text:
Talk:Battle of Plataea

Untitled
the casualty figures seem a little suspect - has any historian made a better estimate?

legends
Aren't there any legends or points of interest concerning this battle?

A day-runner (Pheideppide's job) brought news to the Oracle at Delphi and from there sacred fire, doing the 100+ km trip on the same day Ikokki 23:05, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

contradiction
it says the number of persians was probably under 80 000 but then it says that the persains suffered 200 000 casualties. It doesn't make sense.

The >200,000 figure was from Herodotus. But that is beside the point. I think these numbers are all inflated. It's impossible to imagine even 80,000 Persians at the battle, and the 110,000 Greek figure is also almost certainly massively inflated. Countries at that time simply were not capable of fielding, equipping, and supplying armies of that size, especially over long lines of communications (like from Anatolia to Greece). The largest army Rome ever fielded was the one at Cannae, around 87,000, and Rome was far more capable of fielding large armies that Greece or Persia (especially at long distance).

---

Herodotus actually gives 300.000 as the number of the Persian forces in Plataea of which 40.000 under Artavazus did not take part in the battle because their leader disagreed with Mardonius's strategy and left, forming the mass of the survivors. This detachment however was later defeated by the forces of Alexander I at the delta of the Strymon river. J.A.R. Munro and Macan at  Cambridge Ancient History  volume IV confirm the 300.000 figure by noting that under Mardonius the where 6 superior military commanders (one of whom was Artavazus) and 29 "μυριαρχοι" that is literally leaders of 10.000 soldiers. The Persian Empire under Xerxes had a population of over 20.000.000 inhabitants, meaning 300.000 soldiers is only 1,5% of its population when historically under war at least 5% of a state's population get drafted. The preparations for the campaign took some 4 years and that Herodotus mentions 46 different nations and that includes peoples as far as modern-day Afghanistan. The wealth of the Persian treasury was such that it fueled and paid for wars for 50 years after Alexander the Great's death. Also among the preparations was having food and supplies stored all the way to the edge of the Persian empire of 480 BC, that is the border of the kingdom of Macedonia. Thus I don't understand why the Persians could not have fielded such a large army. Rome had a much smaller population base than Persia and thus could gather a smaller army. Let us not forget however that Polybius give a high 6-number figure as the size of the whole army Rome was capable of rallying in the 2nd century BC.

As for the Greeks Herodotus gives a field army of 38.700 hoplites and 71.300 light troops. He goes on and breaks down the hoplites by city-state giving very realistic numbers, which are quite consistant with the army numbers given by Thucydides for the Peloponesian War 50 years later considering the rise in population and wealth in that these fifty years. For the light troop armies the only number that can be honestly debates is the 35.000 helots, that is 7 helots for every Lacedemonian. If however every helot was drafted (something understandable since you don't want a fifth column lying around at home) that number is consistent with the male population of helots as can be implied from archeological data. For the losses Herodotus might give 156 but Plutarch gives a more realistic 1360. I think the page out to be revised to show at least arguements why the armies were that big.Ikokki 23:43, 4 April 2006 (UTC)ikokki

---

Herodotus was innaccurate at best and frequently inflated numbers. I think this page should be revised to show this. Also, what is this about Alexander?

Good question about Alexader, I'm confused by this too. But don't mistake it with Alexader III the great. This may be the Alexander I of Macedonia, which was conquered along with Thrace during the second expedition of Xerxes.

As for the sub 80,000 estimates, here are some of the modern estimates: One of them even gives the Persians only around 50,000. http://www.herodotuswebsite.co.uk/plataea.htm http://monolith.dnsalias.org/~marsares/warfare/battle/plataea.html http://wildfiregames.com/0ad/page.php?p=1503 http://www.geocities.com/caesarkevin/battles/Greekbattles2.html

This site gives 120,000 http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/ancient/plataea/default.aspx

There seems to be greater agreement on modern estimates of a Persian force between 70,000 to 80,000. There are some estimates as low as 50,000 as I showed and there is also one high source I found 120,000. Anyway, averaged out the Persian force indeed was about 70,000 to 80,000. Making the casualties now make sense.

Actually there's only 2 sources there, not four. The first site says that some 80,000 was left behing, while Herodotus claimed 120,000. Since Herodotus claimed 300,000 in total, the article's 80,000 is not about the total Persian force. The fourth source doesn't claim less than 300,000 at all, it just states that probably 70,000 Persians fell in the battle. Miskin 12:25, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I read Ctesias's account at http://www.tertullian.org/fathers/photius_03bibliotheca.htm#72 .I'm not sure that he refers to this battle of Plataea since he puts it with Xerxes present and before Salamis Ikokki 08:29, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Where are the sources for a modern source saying 300,000. I am only aware of that figure said by the Herodotus the "exaggerater". Modern sources claim from a low of 60,000 to a high of 120,000. PLease site source Mishkin, the former range of 70,000-80,000 was mor accurate in an unbiased opinion. Thanks for the link Ikkoki, quite interesting. And its still me anonymous.

Hammond gives 300,000 and so does the history of the greek nation. You're welcome mr Canadian (at least that is what your IP adress says)Ikokki 21:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

It's strage, I've never seen claims below 120,000 anywhere but those two websites. I've removed the exaggerated figure of Diodorus' 500,000 so it's fair to remove also the non-mainstream estimations. We keep the realistic mentions of antiquity and the consensus of modern times. Miskin 10:16, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

 * I just realised that the anon had also been edit-warring in the Battle of Mycale. He delivered me a personal attack because he couldn't take the truth, I think we can't expect a lot of neutrality from him. Miskin 10:19, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

This has to be one of the most respectable internet source I have seen from a Greeks. Though the name of the site is Hellas.net and that means it definitely should have some bias, it does a remarkable job of keeping all patriotism out of the events of history. http://monolith.dnsalias.org/~marsares/warfare/index.html#history

It gives no more than 250,000 Persians for thermopylae, no more than 50,000 at Plataea for the strength. So Miskin this isn't one source right it's probably 0.5, the way you supposed the previous four sources were only 2. Tell me where are you from Miskin?

As for 60,000 Persians at Mycale, I will continue looking because for all I know a not so popular book with a not so popular author is not as good as a reasonable link to a site. For all I know Miskin could be making up bull. I mean in his quote in the Mycale discussion "The Persian inferiority" interesting I wonder who that author is routing for.

Also Hammond's estimates of 300,000 were straight ripped of from Herodotus, he did not do his own investigation on the issue. As for true Persian numbers at Plataea. Consider this:

We can agree that by modern estimates Xerxes'troops in the grand scale invasion numbered anywhere from 250,000 to 500,000 and almost all of them were present at Thermopylae because it was the first battle of the 480 BCE invasion. Herodotus exaggerates when he gives numbers, but he doesn't lie when he says after Salamis Xerxes takes approximately two thirds of his army away and leaves one third in command of General Mardonius. one third of the original 250,000 to 500,000 (in addition, the dividing number should be even smaller because heavy casualties were sustained by the Persians between the battles of Thermopylae until Salamis, but I will give you the credit because you let bigotory ideas get in the way of your perception of history). So one third of the original figures (just divide by three, Miskin) and you get a range of 83,000 - 166,000.

So I appologize Miskin but 300,000 is way off and utter Greek patriotism BS.

No, we don't agree that Xerxes came with no more than 250,000 in Greece. It was over 400,000. What is accepted in the West is not necessarily what is true. After all, before Ventris decifered linear B Mycenians were believed to be non-Greeks. At a time when there was no data on the flow of Greek rivers Maurice claimed that no more than 175,000 could have come. The same river that according to Maurice could not support 4 liters of water per day for more than 175,000 (Pineios) today supports 800,000 inhabitants using 100+ liters per day and, with the help of the groundwater of Thessaly, waters tens of thousands of hectares of cotton. I know, this is my training, water resources managment. 3 to 1 was a very realistic ratio because the Persians could not defeat the Greeks without numerical superiority. Also when the Persians attacked the Spartans and Tegeans on the hill they had numerical superiority, else they could not hope to win through arrow volleys. Marathon proved that. Hammond did do his homework, which is why he accepts that. If anything it is certain that the Greek hoplites were not the main body of the Persian force since they proved unreliable, and Mardonius knew it. He needed more Persians than Greeks to police the Greeks some of whom had fought against him already (Phocians), some of whom had murdered Persian emissaries (Macedonians). Only the Thebans in the end fought for Persia. When the Spartans and Tegeans defended, the faced a superior numeically force than theirs (ie over 60,000). I am not motivated by nationalism, no thanks. Nationalism died in 1974 when it failed Cyprus. Ethnic states are dead, is what the talking heads in this country say, multicultural societies is the way. That site BTW that you point does not give how it came on these numbers. Oh, and Miskin, let the small number show. Wikipedia is NPOV and those of the critical school can make fools of themselves with small numbers.Ikokki

ΒΤW who says 2/3 left? Herodotus only says that Mardonius could finish the job without navy and with only 30 myriads (that would be baivabaram). The whole army accompanied Xerxes until Thessaly, Artabazus attacked the cities of Halkidiki that had rebelled and later returned. Who says 2/3? Ikokki 21:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

You're right lkokki, let the poor guy have it his way, after all he's bitter from a battle that took place 2500 years ago so he probably needs it. Do you think we should add Diodorus' figure of 500K, or should we leave it out so that he won't start crying? Miskin 23:51, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

My numbers were for a range of 250,000 to 500,000 Ikkoki (not only the lowest end of the scale), 2/3 making it anywhere from 80,000-160,000. Do you not see the large amount of ridicule in the fact that every source you express that inflates the Persian numbers are Greek. Whether it was marathon or Thermopylae, whenever you cannot find a logical contemporary source showing a large Persian force you return to obvious miscalculated figures from antiquity. Guess where those numbers unfortunately come from again, Greece. You want proof 2/3 left here, just wait. "whats accepted from the west is not always true, guess what buddy who happens to be Greek, almost everything flying out of the mouths of ancient Greek historians is either exaggerated or false. A Greek will obviously have bias, on such issues, so much to say their historians, an english or westerner need not be bias because they are nor Persian nor Greek. Then you go and talk about water suport from the river, so you are going to talk about how much water can be reserved and extracted by ancient methods and modern technology, this does not help your case. At the bottom of this page it says, Xerxes left with the bulk of his army. http://www.herodotuswebsite.co.uk/salamis.htm

Well even when we take your higher end no. of 400,000 consider 20,000 deaths at Thermopylae and possible the same amount if not more by at Salamis since 200 Persian ships were sunk (say 150 on a ship and that's another 30,000 Persians, because they rarely new how to swim). When it says bulk I am pretty sure he left less than 300,000 soldiers. Beacause "the bulk" would not mean 50,000 of an original 350,000.

Can you tell me why this even Greek source doesn't claim a larger Persian force than 50,000 http://monolith.dnsalias.org/~marsares/warfare/battle/plataea.html

Even at the top of this site it says that the Persians were 120,000 at best, another author claims on the site claims 70,000. http://www.herodotuswebsite.co.uk/plataea.htm#Post%20Salamis Now I never asked for such a low range but I think that 80,000-160,000 should do it simply because this site says that Herodotus claims the Persians had 120,000 including the Immortals.

Yet another source here that claims 120,000 by a contemporary historian. Oops it maay be a Brit though, watch out they always take the side of the Persians. http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/ancient/plataea/default.aspx

Yet another source that says 120,000 http://members.ozemail.com.au/~ancientpersia/B_xerxes.html

Another site that doubts Herodotus' exaggerated claim of 300,000. This one puts the Persian strength at 70,000. http://www.geocities.com/caesarkevin/battles/Greekbattles2.html

This site says that most of the Persian force retreated with Xerxes after Salamis http://www.reference.com/browse/wiki/Battle_of_Salamis

There are more sources, but honestly I cannot take the time to show them all. Perhaps this 2/3 thing was something I read in a book because I cannot find it anymore, I will keep looking though.

 * You asked for my source and I provided them. I bet the phrase "inferiority of the Persians" hit a weak spot, but it was part of the citation and whether you believe it or not is irrelevant. If you edit-war because you think that someone's source is not real, it will eventually get you blocked. You have shown hostile and chauvinist behaviour, therefore you no longer deserve any respect from my part. I'm adding the maxima numbers provided by Diodorus and if you continue rv-warring, I'll report you both for edit-warring as an anon (which is frowned upon) and for making personal attacks. Miskin 23:42, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Go right ahead, infact talk to Adam Bishop, he's an admin right here usuallytaking care of roman and greek battles. If 300,000 is a source already availbale in the warbox by Herodotus then the contemporary sources I linked to have just as much right to be in the war box. I don't care how many exaggerated sources you wish to put as long as the name is given, I will ensure however that the modern estimaes which I have provided more than enough links to stay, majority estimates between 80,000 to 120,000. Plus I will give you guys a 40,000 persian soldier credit (by adding the higher end of the range to 160,000) because it makes Greek bigots feel warm in side. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.95.91.176 (talk • contribs)

 * Please don't revert more than three times in a 24-hour period. Try to resolve the issue by polite discussion, it will get you farther. Perhaps you could add a sidenote that so-and-so contradicts so-and-so or something. I'm sure it can be worked out with a little cooperation. But reverting is edit warring and the one who reverts to three first can be blocked from editing for a short time. --DanielCD 01:55, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

According to this page, the number of Spartan troops numbered 10,000. However, according to my historical textbooks, the total male population of Sparta at this time numbered 8,000, of which 5,000 were at this battle (A Brief History of Greece, Pomeroy et. al., 101 and others). I would suggest a clarification that Spartan figures were possibly exaggerated or this figure includes non-native Spartans in the Spartan force. 128.61.53.58 04:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Edit warring
We do not need an edit war over this issue. Let us set up a section on what was the size of Persian army, or better yet an article. BTW that Hellas NET site you put up mr Canadian anonymous is maintained by a Dutch. Ikokki 08:23, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Very well Ikkoki, I am ready to discuss with you politely on this issue, I am not however in that mood with Miskin has he has proven I am not worth it. Since we have a 300,000 figure already there by an ancient source (Herodotus, I think it would be wise not to repeat it, especially when I have shown several in my previous posts sites that show a range of 80,000 to 120,000 for the Persian strength. We have the 300,000 figure already there by Herodotus, I have no intentions of changing that but I would like to add the modern estimates to the range of 80,000-120,000 because that is the bulk of many contemporary estimates. With exception to few who get most of their info from ancinet sources like Hammond. So can I ask you is it fair that we already have a 300,000 and you increase the range I put 80,000-120,000 when I have given so many sources they can't all be wrong Ikkoki. Still don't agree?

If you were to remove the 300,000 from the upper end that would mean that no modern historian accepts this. You can put up something more neutral that others accept Herodotus and others estimate it there, but in the main body, not a note Ikokki 21:03, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

So would you agree to writing in the war box, "modern estimates are as low as 80,000"?

Excellent job Ikkoki, I like the organization of the box now, it gives both numbers/ranges, I am satisfied with this one and if you are too, I say we keep like this. Hey, I guess the admins were right huh, talking certainly got us further than edit warrng. Now we are 2/2 Ikkoki, we have agreed on Marathon and Thermopylae, without it getting too hot tempered, wouldn't you agree.

But for historical purposes perhaps, you can clear me up a bit, that was the fact didn't Herodotus say that Xerxes left 300,000 in total before he left back, and weren't only 250,000 in the control of Mardonius and only 50,000 were in command of Artabazus. Didn't Artabazus and his troops refuse to fight at Plataea because he was unsure that just beacause the persian army could win because of numerical superiority. So wouldn't that put Herodotus' more accurate number for the troops fighting at Plataea, the ones that were only under Mardonius, 250,000 of which.

In the battle of Salamis 200 or so Egyptian ships were not in Aegaleo fighting but in Faneromeni keeping the straight colsed. 20 or so Corinthian ships were on the look out for them and did not engage the Persian fleet. Yet both are in the sum. Why should Artabazus's force be any different? In any case Artabazus had an important role in the third phase of the battle, he let the doors open in the fortified camp. Keep him there Ikokki 17:37, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

On the reliability of ancient sources and modern historians
When discussing about enemy army sizes in Plataea in the end boils down to how reliable are ancient sources compared to modern historians. Because the fighting earlier took place when I was asleep I did not have time to elaborate on my position. In general, even modern Western historians, start from what is given out of ancient sources. In the Cambridge History of Ancient Greece (which is given away in leaflets by the newspaper Ta Nea) the text gives constant references to ancient Greek sources. Bury or Bengtson or Champollion, when they were first writing that the numbers are small also had a great knowledge of ancient sources. This however does not mean that we must agree with their conclusions. All historians start by listing numbers by ancient sources. Greek historians who have to publish articles in scholarly journals if they want to get promoted in their universities. Anyway most are socialists, leading to freakish statements like the one calling EOKA an organisation of ultraconservatism. In describing the Persian army ancient sources are consistent that it was huge. Herodotus gives huge numbers, Xenophon gives huge numbers, Arrian gives huge numbers, Ctesias (who was thought to be writting Persian propaganda) gives huge numbers, Justinus gives huge numbers, Cornelius Nepos gives huge numbers etc. Either every historian of antiquity was lying or the Persians did field large armies. That does not mean I accept the numbers they give because they do exaggerate at times, but it does not mean that I do not think they were large. How large were the armies fielded? Lets talk about Herodotus. He gives 700,000 as the force that invaded Scythia and 80,000 as that under Mardomius that stayed behind to finish the job. Did Darius invade with 700,000? Most probably not. This is the number given to him by the Scythians, when he visited them 70 or so years later, enlargened by the fear it produced. 80,000 staying behind under Mardonius is realistic. Herodotus probably talked to someone close to Mardonius. On the battle of Plataea, which is what interests us here, Herodotus gives at least twice the Persian army as 300,000. He also gives us info on what happened inside Mardonius's staff. Obviously he had talked to someone on Mardonius staff. Even if the one who gave Herodotus the 80,000 number does not exist and I made a bad assumption earlier, he most definitely talked to Alexander of Macedon whose propaganda he repeats. Anyway, the only time Iphicrates managed to defeat with lighter troops a phallanx he had a 7 to 1 numerical advantage. 3 to one for archers seems realistic. Ikokki 08:25, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Ikkoki, I didn't quite grasp what you were trying to conclude there, are you saying that 80,000 is a more reasonable number than most thought, or is it that this 80,000 no. was propoganda, can you please elaborate or clarify.

What basically I am saying is that Herodotus should not be rejected lightly. It is better to attempt to reconstruct the truth using Herodotus than by outright rejecting him. Mardonius probably commanded 80,000 in the Thracian/Scythian campaign. Darius probably invaded with these 80,000 plus the Imortals and 1 or 2 baivabarams more. But then again this is my conclusion. I know from my experience that changing someone's formed opinion is very difficult.Ikokki 12:46, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Is it just me or did this article just get significantly shorter, did an admin do that, I hope Miskin was not adding false stuff into the article that led to an almost deletion of half the article. --Arsenous Commodore 18:48, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Someone must have screwed it accidentaly. I'll fix it back.Should have checked it out earlier...Ikokki 21:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Casualty Figures
I think it would be beneficial to include a second opinion on the Persian Warbox numbers, let's try Diodorus. He claims only 100,000 Persians died. I will input this stat in the casualties with his name in brackets and write beside "Only 43,000 survived..." I will write Herodotus. I will also include Diodorus' figure in the article itself. Thus my changes to the article are as stated in the discussion board. Anyone agree, diagree etc.?--Arsenous Commodore 21:26, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

strange
why is there a cross next to Mardonius' name ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by B-rat (talk • contribs) 17:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC).

 * Because he died Ikokki 15:09, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

uh
mistake in the first paragraph: "and with it the Persians were expelled from Greece forever."

persia continued to play athens against sparta, supporting one side then the other, for years to ensure that both would remain weak by fighting each other. King's Peace, anyone? the quoted part above is stupid and now you know that it is.

I think maybe that referred to further Persian conquest of Greece, rather than political influence. Spartan198 (talk) 00:22, 4 May 2008 (UTC) Spartan198

Will remove detail of 'mixed' Spartan army
The statement in the article, that Spartan armies always included 'few actual Spartans,' is subject to intensive, and by no means resolved historical debate, several of the figures include; Anderson (1970), Gomme (1970), Lazenby (1985), Cartledge (1987) and, recently, Singor (2002). There are many historical occurences of 'mixed' forces, as opponents will be aware, but there is intense debate as to whether these were the norm or exceptions. Will therefore remove the reference and will ask for it to stay removed unless someone solves this debate once and for all for the wider world. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.40.26.169 (talk) 19:44, 12 May 2007 (UTC).

Figures in General
Some of the sourcing for the figures are very weak. Having spoken to Miskin, he agrees also that Wikipedia English should be composed of mainly Western scholarship consensus, especially when it comes to something as headline as the warbox. All other minority sources can be included in article text or footnoting. But ostensibly Herodotus 300,000 figure is a blatant exaggeration which does not even need to be in the warbox. Cteisas can stay because more modern estimates back that as the maximum range. Many sources argue that the best way to calculate how many Persians there were at this battle, was to analyze from the 2,000 squared metre stockade (I'm not sure of the dimension but I can get back on this). But the conclusion comes to an estimate of 70,000-120,000. Besides there are plenty of sourced citations in the actual article. Why aren't they given the same weigh in the warbox. Asides from Hammond, no modern scholar accepts anymore than 120,000 for the Persian strength. And even NGL is dubious because he claims that their were only 242,000 in Thermopylae and the invasion force. Reading NGL Cambridge work thoroughly shows that he does not independently suggest 300,000, but merely points out without his own established comments that, that was Herodotus' claim, without supporting or rejecting it. JAR Munro and Macan merely note what Herodotus had said, regarding the baivarabam. They make no independent estimate of the Persian force, thus cannot be counted as an advocator. Besides Macan and Munro, merely state double what Gobineau did (which was 180,000 for the original invasion force). Since they suggested 350,000 Persians at the invasion. There is no way they can be used to back 300,000 at Plataea, considering the casualties in attrition, Artemisium, Thermopylae, Salamis and the forces which accompanied Xerxes back. The conclusion is that Herodotus' 300,000 is given much too much undo weigh, and should be replaced in the warbox. Besides, with these figures the whole flow of the Greco Persian Wars on Wiki won't make sense, there was already an agreement that by modern western scholarship, the original invasion force was about 200,000. Below I will give a list of authors who support different figures, which I will then put in the warbox.--Arsenous Commodore 15:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

 * The following is a list of sources for the Persian strength at Plataea.

Jona Lendering From Livius: 120,000 Peter Connolly From Military History Online: No larger than 120,000.http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/ancient/plataea/default.aspx Peter Green: 50,000+ (Including 20,000+ Medizing Greeks). http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/ancient/plataea/default.aspx Burn: 60,000-70,000 (Based on Stockade) http://www.herodotuswebsite.co.uk/plataea.htm Mark Drury: 120,000. http://members.ozemail.com.au/~ancientpersia/B_xerxes.html Tom Holland in his book "Persian Fire:" 70,000-120,000. Hellas.Net "Monolith:" 48,000. Beloch and De Sanctis: 70,000 (50,000 Persian + 20,000 Greek allies)

I think what seems most suitable for the warbox is 70,000-120,000 (Modern Consensus). We can leave Herodotus in the paragraph text, and also note near it that Cteisas gives a reasonable primary source estimate.--Arsenous Commodore 16:16, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

 * I've also realized that much of the references in this page are in Greek, doesn't that sort of create a conflict of interest, since naturally Greek and Persian sources will be giving polar extremes on figures and events. I'll try to neutralize it with some Western Scholarship. But if anyone can help me out, it would be nice, I'm still a bit of a novice at sourcing. Thanks.--Arsenous Commodore 16:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Article Categorization
I've added only three of the above sources to the warbox consensus figure range. I think it would be best if the rest were included in a separate headline known as "Size of the Opposing Armies". And there we could incorporate both the remaining modern sources and those figures given by a few ancient primary source scholars, such as Herodotus, Plutarch and Cteisas. To do this I suppose all army estimations are going to have to be re-located I suppose. I'd like to hear other views too.--Arsenous Commodore 20:10, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Misleading Illustration
Why the inclusion of the Macedonian phalanx illustration? This particular variation of the phalanx with it's use of the sarissa was invented more than a century after the battle of Platea. It should to be eliminated. Alcmaeonid 15:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

 * excellent point. I was gonna say it but u r first. I suggest rewording the long paragraph. In fact i will. Tourskin 02:32, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

What about the Trojan army use of the formation? Is there any proof of that in the Iliad, or did somebody just take that from the movie and assume it to be historical? Spartan198 (talk) 08:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC) Spartan198

5000 Spartans?
I was just looking over the figures provided in regard to the battle and I see that it says there were 10,000 Spartans present at the battle. I can't actually find a source for these given numbers. I'm reading figures recorded by Herodotus and he gives the same overall force number of 38,700 heavy-armed infantry but he states there were 5,000 Spartans present (and several other figures differ too) I think there were only 5,000 Spartans present, as there were apparently 35,000 light-armed Helots present since the Ephors were said to have given seven helots for each Spartan. This number is given in the actual article too, so there is a discrepancy somewhere. I'll list the numbers I have and you can see for yourself that they differ from the listed ones (Mine I believe are the Herodotus recorded numbers) 5000 spartans 5000 other Lacedaemonians (most likely Perioki) 1500 Tegea 5300 Corinth 600 Arcadia 3000 Sicyon 800 Epidaurus 2900 combined from Troezen, Lepreum, Mycenae, Tiryns, Phlius and Hermion

These were all Peloponnesians Also: 8000 Athens 3000 Megara 600 Plataea 500 Aegina 600 Eretria 400 Chalcis 1500 from the islands of western Greece. Total: 38700

If someone could help me primarily work out the Spartan discrepancy I would be much obliged, I also would like it if we could source the given numbers? The numbers I have provided come from Herodotus and since he is sourced and credited throughout the article heavily I feel his numbers should be the ones we rely on.

Thanks Akaricloud (talk) 14:41, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Popular Culture
I cropped this part of the article. I felt 6 lines talking about the last scene of 300 was much too much and was more a review then reference to popular culture. Feel free to revert it if you wish, but I hope it sticks Akaricloud (talk) 01:40, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

As much as I enjoyed the movie, I definitely agree with you. It has no place in this article. Spartan198 (talk) 00:18, 4 May 2008 (UTC) Spartan198

Maths
If you do simple math its easy, concerning Herodotus saying 43,000 casaulties for the Persians, its then 77,000-257,000 KIA, so I mean by 43+77=120, and 43+257=300, or in thousands I mean 300,000 which Herodotus gives for the Persian numbers so there is no debate here, now if he is right or wrong I do not know, but I know basic math, thanks.--Ariobarza (talk) 04:43, 24 April 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk

Article flow / backpedaling
This article doesn't flow well due to too much quibbling over numbers being injected right into the article. Right when the reader starts to get a feel for what's going on, he is immediately bogged down in an ongoing debate over the numbers with a lot of hemming and hawing over sources and accusations of bias. It would read a lot better if we could put all the accusations of bias and disputes into some other section and turn the rest of it into something readable. --128.222.37.21 (talk) 19:01, 25 June 2008 (UTC)

References Need Updating
The site linked to in the majority of the references throws up an error. It appears the page has moved, and can now be found at this link. CWardUSC (talk) 17:58, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Persian Casualties Modern References needed explanation
What are the references that the modern consensus is that only 10,000 out of the 70-120,000 Persians died? Simanos (talk) 20:19, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Can no one answer this? I'm going to change it soon then. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Simanos (talk • contribs) 10:35, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Motivation for delay in fighting
The reason for the stand-off between armies before the battle is given as being 'primarily tactical'. It should probably be mentioned that that is a modern interpretation. Herodotus, our main source, emphasizes bad omens and oracles. It seems to unduly secularize the motivations of the men involved to describe the battle as if we 'really know' that the interpretation of oracles was symbolic of rational military strategizing. This seems to risk anachronism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.124.200.245 (talk) 12:15, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Greek Casualty Figures
"although they paid a high price by losing most of their men"

The article needs a better source than Holland to support this conclusion. First time I have ever come across this view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.175.43.101 (talk) 16:46, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 09:12, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Battle of Plataea. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051026061231/http://www.livius.org:80/a/battlefields/plataea/plataea.html to http://www.livius.org/a/battlefields/plataea/plataea.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:59, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Persian Fire
I'm concerned that this article relies so heavily on Tom Holland's book Persian Fire. Holland is not a professional scholar, and while his historical books have been generally well reviewed as popular works, they have also been criticized for tending to fictionalization and anachronism. This isn't to say that book can't be used as a source, but the article would be stronger if it relied more on scholarly works. The Uncle of History (talk) 23:24, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

About Backgrounds and Beligerents
I feel that "before (Achaemenid Persia) taking possession of the now-evacuated city of Athens." sound too soft, especially since later on, Athens is mentioned as a destroyed city in the next paragraph.

About Beligerents, I believe it's best to put the names the Greek city states that fought with Persia in that blue box. -- I know it has been mentioned multiple times that some Greeks fought with/under Persia and I'm sure they can technically be counted as Persians like other nations under Persia, but people might still get the wrong idea that all of Greek unite against Persia since they are called either "Greek army" or "the Allies". Allslsl (talk) 09:00, 26 November 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Battle of Plataea


text:
Barcode printer

A barcode printer is a computer peripheral for printing barcode labels or tags that can be attached to, or printed directly on, physical objects. Barcode printers are commonly used to label cartons before shipment, or to label retail items with UPCs or EANs.

The most common barcode printers employ one of two different printing technologies. Direct thermal printers use a printhead to generate heat that causes a chemical reaction in specially designed paper that turns the paper black. Thermal transfer printers also use heat, but instead of reacting the paper, the heat melts a waxy or resin substance on a ribbon that runs over the label or tag material. The heat transfers ink from the ribbon to the paper. Direct thermal printers are generally less expensive, but they produce labels that can become illegible if exposed to heat, direct sunlight, or chemical vapors.

Barcode printers are designed for different markets. Industrial barcode printers are used in large warehouses and manufacturing facilities. They have large paper capacities, operate faster and have a longer service life. For retail and office environments, desktop barcode printers are most common.

Uses of barcode printers
A barcode printer is a specialized device designed to create and print barcodes, which are machine-readable codes consisting of parallel lines or a matrix of squares. These barcodes serve various purposes across different industries. Some common uses of barcode printers include:

 * Retail Industry
 * Product Labeling: Barcode printers are used to generate and print barcode labels for products. These labels contain essential information such as product name, price, and unique identification codes.
 * Inventory Management: Barcodes help smooth inventory processes by allowing quick and accurate tracking of stock levels. Barcode labels on items make it easier to monitor and manage inventory in real-time.
 * Manufacturing:
 * Work-in-Progress Tracking: Barcode printers are used to create labels for work-in-progress items on the manufacturing line. This facilitates tracking and ensures that each stage of production is properly documented.
 * Asset Management: Barcodes can be applied to machinery and equipment, allowing for efficient tracking of assets within a manufacturing facility.
 * Healthcare:
 * Patient Identification: Barcode wristbands are commonly used in healthcare settings to identify patients accurately. These wristbands can be generated by barcode printers and help prevent errors in patient care.
 * Medication Administration: Barcodes on medication packaging assist healthcare professionals in ensuring the right medication is given to the right patient at the right dosage.
 * Logistics and Distribution:
 * Shipping Labels: Barcode printers are essential for creating shipping labels that contain information such as destination, shipping method, and tracking numbers. This ensures accurate and efficient shipment handling.
 * Warehouse Management: Barcodes on products and storage locations within a warehouse facilitate quick and error-free tracking of goods, reducing the likelihood of errors in order fulfillment.
 * Library and Asset Tracking:
 * Library Management: Barcodes are used in libraries to catalog books, making it easy to check items in and out, as well as track their location within the library.
 * Asset Tracking: Barcode labels help organizations track and manage their assets, from computers and office equipment to tools and machinery.
 * Event Ticketing:
 * Ticketing Systems: Barcodes on event tickets simplify the check-in process for attendees. Scanning the barcode at the entrance ensures a quick and secure method of admission.
 * Government and Identification:
 * ID Cards: Barcodes on government-issued identification cards, such as driver's licenses and passports, help streamline identity verification processes.
 * Point of Sale (POS) Systems:
 * Transaction Processing: Barcodes on products enable quick and accurate scanning at the point of sale, expediting the checkout process for retailers and improving overall customer experience.

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

title: Barcode printer


text:
Marian Spychalski

Marian "Marek" Spychalski (, 6 December 1906 – 7 June 1980) was a Polish architect in pre-war Poland, and later, military commander and a communist politician. During World War II he belonged to the Polish underground forces operating within Poland and was one of the leaders of the People's Guard, then People's Army. He held several key political posts during the PRL era, most notably; Chairman of the Council of State, mayor of Warsaw and Defence Minister.

Early career

Born to a working-class family in Łódź, Spychalski graduated from the Faculty of Architecture of the Warsaw University of Technology in 1931. That same year he joined the KPP, and kept his membership after the Nazi-Soviet invasion, when in 1942 KPP became the Polish Workers' Party, renamed in 1948 as the Polish United Workers' Party. Before World War II, he practised architecture and won several national and international competitions and awards.

World War Two
He was in Warsaw during the German invasion and it was not until December 1939 that he fled to Lemberg where his wife and daughter were already waiting for him. However, the family only stayed briefly in Soviet-occupied Lviv and returned to Warsaw in January 1940. Until 1942 he officially held a position in the Warsaw city administration as an architect, but also worked illegally and took part in the activities of the Polish resistance. At first he was involved in publishing a bulletin for a group of communist intellectuals, and from 1941 he became a member of the organization Związek Walki Wyzwoleńczej (German League of the Liberation Struggle). From 1942 he was temporarily chief of the general staff of the communist Armia Ludowa and from July 22, 1944 of the Polish People's Army. He had also been a member of the Polish Workers' Party since it was founded in 1942.

Polish People's Republic
After World War II, he held a number of offices in the government of Poland, one of his first being mayor of Warsaw (18 September 1944 – March 1945), with the war still in progress. Among other posts, he was a long-time member of the parliament, a close friend of Władysław Gomułka, and from 1945 to 1948 was both Deputy Minister of Defense and a member of the Politburo of the Polish United Workers' Party.

He was removed from his remaining political posts in 1949 and then in 1950 imprisoned as part of the Stalinist purges of social-democrats in 1949–1953, where he was accused of anti-Soviet tendencies akin to Titoism and right-wing nationalism. During his interrogations, which were conducted under severe conditions, he confessed to charges such as cooperation with the Gestapo and the Home Army during the war. In 1951 he appeared in a show trial where he was instructed to deliver official (and false) testimony against Gomułka. He was only released in the mass release of political prisoners in April 1956, and subsequently reinstated in the Polish United Workers' Party.

With Gomułka's rehabilitation and return to power in 1956, Spychalski became the Polish Minister of Defence. In 1959 he again became a member of the Politburo, and in 1963 he was promoted to Field Marshal. In 1968 during the anti-Zionist purge of the army, at Gomułka's request he left the Polish Army and his job as Minister of Defense, to assume civilian posts as President of the Front of National Unity, and from 10 April 1968 to 23 December 1970 as Chairman of the Council of State – the de facto head of state of Poland – the Council being the de jure executive authority in the People's Republic, although some considered the post to be mostly symbolic.

Descent from power
As head of state, Spychalski was nearly assassinated at Karachi airport in Pakistan on 1 November 1970 during the welcoming ceremonies. The Gettysburg Times informed that an anti-communist Islamic fundamentalist Feroze Abdullah drove a lorry at high speed into the Polish delegation, narrowly missing his intended target but killing the Polish Deputy Foreign Minister Zygfryd Wolniak (48) and three Pakistani representatives including the Deputy Director of the Intelligence Bureau, Chaudhri Mohammed Nazir, and two photographers.

Spychalski lost his posts as close associate of Gomułka, when Edward Gierek replaced Gomułka as First Secretary of the Polish United Workers' Party during the 1970 Polish protests throughout December. Spychalski retired and wrote a four volume memoir which is now in the archives of the Hoover Institution in California. He died on 7 June 1980, survived by his wife Barbara who also wrote about him.

Honours and awards

 * Knight's Cross of the Virtuti Militari
 * Order of the Builders of People's Poland (1961)
 * Commander's Cross with Star of the Order of Polonia Restituta, also the Commander's Cross
 * Cross of Grunwald, 2nd and 3rd Classes
 * Order of the Banner of Labour, 1st Class
 * Partisan Cross (12 June 1946)
 * Medal for Oder, Neisse and Baltic
 * Medal for Participation in the Battle of Berlin
 * Medal for Warsaw 1939–1945
 * Medal of Victory and Freedom 1945
 * Gold Medal "in the Service of the Armed Forces of the Homeland"
 * Gold Medal "for his contribution to national defense"
 * Medal "For the Capture of Berlin"
 * Badge "Meritorious activist ORMO"
 * Order of Lenin (USSR) (1968)
 * Medal "For the Victory over Germany in the Great Patriotic War 1941–1945" (USSR)
 * Grand Cross of the Order of the Crown (Belgium)
 * Grand Cross of the Order of the White Rose (Finland)

title: Marian Spychalski


text:
Edward Ochab

Edward Ochab (16 August 1906 – 1 May 1989) was a Polish communist politician and top leader of Poland between March and October 1956.

As a member of the Communist Party of Poland from 1929, he was repeatedly imprisoned for his activities under the Polish government of the time. In 1939 Ochab participated in the Defense of Warsaw but afterwards moved to the Soviet Union, where he became an early organizer and manager in the Union of Polish Patriots. In 1943, he joined General Berling's Polish Army on the Eastern Front as a political commissar and quickly advanced in its ranks. From 1944 he was a member of the Central Committee of the Polish Workers' Party (PPR) and a deputy in the State National Council. In 1945, he became minister of public administration and held the successive positions of propaganda chief in the PPR (1945–1946), chief of cooperative associations (1947–1948), and chief of the Association of Trade Unions (ZZZ) (1948–1949). From December 1948 he was a deputy member of the (communist) Polish United Workers' Party (PZPR) Politburo, and a full member from 1954.

Between 1949 and 1950, General Ochab was deputy minister of defense and led the political branch of the Armed Forces. In Stalinist Poland he was responsible for enlisting the so-called enemies of the people to forced labour in the mines of southern Poland. These units were called "battalions of labour". After Bolesław Bierut's death, Ochab became First Secretary of the Polish United Workers' Party and served in that capacity between 20 March and 21 October 1956.

During Ochab's rule the process of the post-Stalinist "thaw" was well under way, but the first secretary also played a role in authorizing the violent suppression of the worker revolt in Poznań in June. In October Ochab stood his ground against the Soviet leadership and is credited with helping to prevent a Soviet military intervention. He relinquished power during the VIII Plenum of the Party Central Committee, complying with the wishes of the majority of the Politburo members to promote Władysław Gomułka. Ochab remained a member of the Politburo until 1968 and also worked as minister of agriculture from 1957 to 1959, and later as the secretary of the Central Committee for agricultural affairs. Ochab was deputy chairman of the Polish Council of State (a collective head of state organ) in 1961–1964. He served as chairman of the Council of State in 1964–1968. In 1965–1968 he also chaired the Front of National Unity.

Edward Ochab resigned all of his party and state offices, and withdrew from politics in 1968, in protest of the anti-Semitic campaign conducted by factions within the communist party with First Secretary Gomułka as its head. In his retirement he remained a dedicated hardline communist, but also a vocal critic of the policies pursued by the regimes of his successors.

Early life and career
Edward Ochab was born in Kraków on 16 August 1906. His father was a clerical official at the central offices of Kraków police. In Kraków Edward completed elementary and in 1925 secondary (the Trade Academy) education. In 1926–1927 he attended and graduated from a higher course in cooperative science at the Agricultural Department of the Jagiellonian University. From September 1925, he was employed in a cooperative rural association in Wieliczka. In 1928 became manager in a cooperative enterprise in Radom.

Ochab was drafted and in June 1928 sent to a military school, but was judged there to be of a subversive attitude, apparently a declared communist, permanently employed in worker cooperatives. The school released him in October. Ochab returned to manage his Radom cooperative until February 1930.

Activist in the Communist Party of Poland
Ochab became a member of the Communist Party of Poland in the summer of 1929. In the next ten years he was arrested five times and spent six and a half years as a political prisoner in Sanation prisons, intermittently released for health reasons (suffered from tuberculosis). When not in prison, he worked in the party executive in Radom, Kraków, Katowice, Warsaw, Łódź, Toruń, Gdynia and Włocławek, frequently relocating or in hiding. Ochab was among the organizers of the miner strikes in Zagłębie Krakowskie (1932), in Zagłębie Dąbrowskie (1935) and the textile worker general strike in Łódź (1936).

Ochab married a fellow communist activist, Rachela Silbiger, a nurse from a "poor and simple" Jewish family. They had four daughters, born in the 1930s and 1940s. On 7 September 1939, the German forces were approaching Warsaw and the guards in the Warsaw prison where Ochab was held fled. Released by fellow inmates he traveled toward Garwolin, but having found out about Warsaw's defense preparations returned to the capital to participate. On 11 September Ochab joined a workers' defense regiment and fought in the poorly armed unit until the city's capitulation.

To continue his party work and to protect his wife Ochab then decided to move into the territories controlled by the Soviet Union. He had met "thousands of comrades" (although many perished in Stalin's purges), was thoroughly familiar with the situation on the Polish Left and was ready to get engaged in the rebuilding of the Polish revolutionary movement. With others who shared their point of view, the Ochabs on 2 October embarked on a trip to Siedlce, and from there went to Lwów.

In the Soviet Union
Ochab lived and worked in Lviv until June 1941. He organized there a small circle of Polish communist sympathizers, but in June approached the Soviet authorities declaring readiness to return to Nazi-occupied Poland for conspiratorial work. However, Germany attacked the Soviet Union, Ochab volunteered for the Red Army and was assigned to an auxiliary unit. In winter his health problems reappeared and caused him to return to civilian work in the Polish section of a Soviet foreign language publishing institute. In May 1943 the enterprise was moved to Moscow. Ochab became active in the newly formed Union of Polish Patriots there, leading its administrative-economic department.

As the pro-Soviet and communist controlled Polish armed forces were being formed in the Soviet Union, in June 1943 Ochab joined the 1st Tadeusz Kościuszko Infantry Division and was enlisted as a political officer with the rank of second lieutenant. In October 1943 he fought valiantly in the Battle of Lenino, for which he was decorated with both the Polish and Soviet medals for valor. In the summer of 1944 Lieutenant Colonel Ochab was already a member of the Central Committee of the Polish Workers' Party.

Party and state official 1944–1956
In July 1944 in Lublin Ochab became an official plenipotentiary of the command of the First Polish Army. In September he was promoted to the post of the Army's deputy commander for political affairs. He claimed having participated in the military struggle for Warsaw and in the drive to push across the Vistula at that time. In November Ochab was discharged from the army and directed to work for the Polish Committee of National Liberation, the nascent communist government, where he became deputy chief of the Public Administration Department. From the beginning of 1945 the PKWN was turned into the Provisional Government and Ochab was an undersecretary in the Ministry of Public Administration, advancing in April to the post of minister. As the plenipotentiary general for the Recovered Territories (previously German lands assumed by Poland), on 25 June 1945 Ochab issued a directive banning and threatening penalties for persecution of Germans still present there or applying repressions like the ones used by the Nazi Germany against Poles. He left the government at the end of June, when it became the Provisional Government of National Unity.

Afterwards Ochab was a member of the Secretariat and held the position of propaganda chief of the PPR (1945–1946) and of first secretary of the regional PPR branch in Katowice (1946–1948). He returned to his cooperative and worker activities, as chief of worker cooperative associations in 1947–1948, and chief of the Central Council of Trade Unions in 1948–1949. In December 1948, the PPR and the Polish Socialist Party became the single Polish United Workers' Party (PZPR), which was to rule Poland until 1989. In the new party Ochab became a deputy member of the Politburo (1948–54).

In one more turn of Ochab's military career, on 1 April 1949 President Bolesław Bierut named him a general and first deputy minister of defense. Minister Michał Rola-Żymierski was replaced in November 1949 by Konstantin Rokossovsky, a Soviet marshal of Polish origin. From January 1950, at the time of increasing Sovietization of the Polish military, Ochab led the political division of the armed forces. In June Rokossovsky discharged him from active military service and from his assignments at the Ministry of Defense.

In 1950–1952 Ochab chaired the Polish–Soviet Friendship Society. He was secretary of the Central Committee from 1950, responsible for the area of ideology. From 1952 he also led the Central Committee's supervision of the military's political division.

At that time and later in his career Ochab had a tendency to express his views in radical and uncompromising terms. When Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński was arrested on 25 September 1953, Ochab published an article fiercely critical of the primate in Trybuna Ludu, the party's official newspaper. In regard to the persecution and imprisonment of Władysław Gomułka, Ochab later blamed Stalin and Beria, rather than Bierut or Jakub Berman.

At the PZPR's Second Congress in March 1954, Ochab finally became a full Politburo member. By many in the party he was considered an "heir apparent" and was ready to take over when First Secretary Bierut died in Moscow in March 1956.

First secretary of the Polish United Workers' Party
First Secretary Nikita Khrushchev of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union attended Bierut's funeral and stayed in Warsaw to participate in the deliberations of the PZPR Central Committee's 6th Plenum, charged with electing a new first secretary. Aleksander Zawadzki was the other major candidate, but in the end Edward Ochab was chosen unanimously on 20 March. Ochab was seen as a compromise candidate by the rival Puławy and Natolin factions of the party. Soon he was perceived as connected with the more liberal Puławy group.

In June 1956 Ochab attended a Comecon gathering of leaders in Moscow. He displayed there his confrontational style when responding to accusations of the supposedly inadequate supplies of coal from Poland. But the encounter also made him doubt his long term suitability as a first secretary.

After the PZPR's 6th Plenum and Ochab's election the processes of de-Stalinization in Poland entered their accelerated phase. The press critically discussed the previously prohibited subjects. The party was split and preoccupied with its internal affairs. The Sejm (national legislature), until then unable to exercise any real influence, used the opportunity and declared wide amnesty, which included in the first place the trespasses of political nature. By 20 May, a half of the 70,000 prisoners nationwide found themselves free. Numerous officials deemed responsible for the Stalinist abuses were removed from their positions, including Berman, who resigned as a Politburo member in early May. Segments of Polish society, including intellectuals, youth (especially academic), and even heavy industry workers were in a state of agitation and reclaiming their inherent and sovereign rights, known in Polish as podmiotowość.

What was happening under Ochab's watch turned out not to be a semi-controlled evolution of the system, because on 28 June workers in Poznań's Cegielski industrial enterprise, frustrated with their inability to redress grievances through official channels, went on strike and rioted. Other workers and Poznań residents joined and violence ensued. Ochab gave Minister of Defense Rokossovsky permission to bring military units to the city and use the force necessary to bring the "counterrevolutionary" revolt under control. Several dozens of mostly civilians were killed and massive damage sustained during the two days of fighting.

Central Committee's 7th Plenum deliberated in the second half of July. It placed partial blame for the Poznań protests on bureaucratic and economic errors. Liberalization and democratization were discussed and the decision was made to readmit to the party the previously expelled Gomułka, Spychalski and Kliszko. Gomułka's "right-wing nationalist deviation" charge was upheld, but both the Puławy and Natolin factions were promoting the idea of his return to power. Ochab, who in 1948 strongly attacked Gomułka, was now overcoming his personal objections and evolving toward entrusting the former PPR chief a high office. On 31 July, delegated by the Politburo, Ochab and Zawadzki had their initial meeting with Gomułka that lasted several hours. Subsequently, the Polish Radio broadcast the information of Gomułka's return to the party.

In September Ochab told Józef Cyrankiewicz to offer Gomułka a position that Cyrankiewicz would be competent to offer. Cyrankiewicz offered Gomułka his own job, that of prime minister. Gomułka thought the move was premature and rejected the proposition. It became apparent to the PZPR establishment that Gomułka was aiming at replacing Ochab as first secretary. Gomulka was invited to participate in Politburo conferences that took place on 12, 15 and 17 October.

The 8th Plenum was summoned for 19 October. The public was informed of the date and of Gomułka's participation in the Politburo meetings by the Polish Press Agency. A statute Ochab submitted to be presented to the Plenum was criticized by Roman Zambrowski and Zawadzki. The majority of the Politburo members voted to reduce the body to nine members and the proposed list did not include Minister Rokossovsky.

The Soviets were increasingly worried by the plans of the leadership of the PZPR and the Soviet ambassador presented on 17 October Nikita Khrushchev's "invitation" for the Polish leaders to immediately visit Moscow. Ochab objected to the timing and refused to make the trip. The Soviets reacted with the announcement (18 October) of Khrushchev's and the Soviet delegation's arrival in Warsaw on 19 October, the day the 8th Plenum was set to begin its deliberations. On 18 October the Polish Politburo, unhappy with the perspective of Soviet meddling (or the appearance of such meddling) with the Plenum debate, designated Ochab, Cyrankiewicz, Zawadzki and Gomułka to greet the Soviets at the airport.

Their arrival was preceded by ominous military moves. Soviet formations present in Poland were moving toward Warsaw and were stopped less than one hundred kilometers from the capital. Units in East Germany were put in a state of readiness and a number of Soviet warships approached the Bay of Gdańsk. Under the direction of Ochab, who "stood firmly in defense of Poland's sovereignty", the Polish Army and internal security forces were placed in defensive positions on the approaches to Warsaw, and the buildings where the PZPR Plenum and the meetings with the Soviet delegation were to take place were secured. It is not clear what the intentions of the formations controlled by Minister of Defense Rokossovsky and commanders loyal to him were. An even greater crisis was not far-off, because the Soviets did not inform the Polish air defenses of their coming and Polish fighter jets scrambled to confront the plane entering the Polish air space. At the military airfield Khrushchev first greeted a separate group of Soviet generals, then approached the Polish comrades, shaking his fist and shouting derogatory comments.

The 8th Plenum conducted some introductory business and suspended deliberations to allow the leadership to attend the separate talks with the Soviet leaders. The negotiations with the Soviets were very difficult and lasted until 1 AM. Khrushchev objected to the planned Politburo changes and the lack of "fraternal consultations", including the removal of Marshal Rokossovsky, noticed the increased activity of anti-Soviet elements in Poland and threatened an active military intervention. Ochab replied that the Soviet leaders themselves would not consult changes in their leadership with the Poles. He, Gomułka, Cyrankiewicz and Zambrowski tried to reassure the Soviets that their interests were not under threat. During a break the Soviet delegation went to its embassy for internal talks and took Minister Rokossovsky with them.

After their return the Soviets displayed a more friendly approach, but Khrushchev was worried that Gomułka, the presumed next Polish communist party leader, might be a social democrat. Gomułka, replied Cyrankiewicz, combined Polish patriotism with loyalty to the Soviet Union. Ochab told Khrushchev that under the circumstances Gomułka was the best choice to lead the country, denying the Soviets the hope of taking advantage of a split within the Polish party. The conciliatory but unyielding attitude displayed by the Polish negotiators and the widespread popular support they were obviously enjoying convinced the Soviet Presidium to cancel the military moves in progress and defer further negotiations to Gomułka's agreed visit in Moscow in November. Early on 20 October the Soviet delegation departed, letting the 8th Plenum continue its business undisturbed.

Ochab decided not to oppose Gomułka's rise to power, because he realized that a divided party would give the Soviets a perfect excuse to intervene. He could have easily allied himself with Marshal Rokossovsky and other discarded Politburo members, but he placed Poland's interests over his own career. In his own mind, Ochab rightfully submitted to the will of the Politburo and the Central Committee. He was no fan of Gomułka and felt that promoting Gomułka as the savior of Poland, unavoidably in the making, would be demeaning to the entire Polish party. But Edward Ochab did all he could to save Poland from tragic events on a mass scale, like the ones that were soon experienced by Hungary.

Work in agriculture and as head of state
Ochab remained a member of the new, reduced in size Politburo. He was seen as close to the factions of Zambrowski and Gomułka in the party. In May 1957, already after the previous collectivization of Polish agriculture had been largely reversed, he became the minister of agriculture. At that time Ochab supported individual farmers and their small associations, not the large cooperatives previously favored by the state. The weaker of the state-owned State Agricultural Farms (PGR) Ochab turned into cooperative units. In October 1959 Ochab gave up his ministerial position, but continued his supervisory role in the same area as a secretary of the Central Committee responsible for agricultural affairs.

In addition, in 1961 Ochab became deputy chairman of the Council of State, a collective head of state organ. After the Fourth Congress of the PZPR (June 1964), he retained his membership in the Politburo and the position of the Central Committee secretary. However, in August Chairman Aleksander Zawadzki died, and Ochab assumed the function of the chairman of the Council of State. He would now receive foreign leaders as the official representative of the Polish state. In March 1966, Ochab notified Primate Stefan Wyszyński that Pope Paul VI was being denied his request to visit Poland for the celebrations of the Millennium of Polish Christianity because of the Vatican's continuing diplomatic relations with the Polish government-in-exile.

March 1968
The events in Poland usually described under the March 1968 heading actually began after the Six-Day War between Israel and the Arab countries in June 1967. On 19 June First Secretary Gomułka spoke in Warsaw to a labor union congress and implicitly referred to the Polish Jewish population as the fifth column. Ochab insisted that the term should be deleted from the published transcript of the speech, and it was.

The widely publicized student demonstrations in Warsaw took place on 8 March 1968. On 19 March, Gomułka delivered another major televised speech. Reviewing with other Politburo members its text in advance, Ochab objected to Gomułka's reference to "student youth of Jewish origin". The Jewish youth were justifiably sensitive because of the millions of Jews killed in Poland during World War II, he argued.

Ochab's and Gomułka's wives were Jewish, but unlike Gomułka, Ochab displayed no tolerance for the antisemitic excesses. To protest the policies pursued in 1967–68 in Poland he decided to resign all of his state and party offices, effectively retiring from political life. He wrote appropriate letters to the Politburo and the Sejm and had a final conversation with Gomułka, Cyrankiewicz and Kliszko. He wrote of the "antisemitic campaign organized by the various reactionary elements, yesterday's phalangists and their today's highly placed protectors" (Mieczysław Moczar's faction in the party). The Politburo accepted his resignation on 8 April and three days later the Sejm replaced Ochab with Marian Spychalski as chairman of the Council of State. General Wojciech Jaruzelski, the armed forces chief of staff, replaced Spychalski as the minister of defense.

In retirement
Ochab first proceeded to safeguard the documents that secured his historical role, the forty years he had been active in the communist movement. He witnessed Gomułka's fall from power in 1970 and the generational change in the PZPR and later expressed highly critical opinions regarding the use of force against the protesting workers, even though he himself had made comparable decisions in 1956.

He carefully observed the dealings of the new leadership of Edward Gierek. When the Party Guidelines were published before its Sixth Congress and the rank and file was asked to debate them, Ochab took advantage of the opportunity and typed up on 30 September 1971 several pages of Introductory Critical Comments. The letter, which included reformist, revisionist or social democratic ideas, caused an uproar because it was soon published by the Polish émigré Kultura journal in Paris under the title Edward Ochab in the Opposition.

The former first secretary criticized the advancing for managerial party and state jobs of cynical career-oriented people, serving only the autocrat (Gomułka) and his circle. He called for measures preventing such "deformations" now and in the future. He proposed a radical reduction in the scope and budget of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and a removal from positions of responsibility of "non-reformable bureaucrats, career-minded people, hooded ONR followers, anti-semites, nationalists and morally deprived people". The "completely inert" Sejm should be competitively elected from separate lists of the participating parties and activists not affiliated with any party (members in the Front of National Unity), which would be applauded by the electorate and "our brothers, the Western communists". The peculiarities of Ochab's proposed solutions included advocating the original "Leninist" ways, such as an establishment of Worker Delegate Councils in enterprises, and his belief that old comrades from the prewar Communist Party of Poland ought to be returned to power. Stripped of its Leninist phraseology, the idea of powerful Worker Councils could be interpreted as a call for a massive labor union movement (delegates elected in all institutions employing one hundred or more people would collectively constitute a second chamber of parliament), something attempted several years later by Solidarity. Such postulates (or their dissemination abroad) could not have been well received by the PZPR's new leadership and Ochab and his views were severely rebuked. During a dispute in his local party organization, Ochab warned that the current investment policy was still wrong, "the economy will collapse, which will create a new December".

From 13 November 1971 to 19 January 1972 Ochab and his wife took a Western Europe coast and Mediterranean Sea cruise on board a Polish merchant ship. During the journey they were closely followed by the Polish secret services, but the government picked up its entire cost.

In October 1977, Ochab was one of the signatories of the letter addressed to First Secretary Gierek and the Politburo. It was signed by a group of intellectuals and former party activists and was highly critical of Gierek team's political and economic record. The letter referred to the protests of the previous year and called for fundamental political and democratizing reforms. Repressions and restrictions would only aggravate the crisis, the authors wrote, and open societal dialog was necessary. Free elections to the Sejm and local councils and especially close partnership with labor unions were urged as prerequisites to any real improvement in the country's precarious internal situation.

In November 1979, as the PZPR's Eighth Congress was approaching, Ochab wrote a ten-page letter To Comrades Communists, which Jerzy Eisler characterizes as highly ideological, detached from practical usefulness. Most of the current party leadership, wrote Ochab referring to the events of prewar Poland, "had not participated in the fight against the fascist organs of the Polish bourgeoisie power", too many "did not appreciate the historic importance of the communists' fight against the shameful rule of the reactionary Polish bourgeoisie". Later in the letter Ochab engaged in polemics with the recent works of Polish historians, which he interpreted as a creeping rehabilitation and legitimization of the Sanation regime. "Such works clearly lead to a whitewashing of the reactionary rule of our capitalists and big landowners, to the slighting of the historic role of the communists in the fight against fascism and the hostile to the masses terrorist policies of the Piłsudskiites, National Democrats, ONR. The venerable professors negate the fascist character of the post-May governments". The former first secretary, who had spent a considerable part of his younger years in Sanation prisons, wrote also of the responsibility for the "spilled blood of thousands of workers and peasants murdered during the strikes and occupations, in antisemitic and anti-Ukrainian pogroms, prison and Bereza Kartuzka persecutions" resting with the "dull military regime, blinded by the hatred for the Soviet Union, the subjugated nations and the Polish masses". Finally Ochab denounced the current "anti-socialist groups", which slandered the people's democracy and Marxism; "they dream of anti-socialist activation of the Polish ayatollahs" (Catholic Church hierarchy). Ochab felt uneasy about both the emerging great independent worker movement, the future Solidarity, and his own "communist" party that he had found so much fault with.

Edward Ochab died on 1 May 1989, between the conclusion of the Round Table groundbreaking negotiations and the historic elections of 4 June, which marked the beginning of the systemic change in Poland. At Ochab's funeral on 8 May at the Powązki Military Cemetery, Stefan Jędrychowski stressed his role in the dissemination of Khrushchev's secret report among the PZPR members in March 1956. Ochab was deeply disappointed by the Sino-Soviet split, Jędrychowski said, and welcomed Mikhail Gorbachev's reforms as long-awaited and giving reasons for hope.

Awards and honors

 * Polish People's Republic:
 * POL_Order_Budowniczych_Polski_Ludowej_BAR.svg Order of the Builders of People's Poland
 * POL_Order_Sztandaru_Pracy_1_klasy_BAR.svg Order of the Banner of Work (1st class)
 * POL Virtuti Militari Srebrny BAR.svg Silver Cross of the Virtuti Militari
 * POL_Order_Krzyża_Grunwaldu_2_Klasy_BAR.svg Order of the Cross of Grunwald (2nd class)
 * POL_Order_Krzyża_Grunwaldu_3_Klasy_BAR.svg Order of the Cross of Grunwald (3rd class)
 * POL_Krzyż_Walecznych_BAR.svg Cross of Valour
 * POL_Złoty_Krzyż_Zasługi_BAR.svg Gold Cross of Merit
 * POL_Śląski_Krzyż_Powstańczy_BAR.svg Silesian Uprising Cross
 * POL_Za_Warszawę_1939-1945_BAR.svg Medal "For Warsaw 1939-1945"
 * POL_Medal_Za_Wolność_Naszą_i_Waszą_BAR.svg Medal "For Your and Our Freedom"
 * Other countries:
 * Legion_Honneur_GC_ribbon.svg Grand Cross of the Legion of Honour (France)
 * FIN_Order_of_the_White_Rose_Grand_Cross_BAR.png Grand Cross of the Order of the White Rose of Finland (Finland)
 * Cordone_di_gran_Croce_di_Gran_Cordone_OMRI_BAR.svg Knight Grand Cross with Collar of the Order of Merit of the Italian Republic (Italy)
 * SU Order of the Red Star ribbon.svg Order of the Red Star (Soviet Union)
 * 100_lenin_rib.png Jubilee Medal "In Commemoration of the 100th Anniversary of the Birth of Vladimir Ilyich Lenin" (Soviet Union)

title: Edward Ochab


text:
Category:Villages in Northern Ireland

See here for a complete list of villages in Northern Ireland

For details of the five cities in Northern Ireland, click here

See here for a complete list of towns in Northern Ireland

The NI Statistics and Research Agency (NISRA) defines a town as having a population of 4,500 or more. Settlements of 2,250 to 4,500 people are defined as intermediate settlements, villages are defined as having populations of 1,000 to 2,250 people and small villages and hamlets are defined as having less than 1,000 people (ref: Report of the Inter-Departmental Urban-Rural Definition Group – Statistical Classification and Delineation of Settlements, February 2005)

For the purposes of this list a village is taken to be any settlement with less than 4,500 people.

title: Category:Villages in Northern Ireland


text:
User talk:Javatyger

Welcome
Hello , and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome! --Spinboy 04:13, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Image Tagging Image:Intuitbuilding.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Intuitbuilding.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use GFDL to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Nv8200p talk 00:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Image Tagging for Image:Laurell.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Laurell.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 20:04, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:MyPic.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:MyPic.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see User talk:Carnildo/images. 14:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Notification about disabling the Wikipedia collections tool
Thank you for using the collections feature in Wikipedia beta! Due to technical and moderation issues, we will be turning off this experimental feature. Your collections will be available for viewing and export until March 1st. If you would like to save your collection as links on a special Wikipedia page, please fill out the following form. If you are interested in giving your feedback about Wikipedia Collections please do so here.

Thanks,

Jon Katz

Product manager, Wikimedia Foundation

Jkatz (WMF) (talk) 23:53, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

title: User talk:Javatyger


text:
William Terriss

William Terriss (20 February 1847 – 16 December 1897), born as William Charles James Lewin, was an English actor, known for his swashbuckling hero roles, such as Robin Hood, as well as parts in classic dramas and comedies. He was also a notable Shakespearean performer. He was the father of the Edwardian musical comedy star Ellaline Terriss and the film director Tom Terriss.

Athletic as a child, Terriss briefly joined the merchant navy and tried several professions abroad and at home. Adopting the stage name William Terriss, he made his first stage appearance in 1868 and was first in the West End in Tom Robertson's Society in 1871. In the same year he had major successes in Robin Hood and Rebecca and quickly established himself as one of Britain's most popular actors. In 1880, he joined Henry Irving's company at the Lyceum Theatre, appearing in Shakespeare plays.

In 1885, he met 24-year-old Jessie Millward, with whom he starred in The Harbour Lights by G. R. Sims and Henry Pettitt. They toured Britain and America together. Terriss played the hero parts in Adelphi melodramas from the late 1880s, among other roles. In 1897, he was stabbed to death by a deranged actor, Richard Archer Prince, at the stage door of the Adelphi Theatre, where he was appearing. Terriss's ghost is supposed to haunt Covent Garden tube station and the Adelphi Theatre.

Life and early career
Terriss was the third and youngest son of George Herbert Lewin, a barrister, and his wife Mary née Friend. His birth name was William Charles James Lewin. He was born in St John's Wood, London, and educated at Christ's Hospital and Bruce Castle School, Tottenham, where he was a friend of J. Comyns Carr and Frederick Selous. Carr later wrote of Terriss's school days that "if he gained but little learning, he at any rate acquired a perfect mastery in the art of tree-climbing". Terriss then studied at Windermere College and Jesus College, Oxford, without taking a degree. He loved the adventurous, outdoor life. He married Isabel Lewis (stage name Amy Fellowes) in 1870 and had a daughter, Ellaline, who became a well known actress in Edwardian musical comedy, often appearing with her husband, the actor-manager Seymour Hicks. He also had two sons, William and Tom, who became an actor and later a well known film director. His aunt and uncle were the writer Harriet Lewin and the historian George Grote.

After brief stints in the merchant navy, and as a tea-planter in Bengal and other unsuccessful ventures, he returned to England, working briefly in a hospital where his brother was a surgeon, and then as an apprentice engineer. Having enjoyed amateur theatricals, he decided to try the stage, adopting the stage-name William Terriss. His first appearance on stage was at the Prince of Wales Theatre in Birmingham in 1868 as Chouser in The Flying Scud. His first West End theatre role was the small part of Lord Cloudrays in a revival of Tom Robertson's Society in 1870, at the old Prince of Wales's Theatre. Still restless, however, Terriss then travelled with his wife to South America and the Falkland Islands, where he tried his hand at sheep-farming and other rustic jobs. In 1871 Terriss returned to London with his wife and baby. He had successes at the Theatre Royal, Drury Lane, in Robin Hood and in Rebecca, based on Ivanhoe by Sir Walter Scott, among other plays. His wanderlust again compelled him to take his young family to America, this time Kentucky, to breed horses. Again failing to find financial success, Terriss returned to London in 1873.

Over the next few years he established his acting career. His handsome presence, fine voice, friendly demeanour and gallant bearing made him one of Britain's most popular actors. Because of his swashbuckling style, he became famous in hero parts and was known as "Breezy Bill". In 1873, at the Strand Theatre, he appeared as Doricourt in the comedy The Belle's Stratagem, which was a long-running success. He then returned to Drury Lane, playing in such roles as Romeo in Romeo and Juliet, and was popular as Captain Molyneux in Dion Boucicault's The Shaughraun, among others. He continued to play in various London theatres in the mid-1870s such roles as Julian Peveril in a successful adaptation of Peveril of the Peak and the title role in the stage adaptation of Nicholas Nickleby at the Adelphi Theatre. In 1878 he had a hit as Squire Thornhill in Olivia, an adaptation by W. G. Wills of The Vicar of Wakefield, alongside Ellen Terry and Hermann Vezin. Among other roles, especially in melodrama, in the late 1870s, he was Captain Absolute in The Rivals.

Peak years
In 1880 he joined Henry Irving's company at the Lyceum Theatre, playing such parts as Cassio in Irving's hit production of Othello, Laertes in Hamlet, Bassanio in The Merchant of Venice, Flutter in The Belle's Stratagem, Courriol in The Lyons Mail, Jack Wyatt in James Albery's Two Roses and Mercutio in Romeo and Juliet to enthusiastic notices. In 1895 he acted there opposite Mary Anderson, for example, as Romeo to her Juliet, in a long run. He was Don Pedro in the long 1882 run of Much Ado About Nothing and travelled with the Lyceum company on its 1883–1884 American tour. Terriss and Irving became close friends. Terriss also became close with his neighbour, George Bernard Shaw. Terriss performed many roles opposite Mary Anderson to much acclaim, including the title characters in Romeo and Pygmalion and Galatea. In the highly successful revival of Olivia that followed, he again earned high praise.

In December 1885 Terriss met 24-year-old Jessie Millward, with whom he starred as David Kingsley in the extraordinarily successful The Harbour Lights (by G. R. Sims and Henry Pettitt), which ran for 513 performances. The pair established themselves as romantic leads together and presumably became lovers. In 1887 Terriss and Millward were engaged at the Adelphi in its melodramas, with Terriss in the hero parts, beginning with Frank Beresford in The Bells of Haslemere (1887). He excited the audience at the Adelphi in both passionate love scenes and in fighting scenes. For the next half dozen years, he rejoined Irving at the Lyceum, where his most acclaimed roles included the title role in Henry VIII (1892) and as Henry II in Becket (1893). In 1889–90, and again in 1893–94, Terriss and Millward toured in the US with Irving.

In 1894 Terriss rejoined the Adelphi, earning even greater fame in melodrama. In 1895, he had a great critical success in Swordsman's Daughter by Clement Scott and B. C. Stephenson. This was followed by One of the Best, inspired by the Dreyfus Trial. His son-in-law, Seymour Hicks, wrote the piece at the suggestion of the dramatist W. S. Gilbert. Subsequent plays were also great successes for Terriss and the theatre. Terriss's last appearance was as Captain Thorne in Secret Service. The New York Dramatic Mirror called Terriss "one of the greatest and next to Henry Irving undoubtedly the most popular actor in England".

Murder
On 16 December 1897, as he was entering the Adelphi Theatre through the stage door in Maiden Lane to prepare for the evening's performance of Secret Service, 50-year-old Terriss was stabbed to death by a deranged and disgruntled actor, Richard Archer Prince. Terriss had helped the struggling younger actor to find work in various productions that he had a hand in. However, Prince had, over the years, increasingly abused alcohol and become mentally unstable. During the run of The Harbour Lights, in which Prince had a minor role, Terriss took offence to something that Prince said about him and had Prince dismissed. Terriss, however, sent small sums of money to Prince via the Actors' Benevolent Fund, and continued to try to find him acting work. By the end of 1897, Prince was destitute and desperate for work, but he had become unemployable.

On 13 December 1897 Prince was forcibly ejected from the foyer of the Vaudeville Theatre, and he and Terriss were seen to argue the next night in Terriss's dressing room in the Adelphi Theatre. On the day of the murder Prince asked for money at the Fund's office, but was told that his request could not be considered that day. He then apparently crossed the street and waited for Terriss, concealed in a doorway near the Adelphi's stage door.

The murder became a sensation in the London press. At the trial Prince was found guilty but insane and sent to Broadmoor Criminal Lunatic Asylum, where he died in 1937. His relatively mild sentence was met with anger by the theatrical community, and Sir Henry Irving was later quoted as saying that "Terriss was an actor, so his murderer will not be executed."

Memorials and references in popular culture
Terriss is buried in Brompton Cemetery, London. A lifeboat house was built in 1898 on Eastbourne seafront in his memory. It still stands there with a memorial plaque. There is also a plaque on the wall by the stage door of the Adelphi Theatre recording his murder. The Terriss Theatre in Rotherhithe, built in 1899, was named after him. It became the Rotherhithe Hippodrome in 1907 but was demolished in 1955; the site is now the Rotherhithe Free Church.

A portrait of Terriss hangs in the stairwell of Denville Hall, the home for retired Actors and Actresses in Northwood, London, England. The home is run by The Actors' Charitable Trust. Henry Irving was the first President of the organisation until his death in 1905.

A fictionalised version of Terriss's murder, The Star of the Adelphi, was broadcast in 2002 on BBC Radio 4 as part of The Further Adventures of Sherlock Holmes.

Ghost
Legend has it that Terriss's ghost haunts Covent Garden tube station and the Adelphi Theatre. A 2005 Channel 5 documentary on ghosts on the London Underground reported that a ghost has been seen many times at the Covent Garden tube station, identified from a photograph as Terriss, though sightings have lessened over the years. A 2008 documentary, Ghosts on the Underground, produced by The History Channel, mentions a recent sighting of Terriss at Covent Garden Underground station, which was built after Terriss's death.

title: William Terriss


text:
Fort Resolution

Fort Resolution (Denı́nu Kų́ę́ (pronounced "deh-nih-noo-kwenh") "moose island place") is a hamlet in the South Slave Region of the Northwest Territories, Canada. The community is situated at the mouth of the Slave River, on the shores of Great Slave Lake, and at the end of the Fort Resolution Highway (Highway 6). It is the headquarters of the Deninu Kųę́ First Nation, whose Chief is Louis Balsillie.

It is the oldest documented European community in the Northwest Territories, built in 1819, and was a key link in the fur trade's water route north. Fort Resolution is designated as a National Historic Site of Canada as the oldest continuously occupied place in the Northwest Territories with origins in the fur trade and the principal fur trade post on Great Slave Lake.

Fort Resolution's Deninoo School offers K-12 schooling. The town also has a hockey arena, community hall, a nursing station, a youth centre, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, a bed and breakfast, a 'Northern' general store, a convenience store, one diner, and two gas stations. Fort Resolution Airport services charter and medivac flights only. The oldest building in town is the historic Roman Catholic Church, built in the early 19th century; there is also a Protestant church in the hamlet. The beach along Great Slave Lake is a prime spot for summer swimming, bird watching, fishing or relaxing. Local people engage in fishing, hunting, and trapping year-round.

The nearby site of Pine Point was once a thriving lead mine. When the value of lead plummeted in the 1980s, the Pine Point Mine closed, and the township was evacuated. Pine Point houses were sold cheaply, and many of the buildings were then moved to Fort Resolution (including the hockey arena), Hay River and Northern Alberta.

Deninoo Days in late August celebrate the beginning of moose hunting season with parades, traditional races, games and talent competitions. Recreational opportunities include camping, canoeing and fishing (self-guided, or available through several outfitters). Little Buffalo River Crossing is a nearby territorial park, with historical and natural attractions, accessible by road and featuring a campground with 12 sites.

Demographics
In the 2021 Census of Population conducted by Statistics Canada, Fort Resolution had a population of $412$ living in $167$ of its $223$ total private dwellings, a change of NaN% from its 2016 population of $470$. With a land area of 452.87 km2, it had a population density of in 2021.

In 2016, the majority of its population, 430, was listed as Indigenous. The majority of townspeople are of Dene (320) and Métis (105) descent. The predominant languages are English, Chipewyan and Michif.

First Nations
Fort Resolution is represented by the Deninu Kųę́ First Nation and are part of the Akaitcho Territory Government.

Notable people
David Graeme Hancock, Q.C., 15th Premier of Alberta, 23 March–15 September 2014

Climate
Fort Resolution has a subarctic climate (Dfc) with short, mild summers and long, cold winters lasting from October through April.

On January 8, 1936, Fort Resolution recorded a temperature of -59.4°C (-75°F), which is the coldest temperature recorded in the Northwest Territories.

title: Fort Resolution


text:
Category:Villages in the United Kingdom

Villages in the United Kingdom.

title: Category:Villages in the United Kingdom


text:
User talk:Jehochman

Arbitration motion regarding Durova
The Arbitration Committee has resolved by motion that:

For the Arbitration Committee, SilverLocust 💬 23:23, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Discuss this at:

title: User talk:Jehochman


text:
Tetradymite

Tetradymite is a mineral consisting of bismuth, tellurium and sulfide, Bi2Te2S, also known as telluric bismuth. If sulfur is absent the mineral is tellurobismuthite and the formula is then Bi2Te3. Traces of selenium are usually present. Crystals are rhombohedral, but are rarely distinctly developed; they are twinned together in groups of four; hence the name of the mineral, from the Greek for fourfold. There is a perfect cleavage parallel to the basal plane and the mineral usually occurs in foliated masses of irregular outline. The color is steel-gray, and the luster metallic and brilliant. The mineral is very soft (H = 1.5 – 2) and marks paper. The specific gravity is 7.2 to 7.9.

The type locality is Zupkov (Zsubko; Schubkau), Stredoslovenský Kraj, Slovak Republic where it was reported in 1831. It was first found, in 1815, at Telemark in Norway. It often occurs in high temperature hydrothermal quartz veins associated with native gold and in contact metamorphic deposits.

title: Tetradymite


text:
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cyberpunk/archive1

Cyberpunk
Influential genre of fiction, and a good example of an article that has grown, and continues to grow, through collaboration and discussion. --Paul Soth 04:17, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Object too many lists, not enough actual paragraphical writing. rewrite it then send it to peer review.  ALKIVAR ™[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 06:46, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Object. I agree with Alkivar. Also, the article doesn't have a seperate references section. Mgm|(talk) 12:50, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Object Alkivar is right on. The lists don't explain why the items included are important.  So when you list Megacorporations as a common element in the cyberpunk genre, give a 2-3 sentence explanation/exploration.  Lists of movies aren't really helpful to the reader unless the reader already knows most of them—change sections like that into a discussion of the major or epochal movies that developed the genre over time.  Do the same with the list of authors and novels.  It won't kill the article to only mention the big ones (only the notable stories/authors/movies), and let the readers discover the other novels by reading articles that this one links to.   —thames 14:06, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Object Agreed. Only readers of the books / viewers of the movies know anything about them.  Common themes are only hinted at.  Influences are scattered.  Also notice a strong seepage of anime themes into this article, some of which are not necessarily related, per se.  Politely disagree about only mentioning the big ones (books, especially, though a fair amount of movies can be removed) wouldn't kill the article.   Zenorbital 05:32, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Object. This article is simply not there yet. Overall, it shows a strong tendency to claim any famous SF as either cyberpunk or a precursor thereto.  It does not sufficiently address the criticisms raised against canonical cyberpunk works.  Its organization is confused and overgrown.  The lists are, by and large, worse than useless.  Better to talk deeply about the smaller number of works which are definitively part of the genre than to include bullet points for all the movies, books and bands "which could possibly be considered cyberpunk".  Anville 17:36, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)


text:
User:Chiacomo/WIP

Judy Peiser
Judy Peiser (born June 5, 1954) is the co-founder and current executive director of the Center for Southern Folklore in Memphis, Tennessee. She graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree from the Univserity of Illinois and as Master's degree from the University of Memphis.

Peiser founded the Center for Southern Folkore in 1972 along with Williams Ferris.

Peiser has produced numerous documentary films including Fannie Bell Chapman: Gospel Singer, Gravel Springs Fife and Drum, and Ray Lum: Mule Trader.

She is currently a member of the board of directors of the North American Folk Alliance.

Peiser is a frequent lecturer at preservation and folk gatherings throughout the world. She was recognized by Esquire Magazing for changing America and by Southern Living for having made a difference in the changing South.

List of Artists Who Were Once 'Regulars' at the Center for Southern Folklore

 * North Mississippi Allstars
 * Mose Vinson
 * Fred Ford (musician) & Honeymoon Garner
 * Blind Mississippi Morris

title: User:Chiacomo/WIP