text:
Talk:Mu'in al-Din Chishti

Untitled
This latest edit is repetitive. e.g. his birthplace is in the first and last paragraphs. Also, there is a contradiction where you say "Khwaja Moinuddin apparently never wrote down his teachings in the form of a book... Khawaja Moinuddin Chisti authored several books including ‘Anis al-Arwah’ and ‘Daleel al-Arefeen’ both of them dealing with Islamic code of living."

These paragraphs:
 * Khwaja Qutbuddin Baktiyar Kaki (d. 1235) and Hamiduddin Nagori (d. 1276) were Khawaja Moinuddin Chisti’s celebrated khalifas or disciples who continued transmitting the teachings of their master through their disciples, leading to the widespread proliferation of the Chistiyya order in India.He had a very confusing name.

Khawaja Mehmood Moena Doz Khujandi: (1192-1259)
 * The third khalifa of Qazi Hameed ud Din Nagori. He attended many meetings alongwith his Sheikh. His sheikh was much influenced by his manners and sayings. He attached himself with Baba Fareed ud Din Masood Ganj e shakr after death of his sheikh. He got the title of Jhaata from Baba Fareed however he was already famous for predictions. He was son of Sheikh Saeed ud Din Khujandi and nephew of Molana Wajeeh ud Din Khujandi (Father of Bibi Qursam Khatoon and father in Law of Baba Fareed). His shrine is in the yard of Dargah Khawaja Qutub ud Din Bakhtiyar Kaki near Hoz-e-Shamsi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 39.42.96.110 (talk) 11:12, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

 * Among Khawaja Qutbuddin Baktiyar’s prominent disciples was Fariduddin Ganj-i-Shakar (d. 1265), whose dargah is at Pakpattan (Pakistan). And Fariduddin’s most famous disciple was Nizamuddin Aulia (d. 1325) popularly referred to as Mahboob-i-Ilahi (God’s beloved) whose dargah is located in old Delhi.

 * From Delhi the disciples branched out to establish dargahs in several regions of India – from Sindh (now Pakistan) in the west to Bengal (now part Bangladesh) in the east and the Deccan in the south. But from all the network of Chisti dargahs Ajmer dargah took on the special distinction of being the ‘mother’ dargah of them all.

...deal with Khawaja Sahb's successors, not himself, so should either go in other articles or in a separate section. In the meantime I will try to make links where any of them already have articles.

I also don't understand why you removed my sentence "Eventually Moinuddin Chishti settled in Ajmer, India, after he said that the Prophet Muhammad had told him in a dream to spread Islam to India." This is my understanding of the story, as told by Dr Hasan Zahurul Sharib of the Gudri Shahi Sufi order. It would be unsuitable in an encyclopedia to describe it as "he was told by the Prophet to settle in...", but it is surely fine to say that Khawaja sahb himself made this claim. Gwaka Lumpa 18:10, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup Tag
I appreciate that it can be difficult for people whose first language is not English, but this section is deficient in grammar and hard to understand. I also do not think it should be in an article on Khawaja Sahb, because it is not about him. Why not move it to its own article? Gwaka Lumpa 11:05, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Reverting unexplained blanking
I have reverted the unexplained blanking of "Descendant And Sajjada Nashin Dargah Moinuddin chishti". I'm not sure that this was intentional. If it was intentional, I think some explanation is in order. I don't know the subject well, but I think the deleted section is rather questionable, and it might deserve permanent deletion. Even so, some explanation would be useful to other editors.--Nemonoman 06:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I still can't understand a word of that section, and suggest it be cleaned up and moved to a separate article Gwaka Lumpa 16:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree. I am going to delete it, as it doesn't seem to contain much useful information for the article. It is about someone who claims being a descendant of Moinuddin Chishti and nothing more. I don't see how this is of any value to the article. The fact that it is all praise, and written in unintelligible English doesn not help either. --Barastert 21:33, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Contradiction
This article contradicts the article Chishti Order. There (in paragraph 2) it says that Abu Ishaq Shami was the founder of the order, but in this article it says that Moinuddin Chishti founded it. Anyone know who actually founded it ? MP (talk•contribs) 22:02, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Moinuddin Chishti did not found the Chishti order. He introduced it in India where the order thrived and had profound impact.--Shahab (talk) 15:03, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Fixed. --Sarabseth (talk) 13:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Another Major Contradiction in this Article, Section Establishing the Chishti Order in South Asia
 * Point 1: "Moinuddin Chishti apparently never wrote down his teachings in the form of a book, nor did his immediate disciples, but the central principles that became characteristics of the Chishti order in India are based on his teachings and practices"

 * Point 2: "Moinuddin Chishti authored several books including Anīs al-Arwāḥ and Dalīl al-'Ārifīn, both of which deal with the Islamic code of living."

 * These statements are logically inconsistent, and cannot be true at the same time.عثمان وقاص چوہان 16:41, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Birth year mentioned differently
the first line says "moinuddin chisti was born in 1141 and died in 1236 CE.". However first line of section early life says "Moinuddin Chishtī is said to have been born in 1520, ".

these 2 lines are contradictory. Please correct. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.177.229.6 (talk) 16:37, 16 September 2013 (UTC)

Should Sufism be listed as his religion?
I'm of the view that the branch of the religion should not be listed in the infobox as, or alongside, the religion. In this case the guy was a Sufi scholar, but should this be listed here alongside "Islam"? George Custer's Sabre (talk) 13:31, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * , if specific person is related to certain kind of sect of that religion then it should be mentioned. You can see several articles mentioning someone as shia or sunni muslim. On your own user page you wrote you are "Sunni muslim" not just "muslim". Also read religion column of Osama bin Laden, Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi many others. Here Chisti is specifically known for Sufism, so there should be mention of it in infobox.-- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 13:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * User:Human3015, you have gone crazy. This is totally ignorance. is right. Mawlana Chisti was both Sunni and sufi. In that time Sufism was just like an organisation (currently we can call this as a political party or group like Tabligh or Jamaat Islam). However at present Sufism may be considered as the third of 4th largest branch of Islam, like the Ahmadi one. There is a huge difference between the old sufism (which was a kind of association) and the current sufism (totally a new belief). 78.149.204.76 (talk) 15:46, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

 * Also, it is a shame that his article is not updated regularly and it does not contain many sources. He is widely recognized as one of the greatest south Asians scholars in the History.--78.149.204.76 (talk) 15:51, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree that sufism shouldn't be listed as his religion since sufism is a sect while Islam is the religion. (I also agree that the article is woefully lacking in reliable sources. We shouldn't be using webpages like http://muslimcanada.org/sufi/chishti.html as a source. Aren't there any good books on Chishti?)--regentspark (comment) 16:35, 27 May 2015 (UTC)
 * As I said before, reliable sources will be provided asap. Here everyone agrees that Human3015 was making mistakes.78.145.28.52 (talk) 10:41, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Dear IP, it will be better if you come with an account. Anyway, first give reliable sources and then make edits. Don't give promise of reliable sources in talk, you need to give it instantly as soon as you make edits, otherwise you will get reverted. -- Human 3015  Say Hey!! • 16:49, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

There is no such thing as Sunni mysticism. There is Tasawuf or Sufism
There is no such thing as 'Sunni mysticism'. There is Tasawuf or Sufism and it is not bound by schisms in Islam. Many Sufis had Jewish and Christian disciples as well.--Wool Bridge (talk) 21:19, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Read WP:BOLD. — kashmiri  TALK  11:42, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress
There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Kwaja Garib Nawaj which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 03:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Conversion
On his orders the Muslim rulers forcefully converted 1 million Hindus to Islam Rajput5131 (talk) 09:27, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

Title picture
I have a great concern which is by the entire Muslim community. The picture on this article is of Indian PM which is disgrace for the Sufi saint. Kindly remove the picture and replace it with shrine of the holy saint 119.155.7.39 (talk) 07:46, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Source of death date
Where is the March 15, 1236 date of death sourced from? Several sources state the year being 1236, but none clearly state the month and day. Sufi wiki states May 21, 1230 (which seems unreliable based on the year being so different). Klausklass (talk) 16:59, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Mu'in al-Din Chishti


text:
Chinpokomon

"Chinpokomon" is the eleventh-aired and the tenth-produced episode of the third season of the American animated television series South Park. It originally aired on Comedy Central in the United States on November 3, 1999, making it the 42nd episode of the series. During this episode, the kids become fascinated with the latest fad: a fictional Japanese anime series called Chinpokomon and its related products, such as video games and collectible toys. It is a parody of the popular Pokémon media franchise. "Chinpokomon" was written by South Park co-creator Trey Parker, who also co-directed the episode together with animation director Eric Stough. The episode was nominated for an Emmy Award in 2000.

Plot
The children of South Park become obsessed with an animated Japanese anime cartoon, Chinpokomon (a parody of Pokémon). The cartoon features overt embedded marketing and subliminal messaging to encourage the purchase and consumption of Chinpokomon-related merchandise. Unbeknownst to the parents, Chinpokomon products all contain anti-American sentiments with the aim of converting American kids to Japanese child soldiers.

Kyle Broflovski is originally oblivious to the fad, and as its popularity increases he reluctantly attempts to keep up-to-date to avoid ridicule from his friends. However, the merchandise lineup is so extensive that he is always one step behind. Meanwhile, the boys make plans to attend the official Chinpokomon camp, which is actually a front for a recruit training boot camp designed by the Japanese government to train and brainwash the kids into becoming soldiers for an upcoming attack on Pearl Harbor. As the adults start to become aware of the scheme, the Japanese distract them by telling them that Americans have "huge penises" compared to the Japanese, a tactic that works well against the male characters.

The parents start to suspect the nonsensical cartoon is dangerous, as "stupidity can be worse than vulgarity and violence" and compare it to Battle of the Network Stars. Kyle's mother Sheila suggests it is just another harmless fad. This is juxtaposed with the truth of the fad's influence, which has turned the children into brainwashed soldiers and left Kenny McCormick in a trance-like state after an epileptic seizure caused from playing the Chinpokomon video game.

Becoming increasingly concerned, the parents attempt to defuse the fad's popularity by trying to manufacture new fads: The "Wild Wacky Action Bike", an abnormal plastic glow-in-the-dark bicycle contraption that cannot be steered, and "Alabama Man", an abusive, alcoholic, redneck action figure that comes with a bowling alley playset and a redneck wife to use as a punching bag. The boys, uninterested, call both the bike and action figure "gay".

As the boys march through the town with Emperor Akihito, President Bill Clinton will not act against the invasion as he too has fallen for the "incredibly large penis" trick. Finally, the parents decide to reverse psychology and pretend to be Chinpokomon fans themselves, figuring that whatever they like their children will immediately dislike. The trick works, and all the children except Kyle instantly lose all interest. Kyle claims that if he stops liking Chinpokomon now, he will be following the crowd, so he prepares to leave in a fighter jet to bomb Pearl Harbor. A heartfelt and contradictory speech by Stan Marsh confuses him into reluctantly getting off the jet.

The group decide to avoid fads for a while, and Kenny is discovered to have been dead for some time once his body explodes, unleashing a large number of rats. This outcome disgusts Eric Cartman while Stan and Kyle laugh.

Production
The chinpo or chinpoko element in Chinpokomon is actually a vulgar Japanese word for "penis". According to the DVD commentary, the Japanese man who repeats the "incredibly large penis" trick is based on someone the creators met in Beijing. South Park animator Junichi Nishimura, who Stone met in college, voices the Emperor in this episode. Saki Miata played the Japanese Woman in Live Action Commercial.

Critical reception
DVD Verdict described it as "perhaps the most devastating parody of the seemingly endless pop culture craziness of forced Japan fads", adding: "Beginning with the title and moving through awkward, amateur anime, video games that cause seizures, and parental confusion over what their kids see in the little crappy toys, the episode smacks of too much truth and contains many moments of ultra-high comedy...This particular episode is why South Park is sometimes begrudgingly called genius, even amongst those who consider it a peek inside the Antichrist's subconscious. It proves that, on occasion, Parker can take the envelope, fill it full of outrageous sentiments and blatant stereotyping, mix in a whole lot of social realities, and filter it through his own sense of tasteless humor and end up with yet another brilliant installment of his show."

ElderGeek described the episode as "a very ironic take on children’s trends and how debilitating they can be". Adam Crane of PixelatedPop ranked the episode 23rd in a top 25 greatest episodes list in 2012. ScreenJunkies wrote "The blindness of parents, the zombie-like children following a fad, and the irrational paranoia of Americans who fear the Japanese simply because they make the occasional incomprehensible TV show were all parodied to perfection". IGN said "'Chinpokomon' was a great rip on the whole Pokemon craze with a lot of crude jokes about Asian male anatomy".

The A.V. Club noted that this episode was South Park's first "fad episode", in which "Characters briefly latch onto something fleetingly popular and often inherently stupid—which is then obsessed about to the detriment of their relationships (or, occasionally, the safety of the entire town)—then, inevitably, they realize that the object of their obsession is dumb and drop it forever."

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

title: Chinpokomon


text:
Cacheu

Cacheu is a town in northwestern Guinea-Bissau lying on the Cacheu River, capital of the eponymous region. Its population was estimated to be 9,849.

Etymology
The town of Cacheu is situated in territory of the Papel people. The name is of Bainuk origin: Caticheu, meaning 'the place where we rest'.

History
Cacheu was one of the earliest European colonial settlements in sub-saharan Africa, due to its strategic location on the Cacheu river. Cacheu developed a European/Afro-European population from the late sixteenth century through informal settlement of Cape Verdian and Portuguese traders, adventurers and outcasts (lançados). The authorities in mainland Portugal also sent to Cacheu degredados - people condemned to exile for a variety of offences.

In 1567 the English slaver John Hawkins raided the settlement. Due to such threats and a period of social conflict with their hosts the Papels, in 1589 the traders sought and received permission from the king of Cacheu to build a fort. They then abandoned the town and moved en masse into the new stockade in 1591 in an attempt to avoid the control of the local government. The Papels unsuccessfully stormed the fort before an agreement was reached allowing cohabitation. The fort did not have a secure water supply, however, and the locals used their control over water to pressure the Portuguese into trade concessions.

In 1598 a resident priest was appointed, and in 1605 the settlement was offered a municipal charter by the Portuguese crown. At this time the settlement had around 1500 inhabitants, of whom 500 were white. A new fort, which still stands today, was built of stone in the 1640s.

Cacheu was an important slave trading point for the Portuguese in the Upper Guinea region, where the crown endeavoured to ensure that duties on all slaves exported were paid. It was also a center of boat-building, with most of the artisans being African. The lancados, Papels, and other European traders all regularly violated this supposed monopoly. To bolster these attempts, in 1676 the Portuguese launched the Company of Cacheu and Rivers and Commerce of Guinea, the first of several that tried and failed to control the trade of slaves from Cacheu to the New World. In 1684 a prominent lancado trader, Bibiana Vaz, even captured the captain-major and imprisoned him at Farim for 14 months. When representative of the Company arrived the 'Republic of Cacheu' refused to let them land, demanding control over trade and direct communication with the king. A triumvirate, which included Bibiana's brother, ruled the town "in the name of the people", meaning the Afro-Portuguese traders for several months before the company regained control.

The condition of the garrison deteriorated progressively from the latter part of the 17th century up through the 19th. In 1878, a reinforced Portuguese force successfully attacked Cacanda in retaliation for the earlier assassination of the captain-major of Cacheu, the first of a series of 'pacification campaigns' that would culminate in the final conquest of the region in 1914. As Portuguese Guinea expanded and solidified, however, towns such as Bolama, Bissau and Canchungo became administrative centers at the expense of Cacheu.

Cacheu Today
Roads in the town are paved with oil palm kernels. Notable buildings in Cacheu include the Portuguese-built 16th century fort, dating from the period when Cacheu was a centre for the slave trade. For more history, one can also visit the Cacheu Memorial of Slavery & Black Traffic memorial museum (Memorial da Escravatura e Tráfico Negreiro de Cacheu). Other attractions in the town include the Cacheu River Mangroves Natural Park and a regular market. The market serves the surrounding areas which export coconuts, palm oil and rice.

Twin towns – Sister cities
Cacheu is twinned with:

 * Lisbon, Portugal

title: Cacheu


text:
Merbaka

Merbaka ((το) Μέρμπακα (n.) or (ο) Μέρμπακας (m.)) is a village and local community of the municipal unit of Midea, in the municipality of Nafplio, in the regional unit of Argolis, in the Peloponnese region.

Name
Merbaka is the village's traditional name, but officially it is called Agia Trias (Αγία Τριάς) in Katharevousa, or Αγία Τριάδα in Demotic). The village was officially renamed on December 29, 1953, in keeping with a broader program of Hellenization of geographical names in Greece.

While the village was considered historically to be inhabited by Arvanites who speak Arvanitika, today it is considered more assimilated, in comparison to the Arvanitika villages of Midea and Manesis.

Merbaka is thought to have been named for William of Moerbeke, a 13th-century Roman Catholic archbishop of Corinth, scholar and Philhellene from Flanders. A roughly contemporaneous Byzantine-Gothic Church of the Dormition of the Mother of God (Ναός της Κοίμησις Θεοτόκου, popularly known as Παναγία της Βούζης, Panagia tis Bouzis, "Our Lady of Bouzis") in the village may have been built under his auspices. The church's popular name is held to have come from a prominent Lemnian family of landowners who donated the land for a mediaeval monastery nearby; their name and social position is attested by contemporaneous documents with the seal of Michael VII Doukas. The monastery was sited further inland from its existing twin, the Monastery of Areias near Nafplio – popularly known as "The Holy Mountain" — to protect the monks and ecclesiastical property from piratical raiding.

Merbaka's official name likely stems from the inclusion of three "saints" on a re-used Classical pediment on the thirteenth-century church: villagers likely interpreted these figures as a representation of the Holy Trinity, and unofficially renamed the church to reflect this; in time, the name was applied to the new church, and later, to the village itself. The older church includes other recycled antiquities like a Roman dedication, in Latin, to Quintus Caecilius Metellus Creticus, a Roman proconsul in Greece who was noted for his suppression of piracy.

History
From the end of the Sixth Ottoman-Venetian War to 1770, when it was attacked by bandits, Merbaka was the seat of the Orthodox Metropolis of Nauplion and Argolis, due to the Venetian imposition of a Latin bishop at Argos.

The modern church of the Holy Trinity, first erected in 1898, was torn down and rebuilt in 1934. A plaque on the front of the belltower says that the clock was donated in 1952.

Merbaka is part of the municipal unit of Midea. According to the 2001 Greek census, the village had a population of 1,267 inhabitants. Before the Kapodistrias plan, and the Kallikratis Programme, the village was part of the Nafplia Province in the nome (prefecture) of Argolis, in the geographic region of the Peloponnese.

Notable people

 * Theofanis Tombras - former general manager of OTE and alleged participant in the "Koskotas scandal", for which he was acquitted; born in Merbaka, he became engaged in the fruit-processing business in Argolis, which continued after his retirement from public life

title: Merbaka


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pol Pot of Tamil Eelam

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was merge and redirect to Velupillai Prabhakaran. Deathphoenix 23:55, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Pol Pot of Tamil Eelam

 * Blatant violation of the neutral point of view and of Godwin's law. There is a legitimate article about this person at Velupillai Prabhakaran. Susvolans (pigs can fly) Did you know that there is a proposal to treat dissent from naming conventions as vandalism? 19:48, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect. Gazpacho 00:11, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge, yes. Radiant! 09:48, Feb 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge with Velupillai Prabhakaran. Megan1967 00:23, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: see Wikipedia talk:Votes for deletion for issues with merging this page. Susvolans (pigs can fly) Did you know that there is a proposal to treat dissent from naming conventions as vandalism? 11:41, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge and delete. Fishal 20:51, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

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


text: User talk:65.166.76.229

title: User talk:65.166.76.229


text:
Talk:Catherine Howard

Henry Manox redirect??????
Why the hell does Henry Manox redirect here?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????// — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.167.8.216 (talk) 13:04, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree. He should have his own entry.--AlwynJPie (talk) 23:39, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Nickname
Katherine's nickname was Kitty. She was known as Kitty Howard. And her name was spelt Katharine or Katherine, not Catherine. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.149.149.17 (talk) 18:47, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

She seems to have signed her name "Katheryn." Perhaps her name was latinized to Catherine.97.83.34.156 (talk) 22:47, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Dates
If Katherine Howard was "definitely dead" before she was 21, then how could she possibly have been born between 1520 and 1525 and died in 1548? Either the portrait comment is incorrect, or Catherine's date of birth is later.

Katherine was definitely dead before she was 21 because she died in the early months of 1542, not 1548. The general consensus favours a date of birth either in 1521 or 1525.Gboleyn 15:29, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Eh?
Why are there two identicle portraits of Catherine? The second one is only smaller, and a bit brighter. I honestly see no real difference between them, and wonder why we can't just combine the captions onto the large one (which, to me, doesn't look so pixel-y)?

"Fraser has persuasively argued that the above portrait is one of Jane Seymour's sister, Elizabeth Seymour-Cromwell. " I think someone changed the top image81.158.255.21 18:34, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Yeah, there's something wrong here. Both images are of the same portrait. The top image is unanimously attributed to Holbein in a Google search. There isn't enough information about the second watercolor (artist, date, etc.) to easily find another copy. I'll keep looking, but recommend we delete the 2nd Holbein image and change the article to indicate that, although the picture exists, we don't have a copy of it.--Marysunshine 22:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I did some looking around, and I think the Holbein image is actually this. (Larger image available here.) That image appears to be under copyright by the National Portrait Gallery of London, so perhaps that's why it was removed (?). Google search is distorted because most sites feed off Wikipedia's (incorrect?) article here.--Marysunshine 22:20, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I went ahead and edited the redundant image out of the page. Both images are of uncertain origin, so I also removed the POV statements about which one was more likely a legitimate portrait of Catherine. Also, I corrected a few typos and altered the text to discuss both pictures (linking to the National Gallery image as per copyright). --Marysunshine 22:36, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Edited biography to remove unsourced POV/update writing style, added references, flagged two statements for citation, and added subheads to the biography. Hopefully this has improved the article a bit. I'm still vaguely stumped on the portrait issue -- both of them seem to be attributed to Holbein as "unknown, previously thought to be Catherine Howard." Oh well.--Marysunshine 01:22, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Is anyone aware of why Catherine Howard is flagged as a courtesan? It seemed an unusual way to find my way to her page.

im not sure 62.56.56.183 (talk) 11:02, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

She should not be. Yet she was a woman who had pre-marital relationships and a flirtation, or possibly an affair, during marriage. By courtesan, we would usually mean prostitute, and her extra-marital relations were certainly not for money. However, she could meet dictionary.com's definition: a prostitute or paramour, esp. one associating with noblemen or men of wealth. [Origin: 1540–50; woman of the court, deriv. of corte court] Boleyn (talk) 17:30, 23rd march 09 (UTC)

K/Catherine Howard
Given that alternate spellings were rife in this era, I propose we stick with "Catherine" (which is the name of the article) unless quoting or referencing sources that refer to her by another variant. --Marysunshine 18:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

 * I looked her up on the official site of the British Kingdom. Her name is spelled with a K there, see http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/page19.asp

As this is the official site, I think the article name as well as all the mentionings in the article itself should be changed. Please tell me whether you agree? Kimelinor 18:26, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * That may well be the 'official' spelling of her name, as the royals spell it. However, traditionally, historical royals don't get the luxury of an 'official' spelling - their names will be spelled as appropriate to country, language, politics, period of history, etc. Consequently, english wikipedia uses the form of name most common in the English-speaking world: which in this case, courtesy of google, is | 130,000 results for "Catherine Howard", as opposed to | 52,000 results for "Katherine Howard". Thus, that's the spelling English wikipedia uses. Michael Sanders 20:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I can imagine that it handier to use a spelling everyone expects, but isn't the role of an encyclopedia to use an 'official' term? You argue that historically the spelling was unsure, but apparently to the royals/officials it is not anymore today; they choose a K. Especially in the case of a name, the spelling is vital rather than the meaning. As this is english wikipedia: (so not American) why should the american spelling overrule the british one, although the subject of the spelling was actually britsh?

 * You can make sure everybody is able to reach the proper site, as a matter of fact "Katherine Howard" in wikipedia already leads directly to this site, so it can be done vice versa as well.

As for your example of google, obviously most Katherine/ Catherine Howards don't refer to the wife of Henry VIII, this is therefore in my view not sufficient reason to use a C rather than a K. Kimelinor 13:27, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I know I'm a year late, but I agree on its own that's convincing. The Google search only shows that "Catherine Howard" is a more common name than "Katherine Howard." It doesn't necessarily say it's a more common spelling for this particular woman. Still "Catherine Howard" queen does get more Google Scholar hits than "Katherine Howard" queen so I guess it works. I've always seen her name start with a "K" though and that's the only start we can find by her.--T. Anthony (talk) 13:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

 * Just thought I'd throw a wrench into the discussion (and add somebody else's two cents). Antonia Fraser uses the "K" spelling for Catherine Howard in The Wives of Henry VIII (ISBN 0140132937), though purely to distinguish her from Catherine Parr. Her logic, as I recall, was as follows: "C" for Catherine of Aragon, to follow the Spanish "Catalina"; "C" for Catherine Parr, who was probably/plausably named for Catherine of Aragon; and "K" for Catherine/Katherine Howard, as I said, to reduce confusion. Then again, Catherine of Aragon, seems to have preferred the spelling "Katherine" in England, per the same source, so the point may well be moot. — AnnaKucsma   (Talk to me!) 21:06, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

 * Royals don't get 'official' terms: as the Fraser example aptly proves, historians and non-historians alike spell and render royal names any way they like, for a variety of reasons - sometimes there is a commonly accepted spelling/rendering amongst those of a same language (e.g. the wife of Charles VI of France is generally 'Isabeau of Bavaria' in English, not 'Isabella' or 'Elisabeth of Bavaria'). English wikipedia's response to any spelling/name version which is uncertain, or varied, is to adopt that form most commonly used in the English language, on the basis that most people will type in that version of the name when they search for the person (and it is considered good form to keep the article at that version, to avoid 'unsightly' redirect signs at the top of the page), and generally illustrated for convenience sake by an online search (although those can be challenged, they are accepted as a rule of thumb in all but the most ludicrous cases - e.g. if a derogatory term is more commonly used than the proper name - since the person is considered notable enough to be the subject of search engine 'hits' rather than a non-notable namesake; in the case of two notables sharing the same name, I believe more complex searches are practised).

 * And to clarify: when I refer to this as 'English wikipedia', I mean of course 'English language wikipedia' - i.e. the version which serves anyone who can read and write English, be they in 'England', America, another English-speaking country, or simply a polyglot. And, to my knowledge, there is no straightforward American/English spelling of 'Catherine/Katherine Howard' (I suppose 'Kathryn' is a particularly American spelling, but have never seen any references to 'Kathryn Howard'): both spellings are used by both. It's just that 'Catherine Howard' is the most common formulation, and thus the article title. Michael Sanders 22:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I understand your point, and although I do not agree entirely, I think this is definately not a case of a clear answer and therefore subject to endless discussion. My suggestion would be, keep the name of the article as it is, but move the name reference up from the notes to the end of the introduction in order te clarify that in many books, musea and 'official' royal documents she is -now- spelled with a K.

Does anyone have any objections to that? Kimelinor 06:57, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

 * I moved the note up for that purpose. If you want to add anything to that, do so by all means. Michael Sanders 15:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I think K is much more accurate- Chloe2kaii7

Katheryn is more accurate. The signature shown on the page suggests a spelling with a K would be more appropriate. Herivelismus (talk) 11:14, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

But did Catherine know how to spell her name? Who would have told her? Did whoever it was know if it was correct? If she was named after her father's sister it is quite likely that her father would have wanted her name to have been spelt the same way. --AlwynJPie (talk) 23:58, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Henry Mannox
A knowleadgable editor should look at the article Henry Mannox and do something with it (merge it here probally, or prod for deletion). The fact that he is not mentioned in this article conserns me. Jon513 16:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the suggestion to merge the articles, unless there is an editor with sufficient information to produce a proper article about Henry Mannox Haemo 03:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

He should have a seperate entry ever if there is only a brief explanation of who he was; it is easier for reference.--AlwynJPie (talk) 00:03, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Did Henry sign the bill of attainder?
The bill of attainder article claims that Henry VIII delegated royal assent in this case, to avoid having to sign personally. This article claims that he did sign personally. Which is correct? here is a citation which claims not.

Henry did not sign it personally. The Council affixed his seal and the declaration 'Le roy le veut' ('the King wills it') with his permission. User:Gboleyn

Portrait
I am sure I read somewhere that the portrait of Catherine Howard, given on this page, had in fact been identified to be of Anne Parr, and that as such no authentic portrait of Catherine Howard existed. Has anyone else heard this? Frickeg 05:18, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Do we mean Catherine Parr. It is certainly a Queen, wearing an identifiable royal jewel, & might just have been painted in the 4 mths between Parr's mariage in 1543 & Holbein's death. But I've never heard Parr suggested, & the Royal Collection website entry doesn't mention this idea. Johnbod (talk) 16:47, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * No, not Catherine - her sister Anne. I have a feeling that it was in one of David Starkey's books. Frickeg (talk) 02:20, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

According to Antonia Fraser, in her book "The Six Wives...", there is no known portrait of Katherine Howard that survived. Remember, she wasn't queen for very long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.208.169.17 (talk) 01:07, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Isn't the statement in regards to the small picture, "So, whilst it is almost certain that the portrait is not Catherine Howard, but rather Henry's sister-in-law, Elizabeth Seymour, the miniature shown above right is very likely to be Henry's unfaithful fifth Queen," contradictory? The statement should be more un-biased (and perhaps make more sense?) so I'm going to edit it. --98.222.76.79 (talk) 03:35, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Does the first 2 sentences of the Portraits section really belong with the Jane Seymour article, suddenly switching to Howard at sentence 3? Its a very strange start to a discussion on Catherine's portraits Rajmarshall (talk) 20:02, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Weight
I changed the wording in the Marriage section, about Henry's weight, slightly. It read as too definite before. Scholars are only estimating Henry's girth at the time based on portraits and suits of armor he is known to have worn from the time period. --Hiraeth 01:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Her last words were, "I die a Queen, but I would rather have died the wife of Culpepper."
What is the primary source supporting this statement? If memory serves me this alleged quote came from a pamphlet written by a Spanish diplomat or agent who was very critical of Henry VIII and who was not himself present at the execution. The pamphlet was written and circulated as part of a smear-campaign against the king and attempted to romanticise Catherine's relationship with Culpepper with Henry playing the part of the ogre ruining the life and love of two young people.

If I remeber correctly none of the true eyewitness-accounts of the people present at the execution mention Catherine saying anything like that. Unfortunately I don't rememeber the name of the Spanish diplomat but I shall endeavour to find it and the text of the pamphlet and something on the discussion about its veracity. Perhaps someone else who knows what I'm talking about can corroborate if, indeed, I am right.

If I am, I feel that the quote should be removed or that it should state clearly that it is uncertain whether she said it or not. Nothingbutmeat 12:07, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

 * Though this is an old posting and I notice that a source has been added, the article is still structured to imply that the quote is actually true, whereas even the source cited says it was an invention. I have added the rest of the information from the cited source.24.190.34.219 (talk) 07:09, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

This is a misquote. No contemporary account supports this in any way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pphilpo (talk • contribs) 20:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

More than likely she did not say it because she was not Queen. Henry had the marriage annulled before she died. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.127.106 (talk) 18:43, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

She would have been too frightened to utter such words.--AlwynJPie (talk) 00:09, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Mistake in name
Has Katherine / Katherine. I'll amend to Catherine / Katherine, per our article name. --Dweller 12:03, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Trivia removed
It not relevant to the article whom is a distant relation to Catharine. Every monarch page would be full of people's names if this mattered. Trivia sections are also, in general, not necessary. If the information is useful it can go on that person's page. 24.159.242.254 (talk) 02:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Another name error
Why the hell is there a period at the end of the article? Shouldn't the article be at Catherine Howard, rather than a redirect to Catherine Howard.? — AnnaKucsma    Speak!  18:56, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Least educated wife?
It says she became the least educated of Henry VIII's wives, yet she could read and write. Contrast this to Anne of Cleves who received no formal education and could only read and write in German. Also contrast this to Jane Seymour who could only read and write her name. I found this info on their respective Wikipedia pages. Maybe an expert can find a citation for this, because right now it appears Anne of Cleves or Jane Seymour deserves the title least educated. Imogenne (talk) 20:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

I think this should be removed. All three wives you mention were, as far as we are aware, literate only in their first languages. I'd be interested to see a quote saying that Jane Seymour could only write her name, this doesn't fit in with what else I've read. Catherine was certainly barely literate, as her surviving letter to Thomas Culpeper proves, but it could be replaced with a comparison to the well-educated Katherine of Aragon and Anne Boleyn rather than the title of 'worst', which will be disputed. Boleyn (talk) 05:54, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

 * I've reworded the sentence to make it more neutral and consequently added a source24.190.34.219 (talk) 01:29, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Lambeth Palace
It says she grew up in Lambeth Palace - but that was the archbishop's home ? What was she doing there ? -- Beardo (talk) 04:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

She grew up in Lambeth, at her step-grandmother's house, but this was not Lambeth Palace. Boleyn (talk) 05:30, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Catherine was most likely born in Lambeth — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlwynJPie (talk • contribs) 10:50, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Lacks citations
The article needs more in-line citations.--Jeanne Boleyn (talk) 18:39, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Page protection
There have been recurrent attempts by anonymous IP editors, apparently working together, to insert a rather dubious claim by a Peter Clarke regarding Catherine Howard, the latest sample found here. There is no source in this version and the Wikilink on Clarke's name leads to a disambiguation page. A previous version quoted a book with the ISBN 0-04-054363-6, which is invalid. Furthermore, intermediate edits like this and this lead me to doubt the constructive intentions of the editor(s). This has lead me revert the changes and semi-protect the article for a week. Renewed attempts will lead to a longer protection period. Favonian (talk) 11:32, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

 * The Peter Clarke who is a professor at Newcastle is a geologist. Something fishy is going on. john k (talk) 19:50, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Wingate in County Durham as Catherine's place of birth appears made up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlwynJPie (talk • contribs) 10:36, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

Second Portrait
their is no official portrait of Catherine but historians believe that the one shown first (at the top of the page) is her. but the second portrait has recently been disassociated with her and historians believe it is more likely to be Katherine Parr — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.210.171.136 (talk) 09:18, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Place of birth
I have been unable to find any credible historical connection with Catherine Howard and Wingate, County Durham.

In most biographies, when her place of birth is specifically mentioned, it is usually Lambeth or London. It is believed her mother, Jocasta "Joyce" Culpeper, who was born in Oxon Hoath in Kent (c1480-1531), already had 9 other children to look after before Catherine was born. This indicates that she was constantly pregnant or nursing throughout her adult life and unlikely to have traveled far.

Wingate in County Durham is 270 miles away from London; unlike today a journey from London to Durham would have taken many days by land or sea and would have been very uncomfortable and tiring for anyone.

I cannot find evidence that Catherine Howard ever left South-East England before the Royal Progress of 1541 where she accompanied Henry and his entourage as far north as York which is 209 miles from London? Wingate is over 60 miles further north. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlwynJPie (talk • contribs) 11:40, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Date of birth
There is a wide range of date given for her date of birth between 1518 and 1527. I would like to know what the most likely date is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlwynJPie (talk • contribs) 11:48, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Should her most probable date of birth be changed from 1523 to 1521 as this is the date estimated by the most credible historians?AlwynJPie (talk) 14:24, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

On further evidence perhaps 1523 is a more likely date for her birth. http://www.philippagregory.com/news/news/346 http://onthetudortrail.com/Blog/2014/08/01/katherine-howards-birthday-a-guest-post-by-conor-byrne/ AlwynJPie (talk) 23:02, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Place of birth
Lambeth or London seems the most likelyAlwynJPie (talk) 18:56, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

I have been unable to find any credible historical connection with Catherine Howard and Wingate, County Durham.

In most biographies, when her place of birth is specifically mentioned, it is usually Lambeth or London. It is believed her mother, Jocasta "Joyce" Culpeper, who was born in Oxon Hoath in Kent (c1480-1531), already had 9 other children to look after before Catherine was born. This indicates that she was constantly pregnant or nursing throughout her adult life and unlikely to have traveled far.

Wingate in County Durham is 270 miles away from London; unlike today a journey from London to Durham would have taken many days by land or sea and would have been very uncomfortable and tiring for anyone.

I cannot find evidence that Catherine Howard ever left South-East England before the Royal Progress of 1541 where she accompanied Henry and his entourage as far north as York which is 209 miles from London? Wingate is over 60 miles further north. AlwynJPie (talk) 19:00, 12 February 2013 (UTC) AlwynJPie (talk) 19:05, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

hatnotes without citations!
This: ^The portrait, believed to be Catherine Howard, has been persuasively identified through the jewels on her dress, which match those in her inventory. <- was put in by an anon IP from what I have been able to see. People, hatnotes require RS citations like anything else. I am removing it for now - if you have a reference, add it again. HammerFilmFan (talk) 02:20, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Annulled or not?
Our infobox says the marriage was annulled, which can only have been before she was executed. But Wives of Henry VIII strongly suggests that no annulment took place. It mentions the annulments of other marriages of Henry's, but not of Catherine Howard's.

So, what is the accurate historical position? --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  21:46, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

 * Alison Weir, The Six Wives of Henry VIII says:
 * The marriage of Henry VIII and Katherine Howard was never formally annulled ... and the King became a widower on Katherine's death.

 * This discussion comments:
 * Alison Weir (The Six Wives of Henry VIII) says the Howard marriage was "never formally annulled." David Loades' The Tudor Queens of England notes that "by 22 November [1541] the Council was convinced of the guilt of all three [Howard, Dereham, Culpeper]. On that day it was decreed that Catherine was no longer to be styled Queen but only the Lady Catherine Howard. This had no judicial significance, but was perhaps a pointer to the way in which it had been decided to proceed against her.

 * Possibly it was this action by the Council that has led people to assume the marriage was annulled. A lot of secondary sources state that while confined at Syon, Catherine was "served as queen" or "attended as queen," and the primary sources keep referring to her still as the queen, so perhaps the Privy Council's decision was not generally known or published. There was also a law in effect against speaking against the queen, whoever it was, so perhaps everyone was just being careful. (end quote)

 * So, it seems clear that she remained Henry's queen right up to her death.  I'll amend the infobox.  --   Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  23:27, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Duke of Grafton, in Tudor times?
"On the 29th [August 1540] the Duke of Grafton arrived for a Council meeting."

Really? According to Duke of Grafton there was no such title before 1675. Or is that article seriously mistaken? Harfarhs (talk) 20:53, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Margaret Douglas
On this edit, I'm not sure Margaret Douglas couldn't have had her portrait painted while in the Tower or Syon; she was allowed correspondence and gifts from the king at about the same time, and Syon complained about her rather worldly train of people and activities. The portrait also looks pretty penitent, even without what is probably a Holbein portrait miniature frame whose back depicts Lot's wife turning to a pillar of salt. I've tentatively clarified, given a more precise reference, and restored it. If there is something I don't know which makes this potential identification really unlikely or impossible, please let me know, and of course I'll remove it. HLHJ (talk) 00:18, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

The subject of the Toledo portrait was twenty-one (not twenty) years of age. Margaret Douglas was twenty-one from 8 October 1536 until October 1537 while she was imprisoned, first in the Tower then (from November 1536) at Syon. During this time she was in disgrace, for having become secretly engaged to Thomas Howard without Henry VIII's permission (a serious offence). Bear in mind that the king had no male heir until Queen Jane Seymour gave birth to a son on 12 October 1537. Margaret was finally released on 29 October 1537. Thomas Howard died in the Tower two days later. When his son, Edward, was born, the king convinced himself that Margaret, like his daughters, was illegitimate. Thus rendered harmless, she was restored to favour. It would have been extraordinary had Margaret Douglas been permitted to have her portrait painted during her imprisonment. Moreover, after her arrival at Syon, Margaret couldn't afford to pay her servants or provide food and drink, let alone cover the not inconsiderable expense of a portrait by Hans Holbein!

"On the bodice of her gown, is a brooch from which hangs a circular pendant with a diamond at the centre and a biblical theme: Lot with his family, guided by an angel, fleeing from Sodom. To the left of the central gem is Lot’s wife who was turned to a pillar of salt because she disobeyed God and looked back to Sodom. A design by Holbein for this pendant survives in the British Museum."

British Museum number SL,5308.25. Medallion of Lot with his family, guided by an angel, fleeing from Sodom, one of ten designs for medallions, from the ‘Jewellery Book’. https://research.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=720738&partId=1

Pendant jewels with a classical or biblical theme were popular with ladies of the Tudor court, for example Lady Lee: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Lee_(lady-in-waiting)#/media/File:Workshop_of_Hans_Holbein_the_Younger_-_Portrait_of_Margaret_Wyatt,_Lady_Lee_(1540).jpg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.214.99.67 (talk) 03:29, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

 * God bless you for this comment. 216.154.5.238 (talk) 00:19, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Cleves/Howard miniature debate
A lot of dubious claims have been surfacing about the miniature of Katherine being Anne of Cleves with poor evidence other than resemblance and an contemporary testimony. I’ve already sent in a request to get this page protected because of them. Dancingtudorqueen (talk) 14:38, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Pregnancy?
I think at some point there was a false pregnancy. Oric22 (talk) 06:21, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Name
Catherine of Aragon should be Catherine, because her name was Catalina. Catherine Parr was most likely named after Catherine of Aragon. Catherine Howard should be referred to as Katherine, seeing as we're not sure if she was named after Catherine of Aragon. Joyce Howard didn't have the close relationship with Catherine of Aragon that Maud Parr enjoyed- there's no reason that Katherine should be called Catherine, seeing as Joyce probably never even worked for Catherine of Aragon.

True, many women were called Catherine in 1520s England, but none so prominent as the queen. There are no close relatives that I know of called Catherine in their family. Yes, there are no relatives called Katherine either, but the Howards were most likely Roman Catholics. Katherine was a name brought from the Crusades, therefore the "Holy Land". Joyce and Edmund Howard would have named their daughter after a saint.

Hence, she's Katherine. If not for all usage, then at least to differentiate from Catherine Parr and Catherine of Aragon. If they're in the same sentence- Catalina of Aragon, Katherine Howard, and Catherine Parr. Oric22 (talk) 16:56, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Catherine Howard


text: Template:Starbox short

title: Template:Starbox short


text:
Wikipedia:Canada collaboration/Participants

Collaborators
The following wikipedians have expressed interest in participating to the CCOTW:

 * 1) Circeus - Self-nominated maintenance officer
 * 2) Lommer | talk
 * 3) Earl Andrew
 * 4) Deathphoenix - mainly for editing and copyediting
 * 5) Sunray
 * 6) Jord - though the page seems to have gone inactive again :S
 * 7) Bremen 21:39, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * 8) Lorddude 23:17, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC) - just a little
 * 9) Samaritan - sorry I'm late! back from Wikisabattical.
 * 10) Ben Babcock - I'm proud to help out as much as I can.
 * 11) Captmondo - I like the CCOTW idea and will help where possible.
 * 12) Double Blue  (Talk)
 * 13) E Pluribus Anthony 16:52, 3 Jul 2005 (UTC): I would love to assist as much as I can but would also like to be apprised of process, if any. :)
 * 14) · Zhatt  ·  20:21, July 11, 2005 (UTC) - I'll do what I can.
 * 15) Pburka
 * 16) --Anchoress 11:38, 16 December 2005 (UTC) Copyediting (for now). I want to help develop and promote CanCon articles.


text:
VIRGOHI21

VIRGOHI21 is an extended region of neutral hydrogen (HI) in the Virgo cluster discovered in 2005. Analysis of its internal motion indicates that it may contain a large amount of dark matter, as much as a small galaxy. Since VIRGOHI21 apparently contains no stars, this would make it one of the first detected dark galaxies. Skeptics of this interpretation argue that VIRGOHI21 is simply a tidal tail of the nearby galaxy NGC 4254.

Observational properties
VIRGOHI21 was detected through radio telescope observations of its neutral hydrogen 21 cm emissions. The detected hydrogen has a mass of about 100 million solar masses and is about 50 million light-years away. By analyzing the Doppler shift of the emissions, astronomers determined that the gas has a high velocity-profile width; that is, different parts of the cloud are moving at high speed relative to other parts. Follow-up Hubble Space Telescope deep observations of the region have detected very few stars (a few hundred).

Dark galaxy interpretation
If the high velocity-profile width of VIRGOHI21 is interpreted as rotation, it is far too fast to be consistent with the gravity of the detected hydrogen. Rather, it implies the presence of a dark matter halo with tens of billions of solar masses. Given the very small number of stars detected, this implies a mass-to-light ratio of about 500, far greater than that of a normal galaxy (around 50). The large gravity of the dark matter halo in this interpretation explains the perturbed nature of the nearby spiral galaxy NGC 4254 and the bridge of neutral hydrogen extending between the two entities.

Under this interpretation, VIRGOHI21 would be the first discovery of the dark galaxies anticipated by simulations of dark-matter theories. Although other dark-galaxy candidates have previously been observed, follow-up observations indicated that these were either very faint ordinary galaxies or tidal tails. VIRGOHI21 is considered the best current candidate for a dark galaxy.

Tidal tail interpretation
Sensitive maps covering a much wider area, obtained at Westerbork Synthesis Radio Telescope (WSRT) and at Arecibo Observatory revealed that VIRGOHI21 is embedded within a much more extensive tail originating in NGC 4254. Both the distribution of the HI gas and its velocity field can be reproduced by a model involving NGC 4254 in a high-speed collision with another galaxy (probably NGC 4192), which is now somewhat distant. Other debris tails of this magnitude have been found to be common features in the Virgo cluster, where the high density of galaxies makes interactions frequent. These results suggest that VIRGOHI21 is not an unusual object, given its location at the edge of the densest region of the Virgo cluster.

The original paper describing VIRGOHI21 as a dark galaxy provides several objections to the tidal-tail interpretation: that high-velocity interactions do not generally produce significant tails, that the high velocity needed is out-of-place in this part of the Virgo cluster and that the observed velocity profile is opposite from that expected in a tidal tail. In addition, according to Robert Minchin of the Arecibo Observatory, "If the hydrogen in VIRGOHI21 had been pulled out of a nearby galaxy, the same interaction should have pulled out stars as well". Proponents of the tidal-tail interpretation counter these objections with simulations and argue that the apparently inverted velocity profile is due to the orientation of the tail with respect to Earth-based observers.

Although the nature of VIRGOHI21 remains a contentious issue, its identification as a dark galaxy seems much less certain now than immediately after its discovery.

title: VIRGOHI21


text:
Talk:Uniform Resource Name

diagram in first section

The diagram confused me at first: it made me think that a URI consisted of a URN directly followed by (concatenated with) a URL. Perhaps something less rectangular would be better—a Venn diagram, for instance. Cup o’ Java (talk • edits) 18:58, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

 * Illustration is important, lets try another illustration? --Krauss (talk) 10:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Confusion by contradition
The article not explain the equivalence or distinction (or contexts for it) between URL and URN.

... And, most importante, just a "contradition feeling" while reading the article today:
 * All URN problems was solved with RFC 8141 in 2017?? The article have some opinion about it or there are sources evidencing the "usefulness of URN"?

So, suggest to express what is a concrete reality for URNs in the first sections, a any other encyclopedic description of an Internet Standard, and the opinions in other section as "criticism" or  "implementation experiences", etc. --Krauss (talk) 10:05, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Syntax diagram
The syntax diagram added to the section Syntax was generated by the Railroad Diagram Generator using the following code:

based on the code in the box above it.

--Ennex2 (talk) 10:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

DOCTYPE Puzzle
Readers of this page may be interested in thw following discussion: --Guy Macon (talk) 22:37, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Reference desk/Computing

title: Talk:Uniform Resource Name