A04:4A43:8DBF:F3BB:25B7:AB20:DA9A:C9C (talk) 19:48, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Internal and external inconsistencies
Some parts of this table do not comport with the consensus made long ago for all country lists. The gist is to use the ISO 3166-1 to decide what counts as a country or territory, or what counts as integral, and also add in partially recognized states. List articles can deviate from it, but only if they rely on a source that deviates in the same way. But this list has never had a source for most of its figures, other than "other wikipedia articles".

What's more peculiar is that the list doesn't always follow its own rules. Sometimes a country's entire area will be considered, sometimes just the Europe part. And unlike most lists, the partially recognized states are split off into their own list.

I think it makes more sense to use only the European part for all countries, noting the total figures for transcontinental countries in a note. And the partially recognized states could be included right up with them. But then, for those countries that are culturally European only, this would mean values of "not applicable" for density and zeroes for area and population - and a note would have to say what the total density/pop/area were. Then they'd be ranked equal at the bottom of the table, edifying nobody. So perhaps there should be a separate table, but for culturally European states.

I'm building these refurbished tables in excel, and it's easy to make changes in reply to comments. So please do comment. Wizmut (talk) 00:57, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

 * I oppose the creation of any "separate tables". Having separate tables goes against established norms found in these types of articles. Tables within Europe-related articles (see: List of European countries by area, List of European countries by population, List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe, Europe, List of European countries by membership in international organisations, List of European countries by population, and many others) tend to list the 50/51 countries of Europe in a single table- irrespective of geography/culture. This article should be no different. Sure, we can make improvements to data within the table, but for consistency, we should keep all countries together. Archives908 (talk) 01:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * But a table should be built to purpose. There's not much purpose in showing empty values. The alternative would be to use total area/population for every jurisdiction, but this is a distortion in the other direction - European Russia is more like Sweden than Svalbard in terms of density.
 * Now, another solution is to make the table twice as wide - Euro pop/area/density and Total pop/area/density. But, again, not perfect. Hard to read. Lots of repeat information. Glance at the Asia population table for a list that's trying to do (maybe) too much. And that one's all my fault :)
 * Maybe it would be better to see what they all look like? I'll try to finish up the notes column and post them in my sandbox. Wizmut (talk) 01:47, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Can you please pinpoint something specific in the existing table which is factually incorrect? If any of the data is incorrect, it may be updated using WP:RS within the existing parameters of the table. I don't think we actually need to change the table itself. I think we may be slightly over-complicating this. When dealing with tables, its best to keep things as simple as possible for readability purposes. That's why I recommend we maintain the existing parameters of the table and adjust any figures which may not be align with sources. Archives908 (talk) 02:13, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The columns have a different definition depending on the row, a big no-no in data science land. Spain, Portugal, Armenia and Cyprus are all total area, despite having non-European land. Most others are just European land, which in some cases is the same as total land. But there could be others - who knows? There are no sources for most entries, and most have no notes for the needed caveats - except for some that do have notes in a separate section above or below. I'd have to check over everything by making notes for each one I've checked... and this is a remarkably similar process to rebuilding the table from scratch.
 * For those who want it simple and don't want separate tables, change is needed.
 * The whole table template should be replaced to fix the faulty ranking ("Total" meaning Europe is ranked 61 - ? And territories and partially recognized states are ranked, sorting is not possible), and notes are needed for any entry with unusual circumstances (offshore territory, UK's constituent countries, all transcontinental countries, all non-geographically European countries). Kazakhstan in particular needs an extensive note to explain the uncertainty in the point estimate currently used. That's a lot of manual labor... and I could instead do it all much more simply in Excel. We just need to decide what the best table to show is. And again, changes aren't hard. I can throw up my work on google sheets if anyone wants to toy around with it. Wizmut (talk) 02:30, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Change requires WP:CON. Which is what needs to be established.
 * Let's be reminded that there are various definitions of Europe. Most geographical definitions place countries such as Turkey, Russia, and Kazakhstan partially in Europe. While many modern geopolitical definitions place these countries (the Caucasus states, Cyprus, Turkey, Russia, and seldom even Kazakhstan) within Europe- partially or wholly. The current inclusion criteria (which is also recognized over at Europe) includes these countries respectively (regardless of their geography). There has already been countless discussions and consensuses reached over the years regarding this.
 * That is why these countries are listed on virtually every single Europe-related article. However, they are traditionally accompanied by detailed explanatory notes which highlight these countries geography either wholly or partially in Asia (and rightfully so!). Some notes I've seen even discuss these countries political, cultural, linguistic, and even sporting ties to Europe. Which is excellent for providing details to the reader and for establishing the difference between physical geography and culture/geopolitics/etc. I agree with you that the note for Kazakhstan is quite minimal and requires significant clarification.
 * I endorse your proposal to update the note(s) and any figures in the table which may be inaccurate (of course, every single figure will need to be verified with WP:RS).
 * So then, that leaves your main concern, which seems to be focused on how this information is presented. I still think that the existing parameters of the table can be refined and worked on. I'm not totally convinced that a complete overhaul is warranted, or even necessary. If any inaccurate data within the table can be updated, it would serve as an improvement to this article as a whole (it may take time and effort- but it can be accomplished).
 * Nonetheless, if you believe you have a genuine improvement to the table itself, then please do share it. I cannot open the link below (goes to a blank page). Perhaps you can present your preferred version of the table here, first? This way, editors will have the opportunity to discuss/review/contribute to it, and avoid making a muck in the edit history.
 * The only suggestion I do have, is to keep these countries together in a single table. I believe that's a fair compromise and it upholds consistency across the board. Genuine improvements to this project tend to focus less on optics and more on data anyways. So let's do exactly that. I for one, look forward to seeing what you produce :) Archives908 (talk) 03:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll delete this link eventually but for now, here is the data I'm using to put together possibilities for a renovated table:
 * link removed Wizmut (talk) 02:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright, two possible revisions of the table are now on my sandbox: . The source is the UN source used by many other lists unless otherwise specified.
 * The first is the one I favor, splitting off the culturally European countries/territories. Their total stats are displayed instead of just what's in Europe (which would be zero in their case).
 * The second is one @Archives908 might favor. The tables are combined and you see that the culturally European countries have no land in Europe proper, and thus density is undefined.
 * Again, changing these drafts is relatively easy, so if you want to see a version with columns or rows re-arranged or removed/added, let me know and I can try to make it happen. Wizmut (talk) 22:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for sharing! I'm a tad busy the next 24hrs...will respond better in a day or two. But from what I quickly gathered, the combined table looks good to me. The separate tables aren't necessarily bad, but, no other Europe-related article divides these countries by geography or culture. They are all part of "Europe" through varying classifications, with the appropriate explanatory notes clarifying geography where needed. Dividing countries by culture seems arbitrary and varies by opinion. Best to keep things consistent and streamlined. Anyways, I will have a better look at the table in the next 24/48 hrs. In the mean time, if other editors care to chime in, now is the time! Archives908 (talk) 22:46, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * And a big thank you Wizmut for putting in time and energy into this table :) Archives908 (talk) 22:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I took a quick look through the combined table and it looks pretty good to me. A few things I noticed is that both Georgia and Abkhazia, which do indeed have territory in Europe, have zero (0) in the combined table. We need to make sure the correct figures are added. Same goes for South Ossetia, although this one is a little more confusing. Under geography of its respective article, it states: "South Ossetia is a very mountainous region located in the Caucasus at the juncture of Asia and Europe." Not sure how much territory it does have within Europe proper, but that will need to be added too. In regards to the notes section, we need to make sure everything is accounted for and aligns. Artsakh is dissolving on 1 January 2024, which would be noteworthy. An expanded note for Kazakhstan would be helpful. Probably also for the status of Northern Cyprus (ie. only Turkey recognizes it). Also, should we continue excluding Greenland? Like Cyprus, they are both technically outside "geographical Europe", but their citizens are EU nationals and both have close cultural/historical/political ties to Europe. Perhaps we should include Greenland in the combined table just like Cyprus with "0" figures. Greenland is included over at Europe. Another thing- I see Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales have been removed and added to the UK total. While I am not opposed to this edit, are they not WP:N enough to warrant independent inclusion? I think there are a few technicalities we need to work out before this gets published. I'll have more time to further analyze the table for any potential inconsistencies in the next day or so. Good start though! Archives908 (talk) 02:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the analysis! For Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the definition used by this article previously seemed to be F on this map based on the Azerbaijan entry, which kept only the district north of the Caucasus entirely. Now, GAS may have sporadic territory throughout the Greater/Northern Caucasus, but I couldn't find anyone who had tried to measure it. It would a similar problem to finding out how much of Colorado is actually south of the 37th parallel. This uncertainty might be covered by a note if a source can't be found. "Nobody knows" but with more words.
 * The note for Artsakh in the draft has "Will be formally abolished at end of 2023." We may learn more by waiting until end of 2023. The figures for the density were simply copied from Artsakh's WP page, and are almost certainly out of date. A lot of people have been moved and are still moving. It may be better to link to Flight of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians than to give a number.
 * Kazakhstan's note covers the provinces along the Ural river - what else should it include? Greenland, you're right, a lot like Cyprus, can be added.
 * The constituent countries of the UK are generally not included on country lists. Some consider the UK like Denmark, but the ISO 3166-1 doesn't think so. And of course people have discussed it on other pages. This page has been an outlier by listing them separately. edit: This page in particular has almost 9000 words specifically about this.
 * Also wanted to note that a lot of the improvements to this list could likely carry over to other Europe lists in the coming weeks. Maybe the watchers on each of those pages would have further input. Something on my to-do list. Wizmut (talk) 05:05, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * It's my pleasure! For Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, I do believe that it is critical we find what portions of their territories lie in Eastern Europe. Surely, there is bound to be some figures available. Because entering "0" within the table itself is factually incorrect (regardless if there is a note). It would be a great improvement to the article overall if we could find those figures for each.
 * For Artsakh- I agree we should wait until the dust settles. But the state itself will be officially dissolved on 1 Jan 2024. I think it would be a good idea to add in the note the years of which Artsakh was de facto independent (I've already seen editors implement this on other pages) and also add this link (2023 Azerbaijani offensive in Nagorno-Karabakh) where it reads "which took control of the region in late 2023". I think that would be useful as a reference for readers. I also agree with your suggestion to someway link in Flight of Nagorno-Karabakh Armenians rather then listing population figures.
 * I'm glad we think alike on Greenland. Totally warrants inclusion based on established criteria.
 * For Kazakhstan, do you think it would serve any benefit to include the percentage of its territory in Central Asia? I think it could be good to not only link Central Asia in the note for Kazakhstan, but adding the Asian percentage provides greater detail to the reader. It's not critical, just a suggestion :)
 * Thanks for explaining the UK situation- I fully support maintaining consistency.
 * Armenia, Cyprus, and Northern Cyprus don't have much of a note, with only total density being listed. Considering this is the main focus of the article, I think it's a good idea to add their figures (most especially total area/ and perhaps population).
 * As for the South Caucasus countries, I think the notes for Georgia, Azerbaijan, and Armenia can also be expanded to included something along the lines of "part of the South Caucasus on the borders of Europe and Asia"...I've seen this standardized note in one capacity or another on almost all Europe related list articles. I think it'll be good to add that here too. Some definitions, however, do include all three of the countries in Europe, while others just partially. So, I'm not sure if you want to make a brief mention of that too. Something along the lines of "some definitions of the South Caucasus include all or a portion of them within Europe". I've also seen other notes that mention their cultural, political, and historical ties to Europe. Not sure if that's worth mentioning too?
 * For Kosovo- do we want to make mention that it is a partially recognized state? Or leave it as is? Serbia doesn't have a note, but they still consider Kosovo as a province. Their wiki article provides those figures in the infobox so maybe it should be mentioned?
 * I know this is a lot of feedback, but I hope its all well received. Thank you again for putting time and effort into this. I will leave implementing changes to you. On my part, over the coming week or two, I'll be reviewing the sources one by one to fact-check and make sure everything is backed by WP:RS. Anything that catches my eye, I'll be sure to let you know! Archives908 (talk) 22:56, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright, latest revision is up. I added a row for Greenland, expanded the note for Artsakh and corrected the figures and notes for Serbia/Kosovo (the UN gives an area figure for S+K, but separate populations). I added a bit to Kazakhstan's note but the percent of the country that's in Asia can be inferred by noting the percent that's in Europe. Perhaps some other notes could be expanded, but no rush.
 * I also removed the zeroes for Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, leaving just blank spaces. I really couldn't find anyone who had calculated a figure. Would be hard to come up with one that wasn't WP:OR. And I didn't add a note for each - there probably ought to be discussion at the top of the page about why these numbers simply don't exist, why there might be different ways to calculate it depending on where you place the border (Azerbaijan and Armenia could be mentioned here too).
 * Much of the text in the "Transcontinental countries" section is going to be obsolete, so the focus of that paragraph could change to whatever the deficiencies of the table will be going forward. Wizmut (talk) 05:26, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Awesome- this is looking good. Glad to see Greenland added. I still think it may be worthwhile to add this link (2023 Azerbaijani offensive in Nagorno-Karabakh) where it reads "which took control of the region in late 2023" for Artsakh's note. Come 1 January 2024, the phrasing of the last sentence will have to be adjusted to past tense to reflect the official dissolution.
 * As for Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia, it is regrettable that no figures could be found. I'd be happy to help you out with research. If you give me a couple days, I can try and find those figures. If worse comes to worse, we can always just add an explanatory note and hope that we find something that isn't OR in the future.
 * In regards to the notes for Abkhazia and South Ossetia, is there a reason why the wordings aren't aligning with that of Transnistria? Both Abkhazia and South Ossetia (unlike Transnistria) actually do have limited recognition from UN member states, I think it may be wise to note that or at least keep the lingo the same for consistency.
 * The notes for Kazakhstan, Kosovo, and Serbia look great!
 * In regards to my suggestions regarding Northern Cyprus and the South Caucasus countries above, what are your thoughts? I know I wrote a lot above, so perhaps it got over looked. My suggestion for Northern Cyprus, is just that, a suggestion. If you think the note is fine as is, then I won't push for anything further :)
 * However, for the three South Caucasus countries, I do believe we should add to their notes stating something along the lines of "some definitions of the South Caucasus include all or a portion of them within Europe". Historically, IP's tend to vandalize/remove these countries so having a more detailed note may help to lessen this. Thoughts?
 * Finally, can you explain what you mean by "much of the text in the Transcontinental countries section is going to be obsolete"? Is your goal to remove this section as it'll become redundant as that information will be in the notes section moving forward?
 * FYI- I have been fact-checking sources since Sunday and I've found no particular issues. I'll switch my time over the next few days to see if I can find any info on Georgia, Abkhazia and South Ossetia's territory within Eastern Europe. Although, I'm not optimistic considering neither Georgia's article has any mention of it, or even Geography of Georgia (country). But, I'll give it a shot. Regards, Archives908 (talk) 18:05, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, generally about notes, versus the explanation section at the top, my first thought was to avoid repetition. Info which is particular about a state/region ought to be at that place's note, and general info about several states should be at the top. But, you mention that putting info in multiple places can prevent confusion/vandalism, I'm all for it.
 * For Artsakh, I'm not sure it would continue appearing on these lists if it no longer exists. Although I don't want to predict the WP:FUTURE I'm assuming a discussion will occur at the end of the year, which decides what the sources are saying - and that new consensus might be to wait a while longer even then. When I read the Artsakh discussion page, it's full of reminders to wait. But yes, also to your point, the note could mention that other page about the military action.
 * As far as noting the area and population of the non-geographic Europe countries, that could be used to fill out the shorter notes, but I'm just a little wary that it would inflate the other notes that already have a lot of numbers in them. The priority I set was to have the density figure available for many regions/agglomerations that the reader might be interested in, because this list is about population density - well, according to the lead sentence if not the article title. I can add a bit to a few notes that seem sparse, though, no problem.
 * I will update my to-do list per your suggestions and try to get a new draft done by end of day. Wizmut (talk) 18:36, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the clarification. If your goal is to reduce repetition, then I endorse removing the "Transcontinental countries" section. My point above wasn't to have information in multiple places, it was to make sure that notes sufficiently cover relevant information- especially if you plan on removing sections with explanatory text like the "Transcontinental countries" section. I just want to make sure all our bases are covered and we leave as little room for confusion as possible. Because, sadly, that gives room for IP's with a POV agenda to strike. And let me tell you, I monitor almost all the Europe-related list articles, and there has been significant disruptions over the years.
 * I applaud your main goal of focusing on the data. My main goal would be to ensure consistency and make sure the notes adequately cover all the necessary info. Which- seems like we are on track to complete.
 * And yes, you are correct, best not to WP:CRYSTAL with Artsakh and wait until the new year.
 * I leave the suggestions I made previously in your capable hands. I shall focus on finding information on GAS in the coming few days. Wish me luck! Archives908 (talk) 20:51, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Newest version is up, but I still haven't finalized exactly what the "disclaimer" notes within the table should say. Instead, I wrote a general explanation that could go before the table (similar to the material on the list page now), explaining why certain countries are included, or zeroed out, etc.
 * Now, some of this could also be included in the per-country notes, but I'd like more input on how much needs to be there. Long notes are hard to read, short notes encourage disruption; it's a tradeoff. Right now the longest note is for Kazahkstan which spills into 8 lines. Not sure what the guidelines are but that's probably a good limit to set.
 * If you want to copy and paste certain phrases into particular notes, or re-phrase anything, I believe the Sandbox page is open to edit. Or give me suggestions here about what else should preface the table and I'll write it up.
 * But other than that, I did add the notes about partially recognized status, the area and population figures for all of the "zero" entries, and the added context on Artsakh. Wizmut (talk) 02:00, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Amazing! I am signing off for the evening- I will have a look at it tomorrow :)
 * FYI- I tried researching the percentage of Georgia's landmass that does fall geographically in Europe. Unfortunately-my efforts also yielded no results. Almost everything I did come across is extremely vague and generalized. Such as, "Georgia is a transcontinental country, located in the crossroad between Asia and Europe", "situated at the strategically important crossroads where Europe meets Asia", "Georgia is situated in the Eastern European region of South Caucasus", "Georgia is at the edge of Eastern Europe", while the WorldFactbook states "Georgia has a sliver of land north of the Caucasus extending into Europe". If only we knew how much this "sliver" was -_-
 * I haven't done any research for Abkhazia or South Ossetia, but I honestly doubt there would be anything if there isn't anything on Georgia. I recall you suggesting leaving the sections for GAS blank. Is this still your preferred recommendation?
 * Anyways, I'll have a look at your newest version tomorrow. Thanks for giving permission to collaboratively edit in your sandbox, although I'm sure it looks great as is. Archives908 (talk) 03:21, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Cheers :) I appreciate all the looking around.
 * Yes, leaving the values blank seems fine, even better than filler I've seen like negligible or unknown because those could be wrong. Maybe somebody in Georgia has calculated the value, but didn't make it easy to find. And anybody who lives there probably doesn't want it called negligible! Wizmut (talk) 03:33, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
 * My pleasure :) Okay, sounds good to me!
 * P.s. I just need a little more time to review the updated table. So sorry- some days are more WP:BUSY than others and there aren't enough hours in the day to accomplish all my wiki to-do's. Give me 1 or 2 more days. Thank you, Archives908 (talk) 00:15, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Alright- I finally had the time to review the revised version in full. The notes and opening statement look fine to me. I agree- capping notes around the length of Kazakhstan's seems appropriate. Otherwise, it becomes clunky. WP:SRF and H:NOTES don't explicitly state rules around max lengths, so I think we are all good!
 * One final remark- in the current version of the article, the countries of Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Cyprus have their territories listed in full. Why don't we just continue using the expansive definitions of Europe and keep them all listed? There is already a WP:CON over at Europe which allows the inclusion of these states respectively. So, I don't think we should be removing their figures from the table. This would require no changes to your notes.
 * Greenland can be kept at "0" because I haven't seen any definitions (other than political, of course) which places their landmass in Europe. On the contrary, there are, as you know, a few geographical and several geopolitical definitions which do place Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Cyprus in Europe. Therefore, there are legitimate grounds, and existing consensus, to maintain their figures in the table.
 * It would be an easy and quick adjustment and then we are good for publishing. Thoughts?
 * Besides that, I have no further suggestions. Cheers, Archives908 (talk) 23:34, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Well, I think we disagree about using a different border definition. I'll try to explain why I think it's better to use the most common geographic definition in articles about continent-specific measurements.
 * One is that we'd have to have different boundary definitions for each article. How do we decide which one to use? If it's the most expansive one, then we might have to include all of Russia in Europe (UN stats do so, for example). This could mean, on the Europe area list, that Europe is 75% Russian territory.
 * It seems that the Europe population list currently does use the full population, which is interesting. It's perhaps a good thing that there's no "percentage of Europe" column right now, or else people would fight over how much of Europe is Russian or Turkish.
 * If we instead try to split the difference and give transcontinental areas for what are usually considered transcontinental countries, but then give full areas for culturally European countries, then we are using different definitions for each country. This is what the current version does, and it doesn't even say when it's doing it. But even with explanations, it would be very confusing to a new reader.
 * If the list was not so focused on giving measurements, I'd be in favor of simple full inclusion for any country that's relevant. But this list is very data-focused, so I prefer the idea of keeping to the same continental model across similar lists.
 * Another option that I hadn't really considered is to list the data for culturally-European countries in a different style of text - say, italic with parenthesis. There's some trouble with this because it breaks the sorting, but it could be a good compromise option if we can't get consensus any other way. Wizmut (talk) 02:24, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Your concerns are valid- I will table my earlier suggestion. I really like your idea regarding the italics- I too believe that would be a fair compromise. The information for these countries is already present in the notes, therefore, supplanting it within the table in a different style of text wouldn't detract from your vision/goals for this article. The distinction would be clear enough, and as an added benefit, we won't have a bunch of zeros and blank boxes (which to the reader, may give the impression of incompleteness). Thanks to your ingenuity, I think this could be a win–win. I say we proceed with your recommendation as a compromise and wrap-up this conversation. Will you be able to adjust the table? While I've dabbled with tables in the past, it isn't my strength. If you need help, however, I'm always willing to learn or contribute in any way. Let me know! Archives908 (talk) 05:00, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The latest version looked good enough to publish, so I did!
 * Comment here and/or edit there as needed. Wizmut (talk) 04:59, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Job well done! Thank you for all your dedication to improving this article. Archives908 (talk) 05:18, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * P.s. are some of the numbers messed up? Albania is 25 and then it jumps to 29 for Serbia then 27 for Spain? Also, there is a duplicate 29 for North Macedonia.
 * I fixed Cyprus to 50. Not sure if that was a mistake?
 * I'll leave it to you to review...I do not want to mess up the table. Cheers! Archives908 (talk) 05:28, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Appreciate the thank you!
 * I saw your fixes - Serbia is corrected to 26 and I changed Cyprus back to "tie" with Armenia. Seemed appropriate since the "loser" would otherwise be determined by spelling. I've seen similar ranking with gold medals. In some ways ranks for N/A values might not make sense but there is a consensus on ranking countries and it doesn't say to exclude countries with weird values, so ranks they get. Georgia is ahead of both Cyprus and Armenia because its 'true' population/area is likely non-zero. Wizmut (talk) 05:37, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Understood- thank you! If we use the most liberal definitions of Europe (which include both Armenia and Cyprus) Armenia's territory would be greater than Cyprus. Would that not work for listing Armenia as "49" and Cyprus as "50"? Archives908 (talk) 23:17, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, the table is mixing definitions. Blank spaces are filled in with alternative definitions for readability's sake. But Armenia/Cyprus are given ranks only because they're countries, not because they have comparable values. Their Europe densities are zero divided by zero, and 0/0 is not less than, equal to, or more than anything else (not even itself) because it's not a number. If we ranked them by their overall density then they wouldn't be ranked last, they'd be 25th and 27th. But mixing definitions for rank might be too confusing.
 * For some reason Armenia's density was wrong, I fixed it. edit: And apologies if this sounds terse, I'm just trying to think up the best solution.Wizmut (talk) 23:50, 15 November 2023 (UTC)
 * No need to apologize- you should be proud of the great work done here! I only made that comment from a purely aesthetic point of view, as some readers may not understand why there are two "49"s in the table. I'll leave it to your best judgment if you want to adjust that or leave it as is. Cheers, Archives908 (talk) 00:56, 16 November 2023 (UTC)


text:
Elektron

Elektron may refer to:
 * Elektron (alloy), a magnesium alloy
 * Elektron (company), a musical instrument company
 * Elektron (ISS), a Russian oxygen generator
 * Elektron (resin) or amber, a fossilised resin
 * Elektron (satellite), a series of four Soviet particle physics satellites

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

title: Elektron


text:
Talk:Benidorm

Tourism
We need information About benidorms tourism statstic and we also need info on where it geography wise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lectonar (talk • contribs) 14:35, 8 February 2005 (UTC)

"With 310 buildings exceeding 35 meters high, it is often claimed that after New York Benidorm has the most skyscrapers in the world." If you look at the skyscraper page it says that skyscrapers after often said to be 150 meters or more, and "highrise" har 35 meters or more. Maybe a change is needed here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aqualize (talk • contribs) 23:38, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, "Today the town is Europe and Spain’s biggest holiday resort..." is that meant to say "Europe's"? I assume so, but better check before editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by GNillePuh (talk • contribs) 11:22, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

Past
Benidorm was never a fishing village, its harbour was too shallow, it was the source of many crews and merchant ship captains but it was never a working fishing village — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.241.136 (talk) 10:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

That's no problem, all the need is a harbor to go out to see to fish or just fish close to the shore, most of the fishing was in small boats. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 11cookeaw1 (talk • contribs) 07:16, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Benidorm 50-60 years ago used to be a small fishing village, but now it is a popular tourist destination, where people have sold their land to build hotels. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.154.34.217 (talk) 15:47, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

Language
IN BENIDORM THEY SPEAK VALENCIAN (CATALAN). I EDITED THIS. (HOW INSULTING WOULD IT BE FOR SOMEONE TO HAVE THEIR LANGUAGE REPLACED AND WIPED OUT BY SOME OTHER ONE...). THANKS. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.129.90.106 (talk) 19:24, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Valencian is a dialect of Catalan, as Majorcan (Mallorquí), Minorcan (Menorquí) or Algherese (Alguerès/Alguerés). Same happens with major languages, as English or Castilian. It is not the same English in Scotland or Ireland than in the South of England. Moreover, Northern Castilian is not the same than Andalusian Spanish.
 * Valencia, along with NW Catalan, belong to the western dialects of Catalan, whereas Majorcan, Minorcan, and Algherese belong to the Eastern Catalan dialects. So please do not bother arguing about a fake statement. Jaume87 (talk) 19:23, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Nearby Mountains
Is it worth having separate article covering the mountains to the West? I can't find anything about Puig Campana or Sierra De Aitana anywhere on Wikipedia but don't know enough about them to write it myself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.145.152.172 (talk) 12:27, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Summer population
It should be noted somewhere in the article that population during summer comes close, and sometimes exceeds, 400,000 people, that is, the normal population times 6. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.155.187.220 (talk) 21:54, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Benidorm. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150925081004/http://www.aefe.fr/pedagogie/formation-continue/home-formation-continue/europe-iberique/les-donnees-de-la-zone-europe-iberique to http://www.aefe.fr/pedagogie/formation-continue/home-formation-continue/europe-iberique/les-donnees-de-la-zone-europe-iberique

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:24, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Inaccurate Climate Averages
The climate averages reported for Benidorm come from a personal weather station. That is highly innacurate as only averages from official, trusted sources such as AEMET should be considered. please remove these averages at once or replace them with official averages, not some random guys personal weather station that could easily be misplaced and report temps erroneously.Abuhesh (talk) 23:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Benidorm


text:
Confederate Ireland

Confederate Ireland, also referred to as the Irish Catholic Confederation, was a period of Irish Catholic self-government between 1642 and 1652, during the Eleven Years' War. Formed by Catholic aristocrats, landed gentry, clergy and military leaders after the Irish Rebellion of 1641, the Confederates controlled up to two-thirds of Ireland from their base in Kilkenny; hence it is sometimes called the "Confederation of Kilkenny".

The Confederates included Catholics of Gaelic and Anglo-Norman descent. They wanted an end to anti-Catholic discrimination within the Kingdom of Ireland and greater Irish self-governance; many also wanted to roll back the plantations of Ireland. Most Confederates professed loyalty to Charles I of England in the belief they could reach a lasting settlement in return for helping defeat his opponents in the Wars of the Three Kingdoms. Its institutions included a legislative body known as the General Assembly, an executive or Supreme Council, and a military. It minted coins, levied taxes and set up a printing press. Confederate ambassadors were appointed and recognised in France, Spain and the Papal States, who supplied them with money and weapons.

At various times, Confederate armies fought Royalists, Parliamentarians, Ulster Protestant militia and Scots Covenanters; these controlled the Pale, parts of eastern and northern Ulster, and the region around Cork. Charles authorised secret negotiations which in September 1643 resulted in a Confederate–Royalist ceasefire and led to further talks, most of which proved unsuccessful. In 1644, a Confederate military expedition landed in Scotland to help Royalists there. The Confederates continued to fight the Parliamentarians in Ireland, and decisively defeated the Covenanter army in the Battle of Benburb.

In 1647, the Confederates suffered a string of defeats at Dungan's Hill, Cashel and Knocknanuss. This prompted them to make an agreement with the Royalists, leading to internal divisions which hampered their ability to resist a Parliamentarian invasion. In August 1649, a large English Parliamentarian army, led by Oliver Cromwell, invaded Ireland. By May 1652 it had defeated the Confederate–Royalist alliance, although Confederate soldiers continued a guerrilla warfare campaign for a further year.

Formation
The Irish Catholic Confederation was formed in the aftermath of the 1641 rebellion, both to control the popular uprising and to organise an Irish Catholic war effort against the remaining English and Scottish armies in Ireland. It was hoped that by doing this, the Irish Catholics could hold off an English or Scottish re-conquest of the country.

The initiative for the Confederation came from a Catholic bishop, Nicholas French, and a lawyer named Nicholas Plunkett. They put forth their proposals for a government to Irish Catholic nobles such as Viscount Gormanston, Viscount Mountgarret, Viscount Muskerry and the Baron of Navan. These men would commit their own armed forces to the Confederation and persuaded other rebels to join it. The declared aims of the Confederates were similar to those of Sir Phelim O'Neill, the leader of the early stages of the rebellion in Ulster, who issued the Proclamation of Dungannon in October 1641.

On 17 March 1642, these nobles signed the "Catholic Remonstrance" issued at Trim, County Meath that was addressed to King Charles I. On 22 March, at a synod in nearby Kells chaired by Hugh O'Reilly, Archbishop of Armagh, a majority of the Catholic bishops proclaimed that the rebellion was a just war.

On 10 May 1642, Ireland's Catholic clergy held a synod at Kilkenny. Present were the Archbishops of Armagh, Cashel and Tuam, eleven bishops or their representatives, and other dignitaries. They drafted the Confederate Oath of Association and called on all Catholics in Ireland to take the oath. Those who took the oath swore allegiance to Charles I and vowed to obey all orders and decrees made by the "Supreme Council of the Confederate Catholics". The rebels henceforth became known as Confederates. The synod re-affirmed that the rebellion was a "just war". It called for the creation of a council (made up of clergy and nobility) for each province, which would be overseen by a national council for the whole island. It vowed to punish misdeeds by Confederate soldiers and to excommunicate any Catholic who fought against the Confederation. The synod sent agents to France, Spain and Italy to gain support, gather funds and weapons, and recruit Irishmen serving in foreign armies. Lord Mountgarret was appointed president of the Confederate Supreme Council, and a General Assembly was fixed for October that year.

The first Confederate Assembly
The first Confederate General Assembly was held in Kilkenny on 24 October 1642, where it set up a provisional government. The Assembly was a parliament in all but name. Present at the first Assembly were 14 Lords Temporal and 11 Lords Spiritual from the Parliament of Ireland, along with 226 commoners. The Confederate's constitution was written by a Galway lawyer named Patrick D'Arcy. The Assembly resolved that each county should have a council, overseen by a provincial council made up of two representatives from each county council. The Assembly agreed orders "to be observed as the model of their government".

The Assembly elected an executive known as the Supreme Council. The first Supreme Council was elected on or about 14 November. It consisted of 24 members, 12 of whom were to abide always in Kilkenny or wherever else they deemed fitting.

The members of the first Supreme Council were as follows:

James Tuchet, 3rd Earl of Castlehaven, representing the Crown, was the final member of the Supreme Council.

The Supreme Council would have power over all military generals, military officers and civil magistrates. Its first act was to name the generals who were to command Confederate forces: Owen Roe O'Neill was to command the Ulster forces, Thomas Preston the Leinster forces, Garret Barry the Munster forces and John Burke the Connacht forces. Ulick Burke, 1st Marquess of Clanricarde was named head general, as they thought he would sooner or later join the Confederates. The Supreme Council issued an order to raise £30,000 and a levy of 31,700 men in Leinster who were to be trained at once.

The Supreme Council also made its own seal, described as follows: "'Twas circular, and in its centre was a large cross, the base of which rested on a flaming heart, while its apex was overlapped by the wings of a dove. On the left of the cross was the harp, and on the right the crown." The motto on the seal was Pro Deo, Rege, et Patria, Hiberni Unanimes (For God, King and Fatherland, Ireland is United).

A National Treasury, a mint for making coins, and a press for printing proclamations were set up in Kilkenny. This first General Assembly sat until 9 January 1643.

Policies

The last piece of legislation agreed by Charles I and Parliament was the 1642 Adventurers' Act, which provided funds to suppress the 1641 Rebellion by confiscating "rebel" lands. In order to keep their estates, in the context of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms the Confederates claimed to be Royalists loyal to the king, which made reaching an agreement with him a matter of primary importance. As a result, the Confederacy never claimed to be an independent government and since only Charles could legally call Parliament, their General Assembly never claimed to be one, although this did not prevent it enacting legislation.

Confederate political demands included Irish self-government, secure tenure of their lands, amnesty for any acts committed during the Rebellion, an equal share in government positions and that these concessions be ratified by a post-war Parliament. In terms of religion, they insisted on toleration of Catholicism and in June 1645 added the stipulation that the Catholic clergy should retain all properties taken from the Church of Ireland since 1641. In reality, these were almost impossible to achieve, since they were asking Charles to make concessions he had refused to make to Parliament, while the vast majority of his advisors opposed them on the grounds that doing so would fatally undermine the Royalist cause in England and Scotland.

The Confederate position was further weakened by divisions between the Old English, mostly descendants of those who arrived during the Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland in 1172, and the native Gaelic Irish. While many historians dispute the extent of the differences between the two groups, there are significant variations in terms of political, religious and economic objectives. In general, the Old English wanted to regain the power and influence they had lost under the Tudors and although they were sincere Catholics, did not support establishing the church as the state religion. Gaelic Irish leaders such as Owen Roe O'Neill wanted to reverse the Plantations of Ireland, since this was the only way to retrieve their ancestral lands; however, they were far less united in their demands than the Old English and it has been argued they formed a pressure group, rather than a distinct political philosophy.

The 1643 Cessation

In September 1643, the Confederates negotiated a "cessation" with James Butler, 1st Duke of Ormonde, Royalist Governor of Ireland, which was signed at Jigginstown, near Naas. This ended hostilities ceased between the Confederates and Ormonde's royalist army based in Dublin. However, Murrough O'Brien, 1st Earl of Inchiquin, a rare Gaelic Irish Protestant who commanded the Royalist garrison of Cork, objected to the ceasefire and declared his allegiance to Parliament in England. The Scottish Covenanters had also landed an army in Ulster in 1642, which remained hostile to the Confederates and to the king – as did the Laggan Army of the Scottish settlers living in Ulster.

The Jacobite historian Thomas Carte mentioned the financial terms of the Cessation, whereby the Confederates undertook to pay Ormonde £30,000 in stages up to May 1644, half in cash and half in live cattle.

In 1644 the Confederates sent around 1,500 men under Alasdair MacColla to Scotland to support the royalists there under James Graham, 1st Marquess of Montrose against the Covenanters, sparking a Civil War – their only intervention on the Royalist side in the civil wars in Great Britain.

Papal Nuncio's arrival

The Confederates received modest subsidies from the monarchies of France and Spain, who wanted to recruit troops in Ireland but their main continental support came from the Papacy. Pope Urban VIII sent Pierfrancesco Scarampi to liaise with and help the Confederates' Supreme Council in 1643. Pope Innocent X strongly supported Confederate Ireland, over the objections of Cardinal Mazarin and the Queen, Henrietta Maria, who had moved to Paris in 1644. Innocent received the Confederation's envoy in February 1645 and resolved to send a nuncio extraordinary to Ireland, Giovanni Battista Rinuccini, archbishop of Fermo, who embarked from La Rochelle with the Confederacy's secretary, Richard Bellings. He took with him a large quantity of arms and military supplies and a very large sum of money. These supplies meant that Rinuccini had a big influence on the Confederates' internal politics and he was backed by the more militant Confederates such as Owen Roe O'Neill. At Kilkenny Rinuccini was received with great honours, asserting that the object of his mission was to sustain the King, but above all to help the Catholic people of Ireland in securing the free and public exercise of the Catholic religion, and the restoration of the churches and church property, but not any former monastic property.

The first "Ormonde Peace"
The Supreme Council put great hope in a secret treaty they had concluded with Edward Somerset, 2nd Marquess of Worcester, under his new title of Earl of Glamorgan, on the King's behalf, which promised further concessions to Irish Catholics in the future. Being a very wealthy English Catholic royalist, Glamorgan was sent to Ireland in late June 1645 with secret orders from Charles to agree to the Confederates' demands in return for an Irish Catholic army that would fight for the King in England. The plan would be anathema to most English Protestants at the time. A copy of Glamorgan's secret orders was publicised by the Long Parliament, and to preserve his support in Protestant England the King had to deny his link and even proclaimed Glamorgan as a traitor. To deter the use of Confederate Irish soldiers in England the Long Parliament passed the Ordinance of no quarter to the Irish in October 1644.

The nuncio considered himself the virtual head of the Confederate Catholic party in Ireland. In 1646 the Supreme Council of the Confederates had come to an agreement with Ormonde, signed on 28 March 1646. Under its terms Catholics would be allowed to serve in public office and to found schools; there were also verbal promises of future concessions on religious toleration. There was an amnesty for acts committed in the Rebellion of 1641 and a guarantee against further seizure of Irish Catholic rebels' land by acts of attainder.

However, there was no reversal of Poynings' Law, which meant that any legislation due to be presented to the Parliament of Ireland must first be approved by the English Privy Council, no reversal of the Protestant majority in the Irish House of Commons and no reversal of the main plantations, or colonisation, in Ulster and Munster. Moreover, regarding the religious articles of the treaty, all churches taken over by Catholics in the war would have to be returned to Protestant hands and the public practice of Catholicism was not guaranteed.

In return for the concessions that were made Irish troops would be sent to England to fight for the royalists in the English Civil War. However, the terms agreed were not acceptable to either the Catholic clergy, the Irish military commanders – notably Owen Roe O'Neill and Thomas Preston – or the majority of the General Assembly. Nor was the papal nuncio Rinuccini party to the treaty, which left untouched the objects of his mission; he had induced nine of the Irish bishops to sign a protest against any arrangement with Ormonde or the king that would not guarantee the maintenance of the Catholic religion.

Many believed the Supreme Council were unreliable since many of them were related to Ormonde or otherwise bound to him. Besides, it was pointed out that the English Civil War had already been decided in the English Parliament's favour and that sending Irish troops to the royalists would be a futile sacrifice. On the other hand, many felt after O'Neill's Ulster army defeated the Scots at the battle of Benburb in June 1646 that the Confederates were in a position to re-conquer all of Ireland. Furthermore, those who opposed the peace were backed, both spiritually and financially, by Rinuccini, who threatened to excommunicate the "peace party". The Supreme Council were arrested and the General Assembly voted to reject the deal.

Military defeat and a new Ormonde peace
After the Confederates rejected the peace deal, Ormonde handed Dublin over to a parliamentarian army under Michael Jones. The Confederates now tried to eliminate the remaining parliamentarian outposts in Dublin and Cork, but in 1647 suffered a series of military disasters. First, Thomas Preston's Leinster army was destroyed by Jones's parliamentarians at the Battle of Dungan's Hill in County Meath. Then, less than three months later, the Confederates' Munster army met a similar fate at the hands of Inchiquin's parliamentarian forces at the battle of Knocknanauss.

These setbacks made most Confederates much more eager to come to reach an agreement with the royalists and negotiations were re-opened. The Supreme Council received generous terms from Charles I and Ormonde, including toleration of the Catholic religion, a commitment to repealing Poyning's Law (and therefore to Irish self-government), recognition of lands taken by Irish Catholics during the war, and a commitment to a partial reversal of the Plantation of Ulster. In addition, there was to be an Act of Oblivion, or amnesty for all acts committed during the 1641 rebellion and Confederate wars – in particular the killings of British Protestant settlers in 1641 – combined with no disbanding of the Confederate armies.

However, Charles granted these terms only out of desperation and later repudiated them. Under the terms of the agreement, the Confederation was to dissolve itself, place its troops under royalist commanders and accept English royalist troops. Inchiquin also defected from the Parliament and rejoined the royalists in Ireland.

Civil War within the Confederation
However, many of the Irish Catholics continued to reject a deal with the royalists. Owen Roe O'Neill refused to join the new royalist alliance and fought a brief internal civil war with the royalists and Confederates in the summer of 1648. So alienated was O'Neill by what he considered to be a betrayal of Catholic war aims that he tried to make a separate peace with the English Parliament and was for a short time effectively an ally of the English parliamentary armies in Ireland. This was disastrous for the wider aims of the Confederacy, as it coincided with the outbreak of the second civil war in England. The Papal Nuncio, Rinuccini, endeavoured to uphold Owen Roe O'Neill by excommunicating all who in May 1648 took part in the Inchiquin Truce with the Royalists; but he could not get the Irish Catholic Bishops to agree on the matter. On 23 February 1649, he embarked at Galway, in his own frigate, to return to Rome.

It is often argued that this split within the Confederate ranks represented a split between Gaelic Irish and Old English. It is suggested that a particular reason for this was that Gaelic Irish had lost much land and power since the English conquest of Ireland and hence had become radical in their demands. However, there were members of both ethnicities on each side. For example, Phelim O'Neill, the Gaelic Irish instigator of the Rebellion of 1641, sided with the moderates, whereas the predominantly Old English south Wexford area rejected the peace. The Catholic clergy were also split over the issue.

The real significance of the split was between those landed gentry who were prepared to compromise with the royalists as long as their lands and civil rights were guaranteed, and those, such as Owen Roe O'Neill, who wanted to completely overturn the English presence in Ireland. They wanted an independent, Catholic Ireland, with the English and Scottish settlers expelled permanently. Many of the militants were most concerned with recovering ancestral lands their families had lost in the plantations. After inconclusive skirmishing with the Confederates, Owen Roe O'Neill retreated to Ulster and did not rejoin his former comrades until Cromwell's invasion of 1649. This infighting fatally hampered the preparations of the Confederate-royalist alliance to repel the invasion of parliamentarian New Model Army.

Cromwell's invasion
Oliver Cromwell invaded Ireland in 1649 to crush the new alliance of Irish Confederates and royalists. The Cromwellian conquest of Ireland was the bloodiest warfare that had ever occurred in the country and was accompanied by plague and famine. Kilkenny fell after a short siege in 1650. It ended in total defeat for the Irish Catholics and royalists. The pre-war Irish Catholic land-owning class was all but destroyed in this period, as were the institutions of the Roman Catholic Church. Most of the senior members of the Confederation spent the Cromwellian period in exile in France, with the English Royalist Court. After the Restoration, those Confederates who had promoted alliance with the Royalists found themselves in favour and on average recovered about a third of their lands. However, those who remained in Ireland throughout the Interregnum generally had their land confiscated, with prisoners of war executed or transported to penal colonies.

Significance
Confederate Ireland's style of parliament was similar to the landed oligarchy Parliament of Ireland established by the Normans in 1297, but it was not based on a democratic vote. Given their large notional power base, the Confederates ultimately failed to manage and reorganise Ireland so as to defend the interests of Irish Catholics. The Irish Confederate Wars and the ensuing Cromwellian conquest of Ireland (1649–53) caused massive loss of life and ended with the confiscation of almost all Irish Catholic-owned land in the 1650s, though some was re-granted in the 1660s. The end of the period cemented the English colonisation of Ireland in the so-called Cromwellian Settlement.

title: Confederate Ireland


text:
Personal flotation device

A personal flotation device (PFD; also referred to as a life jacket, life preserver, life belt, Mae West, life vest, life saver, cork jacket, buoyancy aid or flotation suit) is a flotation device in the form of a vest or suit that is worn by a user to prevent the wearer from drowning in a body of water. The device will keep the wearer afloat with their head and mouth above the surface – they do not have to swim or tread water in order to stay afloat and can even be unconscious.

PFDs are commonly worn on small watercraft or other locations where accidental entry into deep water may occur in order to provide immediate support for the wearer should they end up in the water. PFDs are also kept on large vessels for passengers to wear in an emergency in order to help them stay afloat should they be forced to enter the water or accidentally fall overboard during an evacuation. PFDs are commonly worn for swimming and/or other activities that require an individual to be in water. This is for reasons such as safety (to prevent the drowning of weak swimmers, swimmers in dangerous conditions or swimmers far from safety), to make swimming easier and less demanding, to allow someone who is unable to swim to safely enter water, or as assistance for activities such as water skiing.

PFDs are available in different sizes to accommodate variations in body weight. Designs differ depending on wearing convenience, the activities and conditions they are designed to be used in and the level of protection the wearer needs. There are three main types of PFDs: life jackets, buoyancy aids and survival suits; PFDs are most often constructed out of foam pieces, with the exception of some life jackets which are inflated with air. Other highly specialized forms of PFDs include buoyancy compensators used for scuba diving, and submarine escape devices.

History

The oldest examples of primitive life jackets can be traced back to inflated bladders, animal skins, or hollow sealed gourds for support when crossing deep streams and rivers. Purpose-designed buoyant safety devices consisting of simple blocks of wood or cork were used by Norwegian seamen.

In a letter to the Naval Chronicle, dated February 1802, Abraham Bosquet proposed issuing Royal Navy Ships with "strong canvas bags of dimensions, when filled with cork shavings, equal to about that of a bed bolster, coiled in manner like a collar, and sufficiently wide for the head and shoulders to pass through."

In 1804, a cork life jacket was available for sale in The Sporting Magazine.

In 1806, Francis Daniel, a physician working at Wapping, exhibited an inflatable life preserver, mounting a demonstration in which a number of suitably equipped men jumped into the Thames below Blackfriars Bridge, and variously played musical instruments, smoked pipes, discharged guns and drank wine, as the tide took them upstream. Daniel pursued his idea for some years, by his own account receiving a gold medal from the Royal Society of Arts after surrendering the idea to them.

Personal flotation devices were not part of the equipment issued to naval sailors until the early 19th century, for example at the Napoleonic Battle of Trafalgar, although seamen who were press-ganged into naval service might have used such devices to jump ship and swim to freedom.

Following the 1852 sinking of the troopship Birkenhead, Ensign G.A. Lucas of the 73rd Regiment of Foot wrote "Cornet Bond, 12th Lancers, was...the only person to have a lifejacket – a privately owned Macintosh Life Preserver and seems to have got ashore fairly easily."

It was not until lifesaving services were formed that the personal safety of lifeboat crews heading out in pulling boats in generally horrific sea conditions was addressed. The modern life jacket is generally credited to the Inspector of Lifeboats at the Royal National Lifeboat Institution in the UK, Captain John Ross Ward (later Vice Admiral of the Royal Navy). He created a brown cork vest in 1854 to be worn by lifeboat crews for both weather protection and buoyancy. They would be worn over the blue/grey waterproof oilskins

In 1900, French electrical engineer, Gustave Trouvé, patented a battery-powered wearable lifejacket. It incorporated small, rubber-insulated maritime electric batteries not only to inflate the jacket, but also to power a light to transmit and receive SOS messages and to launch a distress flare.

In 1904 the rigid cork material was supplanted by pouches containing watertight cells filled with kapok, a vegetable material. These soft cells were much more flexible and comfortable to wear compared with devices using hard cork pieces. Kapok buoyancy was used in many navies fighting in World War II. In 1972 yellow or red Beaufort synthetic foam life jackets supplanted kapok for 'inherently buoyant' (vs. inflated and therefore not inherently buoyant) flotation. These modern jackets could support not only the rescuer but the rescued at the same time.

The University of Victoria pioneered research and development of the UVic Thermo Float PFD, which provides superior protection from immersion hypothermia by incorporating a neoprene rubber "diaper" that seals the user's upper thigh and groin region from contact with otherwise cold, flushing and debilitating water.

During World War II, research to improve the design of life jackets was also conducted in the UK by Edgar Pask, the first Professor of Anaesthesia at Newcastle University. His research involved self-administered anaesthesia as a means of simulating unconsciousness in freezing sea-water. Pask's work earned him the OBE and the description of "the bravest man in the RAF never to have flown an aeroplane".

M1926 Inflatable Life Preserver Belt
The M1926 Life Preserver belt was issued to US infantry where they were on ships or near the water, in particular amphibious landings such as D-Day. The belt had two bottles that could be activated to inflate the belt if needed, or it could be blown up manually with a tube, if the  bottles failed.

Admiralty Pattern 14124 inflatable life ring
The Admiralty Pattern 14124 inflatable life ring was the main life preserver issued to British sailors at the start of WW2. It provided about 8.5 lbs of buoyancy. Its inherent flaw, and an issue with many life preservers at the time, was that it did not keep the wearer's head back out of the water while they were floating. This meant if they went unconscious they would roll forward and end up face down in the water and drown.

Mae West
The Mae West was a common nickname for the first inflatable life preserver, which was invented in 1928 by Peter Markus (1885–1974) (US Patent 1694714), with his subsequent improvements in 1930 and 1931. The nickname originated because someone wearing the inflated life preserver often appeared to be as large-breasted as the actress Mae West. It was popular during the Second World War with U.S. Army Air Forces and Royal Air Force servicemen, who were issued inflatable Mae Wests as part of their flight gear. Air crew members whose lives were saved by use of the Mae West (and other personal flotation devices) were eligible for membership in the Goldfish Club. British pilot Eric Brown noted in an interview that the Mae West device saved his life after he was forced into the ocean following the sinking of the aircraft carrier he was on, HMAS Audacity, by a U-boat in WW2. Out of the 24 crew in his group in the water, the only two who survived were two pilots wearing Mae Wests, the rest were sailors wearing more basic flotation devices (inflatable rings) that kept them afloat, but did not keep their heads out of the water.

Specifications
Devices designed and approved by authorities for use by civilians (recreational boaters, sailors, canoeists, kayakers) differ from those designed for use by passengers and crew of aircraft (helicopters, airplanes) and of commercial vessels (tugboats, passenger ferries, cargo ships). Devices used by government and military (e.g. water police, coast guard, navy, marines) generally have features not found on civilian or commercial models, for example compatibility with other items worn, like a survival vest, bulletproof vest/body armor, equipment harness, rappelling harness, or parachute harness, and the use of ballistic nylon cloth to protect pressurized canisters used for inflating the vest from injuring the wearer if struck by a round from a firearm. The ballistic cloth keeps the fragments from the canister from becoming shrapnel injurious to the user.

Design and regulation

Life jackets or life vests are mandatory on airplanes flying over water bodies, in which case they consist of a pair of air cells (bladders) that can be inflated by triggering the release of carbon dioxide gas from a canister—one for each cell. Alternately, the cells can be inflated "orally", that is by blowing into a flexible tube with a one-way valve to seal the air in the cell. Life jackets must also be supplied on commercial seafaring vessels, be accessible to all crew and passengers, and be donned in an emergency.

Flotation devices are also found in near water-edges and at swimming pools. They may take the form of a simple vest, a jacket, a full-body suit (one piece coverall), or their variations suited for particular purposes. They are most commonly made of a tough synthetic fiber material encapsulating a source of buoyancy, such as foam or a chamber of air, and are often brightly colored yellow or orange to maximize visibility for rescuers. Some devices consist of a combination of both buoyancy foam and an air chamber. Retroreflective "SOLAS" tape is often sewn to the fabric used to construct life jackets and PFDs to facilitate a person being spotted in darkness when a search light is shone towards the wearer. In the US, federal regulations require all persons under the age of 13 to wear a life jacket (PFD) when in a watercraft under 12 meters long. State regulations may raise or lower this number and must be followed when in that state's jurisdiction.

Buoyancy aid (foam core)

Buoyancy aids are designed to allow freedom of movement while providing a user with the necessary buoyancy. They are also designed for minimal maintenance and as they are only constructed from foam and can be mass-produced inexpensively, making them one of the most common forms of PFDs.

Some buoyancy aids also come designed especially for children and youth. These vests may include one or two understraps to be worn between the legs of the wearer and also a headrest flap. The understraps are designed to keep the vest from riding up when worn in the water and restrict the wearer from slipping out of the life vest. These straps are adjustable and are included on many different life vests designed to be worn by everyone from infants to adults. The headrest flap is designed to help support the head and keep it out of the water. A grab handle is attached to the headrest to be used if needed to rescue or lift someone out of the water.

Buoyancy aids are rated by the amount of buoyancy they provide in Newtons - the minimum rating to be considered suitable as an adult life-jacket for offshore use is 150 N.

Life jacket

Life jackets for outfitting large commercial transport ventures in potentially dangerous waters, such as coastal cruises, offshore passages, and overwater air flights, consisting of either a single air chamber or a pair of (twin or double) sealed air chambers constructed of coated nylon (sometimes with a protective outer encasing of heavier, tougher material such as vinyl), joined, and buckled with a side release buckle. For use aboard ships they may be constructed of foam. Twin air chambers provide for redundancy in the event of one of the air chambers leaking or failing to "fire", for example if the thin air cell fabric is sliced open by sharp metal fragments during emergency evacuation and egress. Most life jackets for leisure use are of the single air chamber type.

Aircraft devices for crew and passengers are always inflatable since it may be necessary to swim down and away from a ditched or submerged aircraft and inflated or foam filled devices would significantly impede a person from swimming downward in order to escape a vehicle cabin. Upon surfacing, the person then inflates the device, orally or by triggering the gas canister release mechanism. Most commercial passenger life jackets are fitted with a plastic whistle for attracting attention. It has a light which is activated when in contact with water.

Quality life jackets always provide more buoyancy than offered by the buoyancy aids alone. The positioning of the buoyancy on the wearer's torso is such that a righting moment (rotational force) results that will eventually turn most persons who are floating face down in the water (for example, because they are unconscious) into a face up orientation with their bodies inclined backward, unlike more simply designed common foam buoyancy vests. A life jacket that is too loose may not provide sufficient buoyancy in case of an emergency.

Today these air chamber vests are commonly referred to as 'inflatable life jackets or vests' and are available not only for commercial applications but also for those engaged in recreational boating, fishing, sailing, kayaking and canoeing. They are available in a variety of styles and are generally more comfortable and less bulky than traditional foam vests. There are also life vests made especially for women.

The air chambers are always located over the breast, across the shoulders and encircle the back of the head. They may be inflated by either self-contained carbon dioxide cartridges activated by pulling a cord, or blow tubes with a one-way valve for inflation by exhalation. Some inflatable life jackets also react with salt or fresh water, which causes them to self-inflate. The latest generation of self-triggering inflation devices responds to water pressure when submerged and incorporates an actuator known as a 'hydrostatic release'. All automatic life-jackets can be fired manually if required. Regardless of whether manually or automatically triggered, a pin punctures the cartridge/canister and the CO2 gas escapes into the sealed air chamber.

However, there is a chance that these water pressure activated inflation devices do not inflate the life jacket if a person is wearing waterproof clothing and falls into the water face-down. In these cases the buoyancy of the clothing holds a person on the water surface, which prevents the hydrostatic release. As a result, a person can drown although wearing a fully functional life jacket. In addition there are some circumstances in which the use of self-triggering devices can result in the wearer becoming trapped underwater. For example, the coxswain of a bowloader rowing shell risks being unable to escape should the craft capsize.

To be on the safe side, a pill-activated inflation device is preferred. A small pill that dissolves on water contact is the safest option, as it also works in shallow waters where a hydrostatic activator fails. This type of jacket is called an 'automatic'. As it is more sensitive to the presence of water, early models could also be activated by very heavy rain or spray. For this reason, spare re-arming kits should be carried on board for each life jacket. However, with modern cup/bobbin mechanisms this problem rarely arises and mechanisms such as the Halkey Roberts Pro firing system have all but eliminated accidental firing.

Drifting in open seas and international waters, as encountered on long sea voyages and by military forces, requires prolonged survival in water. Suitable life jackets are often attached to a vest with pockets and attachment points for distress signaling and survival aids, for example, a handheld two-way radio (walkie-talkie), emergency beacon (406 MHz frequency), signal mirror, sea marker dye, smoke or light signal flares, strobe light, first-aid supplies, concentrated nutritional items, water purification supplies, shark repellent, knife, and pistol.

Accessories such as leg straps can be utilized to keep the inflated chambers in position for floating in a stable attitude, and splash or face shields constructed of clear see-through vinyl covers the head and face to prevent water from waves from inundating the face and entering the airway through the nose or mouth.

Immersion suit

Some formats of PFDs are designed for long term immersion in cold water in that they provide insulation as well as buoyancy. While a wetsuit of neoprene rubber or a diver's drysuit provides a degree of flotation, in most maritime countries they are not formally considered by regulatory agencies as approved lifesaving devices or as PFDs.

It is possible for an incapacitated person in the water to float face-down while wearing only a wet suit or a dry suit since they are not designed to serve as lifesaving devices in the normal understanding of that term.

The Mark 10 Submarine Escape Immersion Equipment (SEIE) suit is intended to allow submariners to escape from much deeper depths than currently possible with the Steinke hood. Some United States Navy submarines already have the system, with an ambitious installation and training schedule in place for the remainder of the fleet.

Because it is a full-body suit, the Mark 10 provides thermal protection once the wearer reaches the surface, and the Royal Navy has successfully tested it at 180 m depths.

Buoyancy compensator
Scuba divers commonly wear a buoyancy compensator, which has an inflatable gas chamber. The amount of gas can be increased or decreased to enable the diver to ascend, descend or maintain neutral buoyancy at a given water depth and to provide positive buoyancy in an emergency to bring the diver to the surface or keep the diver at the surface.

Specialized
Specialized life jackets include shorter-profile vests commonly used for kayaking (especially playboating), and high-buoyant types for river outfitters and other whitewater professionals. PFDs which include harnesses for tethered rescue work ('live-bait rescue') and pockets or daisy-chains (a series of loops created by sewing flat nylon webbing at regular intervals for the attachment of rescue gear) are made for swiftwater rescue technicians.

PFDs for pets
Personal flotation devices have been developed for dogs and other pets.

While the USCG does not certify personal flotation devices for animals, many manufacturers produce life jackets for dogs and cats. Dogs and cats have been known to die from drowning, either because they do not know how to swim, or because they tire out from overexposure or old age, or have a medical complication such as a seizure, or become unconscious.

Most life jackets on the market are designed with foam that wraps around the animal's torso and neck. They provide a basic amount of buoyancy for a dog, but may not provide enough support for the head. They are not ideal for use with heavy dogs. However, they often incorporate a grab handle, which may help to hoist the dog back into the boat.

Although most pet life jackets are passive devices, there is at least one automatically inflated life jacket available for pets (made by Critter's Inflatable, LLC). An automatic flotation device is generally more expensive than a foam life jacket, but, like automatic PFDs designed for humans, they are less bulky to wear when not inflated, and when inflated may provide more buoyancy than foam devices. Automatic pet flotation devices are popular in the bulldog community, and also for water therapy where extra support may be needed under the head.

title: Personal flotation device


text:
Kaapmuiden

Kaapmuiden (Cape Mouth) is a small farming town situated at the confluence of the Kaap and Crocodile Rivers in Mpumalanga, South Africa. The town lies just off the N4 national highway and is marked by a large abandoned silo visible from the road. The silo has since been repainted to add to tourism appeal. The farms in the region produce sugarcane, subtropical fruit and vegetables. The town began as a junction on the Netherlands-South African Railway Company (NZASM)'s Pretoria - Delagoa Bay railway line.

Recently the town underwent some development due to the Sasol pipeline and construction and upgrading of the national highway. The Nkomazi Tollgate has subsequently been built on the N4 national route (Maputo Corridor) on the eastern outskirts of the town.

Selati Railway
In June 1890, Eugene, the younger of the Barons Oppenheim, sought to obtain a concession from the Government of the Zuid-Afrikaansche Republiek to construct a railway line to the Murchison Range goldfields along the Ga-Selati River. Work on the construction of the Selati Railway in the Transvaal Lowveld began early in 1893, with the line branching off from the Pretoria-Delagoa Bay mainline at a junction near Komatipoort.

The line was extended via Gravelotte and Tzaneen to a junction at Soekmekaar, where it met the line from Pietersburg to Messina in 1912. In 1963, the part of the line through the southern part of the Kruger National Park, from the junction near Komatipoort, was abandoned and replaced by a new line from the present junction near Kaapmuiden.

title: Kaapmuiden


text:
Wenlock Olympian Games

The Wenlock Olympian Games, dating from 1850, are a forerunner of the modern Olympic Games. They are organised by the Wenlock Olympian Society (WOS), and are held each year at venues across Shropshire, England, centred on the market town of Much Wenlock. One of the two mascots for the 2012 Summer Olympics was named Wenlock in honour of the Wenlock Olympian Games.

History
On 25 February 1850 the Wenlock Agricultural Reading Society (WARS) resolved to establish a class called The Olympian Class – "for the promotion of the moral, physical and intellectual improvement of the inhabitants of the town and neighbourhood of Wenlock and especially of the working classes, by the encouragement of outdoor recreation, and by the award of prizes annually at public meetings for skill in athletic exercise and proficiency in intellectual and industrial attainments". The secretary of the class and driving force behind the Olympian Games was Dr William Penny Brookes who was inspired to create these events through his work as a doctor and surgeon in the sprawling borough of Wenlock which consisted mainly of Madeley, Broseley and Much Wenlock.

The first meeting was held at Much Wenlock racecourse on 22–23 October 1850. These first Games were a mixture of athletics and traditional country sports such as quoits, football and cricket. Events also included running, hurdles and cycling on penny farthings. Some of the early Games included "fun events" such as the blindfolded wheelbarrow race and, one year (1851) an 'Old Women's Race' with the prize of a pound of tea.

In 1859 Wenlock Olympian Class sent £10 to Athens as a prize for the best runner in the Long Foot Race at the Zappas Olympics which was held in November that year – open only to Greek-speaking athletes. The Wenlock Prize, the largest prize on offer was won by Petros Velissarios of Smyrna (now İzmir) in the Ottoman Empire, one of the first international Olympians.

In 1860, Brookes introduced the Shropshire Olympian Games, with their first games held at Much Wenlock, despite 'vile weather'. Lieutenant Colonel Herbert Edwardes, who Brookes had invited to speak at the games, praised their founder and the WARS's work but disagreed with the Greek influence of the name 'Olympian' by publicly suggesting the games be called "'The Shropshire Class of British Work and Play', or anything else you will; but let it tell of English men and women, English boys and girls." Despite this the Olympian name stuck.

Following a dispute with WARS, in November 1860, the Wenlock Olympian Class separated from WARS and changed its name to Wenlock Olympian Society.

The first National Olympian Games were held in London in 1866 and were organised by the National Olympian Association (NOA) which had been co-founded by Brookes in 1865. The NOA ceased its operations in 1883.

Baron Pierre de Coubertin visited the Wenlock Olympian Society in 1890, which held a special festival in his honour. He was inspired by Dr Brookes and went on to establish the International Olympic Committee. Brookes was named as an honorary delegate at the 1894 Sorbonne Congress at which the IOC was established, although he was unable to attend due to ill health. The Wenlock Olympian Games continued intermittently after his death in 1895, with significant revivals in 1950 and 1977. The current series has been running since 1977, and has received official recognition from the IOC and the British Olympic Association (BOA), exemplified by visits from the Princess Royal for the BOA in 1990 and Juan Antonio Samaranch for the IOC in 1994.

The mascot for the London 2012 Summer Olympics was named Wenlock after Much Wenlock where the Wenlock Olympian Society and its Games began. The 2012 Summer Paralympics mascot was named Mandeville in honour of Stoke Mandeville Hospital, where the Paralympian Games originated.

The medals awarded featured Nike, the Greek goddess of victory, as do Olympic medals.

Following the unexpected death of President Roy Rogers, triple jump world record holder and Olympic gold medallist Jonathan Edwards, CBE, was elected President of the WOS in 2011.

Events
In 2017 the games included the following:

 * Archery
 * Athletics
 * Badminton
 * Fencing
 * Junior Biathlon
 * Kwik Cricket
 * Half Marathon
 * Netball
 * Road Race
 * Schools Hockey
 * Tennis
 * Triathlon
 * Volleyball
 * Live Arts, open to school age participants, consisting of the following:
 * {| class="wikitable"

! Area ! Awards
 * Music
 * Instrumentalist of the year Vocalist of the year
 * Speech and Drama
 * Verse speaking Reading for performance Creative verse writing Acting solo/Duo
 * Dance
 * Ballet Modern Tap Cabaret Song and dance Classical Lyrical Acrobatic
 * }
 * Dance
 * Ballet Modern Tap Cabaret Song and dance Classical Lyrical Acrobatic
 * }

title: Wenlock Olympian Games


text: Template:Ranger program

title: Template:Ranger program