text:
User talk:Parmaestro

RfC work on EU/US Economy Size
I did some more work on the draft-RfC for the topic. I listed other articles where it applies. Please review the summary section and contribute your viewpoint. Do you think this will be ready for posting to RfC within a day or so? Feco 05:36, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I doubt it. I've done some more work as well and have written a draft that I prefer. I think that it may be totally unnecessary to submit an RfC and I would suggest perhaps leaving the articles as they are. Our viewpoints are probably not as different as they might appear. Parmaestro 06:30, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * If I read your message above correctly, you're done with your version for now. I'm going to merge those into a consensus version to see if you approve. I'll make some section label changes so we can easily see what's going on, but I will not delete any text from the page. I think an RfC is necessary, because the current presentation in the different articles is confusing (at least to me). An RfC will allow consensus to be built on how GDP info should be presented. Feco
 * If I'm incorrect in assuming that you're done with edits to the text for now, post a message on my talk page and I'll stop immediately.Feco

 * I had already begun work on a consolidated version of our two edits... it's here User:Feco/Temp/GDP if you'd like to take a look. I had intended to post it in the usual place (talk page), but moved it when you messaged w/"still working". Once you're done, I'll integrate your changes back into that. I do think an RfC is necessary. Feco

 * Sorry about my 22 minute delay in posting a message to your talk page. I remain unconvinced about the necessity for an RfC.  The integrated text is more neutral than our previous versions and I agree with some of your edits including specifically the dropping of "ever."

Where do you stand on the "Consolidated1" edit? Do you foresee being willing to post on RfC in the next few days? Feco 22:14, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC) (reposting to bring to your attention)

 * I'm going to post everything to RfC in approx 24 hours. I'm assuming you're ok with your half of the RfC text since I haven't heard from you. Feco 05:09, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Sorry for the delay. I was busy reading the sixth Annual report of "The City’s Importance to

the EU Economy 2004;" It's a report to asses the impact of the city of London on the economy of the EU and on the EU's GDP. Apparently, the economists at the centre for economics and business research ltd have been operating under the illussion for six years that there's an EU economy and that it makes some sense to talk about an EU gdp.  Parmaestro 05:54, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I'll try to wrap up my edits within 24 hours since you still want to proceed. Since our two positions have converged somewhat since we first started the discussion, I was hoping that we could work out a compromise.  Parmaestro 05:54, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * check out the latest version of the article... apologies for the delay... it fell to the bottom of my list unintentionally. Feco 08:36, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

 * just checking in... are you ready to post to RfC? Feco

Switzerland and EU
Thank you for your precisations: I checked and I was wrong. But I think we should clarify a little bit the position of Switzerland regarding the application to EU. As cleary explained here, Swizerland did applied th 26th may 1992, but because of the rejection of 6th december's (again 1992) referendum on a similar topic (the Economic European Space), the government has completely freezed any application, and in the current legislature (2003-2007) there is no plan to propose that to a very skeptic population. In fact politicians are talking about something in the distant future: 15 maybe 20 years. The article is formally correct but a little bit misleading right now. What do you think? Nova77 16:20, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

European GPDs
But the source at the bottom said "World Bank". I went to the given link, and the values given were for 2003. So the source given was wrong. —Cantus… ☎   22:52, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

The article's title only says "GDP", and this is generally assumed to be nominal GDP. Regardless of this, we could include two tables, one nominal, and another PPP, in this same article. —Cantus… ☎   23:31, Apr 30, 2005 (UTC)

Doing that for Continent articles is not a problem for me. However I don't think it's appropiate for the main articles. I like the separation. But this is not a final opinion. —Cantus… ☎   00:44, May 1, 2005 (UTC)

EU-Stub
Hi there,

Just to let you know, I created the EU-stub and it was created to be specifically about European Union operations such as EU procedures or programmes run by the EU like the Erasmus programme. Pretty much all the articles in the category are about operations and I will be recategorising articles that aren't. If the article is about buildings / stuctures or geography these articles have their own stubs. Please use Template:euro-struct-stub for European buildings / stuctures or the appropriate country geo stub or Template:euro-geo-stub for geographical articles. Hope this info helps! -- Lochaber 10:22, 3 May 2005 (UTC)

EU portal
I'm keen on helping out on the portal wherever I can :) -- Joolz 15:41, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

Templates
Regarding the (Flag - Country) templates you created, is there a list somewhere of which countries have which template code? I'd like to include the templates in the UN member list, for instance, but don't want to have to try all of them until I find the correct ones... Thanks! Nightstallion 08:40, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

You should be able to find the flag templates by using IS0 3166-1 alpha-3 codes or the IOC country codes. Parmaestro 13:56, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Revert of case for UK euroscepticism
Whilst I strongly disagree with what the eurosceptic contributor had to say in Euro, I do think you ought to have managed his contribution into some kind of context, rather than simply delete it. That is the lazy way out and implies that there is no reasoned response to his view. --Red King 23:47, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
 * I agree, it was a bit of a mess. If the contributor were registered, you could write to say that it needs more care.  And to answer your other question, no, I couldn't have made it sensible either!  if I'm honest, I'd applaud your action in any other topic...

WikiProject European Union
Hey, I thought you might be interested in the WikiProject European Union which I've just created, Cheers - Joolz 23:05, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

What ??
Hi, I received this message on my talk page : Thanks for restoring the paris link. Parmaestro 11:44, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC) I just don't know what you're talking about. Revas 13:34, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism in Template:Europe and other pages
Hi Parmaeastro,

When reverting vandalism in Template:Europe you asked "why does this keep getting edited". I think, if you are not aware you may be interested in reading Regular disclaimer on vandal Rovoam. You may also find it interesting to look at my contribution log to visually see the range of his vandalism. Because of this vandal, my whole activity in Wikipedia was reduced to simply putting "regular disclaimers". He's literally terrorizing me and in my representation Wikipedia. You'll be facing his vandalisms quite often for quite some time.--Tabib 05:43, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

Norway Templates
Why are you readding the tempaltes ot the NATO page? After much debate Wikiproject countries has decided that international organization templates, like Template:NATO, do not belong on country pages. Norway is one of the last country pages to still have these templates. - SimonP 17:13, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

Template:ISO
You expressed interest in an ISO flag template: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Flag_Template (SEWilco 06:19, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC))

"Vandalism"
Please don't call so many edits "vandalism". It's quite offensive for a person to be called a vandal when they have made good faith edits. violet/riga (t) 5 July 2005 21:15 (UTC)

Maybe there is a misunderstanding here. I only used the term vandal once. I was not referring to your edits. I was referring to a person who has repeatedly blanked out an entire article. I'm pretty sure that this would qualify as vandalism. Parmaestro 6 July 2005 08:28 (UTC)

EU project
Hi there! I am new to wikipedia and would like to contribute to the E.U. section. I've already contributed an article on the Open Method of Coordination. Comments would be welcome (no one has bother so far - don't know if that is a good sign or not). Also, the article does not appear if I tye open method in the search box - is that normal? Generally I could contribute something on EU research policy and information technology. Hope to hear from you, --Daniel Spichtinger 6 July 2005 15:22 (UTC)

Preferred form for title of Directives articles
I have opened a Request for Comment on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject European Union on consistent titling - your comments would be welcome. --Red King 08:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

2012 Summer Olympics bids
Why have you been removing info about other bids that weren't submitted to the IOC? Please don't do this. Thanks.--Pharos 6 July 2005 15:25 (UTC)

New European Union collaboration
Hi Parmaestro, this is just a note telling you that I have created the European Union collaboration (the first collaboration is Eurobarometer). I'm looking forward to your contributions! Talrias (t | e | c) 12:11, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

3RR
Please be careful about not breaking the three-revert rule. Thanks Baristarim 01:36, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked. TWINKLE
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for violation of the 3 Revert Rule at Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text below. ⇒   SWAT Jester    On Belay!  03:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)  ⇒    SWAT Jester    On Belay!  03:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Project European Union
Hello, you are member of the project European Union. I try to create a new project page for the project. You can see it at here Because this should be the project page for all it´s members, please tell me, what you think about it. Please leave your comments on the talkpage of the project.--Thw1309 11:02, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:FRA-Ref
A tag has been placed on Template:FRA-Ref requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:35, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Life in the European Union
A tag has been placed on Template:Life in the European Union requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes.

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:44, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

December 2019
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Talk:European Union, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button OOUI JS signature icon LTR.png located above the edit window.

Thank you. BegbertBiggs (talk) 09:51, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

I have sent you a note about a page you started
Hello, Parmaestro

Thank you for creating European Strategy for Particle Physics.

User:DGG, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

To reply, leave a comment here and prepend it with. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~.

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

 DGG ( talk ) 21:09, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I’ve added third party references please let me know if I need any other changes. Thanks

Parmaestro (talk) 15:01, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of European Cultural Month

The article European Cultural Month has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Lack of notability or overall quality"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Vegantics (talk) 19:35, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

This IP address has been blocked from editing Wikipedia.
I have been blocked from editing.

The message says « The IP address or range 2A09:BAC2:0:0:0:0:0:0/31 has been blocked (disabled) by L235 »

Apparently this is blocked because some or all of Apple relay IP addresses have been blocked.

I can understand the logic of blocking anonymous users from that range but not blocking in logged in users from that range.

I’ve been an editor for many years in good standing and would like to resume editing

I know there is another process to request unblocking and I have attempted to use that but I am blocked from submitting requests because of the same IP issue!

I hope someone can please take the necessary steps to allow me to edit again

Thanking you for your consideration

P.S. Here is a quote from another user expressing a similar sentiment: « I'm finding it a bit hard to follow the structure of this document so forgive me if this is what's being discussed, but wouldn't it make the most sense to block Anonymous editing from Apple Private Relay IP ranges? Once signed in, there is again a way to track the editor, and a way to deal with bad actors. » Parmaestro (talk) 07:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * If you can edit this page, you should be able to make an unblock request on this page. 331dot (talk) 08:36, 2 April 2024 (UTC)
 * You will need to turn off the relay and clear your browser cache- it is not permitted to edit via a proxy/VPN/or similar. 331dot (talk) 08:37, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

title: User talk:Parmaestro


text:
User talk:Fwiqar

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 23:18, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Fwiqar


text:
Praja Socialist Party

The Praja Socialist Party, abbreviated as PSP, was an Indian political party. It was founded in 1952 when the Socialist Party, led by Jayaprakash Narayan, Rambriksh Benipuri, Acharya Narendra Deva and Basawon Singh (Sinha), merged with the Kisan Mazdoor Praja Party led by J. B. Kripalani (former president of the Indian National Congress and a close associate of Jawaharlal Nehru).

The PSP led the cabinet under Pattom A. Thanu Pillai as chief minister of State of Travancore-Cochin from March 1954 to February 1955. In 1955 a faction led by Ram Manohar Lohia broke from the party, reusing the name "Socialist Party". The PSP again came to power in the new state of Kerala under Pattom A. Thanu Pillai from February 1960 to September 1962. In 1960, Kripalani left the party and in 1964, Asoka Mehta joined Congress after his expulsion from the party.

Another section of the party, led by the trade union leader George Fernandes, broke off to join the Samyukta Socialist Party in 1967. In 1972, a section merged with Fernandes's party to become the Socialist Party once more, before becoming part of the Janata coalition in 1977 following the proclamation of Emergency by Indira Gandhi.

Formation
In September 1952, the Kisan Mazdoor Praja Party merged with the Socialist Party with J. B. Kriplani as the chairman and Asoka Mehta as the general secretary.

Elections
At the party's first general election in 1957, the PSP won 10.41% of the total votes and 19 seats in the Lok Sabha. However, the party's vote share continued to decline over the next few elections. It won 6.81% of the total votes and 12 seats in the Lok Sabha in 1962, 3.06% of the total votes and 13 seats in the Lok Sabha in 1967 and only 1.04% of the total votes and only 2 seats in the Lok Sabha in 1971.

title: Praja Socialist Party


text:
User talk:Ryan Reich

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * To sign your posts (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).
 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

Meelar (talk) 23:18, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

24 hours in a day
Thanks, I never noticed the warning box in infinity symbol.Firedrop (talk) 19:20, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Iowa class battleship
Thanx for your edit. I felt like "finest battleship" should be there, but my grammar far from perfect. Now I think you found a perfect wording. TestPilot 19:50, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Griffiths
You realise you have to create the Phillip Griffiths page now, I hope. Charles Matthews 20:53, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Zariski topology
Thanks for the rewrite at Zariski topology. It's much improved. -- Fropuff 18:00, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Wow, you're fast. I just committed that ten minutes ago.  I'm glad you like it; it's a shame the thing sat around for so many months without help. Ryan Reich 18:02, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

I have eyes everywhere :) Yeah, I've been meaning to rewrite that article for a long time; I've just never gotten around to it. Too many things to do. -- Fropuff 18:05, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

By inspection
Hi Ryan. I started a discussion on this article at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. I wonder if you could comment. Thanks. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 02:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Mathematical jargon
Just wanted to commend you for your recent work on this article. It looks a lot better. dbtfz talk 01:19, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Thank you. It was my hope with the new sections that people would see more clearly what jargon had yet to be included, which should help the page grow.  Plus it's easier to look things up now.  Ryan Reich 04:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

 * thank you for the symbols on proof by induction. (Where do I go to learn how to do that?) Since I generalised it to begin at an integer 's', we need the range at the end of the line to read 'for all n greater than or equal to s' to be precise. Pliny 19:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

 * You can write in LaTeX (or a reasonable subset of it, at least) if you enclose it in $$ $$ tags. To learn LaTeX...Google it, there are zillions of tutorials.  You'll need to practice to get any good, though.  Try typesetting random math documents (don't put that on Wikipedia, of course).   Also, it would have been more appropriate to start a new section on my talk page rather than burying your comment in a very old section. Ryan Reich 19:57, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

wikiproject mathematics
Dude surely you must add your name to WikiProject Mathematics/Participants.

Dmharvey 22:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

 * David, I was just about to leave a message on your page. It's scary now that real people I know can read me on Wikipedia too. Ryan Reich 23:00, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

limitation of size
Hi Ryan,

a redirect to NBG is not what I was looking for. I want a discussion of the philosophical concept, not a formal theory that arguably incorporates it. --Trovatore 23:09, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

 * My apologies. I jumped on it too hastily when I found a requested article whose title actually rang a bell.  These days, most of them don't, and I assumed that's what was meant.  I couldn't tell who had placed the request, so I figured, given the similarity, that it might well be someone who came across the term in a book, couldn't trace it to the NBG page, and asked for an article. Ryan Reich 07:09, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Three forms of mathematical induction
Thank you for your contribution to the discussion page regarding AfD for this article. I found it very constructive and helpful. Slowmover 16:16, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Glad I could help. I hope that I can influence enough people (one way or the other) that the debate has a resolution rather than being inconclusive, which is disappointing. Ryan Reich 17:19, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

 * The AfD debate was inconclusive, but I am still trying to get Michael Hardy to accept something like my reformulation of his insights, placed as a section of Mathematical induction. Since my reformulation inadvertantly mimicked an insight about binary functions that you posted first, I would like to invite you to participate in the discussion at Talk:Mathematical induction. (I've been talking to Hardy at User talk:Michael Hardy, so please check there, too.) Joshuardavis 19:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

not sure you realize how that sounds
Hi Ryan,

Are you aware that "I can tell you where you should try to merge it" can be read as a vulgar insult? If not, you might want to rephrase that. (If so, you might still want to rephrase that.) --Allen 01:29, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Obviously I didn't realize that. If it comes off badly I'll change it. Ryan Reich 01:33, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Thanks... I apologize for suggesting that you might have meant that. I may be the only one who read it that way, but in case I wasn't I felt I should say something.  Sorry again.  --Allen 01:37, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

 * No problem. I write so many words eventually they'll say something stupid. Ryan Reich 01:38, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I can easily believe nothing was being insinuated, but given the accusations and harsh tones already in the discussion, I believe it's wise if you modify that statement and note in the edit summary that it was not meant to be an insult. Better safe than sorry. --C S (Talk) 01:41, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Too bad...it really would have been a good insult. :-)   dbtfz talk 01:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

 * Yep, it's changed now. I'm trying hard to keep my criticism of the article from reflecting on the author. Ryan Reich 01:48, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I was positive that you didn't mean anything nasty when I read it, and I'm sure Michael wouldn't have taken it the wrong way... but I still had a laugh. It could have been an instant Wikipedia classic! I guess it just goes to show the dangers of communicating through text. Anyway, let me add my thanks to you for spending so much thought on the AfD. Cheers, Melchoir 01:56, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Many thanks for your stellar work on Common misconceptions in probability and statistics (or whatever its current title is). I had given up on that article, but you are probably right that User:Helgus meant to explain the difference between statistical independence and causal independence. This is an important point, and it wasn't yet mentioned on Wikipedia, so I'm very glad if it will be saved because of your efforts. -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 02:31, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm glad it will turn out to be useful. At first I thought the article would end up proving to be OR anyway, but the example seems not to be, and the philosophical point is certainly worth a page.  Though his original article talked about "information", which has me wondering if there is, in the mathematical sense, information between dependent events.  Not that I know anything at all about information or probability.  Anyway, even if the article gets deleted I'd be happy to find the causal/statistical independence dichotomy a more suitable home. Ryan Reich 02:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Did I offend you?
I see no relation between your "we disagree" statement and what I wrote, and don't understand why you write that you're "through". If I offended you in some way, I'm sorry. --Lambiam Talk 16:28, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

 * Maybe unintentionally. More to the point is that in general, what I enjoy about Wikipedia is much more creating articles than deleting them; arguing over what should or should not be said is not rewarding for me.  The participants in these arguments (including myself) are always hugely dismissive of the topics they oppose, as is true of any asynchronous Internet communications, but they are only ever justified in this in the case of the most frivolous or deliberately fraudulent articles.  I often find myself defending material which is being attacked as "unencyclopedic", but which I think is important to any writing on mathematics.  I take this as a sign that I don't get along with the enyclopedia model, and I don't want to have anything to do with the legal wrangling.  I'm through with AfD's.  Ryan Reich 21:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 04:49, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Helgus’s request
Dear Ryan,

Many thanks for the help in editing wiki-papers. Obviously, my English is not perfect. Moreover, your help was rather pertinent and indispensable. I understand, that you are very busy. And nevertheless I'd like to address to you with the request of the same sort.

On July, 30th I leave for Paris on Conference IPMU-2006, where I have the session E22 on eventology.

Would you be so kind to find a spare minute and examine preambles of two wiki-papers from the point of view of your excellent English style?:
 * User:Helgus/Eventology
 * User:Helgus/Theory of random events (mathematical eventology)

Thank you in advance:) - Helgus 04:25, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Rational map
Hi Ryan, why do you hesitate to post your draft on rational maps? I think it is valuable. Some of the material, e.g. dominant map, might also be good to add to the Glossary of scheme theory. Jakob.scholbach 04:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Laziness? I guess I should get it out there, it's been ages.  I just never feel like it's truly correct (from a mathematical-philosophical standpoint). Ryan Reich 04:56, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Just post it and others, maybe myself may see whether they want to add, rearrange etc. something. Jakob.scholbach 15:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Well, I put it up and structured it a bit. Ryan Reich 16:14, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Mathematics CotW
Hey Ryan, I am writing you to let you know that the Mathematics Collaboration of the week(soon to "of the month") is getting an overhaul of sorts and I would encourage you to participate in whatever way you can, i.e. nominate an article, contribute to an article, or sign up to be part of the project. Any help would be greatly appreciated, thanks--Cronholm144 00:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Abel Rating
Hey Ryan, I notice your change to the article and I am fine with it, but I encourage you to address the comments in the comment box. thanks--Cronholm144 00:30, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

 * I'm thinking about it. Depending on how familiar you are with my edits, you might have noticed that I tend to write as much as I can when I create an article.  So, if I don't write something, I don't know it.  I changed the rating just because I realized that it wasn't actually a stub.  Ryan Reich 00:58, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Well I knew that it was not a true stub but it needed work and I sometimes rate lower than the article's true value, which I think is start, in hopes of attracting angry editors who will improve their article to prove me wrong;), but if that is all there is to say then that is all there is to say on the topic. However I wonder if there is another editor who could help expand the article? anyway thanks so much for your prompt reply--Cronholm144 01:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Help out with the Math collaboration of the week Mathematical physics if you have time!

 * I don't mean to imply that there's nothing more to say on the Abel-Jacobi map; just that I don't have anything more to say. I know nothing about abelian varieties and I only know this bit because of a reading course I did last year.  Hopefully I'm not the only "algebraic geometer" around here. Ryan Reich 02:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:tinfoillinux.jpg copy to Commons?
Just curous, what is the meaning of the template you've put on this image today? It seems to imply that you think the image is inappropriate for some reason, i.e. being indiscriminately included. Do you think that Tinfoil Hat Linux does not deserve an image of its logo on its page? Or is it simply that you think that the image itself belongs to be hosted on the Commons site rather than on Wikipedia itself? I am not experienced in these political matters, so I don't know what the rule is with where images of various licensing belong. Ryan Reich 16:50, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

 * As it is the image can only be used on the English Wikipepia, but since it's a free image it can be copied to commons. Then it will become available on all Wikimedia projects. It's certainly not tagged because it's inappropriate, but rather the opposite. // Liftarn

 * Okay, cool. I'm just being vigilant about my pet articles; from time to time, people do things which are perhaps well-meaning, but still quite wrong, on the "advice" of some guideline or other. Ryan Reich 17:39, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

 * It's OK to have your pet articles, just remember that you don't own them. // Liftarn

Mathematical jargon
Hi, I noticed your undo of my edit to Mathematical jargon. The reason I made my edit is that your definition of "stronger" doesn't cover the one I gave (although it gives related meanings), and the one I give is the only one I encounter on a regular basis. Undoing doesn't fix that. Please suggest a solution. Rp (talk) 07:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It looks to me like what you said:

"A property or condition is said to be stronger than another if the second property holds in all cases where the first property holds, but not vice versa; e.g. for positive whole numbers, being divisible by 4 is a stronger property than being even, while being divisible by 3 is neither stronger or weaker than either.:
 * is exactly the same as what is said in the final sentences of the existing definition:

"Finally, the adjective strong or the adverb strongly may be added to a mathematical notion to indicate a related stronger notion; for example, a strong antichain is an antichain satisfying certain additional conditions, and likewise a strongly regular graph is a regular graph meeting stronger conditions. When used in this way, the stronger notion (such as "strong antichain") is a technical term with a precisely defined meaning; the nature of the extra conditions cannot be derived from the definition of the weaker notion (such as "antichain")."
 * Did you have something else in mind? Ryan Reich (talk) 21:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, looks like you're right. Then all I am unhappy with is the word "notion", where the term "property" seems common to me; and the lack of a formal definition (subset would do in most cases). Rp (talk) 20:15, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Seeing them together like this I'm not sure I don't prefer your version, though. When I originally wrote all the definitions on that page, I wanted to keep them very short, since it's a big list and many of them have articles elsewhere.  "Strong" is easily the worst offender in terms of length and I don't think it is necessarily better than an efficiently worded, shorter version.  However, the point made in the last sentence of the current definition is a good one: sometimes, "stronger" is not a value judgement but just jargon for "subset of". Ryan Reich (talk) 03:13, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Inherent notability
Hi Ryan. Given your recent comments, I just thought you mind find this entertaining (if somewhat worrying). I'll never forget that particular AfD, in which people it was argued that a misprint (in all probability) was inherently notable. To my mind, that's why the concept is so absurd. Jakew (talk) 22:00, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
 * This really is absurd. At least the article was moved. Ryan Reich (talk) 22:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Inherent notability and FritzpollBot
Hi Ryan - as you may know, the community reached consensus in relation to FritzpollBot. I believe that there is no such thing as inherent notability, per your arguments during the discussion. What I was interested in hearing was your thoughts on creating full stubs (oxymoron? :) ) on places with sources to verify notability per the only presently available guideline but creating lists of the places in particular administrative districts with information such as coordinates, population data, etc. One option might then be a redirect from the placename to the list, but I'm not sure.  Anyway, this and many other discussions will be taking place at a centralised location, which we should be able to find in the next 48 hours, but if you would like to contribute, can you drop a line over at User:John_Carter/GEOBOT_group.  I think we could certainly use your guidance, as I'm pretty certain WP:NPT won't become a guideline any time soon Fritzpoll (talk) 12:29, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

 * Thanks for telling me! I'd be happy to participate in a day or two, when I return from my present mini-vacation. Ryan Reich (talk) 21:32, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Creating geo lists
Hi I've made an intital suggestion at the GEOBOT talk page in that it would be an excellent idea to generate a full lists of places in a tabled list. Once this is accomplished we can work through what articles could be started in their own right if there is enough info avilabale. I see it as a solid comprehensive base to build geo content on if we have a full world list organized like this. See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Geography/Bot. Please offer your thoughts thanks  ♦Blofeld of SPECTRE♦       $1,000,000? 14:25, 21 June 2008 (UTC)

Cayley–Hamilton
Ryan, I've seen your edits on the Cayley–Hamilton article, and I appreciate that you informed me on my talk page, since indeed I had invested quite a bit of time in the part that you replaced. The text you replaced it with is interesting, but in my opinion not an improvement, even though it seems essentially correct (I have a few gripes but these are not so serious). But I'm probably not the most neutral person to judge, so we'll see how your change fares by other editors opinions. Let me just say a few things that come to mind.

Marc van Leeuwen (talk) 20:21, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Your text frequently (at least four times) mentions the "defining property" of adjugates. It is important, but not "defining". The definition of the adjugate is that its entries are certain minors, and the mentioned property follows from that. If the property were "defining" any zero matrix could have any matrix of the same size as adjugate.
 * You say "a lot of the pedagogy of comparing and correcting incorrect proofs has gone by the wayside as a result of the last one". I don't understand the phrase, which one is the last one?
 * Your first edit summary mentions a didactic diatribe, but I did not want to push any didactic point. It is just that I think it is really a singular property of the Cayley–Hamilton theorem to inspire false proofs, and it is valid for the article to say so. I've seen many false proofs, some in print; before I edited the article all the proofs given there were false (rest assured, yours are not). Most false proofs are more sophisticated than bluntly substituting A for t in the defining equation of the characteristic polynomial, but they are false anyway. The thing that worries me most about the text you substituted is not that it it will mislead people, but that it will soon get replaced by people honestly convinced that they can do better than this.
 * While interesting, none of the proofs given gives me the impression that it touches the essence of why Cayley–Hamilton holds (well the final argument invoking Euclidean division comes close, but phrases like the one starting "This incorporates the evaluation map" put me off (frankly I don't understand what it is affirming) and seem to have little to do with Euclidean division). The first three proofs are all quite long, and apart from the first one I doubt there are many wikipedia users that can actually understand them (given that their average level seems to be high school). The second took me long to absorb, and the essential point, that the determinant of B is p(A) needs more thought than is suggested.
 * You say some of what I wrote is simply not true. I would appreciate if you were more specific. And then, you could have corrected (and added the proofs you did) without throwing away everything.
 * The proof I wrote was loosely based on a book I found in our library (being dazzled by all the wrong proofs I looked for some solid ground), which happened to be an algebra course by Patrice Tauvel (in French); I undid it of some of what seemed to me unnecessary generality for the context at hand (it arrives at the Cayley–Hamilton theorem as a corollary to something more general). The consideration of Euclidean division was a result of discussions with colleagues at our math institute. But later I found much of it also on the French wikipedia (in some indirectly related article I cannot trace right now), so there is no point in claiming (or being accused of) original research here. In fact somebody sent me a paper reviewing some 20 different proofs... It seems like that many people have been thinking about this.
 * I regret the disappearence of some points
 * the observation that the inital naive method not only gives a wrong argument, but also leads to the wrong conclusion (a scalar rather that matrix 0).
 * the observation that confusion arises from confusing unwritten (matrix and scalar) multiplication operations
 * the example that shows how naive substitution leads to genuinely false identities
 * the (before last) expression that shows that the adjugate of A is in fact a polynomial in A (with coefficients taken from the characteristic polynomial of A). This is an inportant and very general fact, which implies Cayley–Hamilton immediately, without being as easily implied by it.

 * Thanks for replying! My response:

 * The reason I keep saying "defining property" is that it's hard to number equations in Wikipedia, and I need some other memorable device to refer back to them. Perhaps I will do as you did and insert (*) next to this one.

 * "The last one" referred to the last item in the previous sentence (which you didn't copy here), namely, that your text was sometimes opinionated. Basically, it seemed to me that your main goal was to correctly instruct the reader in the art of proving Cayley-Hamilton, and in particular, to push the point that trying to use the evaluation map directly could never work.  All of your examples, including one example false proof, made this point; this is the thing that I thought was not right in what you wrote, since in fact it is possible to formulate a proof correctly using the evaluation map (you just have to be more careful, as in the third proof I wrote).  The whole effort seemed "didactic" in that it was primarily concerned with correcting a misconception and instructing the reader through numerous but subtly different arguments that the only path to a proof of the Cayley-Hamilton theorem is through "real work" (that phrase really did have to go, by the way).

 * Concerning the loss of these subtly different arguments: looking back at the last version of the page before I edited it, the two big points you made were: there is no evaluation homomorphism from M[t] to M (in my notation), because A is not in the center of M; and, direct evaluation of the equation
 * $$p(t) = \det(tI_n - A) \, $$
 * at A leads to equating a matrix, p(A), with a scalar, det(0); a sub-point of this is that even replacing t by A on the right requires one to reconcile three things:
 * That t In is a diagonal matrix with t on the diagonal, so substituting A gives a matrix with matrix entries;
 * That A itself, as it appears in that expression, is a matrix with scalar entries;
 * That if we interpret t In as the "quantity" t multiplied by the matrix In, substitution of A for t transforms a scalar multiplication into a matrix multiplication.
 * You also think that these are among your main points. The one about there being no evaluation homomorphism is the one I think is wrong (given the proper context, and this distinction did make it into my version).  As for the others, I actually think that they have been partially retained in my text, although perhaps in an excessively terse form.  The first numbered point and its comparison with the second are explicitly in my text right before the first proof.  I did miss the opportunity to give the "matrix equals scalar" dichotomy, but there is an obvious place to do so also right before the first proof, and I will make that correction.  The point about multiplication is also implicit in the juxtaposition of the second and third proofs, though as you observe, the proofs as a whole are long and detailed, and perhaps extracting their "meaning" is not easy.  I will expand the discussion before the proofs in order to reincorporate these points.

 * The reasons I replaced your analysis of erroneous arguments with just some proofs are that first, I felt that the existence of my third proof invalidated your frequently-expressed assertion that there could be no proof based on the evaluation homomorphism; second, although the above points are worthy ones, they could be easily expressed more briefly in the context of correct proofs, rather than as criticisms of incorrect ones; and third, that what was there concerned itself at least as much with educating the reader as with informing them. The second and third reasons are both related to the nature of the medium here: since an article is not a discussion, the false arguments you shoot down are more of the nature of a straw man than a real opposing position; and since it is also not a page in a textbook, the instruction you provide doesn't reside in the proper context for it to be received as intended.

 * I didn't mention original research because I think that any attempt to be philosophical about the proof of any theorem borders on it (comparison of proofs is not a major mathematical activity, although you say that for this theorem, it may be). I believe that a discussion such as you wrote is a good idea, but that to have the discussion in full requires a more scholarly medium.

 * This also goes for the proofs I included. I liked the third one much more before I started to write it up, at which time I realized that the story for Z is not as nice as I had thought, since it is not commutative.  The whole thing ends up being a little technical, whereas the concept, which is to restrict the evaluation homomorphism to a context in which it is a homomorphism but still does the job intended for it, is quite simple.  The fourth proof based on your Euclidean division idea is much more elegant.  You say that you don't feel like any of the proofs gets at the "why" of the theorem, except maybe the fourth, but I think that the second one is really the best (this is somehow to be expected, given the author).  My reason is that since (as we both agree is essential) p(A) is to be the zero matrix, and since matrices are naturally endomorphisms of vector spaces, this should be verified by considering its action on a vector space, and not simply by having p(A) = 0 pop out of a piece of algebraic machinery.  Using the evaluation homomorphism is an elegant trick, but polynomial algebras are at their core a piece of algebraic machinery, a formal device; in the second proof, the matrix B is literally the matrix-with-matrix-entries which is t In - A, evaluated at A, and with the A already appearing considered as having matrix entries (which are all scalar matrices).  This interpretation is consistent with the idea of using "actions on vector spaces" in the proof.  That det(B) = p(A) is clear once this point is made; perhaps it needs to be made better, but I think this proof (which, unlike the last two, is sourced) is an important part of the philosophy of this theorem.

 * As for the fact that Adj(A) is a polynomial in A, of course, I did make that point in the fourth proof. I didn't mention that the coefficients are those of the characteristic polynomial, though that would of course give still a third way of using the Euclidean division technique to prove the theorem (the first two are: do division, observe that the remainder is p(A), and also that the remainder must be zero; do division, observe that the quotient is in k[A][t], and then show that the evaluation map is a homomorphism).

 * The main thing I'm getting out of this discussion is that the theorem is even more interesting than I had thought. What is this paper with the 20 proofs in it?  I'd like to see it. Ryan Reich (talk) 17:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Change of Variables (PDE)
Hi Ryan,

The theory is in section 2. If you don't think the theory is well-presented, please improve the exposition.

Change of variable for PDE is not much discussed but it is an essential technique. Change of variable for integral equations is discussed in Integration by substitution but this doesn't really give you much help.

Also let's continue this discussion in the article's Talk page.

Thanks, Erxnmedia (talk) 13:42, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

manifold destiny
Hi, The "reactions" subsection has undergone a bit of an edit war. I already left a comment at talk:manifold destiny, perhaps you could offer an opinion. Katzmik (talk) 14:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Algebra stub template
Dear Ryan,

Before I respond to your comment, I would just like to note that I accepted Ozob's idea at some point in the discussion but that at that point, people conveniently changed their minds to choosing the Rubik's cube. I don't mind you changing the image as such (I could have reverted and continued pointless dispute but I didn't. So really you didn't end the discussion; I agreed with your idea), but I feel that I might look into this later on. The discussion:

1. Started out with me wanting to know how to find a good image (in fact I was happy with a*b = c) but then I saw the commutative diagram.

2. I started supporting the commutative diagram hoping for some back-up but it didn't come. By then, I had argued for so long, I did not want to give up (not because I wanted to waste more time but because I felt strongly about the image).

As you mentioned, this discussion was a waste of time and one of the reasons why I was unwilling to accept the Rubik's cube idea, was because I had been 'for my idea' for quite a while (ask yourself what you would have done in the same position if you felt strongly about a particular image and had argued for 1 page about it). Anyway, my response to one of your comments:

the icon should be "real math" and by that you meant category theory, that only "real mathematicians" need understand it, that the template actually function as an instructive device

 * I never mentioned (or even implied) that real math was category theory; I only said that math symbols such as sqrt (x) or the Rubik's cube was not real math (in my opinion, but I think that you will at least agree that sqrt (x) is not real math).

 * One of the purposes of the template was to function as an instructive device; the other purpose is of course to represent algebra.

By the way, I don't want to make a pointless discussion out of this but I suspect sockpuppetry at some point in the discussion (see the contributions of User:Brwian). Perhaps one user created an additional account for more support. I am also sure that if more users participated, I would have got some more support (especially by algebraists who specialize in homological algebra).

Topology Expert (talk) 08:48, 20 November 2008 (UTC)

I've been avoiding this for too long....
Village_pump_(policy) - I've initiated a question that I feel needs asking and which you may be interested in Fritzpoll (talk) 08:31, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Agent provocateur?
See my comment on the Grothendieck talk page. Feketekave (talk) 04:38, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token 586f1edd864d37b8a89eae0a31d5f150
I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Flagged revisions alternative
I came across an alternative to flagged revisions on Jimbo's talk page today. If you didn't know, there was an error on the page about Ted Kennedy that stated that he had died. Though the edit was corrected within five minutes, the change prompted some to ask for flagged revisions, meaning that all edits had to be checked by established users. Anyway, I think the alternative suggestion is good—do you know how I can propose and maybe get a vote on it? Jchthys (talk) 04:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

QED dab (quantum electrodynamcs)
I see you took this out. I must admit I was tempted to do the same. I couldn't make up my mind. In all these cases, which are kinda a tough call, I dunno really what the rule of thumb is. Any advice?

Like I just tried to think "where would someone looking for quantum electrodynamics" end up and also "is it doing any harm?". The last is weaker because otherwise, yeah, might as well just stuff everything in as a seealso or whatever, from querelous erratic damned children to quite educated democrats (that's a very short topic).

It's a hard one to call. SimonTrew (talk) 16:50, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

 * Not that you should have known this, but a while ago this exact sequence of edits was performed by two different users on Q.E.D., and the guy playing my role gave the same justification for reverting, so you might say I had prejudice. Still, I have reasons.  I agree that the note does no harm, but it does single out just one of the alternatives when in fact I would say that in addition to the mathematical phrase, the ones most likely to be searched for are the physics theory, the Feynman book, and the play.  When it's a choice between one of the two Gromov's compactness theorems, say, there is a good reason to point to one in particular, especially since they have the same name.  I note that people searching for any of the other QED's would not put in periods at all, so wouldn't end up at Q.E.D but at the dab page.  In this case the dab page is pretty nontrivial, so rather than psychoanalyzing the users of each particular article I think it's best just to point them to the nexus. Ryan Reich (talk) 17:36, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Ryan Reich


text:
Kayastha

Kayastha or Kayasth denotes a cluster of disparate Indian communities broadly categorised by the regions of the Indian subcontinent in which they were traditionally located—the Chitraguptavanshi Kayasthas of North India, the Chandraseniya Kayastha Prabhus of Maharashtra, the Bengali Kayasthas of Bengal and Karanas of Odisha. All of them were traditionally considered "writing castes", who had historically served the ruling powers as administrators, ministers and record-keepers.

The earliest known reference to the term Kayastha dates back to the Kushan Empire, when it evolved into a common name for a writer or scribe. In the Sanskrit literature and inscriptions, it was used to denote the holders of a particular category of offices in the government service. In this context, the term possibly derived from kaya- ('principal, capital, treasury') and -stha ('to stay') and perhaps originally stood for an officer of the royal treasury, or revenue department.

Over the centuries, the occupational histories of Kayastha communities largely revolved around scribal services. However, these scribes did not simply take dictation but acted in the range of capacities better indicated by the term "secretary". They used their training in law, literature, court language, accounting, litigation and many other areas to fulfill responsibilities in all these venues. Kayasthas, along with Brahmins, had access to formal education as well as their own system of teaching administration, including accountancy, in the early-medieval India.

Modern scholars list them among Indian communities that were traditionally described as "urban-oriented", "upper caste" and part of the "well-educated" pan-Indian elite, alongside Punjabi Khatris, Kashmiri Pandits, Parsis, Nagar Brahmins of Gujarat, Bengali Bhadraloks, Chitpawans and Chandraseniya Kayastha Prabhus (CKPs) of Maharashtra, South-Indian Brahmins including Deshastha Brahmins from Southern parts of India and upper echelons of the Muslim as well as Christian communities that made up the middle class at the time of Indian independence in 1947.

Etymology
According to Merriam-Webster, the word Kāyastha is probably formed from the Sanskrit kāya (body), and the suffix -stha (standing, being in).

As a class of administrators
As evidenced by literary and epigraphical texts, Kayasthas had emerged as a 'class of administrators' between late-ancient and early-mediaeval period of Indian history. Their emergence is explained by modern scholars as a result of growth of state machinery, complication of taxation system and the "rapid expansion of land-grant practice that required professional documenting fixation". The term also finds mention in an inscription of the Gupta emperor Kumaragupta I, dated to 442 CE, in which prathama-kāyastha is used as an administrative designation. The Yājñavalkya Smṛti, also from the Gupta era, and the Vishnu Smriti describe kayasthas as record-keepers and accountants, but not as jāti (caste or clan). Similarly, the term Kayastha is used in the works of Kshemendra, Kalhana and Bilhana to refer to members of bureaucracy varying from Gṛhakṛtyamahattama to the Aśvaghāsa-kāyastha.

According to Romila Thapar, the offices that demanded formal education including that of a kayastha were generally occupied by the "Brahmins, revenue collectors, treasurers and those concerned with legal matters".

In Buddhist association
According to Chitrarekha Gupta, it is possible that Buddhists, in their effort to create an educated non-Brahmin class, strove to popularize the utility of education and fostered those vocations that required a knowledge of writing. This is corroborated in Udāna, where the lekha-sippa ('craft of writing'), was regarded as the highest of all the crafts. It is also backed by the fact that the earliest epigraphical records mentioning lekhaka ('writer') or kayastha have been made in association with Buddhism.

As an independent guild of professionals
It is possible that kayasthas may have started out as a separate profession, similar to bankers, merchants, and artisans. As suggested in certain epigraphs, they had a representative in the district-level administration, along with those of bankers and merchants. This is also implied in Mudrarakshasa, where a kayastha would work for any man who paid his wages on time. Possibly secular knowledge, like writing, administration, and jurisprudence, was monopolised by a non-Brahmin professional elite that later came be referred as kayasthas.

From classical to early-medieval India
The Kayasthas, at least as an office, played an important role in administering the Northern India from the Gupta period. The earliest evidence comes from a Mathura inscription of Vasudeva I, composed by a Kayastha Śramaṇa. From this point we find, the term kayastha occurring in the inscription of the Gupta Emperor Kumaragupta I as prathama-kāyastha,  as karaṇa-kāyastha in Vainayagupta’s inscription, and as gauḍa-kāyastha in an Apshadha inscription dated 672 CE. The occasional references to individuals of the Karaṇa caste occupying high government offices are made in inscriptions and literary works too. Razia Banu has suggested that Brahmin and Kayastha migrants were brought to Bengal during the reign of the Gupta Empire to help manage the state affairs. According to a legend, a Bengali King named Adisur had invited Brahmins accompanied by Kayasthas from Kannauj who became an elite sub-group described as Kulin. However, such claims are disputable and even rejected by some scholars.

From the ninth-century and perhaps even earlier, Kayasthas had started to consolidate into a distinct caste. The Kayastha appears as a figure in Act IX of the Mṛcchakatika, a kāyastha is shown accompanying a judge (adhikaraṇika) and assisting him. In Act V there is mention that:

In Mudrarakshasa, a Kayastha named Śakaṭadāsa is a crucial character and one of the trusted men of the Prime Minister of the Nanda King. According to Chitrarekha Gupta, the title Ārya added to the name of Śakaṭadāsa implies that he was a member of the nobility. Another Kayastha called Acala is the scribe of Chanakya.

In early-mediaeval Kashmir too, the term kayastha denoted an occupational class whose principal duty, besides carrying on the general administration of the state, consisted in the collection of revenue and taxes. Kshemendra’s Narmamālā composed during the reign of Ananta (1028-1063 CE ) gives a list of contemporary Kayastha officers that included Gṛhakṛtyadhipati, Paripālaka, Mārgapati, Gañja-divira, Āsthāna-divira, Nagara-divira, Lekhakopādhya and Niyogi. Kalhana’s Rājataraṃgiṇī ('The River of Kings') and Bilhana's Vikramāṅkadevacarita ('Life of King Vikramaditya') also mention Kayasthas. It is also mentioned that father of Lalitaditya Muktapida of the Karkota Dynasty, Durlabhavardhan, had held the post of Aśvaghāsa-kāyastha.

Kayasthas have been authors of several Sanskrit texts too.

In Brahmanical literature
Kayasthas have been recorded as a separate caste responsible for writing secular documents and maintaining records in Brahmanical religious writings dating back to the seventh-century. In these texts, some described Kayasthas as Kshatriyas, while others often described them as a 'mixed-origin' caste with Brahmin and Shudra components. This was probably an attempt by the Brahmins to rationalize their rank in the traditional caste hierarchy and perhaps a later invention rather than a historical fact.

Late medieval India
After the Muslim conquest of India, they mastered Persian, which became the official language of the Mughal courts. Some converted to Islam and formed the Muslim Kayasth community in northern India.

Bengali Kayasthas had been the dominant landholding caste prior to the Muslim conquest, and continued this role under Muslim rule. Indeed, Muslim rulers had from a very early time confirmed the Kayasthas in their ancient role as landholders and political intermediaries.

Bengali Kayasthas served as treasury officials and wazirs (government ministers) under Mughal rule. Political scientist U. A. B. Razia Akter Banu writes that, partly because of Muslim sultans' satisfaction with them as technocrats, many Bengali Kayasthas in the administration became zamindars and jagirdars. According to Abu al-Fazl, most of the Hindu zamindars in Bengal were Kayasthas.

Maharaja Pratapaditya, the king of Jessore who declared independence from Mughal rule in the early 17th century, was a Bengali Kayastha.

British India
During the British Raj, Kayasthas continued to proliferate in public administration, qualifying for the highest executive and judicial offices open to Indians.

Bengali Kayasthas took on the role occupied by merchant castes in other parts of India and profited from business contacts with the British. In 1911, for example, Bengali Kayasthas and Bengali Brahmins owned 40% of all the Indian-owned mills, mines and factories in Bengal.

Modern India
The Chitraguptavanshi Kayasthas, Bengali Kayasthas and CKPs were among the Indian communities in 1947, at the time of Indian independence, that constituted the middle class and were traditionally "urban and professional" (following professions like doctors, lawyers, teachers, engineers, etc.) According to P. K. Varma, "education was a common thread that bound together this pan Indian elite" and almost all the members of these communities could read and write English and were educated beyond school.

The Kayasthas today mostly inhabit central, eastern, northern India, and particularly Bengal. They are considered a Forward Caste, as they do not qualify for any of the reservation benefits allotted to Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes that are administered by the Government of India. This classification has increasingly led to feelings of unease and resentment among the Kayasthas, who believe that the communities that benefit from reservation are gaining political power and employment opportunities at their expense. Thus, particularly since the 1990 report of the Mandal Commission on reservation, Kayastha organisations have been active in areas such as Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Bengal and Orissa. These groups are aligning themselves with various political parties to gain political and economic advantages; by 2009 they were demanding 33 percent reservation in government jobs.

Chitraguptavanshi Kayasthas
The Chitraguptavanshi Kayasthas of Northern India are named thus because they have a myth of origin that says they descend from the 12 sons of the Hindu god Chitragupta, the product of his marriages to Devi Shobhavati and Devi Nandini. The suffix -vanshi is Sanskrit and translates as belonging to a particular family dynasty.

At least some Chitraguptavanshi subcastes seem to have formed by the 11th or 12th century, evidenced by various names being used to describe them in inscriptions. Although at that time, prior to the Muslim conquests in the Indian subcontinent, they were generally outnumbered by Brahmins in the Hindu royal courts of northern India, some among these Kayasthas wrote eulogies for the kings. Of the various regional Kayastha communities it was those of north India who remained most aligned to their role of scribes, whereas in other areas there became more emphasis on commerce.

The group of Bhatnagar, Srivastava, Ambashtha and Saxena of Doab were classified by various Indian, British and missionary observers to be the most learned and dominant of the "service castes".

Bengali Kayasthas
In eastern India, Bengali Kayasthas are believed to have evolved from a class of officials into a caste between the 5th-6th centuries and 11th-12th centuries, its component elements being putative Kshatriyas and mostly Brahmins. They most likely gained the characteristics of a caste under the Sena dynasty. According to Tej Ram Sharma, an Indian historian, the Kayasthas of Bengal had not yet developed into a distinct caste during the reign of the Gupta Empire, although the office of the Kayastha (scribe) had been instituted before the beginning of the period, as evidenced from the contemporary Smritis. Sharma further states:"Noticing brahmanic names with a large number of modern Bengali Kayastha cognomens in several early epigraphs discovered in Bengal, some scholars have suggested that there is a considerable brahmana element in the present day Kayastha community of Bengal. Originally the professions of Kayastha (scribe) and Vaidya (physician) were not restricted and could be followed by people of different varnas including the brahmanas. So there is every probability that a number of brahmana families were mixed up with members of other varnas in forming the present Kayastha and Vaidya communities of Bengal."

Chandraseniya Prabhu Kayasthas
In Maharashtra, Chandraseniya Kayastha Prabhus (CKP) claim descent from the warrior Chandrasen. Historically they produced prominent warriors and also held positions such as Deshpandes and Gadkaris (fort holder, an office similar to that of a castellan. The CKPs have the upanayana (thread ceremony) and have been granted the rights to study the vedas and perform vedic rituals along with the Brahmins.

Karanas
Karana is a caste found predominantly in Odisha and Andhra Pradesh. They are a regional subcaste of Kayastha and traditionally they were the official record-keepers in the royal courts during Medieval times. They represent around 5% of Odia people. The Karanas are a forward caste of Odisha.

Varna status
As the Kayasthas are a non-cohesive group with regional differences rather than a single caste, their position in the Hindu varna system of ritual classification has not been uniform.

This was reflected in Raj era court rulings. Hayden Bellenoit gives details of various Raj era law cases and concludes the varna Kayastha was resolved in those cases by taking into account regional differences and customs followed by the specific community under consideration. Bellenoit disagrees with Rowe, showing that Risley's theories were in fact used ultimately to classify them as Kshatriyas by the British courts. The first case began in 1860 in Jaunpur, Uttar Pradesh with a property dispute where the plaintiff was considered an "illegitimate child" by the defendants, a north-Indian Kayastha family. The British court denied inheritance to the child, citing that Kayasthas are Dvija, "twice-born" or "upper-caste" and that the illegitimate children of Dwijas have no rights to inheritance. In the next case in 1875 in the Allahabad High Court, a north Indian Kayastha widow was denied adoption rights as she was an upper-caste i.e. Dwija woman. However, the aforementioned 1884 adoption case and the 1916 property dispute saw the Calcutta High Court rule that the Bengali Kayasthas were shudras. The Allahabad High Court ruled in 1890 that Kayasthas were Kshatriyas. Hayden Bellenoit concludes from an analysis of those that "in the suits originating in the Bihari and Doabi heartlands rulings that Kayasthas were of twice-born status were more likely. Closer to Bengal country, though, the legal rulings tended to assign a shudra status." Even where the shudra designation was adjudged, the Raj courts appear to have sometimes recognised that the Bengali Kayasthas were degraded from an earlier kshatriya status due to intermarrying with both shudras and slaves ('dasa') which resulted in the common Bengali Kayastha surname of 'Das'. The last completed census of the British Raj (1931) classified them as an "upper caste", i.e. Dwija, and the final British Raj law case involving their varna in 1926 determined them to be Kshatriya.

Other than literature by Europeans such as Max Müller and others, several Hindu religious scriptures and Hindu scholars' opinions were also used by the courts to decide the varna as well as make decisions in the specific cases. The Hindu texts referenced were Mitākṣarā, the Padmapurāṇa, “original Vyavashta of the Pundits of Kashmir”, Vishvanath Narayan Mandlik's books, (8th to 5th century BC authored) Yājñavalkya Smṛti, Vīramitrodaya (17th century), Bhaviṣyapurāṇa, Skandapurāṇa, Vivādacintāmaṇi of Vāchaspati Misra, Sanskrit Professor Sarvadhikari's literature, Dattakamīmāṃsā,  Shyamcharan Sarkar’s Vyavasthādarpaṇa, etc. Some contemporary Hindu scholars referenced (as witnesses in person or indirectly by their writings) were two Benaras Pandits(Nityananda and Bast Ram Dube), Raja Ram Shastra( a Benares Sanskrit College professor, well versed in Hindu Dharmaśāstras) and Vishvanath Narayan Mandlik.

Earlier, in Bihar, in 1811–1812, botanist and zoologist Francis Buchanan had recorded the Kayastha of that region as "pure shudra" and accordingly kept them at the par with other producer caste groups like goldsmiths, Ahirs, Kurmis and the Koeris. William Pinch, in his study of Ramanandi Sampradaya in the north describes the emergence of the concept of "pure Shudra" in growing need of physical contact with some of the low caste groups who were producer and seller of essential commodities or were the provider of services without which the self sufficiency of rural society couldn't persist. However, many of these adopted Vaishnavism in the aim to become Kshatriya. In 1901 Bihar census, Kayasthas of the area were classified along with Brahmins and Rajputs in Bihar as "other castes of twice-born rank" According to Arun Sinha, there was a strong current since the end of the 19th century among Shudras of Bihar to change their status in caste hierarchy and break the monopoly of bipolar elite of Brahmins and Rajputs of having "dvija" status. The education and economic advancement made by some of the former Shudra castes enabled them to seek the higher prestige and varna status. Sinha further mentions that the Kayasthas of Bihar along with the Bhumihars were first among the shudras to attain the recognition as "upper caste" leaving the other aspirational castes to aspire for the same. The Raj era rulings were based largely upon the theories of Herbert Hope Risley, who had conducted extensive studies on castes and tribes of the Bengal Presidency. According to William Rowe, the Kayasthas of Bengal, Bombay and the United Provinces repeatedly challenged this classification by producing a flood of books, pamphlets, family histories and journals to pressurise the government to recognise them as kshatriya and to reform the caste practices in the directions of sanskritisation and westernisation. Rowe's opinion has been challenged, with arguments that it is based on "factual and interpretative errors", and criticised for making "unquestioned assumptions" about the Kayastha Sanskritisation and westernisation movement.

In post-Raj assessments, the Bengali Kayasthas, alongside Bengali Brahmins, have been described as the "highest Hindu castes". After the Muslim conquest of India, they absorbed remnants of Bengal's old Hindu ruling dynasties—including the Sena, Pala, Chandra, and Varman—and, in this way, became the region's surrogate kshatriya or "warrior" class. During British rule, the Bengali Kayasthas, the Bengali Brahmins and the Baidyas considered themselves to be Bhadralok, a term coined in Bengal for the gentry or respectable people. This was based on their perceived refined culture, prestige and education.

Modern scholars like John Henry Hutton and Ronald Inden consider the present varna status of Bengali Kayasthas as 'twice-born',  while Julius J. Lipner considers their varna as disputed.

According to Christian Novetzke, in medieval India, Kayastha in certain parts were considered either as Brahmins or equal to Brahmins. Several religious councils and institutions have subsequently stated the varna status of CKPs as Kshatriya.

Socio-economic condition
In 2023, Government of Bihar published the data of 2022 Bihar caste-based survey. It showed that amongst the Forward castes of Bihar, Kayastha was the most prosperous one with lowest poverty. Out of total families of Kayasthas residing in the state, only 13.38% were poor. The community totally numbered 1,70,985 families, out of which 23,639 families were poor.

Kayasthas in Nepal
The Central Bureau of Statistics of Nepal classifies the Kayastha as a subgroup within the broader social group of Madheshi Brahmin/Chhetri (together with Terai Brahmins and Rajputs). At the time of the 2011 Nepal census, 44,304 people (0.2% of the population of Nepal) were Kayastha. The frequency of Kayasthas by province was as follows:
 * Madhesh Province (0.5%)
 * Lumbini Province (0.2%)
 * Bagmati Province (0.1%)
 * Koshi Province (0.1%)
 * Gandaki Province (0.0%)
 * Karnali Province (0.0%)
 * Sudurpashchim Province (0.0%)

The frequency of Kayasthas was higher than national average (0.2%) in the following districts:
 * Parsa (1.0%)
 * Dhanusha (0.8%)
 * Banke (0.6%)
 * Mahottari (0.4%)
 * Morang (0.4%)
 * Rautahat (0.4%)
 * Sarlahi (0.4%)
 * Kapilvastu (0.3%)
 * Saptari (0.3%)
 * Siraha (0.3%)

Notable people
This is a list of notable people from all the subgroups of Kayasthas.

President of India

 * Rajendra Prasad

Prime Minister of India

 * Lal Bahadur Shastri

Chief Ministers

 * Krishna Ballabh Sahay
 * Mahamaya Prasad Sinha
 * Uddhav Thackeray
 * Shiv Charan Mathur
 * Nabakrushna Choudhuri
 * Biju Patnaik
 * Biren Mitra
 * Janaki Ballabh Patnaik
 * Naveen Patnaik
 * Sampurnanand
 * Jyoti Basu

Others

 * Sri Aurobindo, Indian philosopher, yogi and nationalist
 * Nagendranath Basu, historian and editor
 * Shankar Abaji Bhise (1867–1935), scientist and inventor with 200 inventions and 40 patents. The American scientific community referred to him as the "Indian Edison".
 * Jagadish Chandra Bose, Indian scientist
 * Satyendra Nath Bose Known for his work on quantum mechanics, for developing the foundation of Bose statistics and the theory of the Bose condensate. The class of particles that obey Bose statistics, bosons, was named after Bose by Paul Dirac.
 * Subhas Chandra Bose
 * Mahadev Bhaskar Chaubal (1857–1933), Indian origin British era Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court. Member of Executive Council of Governor of Bombay in 1912 and Member of Royal Commission on Public Services in India.
 * Har Dayal, Indian revolutionary and intellectual of the Ghadar party in the USA
 * C. D. Deshmukh (1896–1982), first recipient of the Jagannath Shankarseth Sanskrit Scholarship, topper of ICS Examination, first Indian Governor of RBI, first finance Minister of independent India and tenth vice chancellor of the University of Delhi
 * Baji Prabhu Deshpande (1615–1660), commander of Shivaji Maharaj's forces who along with his brother died defending Vishalgad in 1660
 * Murarbaji Deshpande (?–1665), commander of Shivaji Maharaj's forces who died defending the fort of Purandar against the Mughals in 1665
 * Jayaprakash Narayan (1902 -1979) - freedom fighter, social reformer and anti-corruption campaigner
 * Bipin Chandra Pal, Indian nationalist, writer, orator, social reformer and Indian independence movement activist of Lal Bal Pal triumvirate
 * Vithal Sakharam Parasnis (17xx-18xx)- Sanskrit, Vedic and Persian scholar; consultant to British Historian James Grant Duff; author of the Sanskrit "karma kalpadrum"(manual for Hindu rituals); first head of the school opened by Pratapsimha to teach Sanskrit to the boys of the Maratha caste
 * Devdutt Pattanaik
 * Premchand (1880–1936) – author in Hindi language
 * Sachchidananda Sinha, lawyer prominent in the movement for establishing the state of Bihar
 * Mahadevi Varma
 * Bhagwati Charan Verma
 * Swami Vivekananda
 * Paramahansa Yogananda, author of Autobiography of a Yogi

title: Kayastha


text: Wikipedia:Multilingual ranking/February 2005


text:
Siding Spring 2.3 m Telescope

The 2.3 metre telescope at Siding Spring Observatory is operated by the Australian National University. The Advanced Technology Telescope was constructed during the early 1980s and featured, at the time, bold features and design: an unusually thin mirror, an alt-az mount and co-rotating dome. The optical telescope has Altazimuth mount and a primary mirror with a focal length of f/2.05. It is housed in a box-shaped building which rotates as the telescope tracks objects.

Instrumentation includes an integral field spectrograph known as WiFeS, an echelle spectrograph, and a Nasmyth imager. The telescope is a workhorse for numerous large programs where it is used to do follow-up observations on objects of interest before more extensive observations are made at larger telescopes. It is also a valuable tool for training students in the astronomical observing techniques.

History
The telescope was the initiative of Don Mathewson. It was inaugurated Prime Minister, Bob Hawke on 16 May 1984. It was regarded as an achievement in high technology for Australia. In 1985, it won an award from the Institution of Engineers.

In 2023 the telescope was automated to robotically study astrophysical explosions

Mirror
The mirror used in the telescope is much thinner than those typically used in a telescope mirror. Its ratio of diameter to thickness is about 20:1. The light mirror and rotating design allows the telescope to be rapidly moved as observations are made.

title: Siding Spring 2.3 m Telescope


text:
TSMS Lakonia

TSMS Lakonia was an ocean liner that was launched in 1929 for Netherland Line as the ocean liner Johan van Oldenbarnevelt. In 1962 she became the Greek Line cruise ship TSMS Lakonia. On 22 December 1963 she caught fire at sea and on 29 December she sank. 128 people were killed in the disaster.

In the 1930s Johan van Oldenbarnevelt's regular route was between Amsterdam and the Dutch East Indies. She served in the Second World War as an Allied troop ship. She was refitted several times and latterly became a cruise ship.

In 1962 Netherland Line sold her to a Greek company, the Shipping Investment Corporation, who renamed her Lakonia and for whom the Greek Line managed her for cruising. From April 1963 Greek Line operated her on cruises from Southampton.

On 22 December 1963 fire broke out during a Christmas cruise. As the fire spread, alarms sounded too softly to be heard by most people aboard. Evacuation was hampered by the overcrowding of lifeboats and the loss of several boats to fire. Some deaths were caused by the fire itself, others by accidents when abandoning ship, and others by exposure or drowning in the sea.

Lakonia's crew successfully launched just over half of her lifeboats. Some passengers were able to reach the water via gangways and rope ladders. Two ships alerted by distress signals managed to save most of the others.

On 24 December ocean tugs took Lakonia in tow and tried to tow her to Gibraltar. But the ship had developed a list and on 29 December she sank in the Atlantic.

A board of inquiry traced the fire to faulty electrical wiring, but strongly criticised the maintenance of equipment, thoroughness of lifeboat drills, and the standard of supervision. Eight of the ship's officers were charged with negligence.

Building
Nederlandsche Scheepsbouw Maatschappij built Johan van Oldenbarnevelt in Amsterdam. Her yard number was 194. She was launched on 3 August 1929 and completed on 13 March 1930. The same shipyard built a sister ship, Marnix van St. Aldegonde, which was launched in December 1929 and completed in September 1930. Both ships were built for Netherland Line to operate scheduled passenger and cargo services between Amsterdam and the Dutch East Indies.

Johan van Oldenbarnevelt was named after a Dutch soldier and statesman of the same name who was beheaded in 1619.

Johan van Oldenbarnevelt was a motor ship with two Sulzer marine diesel engines driving her two propellers. Between them the engines developed 1,555 NHP and gave her a cruising speed of 19 kn. The ship was 586.2 ft long, had a beam of 74.8 ft and her tonnage was.

Johan van Oldenbarnevelt was the 89th ship built for the Netherland Line. When she was launched she was the largest ship yet built in the Netherlands. The artist Carel Adolph Lion Cachet and sculptor Lambertus Zijl decorated her interior with teak, marble, and many statues, mosaics, tapestries and chandeliers.

As built, she had berths for 770 passengers: 366 in first class, 280 in second, 64 in third and 60 in fourth class. She had berths for 360 crew. She had four decks and could carry 9,000 tons of cargo.

Until 1933 the ship's code letters were PGHB. In 1934 they were superseded by the maritime call sign PFEB. Until 1939 she was registered in Amsterdam.

World War II service
When the Second World War broke out in 1939, Holland America Line chartered Johan van Oldenbarnevelt, re-registered her in Batavia in the Dutch East Indies and used her as a cargo ship between Batavia and New York City.

On 20 January 1941 she was requisitioned to be an Allied troop ship, and was converted by Harland and Wolff to carry up to 4,000 troops. Orient Line managed her. In 1943 she was re-registered in Willemstad, Curaçao. After servicing India, Singapore and Penang, she finally returned to her home port of Amsterdam on 13 February 1946.

Her sister ship, Marnix van St. Aldegonde, also served as a troop ship. German aircraft sank her by torpedo off the Algerian coast, but all 3,000 troops and crew were saved by rescue ships.

Post-war service
After Johan van Oldenbarnevelt was released from government service, Netherland Line had her refitted and in 1946 returned her to service on the Amsterdam – Batavia route. From 1945 until 1949 Indonesians fought for their independence from the Netherlands. For several years the ship ferried Dutch troops returning home from Indonesia.

By 1950 Indonesia was independent and the ship was withdrawn from the East Indies service. She was transferred to the Amsterdam – Australia service and began her first voyage to Australia on 2 September 1950. She serviced Australia and New Zealand for the next twelve and a half years, with occasional service to Canada and the United States.

The Australia run was an instant success, and 1951, Johan van Oldenbarnevelt was put into dry-dock in Amsterdam for refitting. She was refitted as a one-class ship with berths for 1,414 passengers. Her lounges were restored to their original and additional passenger facilities were installed. Eight lifeboats were added, bringing her total number of boats to 24.

On 23 January 1952 she left for Australia but was forced to return to Amsterdam after four small fires were discovered aboard. The fires were quickly extinguished. Arson was suspected, but no suspects were ever arrested.

In 1958 Johan van Oldenbarnevelt was refitted again, reducing her berths to 1,210. The Amsterdam Dry Dock Company completed the refit in three months at a cost of A$800,000. Three luxury suites were added, as well as a nightclub, cinema, gift shop, promenade lounge and second swimming pool. All public rooms were refinished and restored. Her main mast was moved to atop the bridge, and her decks were extended aft. Her funnels were raised, given rounded tops and painted yellow and black. Her black hull was re-painted grey.

On 2 April 1959 the ship was assigned to her new port, Southampton, England. She offered round-the-world service, making stops in Australia, New Zealand, Bermuda and New York City. She was now a cruise ship instead of an ocean liner.

Johan van Oldenbarnevelt left on her last round-the-world voyage for the Netherland Line on 30 June 1962. She arrived in Sydney, Australia on 3 February 1963 and was decommissioned by the Netherland Line that day, ending a 33-year career for that shipping line. She then sailed for Genoa, Italy, and arrived on 7 March 1963.

TSMS Lakonia
On 8 March 1963 Johan van Oldenbarnevelt was sold to a Greek company, the Shipping Investment Corporation. Her decks and public rooms were renamed and the aft swimming pool was enlarged. 12 extra cabins were added, and air conditioning was installed throughout the ship. Her hull was painted white, and her tonnage increased to. She was renamed TSMS Lakonia.

Ormos Shipping Company, also known as the Greek Line, operated Lakonia offering cruises from Southampton to the Canary Islands. She left Southampton on her first voyage as Lakonia on 24 April 1963. She proved very popular, and Greek Line planned 27 cruises for 1964. From 9–13 December 1963 she underwent another minor upgrade. A new pneumatic fuel injection system was installed. Cabins were redecorated, and the kitchen and pantry were completely remodelled.

Lakonia was fitted with a number of safety features. She carried 24 lifeboats capable of holding 1,455 people. She had an automatic fire alarm system and two fire stations with specialist firefighting equipment. She had lifejackets for every person aboard and an extra 400 stowed on deck.

Fire
Lakonia left Southampton on 19 December 1963 for an 11-day Christmas cruise of the Canary Islands. Her first scheduled stop was to be the island of Madeira. She carried 646 passengers and 376 crew: a total of 1,022 people. All but 21 of the passengers were British citizens. Most of her crew were Greek or German. The captain of Lakonia was 53-year-old Mathios Zarbis.

The crew had conducted a boat drill a week before, and the ship passed a safety inspection by the British Ministry of Transport 24 hours before sailing. She carried a Greek certificate of seaworthiness. Passengers took part in a boat drill on 20 December, but one passenger noted that he was the only one at his lifeboat Station.

On 22 December, at around 11:00 p.m., a steward noticed thick smoke seeping under the door of the ship's hairdressing salon. Upon opening the door, he found the room completely ablaze, and the fire rushed into the hallway toward the state rooms. He and another steward tried to fight the flames with fire extinguishers, but the fire spread too fast to be contained. One of the men ran to notify the ship's purser, Antonio Bogetti.

Fire alarms sounded, but too softly to be heard by most passengers. "The fire alarm bell was so weak that it sounded like someone calling the waiter to ask for tea," one survivor later told reporters. An alarm went off on the bridge, showing the fire's location. The ship was about 200 mi north of Madeira at °N, °W. [A]

At the time the fire was discovered, most of the passengers were in the ship's ballroom, called the Lakonia Room, dancing at the "Tropical Tramps' Ball." Passengers began to notice the smell of smoke, but most dismissed it as strong cigar smoke. Captain Zarbis, who had been notified of the fire, tried to make an announcement on the ship's public address system, but the fire had disabled it. As smoke began to fill the ballroom at about 11:30, the band stopped playing and cruise director George Herbert ushered the frightened passengers to the boat deck. The upper deck was ablaze within 10 minutes.

Many of the passengers who had been asleep in their cabins found themselves unable to escape the fire. Some passengers were told to go to the main dining room to await instructions, but most ignored this order, since the dining room lay directly in the path of the fire.

At 11:30 p.m., the ship's chief radio officer Antonios Kalogridis sent out the first distress call: "Fire spreading up. Prepare evacuation on ship." At midnight, a second distress call was sent out: "We are leaving the ship. Please immediately give us assistance. Please help us." Kalogridis sent out the last call at 12:22 a.m., just before the radio room caught fire: "SOS from Lakonia, last time. I cannot stay anymore in the radio station. We are leaving the ship. Please immediate assistance. Please help."

A six-man fire crew tried to fight the blaze, but the fire spread too quickly to be contained. Boilers began to explode, filling the rooms and hallways with thick, black smoke, and the suffocating passengers were forced on deck.

Evacuation
The ship's purser gave the order to abandon ship shortly before 1:00 a.m. Dazed passengers made their way to the lifeboats, some in their pyjamas and others still wearing their jewellery and evening wear.

A few crew members went below decks to try to save passengers from their burning cabins. The ship's swimming pool attendant and a steward lowered themselves over the side of the ship, by rope, to pull trapped people from portholes.

Evacuation of the ship was very difficult. Some lifeboats burned before they could be lowered. Two of the lifeboats were swamped, spilling their occupants into the sea; one when it was lowered only by one end, and the other when its davits broke off. Chains had rusted in many of the davits, making boats difficult or impossible to move. Only just over half of the lifeboats made it safely away from Lakonia, and some of them less than half full. Several people who dove overboard struck the side of the ship on the way down, killing them before they hit the water.

Passengers were angered when the radio operator left the ship in a launch, with a nurse and two musicians. Kalogridis later testified that he had left to rescue people from the water. He stated that he did not return to the ship because the current pushed the launch away.[B] Passengers also claimed that some of the crewmen took advantage of the chaos to loot state rooms.

When all of the boats were away, there were still people in the water and over 100 people left aboard the burning ship. Lakonia continued to burn fiercely and was rocked by violent explosions. Those who remained aboard flocked to the glass-enclosed Agora Shopping Centre at the stern of the ship. After several hours, the flames closed in on them, and they were forced to descend ropes and rope ladders into the ocean. The port and starboard gangways were lowered as well, and people walked down the gangways single file into the sea.

Rescue
At 3:30 a.m., four hours after the first distress call, the 495 ft Argentine passenger ship Salta arrived on the scene. Salta, commanded by Captain José Barrere, had been on her way from Genoa, Italy to Buenos Aires. The 440 ft British cargo ship Montcalm arrived half an hour later at 4:00 a.m. The majority of the survivors were saved by these two ships. Salta rescued 475 people and took aboard most of Lakonia's lifeboats.

In the hours that followed, the Belgian ship Charlesville, the USA freighter Rio Grande, the British passenger ship Stratheden and the Panamanian freighter Mehdi all arrived to join the rescue. Each rescue ship launched boats to pluck survivors from the water. The United States Air Force sent four C-54 aircraft from the Lajes Field in the Azores. The planes dropped flares, lifejackets, life rafts and survival kits to people in the water. An RAF Avro Shackleton from Gibraltar criss-crossed the area, pinpointing boats and survivors and guiding rescuers to them.

The rescue was hindered by the fact that Lakonia drifted for several miles during the evacuation. People in the water were dispersed over a 2 to 3 mi area. Also, rescue ships were reluctant to get too near Lakonia because of the risk that her 500 tons of fuel oil could explode.

Charlesville sent a lifeboat shortly after daybreak to rescue Captain Zarbis, who was spotted pacing the decks of his still-burning ship. Zarbis was the last person to leave Lakonia alive.

Most of the survivors were taken to Madeira. Others, including Captain Zarbis, were taken to Casablanca.

Aftermath
The disaster killed a total of 128 people. 95 were passengers and 33 were crew. Only 53 people were killed in the actual fire. The rest died from exposure, drowning and injuries sustained while diving overboard. Most of the dead were buried in a Gibraltar cemetery after an autopsy which was carried out in a cavern workshop of 1st Fortress Squadron, Royal Engineers.

One passenger who jumped from the ship cut her throat on her life jacket. After being rescued by Montcalm, her injuries were treated by another passenger, Alan Leigh. Largely due to this incident, cruise ship passengers are now instructed how to hold their jackets if jumping from a height.

Crewmen from the Royal Navy aircraft carrier HMS Centaur (R06) boarded Lakonia on 24 December, once the flames had died down. Most of the bodies were recovered by the crew of Centaur. By this time Lakonia was a charred, smoking hulk. Her superstructure had partially collapsed amidships, and the bridge and aft decks had caved in. There were holes blasted near her bow, and she was listing 10 degrees to starboard.

The Norwegian tugboat Herkules secured a tow line to Lakonia at 5:30 p.m. on 24 December. Herkules, along with the Portuguese tugboat Praia da Adraga and two other tugs, set off for the British base at Gibraltar with Lakonia in tow. Her list grew more severe each day, and at about 2:00 p.m. on 29 December, Lakonia rolled onto her starboard side. She sank stern-first in only three minutes. The ship went down 230 nmi southwest of Lisbon, Portugal, 250 nmi west of Gibraltar.

The only colour photographs taken of the Lakonia disaster ran in Life magazine on 3 January 1964. Life's photographic coverage of the event marked only the second time in history that a publication was able to offer hour-by-hour photographic coverage of a disaster at sea. The first such coverage appeared on 6 August 1956, when Life ran a series of photos of the Italian liner SS Andrea Doria sinking. The only person known to have taken photos aboard the ship during the fire was Ian Harris from Finchley, London, who was travelling with his wife, Rita Harris. These photos appeared in Life, edition dated 3 January 1964. Rita Harris recounted the events on 2 July 1964 on Woman's Hour on the BBC Light Programme.

Survivors include British educator Sir Ivor Jennings with wife and daughter, architect Owen Luder and wife Doris, and Henry Wilson, Baron Wilson of Langside.

Investigation
The Greek Merchant Marine Ministry conducted a two-year investigation into Lakonia disaster. The board of inquiry maintained that Lakonia should not have passed safety inspections before sailing. Lifeboat davits were rusted and lockers containing lifesaving equipment failed to open. The drain holes in many of the lifeboats lacked stoppers, so that passengers had to constantly bail water.

The crew had conducted a lifeboat drill a week before the voyage, but only five of the boats had been lowered. The board argued that all of the boats should have been tested.

Charges of looting were dropped after extensive questioning. The crew maintained that they had only broken into cabins to search for lifejackets.

The board of inquiry made a number of other charges. The order to abandon ship was given too late. Operations on deck were not supervised by responsible officers. The crew, except for a few acts of self-sacrifice, failed to rescue sleeping passengers from their cabins below decks.

Eight of Lakonia's officers were charged with negligence. Captain Zarbis, his first officer and the ship's security officer were charged with gross negligence. The other five men were charged with simple negligence.

The cause of the fire was ultimately determined to be a short circuit of faulty electrical wiring.

title: TSMS Lakonia


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barricade

 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 KEEP. —Korath (Talk) 17:40, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Barricade
Dictionary definition Preisler 23:21, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. It can be expanded to describe various kinds of barricades. —Mar·ka·ci: 2005-02-19 23:24 Z
 * Keep and expand. It needs descriptions of the various kinds, and how they have been used throughout history. Zzyzx11 00:06, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * ...and the bar of this name that was partly owned by Phil Ochs. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:48, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Concur with Preisler - Transwiki to wiktionary. Radiant! 09:07, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)
 * Transwiki. Yes, barricades are multifaceted, but in my opinion it's still a dicdef. HyperZonktalk 02:38, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep -- Longhair 03:50, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - Agree with Zzyzx11. Needs a lot of expansion, though. Barricades have a long and important history, which could be (and should be) incorporated into the article. Grutness|hello? [[Image:Grutness.jpg|25px|]] 04:36, 21 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.