text:
User talk:212.219.59.241

April 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to the page Legend of the Mistletoe Bough has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. decltype (talk) 11:53, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Welcome and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. MANdARAX • XAЯAbИAM 18:08, 28 April 2009 (UTC)

May 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Biomagnification, did not appear to be constructive and has been automatically reverted by ClueBot. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you believe there has been a mistake and would like to report a false positive, please report it here and then remove this warning from your talk page. If your edit was not vandalism, please feel free to make your edit again after reporting it. The following is the log entry regarding this warning: Biomagnification was changed by 212.219.59.241 (u) (t) making a minor change with obscenities on 2009-05-05T13:03:16+00:00. Thank you. ClueBot (talk) 13:03, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Israelites. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Leave  Sleaves  13:05, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Scouting for Girls. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. ThoseStarsBurnLikeDiamonds chat  11:24, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Bertolt Brecht.  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 12:08, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below. -- Ed (Edgar181) 12:13, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

May 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit that you made to the page Asexual reproduction has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Please use the sandbox for testing any edits; if you believe the edit was constructive, please ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing for further information. Thank you.  Wikipelli  Talk   12:22, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Asexual reproduction. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. Favonian (talk) 12:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

September 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Your test on the page Special Air Service worked, and has been removed. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing and its related help page for more information. Thank you. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 12:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page Bridgwater. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. The Thing //  Talk  //  Contribs  15:18, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Please do not vandalize pages, as you did with this edit to Weston-super-Mare. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. The Thing //  Talk  //  Contribs  15:19, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Drawing (manufacturing), you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Wizard191 (talk) 16:46, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Architectural drawing, you may be blocked from editing. M AN d ARAX •  XAЯA b ИA M  10:43, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Lubrication, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. M AN d ARAX •  XAЯA b ИA M  10:45, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. -- Ed (Edgar181) 17:12, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

September 2012
Hello, I'm Wikipelli. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions, such as the one you made to Network topology, because it didn’t appear constructive to me. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks,   Wikipelli Talk   13:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Henry V of England. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. undefined tausif(talk) 15:24, 18 September 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, I'm Arthur Holland. I wanted to let you know that I undid one of your recent contributions to Westland Helicopters because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Arthur Holland (talk) 13:39, 21 September 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Wellington School, Somerset. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. SassyLilNugget (talk) 14:32, 26 September 2012 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. Lerd the nerd wiki defender  15:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

October 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for reverting your recent experiment with the page Torque. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox instead. Thank you. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:18, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, I'm Guðsþegn. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Tire because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Guðsþegn (talk) 13:29, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Newspeak. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Regards, — Moe ε  10:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

November 2012
Hello, I'm Widr. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Human skull because it didn't appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Widr (talk) 11:43, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Spruce. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Vacation9 (talk) 14:43, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 4 years for abuse of editing privileges, as done at File:Tour Eiffel Wikimedia Commons.jpg. If you have a registered Wikipedia username, you may log in and continue to edit. Otherwise, once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. A. B. (talk • contribs • global count) 21:13, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

October 2018
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Spindle oil. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Yate Town F.C, you may be blocked from editing. – Gilliam (talk) 21:24, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

January 2022
Hello, I'm Egghead06. Your recent edit(s) to the page 2021–22 EFL Championship appear to have added incorrect information, so they have been reverted for now. If you believe the information was correct, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Egghead06 (talk) 12:18, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:212.219.59.241


text:
Claydon, Suffolk

Claydon is a village just north of Ipswich in Suffolk, England. The meaning of the name is "clay-on-the-hill".

The village gives its name to the hundred of Bosmere-and-Claydon, one of the 21 administrative districts into which Suffolk was divided for administrative purposes between Saxon and Victorian times.

Geography
The countryside around Claydon is set among low-lying hills and lies next to the River Gipping. It is close to the intersection of the A14 and the B1113. Between the A14 and the B1113 (former A45) is the Ipswich to Ely Line.

Amenities
The village has two pubs: The Crown and The Greyhound. There is also a bakers and sandwich bar Freshfills, post office, fish and chip shop, hotel, hairdressers, car dealership and travel agency. It also has a primary school and Claydon High School. There are regular bus connections to Ipswich, Bramford and Stowmarket from the centre of the village.

At the top of the hill on Church Lane can be found the Church of St Peter, which has been partially restored. It is one of the few pre-Norman churches in Suffolk. The interior contains a wooden fan-vaulted ceiling.

Nearby villages include Barham, Bramford, Great Blakenham and the hamlet of Akenham.

Former fuel storage depot
An Air Force distribution depot was constructed around 1939 by Shell-Mex & BP for the Air Ministry. It received fuel by rail and distributed it by road tanker. In the 1970s two new sites were constructed with modern storage tanks and pump-houses. It was connected to the Government Pipeline and Storage System and supplied RAF Bentwaters and Woodbridge. The wartime site was sold off in the mid 2000s and later demolished. The other two sites are no longer operational.

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

title: Claydon, Suffolk


text: User talk:69.140.243.47

title: User talk:69.140.243.47


text:
User:TAS/Buses

At present this page is empty.

title: User:TAS/Buses


text:
MicroLink

MicroLink was a Baltic IT company, founded by Rainer Nõlvak and Hanno Haamer in August 1991 in Tallinn, Estonia. Launched as a PC maker, it diversified into IT distribution (CHS Estonia), systems integration (Microlink Systems) and providing of internet services (MicroLink Online) and electronics manufacturing (MicroLink Electronics). The company established itself as the largest Baltic PC maker by the mid-1990s.

In 1998, the company appointed Allan Martinson as its CEO and merged with the 2nd largest Estonian IT company Astrodata. A period of quick growth ensued, fuelled by 4 private equity rounds from Baltic Investment Fund, Baltic Republics Fund and other players. In 1999–2000, the company grew 5 times by completing 15 mergers and acquisitions, including mergers with the biggest and second-biggest of the Latvian IT companies Fortech and VAR, seven internet service providers across the Baltic region etc. While the corporate headquarters remained in Tallinn, Estonia, the group became essentially pan-Baltic, with the largest number of employees and revenues from Latvia.

In 1999, the company also launched Delfi, which established itself as the leading news portal in all three Baltic countries. Initially, Delfi was set up as a 50:50 joint venture with BNS, the region's leading news agency, but eventually MicroLink bought out its counterpart.

Through the merger with Fortech, MicroLink also inherited a majority stake in SAF Tehnika, a Latvian developer and producer of microwave radio links.

At its peak, MicroLink employed near 1000 employees and had 60 million EUR in revenues.

In 2003–2005, MicroLink sold off its investments. Delfi was sold for 5 m EUR to Norwegian company Findexa (resold 3 years later to Estonian Ekspress Grupp for 51 m EUR). SAF Tehnika became the first and only listed Baltic stock at Riga Stock Exchange in the IPO that valued the company at 52 m EUR. MicroLink Computers was sold to the management and MicroLink Electronics to Amphenol. Finally, MicroLink's core IT business was sold to three Baltic telecom companies (Eesti Telekom, Lattelecom and Teo LT). in a deal exceeding 20 m EUR. Soon after this sale, MicroLink's Lithuanian arm was sold by Lithuanian telecom TEO.LT to MTVP venture capital company and part of the Latvian operations – the leading local ERP software maker FMS – to the management.

The last CEO of independent MicroLink was Jānis Bergs, who took the post over in 2004.

In 2006, Microlink Latvia Ltd. was renamed Lattelecom Technology, but since 2019 its name is T2T.

By 2011, both Latvian and Estonian telecoms had merged MicroLink with their core operations and MicroLink ceased to exist both as a brand and an independent corporate entity. The Lithuanian MicroLink was named Hostex and sold back to Teo LT in 2010.

Microlink business interests included: system integration and infrastructure solutions, software development, ERP and business solutions, IT consulting and training, central systems and datacentre solutions and end-user PC services and support.

title: MicroLink


text:
Battle of Custoza (1848)

The First Battle of Custoza was fought on July 24 and 25, 1848, during the First Italian War of Independence between the armies of the Austrian Empire, commanded by Field Marshal Radetzky, and the Kingdom of Sardinia, led by King Charles Albert of Piedmont-Sardinia.

Background
In March 1848, the city of Milan launched an uprising against Austrian occupation. Charles Albert supported the Milanese revolt and declared war on Austria. Venice also declared its independence from Austria. The Austrian Field Marshal Radetzky withdrew his forces from Milan to the defensive positions based on the four fortresses known as the Quadrilateral: Verona, Mantua, Peschiera, and Legnago. The Piedmontese took Peschiera after a short siege, but Radetzky received substantial reinforcements.

Battle
Around July 25, the Piedmontese Army was widely dispersed on the war theatre, from the Rivoli plateau on the north to Governolo on the south. Marshal Radetzky attacked, on July 23, the Piedmontese II Corps (commanded by General ), and forced it to retire first before Peschiera and then, after another successful attack on the 24th, behind the river Mincio, splitting the Piedmontese Army in two.

The Piedmontese High Command reacted slowly and uncertainly to the news coming from the north, and eventually it was decided to attack the Austrian army in the rear towards the village of Staffalo, with the bulk of the I Corps (led by General Eusebio Bava); the attack, begun in the afternoon of the 24th, was successful and the single brigade which covered this area was forced to retreat. However, this lulled the Sardinian commanders into complacency, and spurred Radetzky to stop his advance beyond the Mincio and march on these enemy forces.

For the 25th, the Piedmontese were ordered to attack the enemy further in the area, while the II Corps was instructed to support the attack from the Mincio (however General De Sonnaz refused to obey the order, claiming that his troops were too tired); but what was supposed to be an offensive soon turned into a desperate battle to hold the advancing enemy. For the whole day, the outnumbered Piedmontese were subjected to attacks by two Austrian army corps, and by the end of the day the whole line had been forced to move back; however, the retreat was done in an orderly way and with the men fighting.

Aftermath
While not a total victory (in fact, the Austrians had suffered higher losses than the Piedmontese and all major Piedmontese units kept their cohesion and their equipment), the battle was nonetheless a considerable reversal. On the 26th Piedmontese troops sought to prevent the Austrians from crossing the Mincio at the battle of Volta Mantovana. Their failure to do so and a decisive Austrian victory meant that the Piedmontese were first forced to retreat westwards to a new defensive line behind the river Oglio, and then further to Milan. After a small battle at the outskirts of Milan an armistice (originally of six weeks and then prorogued) was signed, and the Piedmontese Army retreated within the borders of the Kingdom of Sardinia.

The attempt to renew the war effort the next year resulted in another victory for Radetzky and the effective end of the First Italian War of Independence. The Austrian marshal returned all the rebellious provinces to Austrian rule.

In popular culture
Johann Strauss I's Radetzky March was commissioned to commemorate Radetzky's victories at this battle.

title: Battle of Custoza (1848)


text:
Transvection

Transvection may refer to:

 * Transvection (flying)
 * Transvection (genetics)

Mathematics

 * The creation of a transvectant in invariant theory
 * A shear mapping in linear algebra
 * Raising and lowering indices

title: Transvection


text:
Talk:Treaty of Tordesillas

Merge
Tordesilhas line should be merged here. If someone has a second available... Lapaz 02:00, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

its been merged, but how to delete the other article? Shall I have a redirect? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.240.49.132 (talk • contribs)

 * Your merge was incorrect in the sense that all its info already appears in this article, so just removing the merger notice from this article is all that is necessary. The text of the other article should be replaced by a redirect—don't just put the redirect in front of the existing text (if the merge has to be reverted, the text can be recovered from a previous version). I'm correcting that. Also you should have clicked on "what links here" on the redirect page to make sure that no double redirects were created. I checked and found that Tordesillas Line was redirected to Tordesilhas Line, which, due the merger, was redirected here. I corrected that also. — Joe Kress 07:06, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Ratification sites
"The treaty was ratified...by Portugal, September 5, 1494.". Does anyone knows where in Portugal? Thank you. FB

 * According to part 2 of the external link, the King of Portugal signed it in Setubal, whereas Ferdinand and Isabella signed it in Arevalo. — Joe Kress 06:15, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Credibility
This might be something that might not matter and could have been already discussed, but during class my professor brought it up that this treaty may have only been an urban legend. I might be wrong and she was not completely positive. It apparently had a lot to do with the pope and other people can anyone prove this or something? Thanks clash_division 03:37, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * It's absolutly real and proven so in more sources then I can name. The original copies are keept in the national archives of Portugal and Spain (I just saw the Portuguese copy being shown in tv the other day), and the treaty was efective as long as both countries could impose a Mare clausum policy, that was soon disputed, de facto and de jure - see the Mare Liberum controversy by Hugo Grotius. The Ogre 14:46, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Cantino map 1502
The old map pictured is the Cantino planisphere of 1502 held by the Biblioteca Estense Universitaria. There is good information about its significance elsewhere on wikipedia.--Nickm57 23:46, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Wrong wiki links
Cipangu and Antilia shouldnt be wiki linked because they redirect to subjects totally unrelated to this treaty. I cant change it seems wiki seems to be having problem with its servers 193.47.167.202 13:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Hello 193.47.167.202! In fact the links are not wrong! They named the island thinking Cipango might be Japan, and the other one the mythical island of Antilia. Thank you. The Ogre 13:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Wrong information about Treaty of Zaragozza
I found nowhere outside wikipedia the information, that the line of the treaty of Zaragoza passed close 145°E near Guam and the Marian Islands, but saw several maps (A. H. de Oliveira Marques: Geschichte Portugals und des portugiesischen Weltreichs. Kröner August 2001, ISBN 978-3520385017.) showing a line at the east coast of Kyushu, corresponding with the information at German school book publisher Klett, that the line was close 135°E. --J. Patrick Fischer 08:48, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the citation. It raises the interesting dilemma of how to handle 'authoritative' sources that are clearly wrong. Two other citations in this class are Lines in the sea (p.3) and Lines of Demarcation 1529. But the treaty clearly states that the line is 297.5 leagues east of the Moluccas. Unlike the Treaty of Tordesillas, the Treaty of Zaragoza gives a conversion factor of 17.5 leagues per degree in the same sentence, leaving the inescapable conclusion that the line is 17° east of the Moluccas, even though the treaty itself states that the line is "almost seventeen degrees on the equinoctial" [equator]. "The fortress which is already built at Maluquo" mentioned in the treaty is probably that constructed in 1522 on the small volcanic island of Ternate, just west of the large North Maluku island of Halmahera, so its longitude (127°24'E) may be regarded as the longitude of the Moluccas for the purposes of the treaty. Klett's line of "approximately 135° east" is just east of the easternmost island, Kepulauan Aru, of the modern Maluku province, but is nowhere near 17° east of the Moluccas. The treaty also states that the line passes through the islands of las Velas (the Sails), which refers to the official name given by Magellan to the Mariana Islands, "Islas de las Velas Latinas" (Islands of the Lateen Sails), so named because the natives used proas with triangular sails. Islas de los Ladrones (Islands of the Thieves) was their unofficial name. I have not yet identified "Santo Thome" with any certainty, another island through which the treaty states the line passes. In support of 145°E are The cartography of the Orientals and Southern Europeans in the beginning of the western exploration of South-East Asia from the middle of the XVth century to the beginning of the XVIIth century by Frédéric Durand, which places the line at the eastern end of New Guinea. In the opinion of the authors of Philip II Orders the Journey of the First Manila Galleon, Father Urdaneta determined in 1560 that the line was at 147°E, 17° east if the west end of New Guinea. An even more extreme location is 162.5°E mentioned in . I intentionally excluded from this list two references to c. 145°E that had no other commentary because they may have been influenced by Wikipedia. — Joe Kress 23:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Current use of Treaty
I believe, though I am not absolutely certain, that the Treaty of Tordesillas is part of the justification for Chile and Argentina's claims to the Antarctic Peninsula in Antarctica - the Antarctic Peninsula is held to be covered by former Spanish claims to the west of South America. Can someone confirm or deny this? If so, this would perhaps be the only current area in which the treaty still has some (debatable!) validity. --APRCooper 19:18, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

 * Chile has indeed at least partially based its claim to its Antarctic sector on the Treaty of Tordesillas according to (1.2MB) and Chilean Sovereignty in Antarctica. The treaty is also invoked for its Antarctic sector by Argentina according to Argentine National Territory of Tierra del Fuego, though apparently not as strongly as Chile has. Much more strongly, Argentina bases its claim to the Islas Malvinas on the treaty according to Las Islas Malvinas (Flash), also see The Falkland Islands Dispute in International Law and Politics by Raphael Perl. The treaty is also discussed in Territorio Chileno Antártico, but is not listed among the reasons given in Argentine Antarctica. It is not mentioned in either Antártida Argentina or La Actividad Argentina en la Antártida. — Joe Kress 17:12, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Brazil goes west of the line
So, how does Brazil jibe with the treaty? I've read some snippet about one man leading the conquest of the vast territory that is now Brazil's, but no indication of how he went about it, or how Spain reacted to the seizure of its lands. (Presumably, the interior of South America, if Portugal had never acquired it, would have belonged to one or another of the vice-royalties, or even be partitioned among them, prior to the wars of independence.) GBC 13:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Check Bandeirantes! The Ogre 14:21, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The reason is the Union of the Portuguese and Spanish Crowns under Phillip II of Spain, which became also the King of Portugal. So Portuguese forces could go West in Brazil, and Spanish forces could go East in the Philipines...--88.23.172.136 (talk) 06:09, 7 March 2011 (UTC) Dumb dumb dumb to show the Tordesillas line on the map but not latitude or longitude so you have to guess where it went. Stupid. Typical Wiki moronism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 107.2.2.45 (talk) 08:34, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Major move of material
I am concerned about a major move of material by an anon editor from this article to Inter caetera. Two questions:
 * Should the material which was moved, actually be in both articles?
 * More importantly, the moved material is unreferenced, pov-sounding, and not exactly encyclopaedic tone - so the question is - does this material actually belong in either article, or should it be pulled out, and placed on the talk page, or on a sub-page for substantial re-writing, source-adding, and fact-checking?

NorCalHistory 23:38, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

 * The anonymous editor who moved the material is the same editor who wrote it five days earlier. However, I think it goes well beyond the subject matter of either article and should not be in either article. — Joe Kress 05:46, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Map Image issues
Regarding this revert... see Image:Treaty of Tordesillas bad align.png which was what I tried to fix. I run Firefox 2.0 at a width of about 1200-1300 or so. I think the revert was in error. Moving the maps up solved the problem for me, and does not throw the article flow off. I'll be reverting back after a chance for some discussion. ++Lar: t/c 16:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
 * There having been no comment for more than a day I'm carrying out the change, but have tried a different placement and location to see if that works better stylistically. I have no special affection for any particular place, but as the image I gave shows, the current location does not work on all browsers. Firefox 2 on Win XP is way too common a browser/machine type to not support correctly. Please discuss, providing an alternate solution, before reverting back. Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 13:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)

 * Placing the maps to the left of a bulleted list hides the bullets in Internet Explorer 7 (no problem in Firefox 2), so I had to move them. I assume that placing them to the right of paragraphs causes the observed problems on a wide screen. So I tried placing the maps to the left of the numbered ref list instead, but some numbers were also hidden in IE7. So I'm moving the maps to their own section (where I had them at one time) which will hopefully not cause interference on a wide screen. — Joe Kress (talk) 07:59, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Aftermath
This article needs an aftermath section. I know that after the Reformation, many of the Protestant colonizing countries explicitly ignored the treaty since it was a papal treaty. That explains why the Netherlands, England, Scotland, and others ignored it. I have no idea why France ignored it or if the treaty was eventually dismantled. 128.227.185.214 (talk) 21:55, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

The Treaty was ignored for a simple reason - the parties to the Treaty i.e. the Crowns of Iberia and Pope Alexander VI had no legal rights to dispose of the newly discovered territories or, indeed, those to be discovered. There were other parties whose opinions and wishes were totally ignored - the peoples who lived in the territories.86.2.251.0 (talk) 18:23, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Why would any country, Catholic or otherwise, be bound by a treaty it did not sign? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.108.6.50 (talk) 01:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

 * The Pope's words carried far more weight -- not just moral weight but actual legal weight -- at least for majority Catholic states -- in those days, that's why.  The Divine Right of Kings also worked hand in hand with Papal authority.   If you didn't follow the Pope's instructions, then folks might question your own kingship, etc.   Example -- Napoleon having the Pope crown him King (but then snatching the crown himself).   It wasn't just for show -- it was symbol that all the major players in the syndicate  (and you can view Western European history of kings, queens and popes as a syndicate) were on the same page.   Chesspride 66.19.84.2 (talk) 07:36, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Australia
Long ago, perhaps at school, I read that when the British settled Australia and created the colony of New South Wales, they made the western border this line of demarcation, because they were at war with Spain and were pleased to annex its territory but had a treaty with Portugal and respected its rights. I don't know where to varify this. The present Western Australian border fits this. Norm Tered (talk) 05:03, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

 * Interesting theory, although it has some faults. The principal problem is that the Treaty of Saragossa in 1529 specified that the line of demarcation between Portugal and Spain was 17° east of the Moluccas, near the present 145°E, which passes through Melbourne, well east of the border of Western Australia. This implies that the Treaty of Saragossa was ignored or forgotten by the British during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries (or by your teacher). I presume the war with Spain you are referring to was the Anglo-Spanish War (1796–1808), which occurred a few years after the colony of New South Wales was established in 1788, but I don't know when its western border was defined. Portugal was indeed aligned with Britain near the end of the war. The article on Australia states that the British claimed Western Australia in 1829, which also fits your story. The New South Wales article states that when it was formed it covered most of the Australian mainland, and that other provinces were later carved out of it. — Joe Kress (talk) 04:49, 7 May 2009 (UTC)

 * A book devoted to this issue has been published, but I do not have access to it:
 * The Papal Line of Demarcation and Its Impact in the Eastern Hemisphere on the Political Division of Australia, 1479-1829 (2008) by Leslie Ronald Marchant
 * — Joe Kress (talk) 21:20, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

I also read that theory in an old book, I think it 'History of Australia' by Arthur W. Jose, first published 1899, though I had the tenth edition, published 1924. The western boundary of NSW was set at 135E in Governor Phillips commission, dated 25 April 1787Nudge67 (talk) 13:09, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Current value
Neither Portugal or Spain has any colonies nowadays. So the contract(s) may have been breached when both countries gave independance to these South American countries....or was independance merely taken? Or did Spain and Portugal just leg it? Was it not a breach of contract when the USA gained Cuba (please dont mention Guantanamo). What is the current value of these treaties? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.134.28.194 (talk • contribs) 09:34, 26 April 2010

 * Before any Latin American country gained its independence, the Treaty of Madrid (1750) suspended the Treaty of Tordesillas and then several other treaties determined the borders between Brazil and its neighbors. The article already discusses 20th century claims by Chile to Antarctica and by Argentina to the Falklands that are based on the Treaty of Tordesillas. — Joe Kress (talk) 08:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC)
 * "The treaty of 1750 was repudiated by Spain" how so? IF that were really true, Brazil would be much smaller. --Hrotovice (talk) 20:00, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Who said repudiated? --Stat-ist-ikk (talk) 18:01, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

"Our sphere"
In places in the article the phrase "our sphere" is used. It makes no sense. It the text copypasted from somewhere? Abductive (reasoning) 03:48, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * That phrase is defined in the first paragraph of the section Tordesillas meridian wherein it is used, and its source is explicitly stated in that section to be Harrisse. Please reread it. Although that section is not copypasted from Harrisse, it does completely depend on him, as indicated by that section's references, all of which refer to pages within Harrisse's book, which is available online at the link in the References section. — Joe Kress (talk) 08:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * "Harrisse" wasn't defined the first time it's used, though. Fixed. --「ѕʀʟ·✎」 02:23, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Better just to remove his whole phrasing from the article. We don't use his bizarre numerical system either. Fixed. — Llywelyn II   15:09, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

Treaty of Alcáçovas
The Treaty of Tordesillas superseded the Treaty of Alcáçovas (1479). I think it would be worth to mention this in the article.

Ekkehard, Berlin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.15.138.11 (talk) 13:56, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

 * The Treaty of Tordesillas only superceded the Treaty of Alcáçovas in the sense that it covered the whole world, whereas the 1479 treaty only covered the west coast of Africa. But the 1494 treaty did not change who owned any land granted to either Spain or Portugal by the 1479 treaty. Although the 1479 treaty is not mentioned, the papal bull Aeterni regis, which ratified the Treaty of Alcáçovas, is mentioned. — Joe Kress (talk) 08:21, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

League
Two forms of the Castilian league exist, the legal league (legua legal) and the common league (legua común), see The Castilian League by Fred Roeder in American Surveyor. The legal league is almost always used on land, whereas the common league is used for travel. The legal league has three Castilian miles whereas the common league has four Castilian miles, each mile containing 5000 Castilian feet (pies). On 26 January 1801 the Castilian foot was standardized to 278.6 mm, making the legal league 4.179 km and the common league 5.572 km. Immediately before 1801 several different feet were used, ranging from 277.3 mm to 282.7 mm each (one third of corresponding vara). But the Treaty of Tordesillas was negotiated in 1494, long before the Castilian foot was standardized, so even 5.572 km is the wrong league.

Fortunately, the opinion of the expert consulted by King Ferdinand, Queen Isabella and Cardinal Mendoza survives. Jaime Ferrer stated in his Parer issued shortly after 28 February 1495 that there are 8 stades per mile and 4 miles per league (Henry Harrisse (1897) p. 92, Spanish p. 179). Harrisse also stated (p. 93) that Portugal would have accepted Ferrer's opinion regarding the league, but not the specific island within the Cape Verde Islands from which 370 leagues was measured. Harrisse stated (p. 180) that the stade was 192.27 m, but did not give his source. Thus Ferrer's league is 6.15264 km according to Harrisse. The American Surveyor article linked above states that the vara was standardized by Jaime I of Aragon (1213–1276) and other Spanish monarchs to three Roman feet (886.5 mm). After the 8th century, there were 3 Roman miles of 5000 Roman feet each (295.5 mm) in a league. All sources agree that a Roman stade was 625 Roman feet, hence a stade is 184.6875 m and a Ferrer league is 5.91 km according to the American Surveyor. Information on pages 227–230 of An essay on the ancient weights and money by Robert Hussey (1836) results in a Roman foot of 295.8 mm, hence a stade of 184.875 m and a Ferrer league of 5.916 km. Eratosthenes and the mystery of the stades by Newlyn Walkup gives a stade of 184.8 m and also mentions "the most commonly accepted value" of 185 m. These give Ferrer leagues of 5.9136 km and 5.92 km, respectively.

Thus Harrise's stade is about 4% larger than all others, which agree with each other within 0.2%. Because Harrise is a "reliable source", I can't dismiss his value, but it is too different from the others to use in the lead. So we could average the other values for a Ferrer league of 5.9149 km, state in the lead that 370 leagues is 2189 km, 1360 statute miles, or 1182 nautical miles, explain these values in a note, and relegate Harrisse's stade to that note. — Joe Kress (talk) 09:07, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Section 'Signing and enforcement'
At the end of the third paragraph, a quotation notes 'confirming to the Portuguese not only the true route to Indian, but most of the south Atlantic.' Should it be the true route to India? It makes more sense. The Average Wikipedian (talk) 14:23, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

 * It is indeed India according to Parry's quote from page 152 of The Age of Reconnaissance. I'm correcting it. — Joe Kress (talk) 21:25, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

comment from User:Rod jardiolin moved from article
Ps. Please consider that until the Magellan expedition in 1519–21, the world was not yet established as round and longitudes were not established yet to be given in term of degrees. Earth was neither circumnavigated yet, laterally nor vertically.

But since magnetic compass already existed at that time, directions could be given in figures of degrees by compass point and the distances in terms of leagues or other linear measures added to them. (example: 100 leagues, 45 degrees East) You measure one angle correctly you get to know the two missing angles also, their distances easily estimated as well. Algebra at work.

Exact location could then be determined by triangulation and not by degrees-latitude-meeting-degrees-longitude, which is the modern system that came much later. This is in connection with the article citing Jaime Ferrer purportedly giving exact locations using the modern system. Rod — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vannie227 (talk • contribs) 06:14, 11 October 2015 (UTC)

Sources for future article expansion
For the cartographic aspects of the line-drawing and its visualization at the time, more here: — Llywelyn II   23:30, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

There's much more in the Chardon article already cited, for anyone who has access to JSTOR. All of the Wikisource items requested are already available as well (removing header).

This actually has an excellent overview of the debates that happened over the measurements once they realized how relevant they were to the money coming in from the Moluccas. It can probably add some information separate from what we have now. In any case, it deserves to go into the bibliography or a #See also section for people interested in the topic.

Similar. — Llywelyn II   12:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Question on dates
Is the dates in O.S. or N.S.? It was ratified before the Gregorian shift--Simen113 (talk) 22:45, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Pronunciation
The IPA [tɾɐˈtaðu ðɨ tuɾðɨˈziʎɐʃ] doesn't seem to be the right, it seems to me that the modern European Portuguese pronunciation of "d" tends to sounds more like a regular "d" than a "ð". RafaAzevedo msg 00:53, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

 * Portuguese is messy in this regard. Some pronounce /d/ as [d], some as [ð]; mispronouncing /s/ as [ʃ] in certain dialects is common, some stick to [s]; some reduce unstressed vowels as much as /a e i o u/ becoming [ɐ ɨ ɪ ʊ ʊ] or something like that. In this case since it refers to a treaty that affected Portuguese speakers from multiple dialects, I think the correct approach would be using 'the reconstructed pronunciation of that time', that was probably something like [tɾaˈtado de toɾdeˈziʎas]. 189.26.29.152 (talk) 19:05, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Leagues
Personally, I like the standard letters more than the needlessly long [note 2] style notes. That said, whoever did the section on the leagues and the historical sourcing for them made a thing of beauty. It's extremely well researched and clearly stated. It also seems almost certainly wrong. The diplomats may have consulted experts who discussed things in terms of Roman miles despite having no real access to comprehensive archaeological research on it (i.e., they were using a number out of some book or from some supposed baseline). The Roman mile never had anything to do with geographical miles.

I'm sure it's the sources not understanding what they were talking about or trying to simplify things for lay readers but the Romans—assuming they were being extremely careful and using a fully functioning odometer and using gromas, dioptras, and Greek trig to roughly accommodate changes in elevation and weren't just counting out 1000 legionary paces at a brisk march—were basing their miles on a standard unit determined by reference to officially sanctioned decempedas.

None of that has anything to do with how distances were computed by early modern Spaniards at sea, which involved a different set of tools and trig to reckon things based on geographical/nautical miles determined by sextants and the like as fractions of a degree of equatorial longitude. You're going to get roughly the same set of numbers once the correct computations and units are being used but it won't be these numbers to within ±1 km of precision unless something has been badly misstated. — Llywelyn II   00:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Ah. It was the editor who seems to have misunderstood their own sources. The actual numbers are discussed on the first page of the Jstor and all over the place on Google Books but, digging in, they've ignored (a) the essential caveat that these numbers were extremely inexact at the time at the scale involved and particularly at sea (p. 130 JS & 189 GB) and the 'don't be overprecise' from applies in spades; (b) the fact that 5+ separate "leagues" were being used at the time of the treaty and its active parsing (p. 137–142 JS); (c) the fact that the Spanish knew this and actively fought about it in an extended controversy in 1528 specifically with reference to Tordesillas (p. 140) and in the end didn't agree with Ferrer's ideas that GB spends so much time dwelling on. Similarly, (d) they discuss how Ferrer justified things to himself in terms of his misconception of "Roman miles" and what that might've meant in terms of Erastothenes's stadia but the only units that ever mattered were the leagues based on degrees which for the Spanish of the time were either 16⅔ leagues to the degree or 17½ leagues to the degree. The we're currently using doesn't match either number. (e) Sure, you need to adjust for the inexact Spanish knowledge of the actual circumference of the earth and the inexactness of the ability to measure a degree using the tools of the period but the number here seems entirely bogus and based only on Roland Chardon's chart of p. 144, which—for this—disagrees with his own text and has a footnote saying that and warning the reader that the figures presented are notional approximations.

What we should be using are the actual measurements argued about at the time, which we already have in the #Tordesillas meridian. We just need to fix this to have less pretend precision and remove any reference to the Roman mile and stadia (let alone the Olympic stadia) which had nothing to do with anything except period rhetoric and our ability to reckon what they considered the earth's circumference to have been as they did their actual measurements based on degrees. — Llywelyn II   00:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Ducats
It's completely correct that it's helpful to convert the essentially random period coins into pure gold or silver equivalent but this could've been handled a little better.

I assume it's the same editor here with similar mistakes. (Possibly not since the sources are so much worse. The link to a commercial website for a ducat from the wrong country 400 years in the wrong direction certainly needs to just be removed.) Assuming our own (unsourced) information isn't wrong (Wikipedia is not a reliable source), the ducat doesn't weigh 3.521 g of gold. It weighs 3.521 total and is 3.484 g of gold. The difference matters by ~10 kg when there are 350k of the things. (The actual Venetian ducat has different numbers entirely so it also becomes important if we know whose ducats were in use. I assume the Portuguese had their own version. At least the current treatment clearly states and links to our treatment of period Spanish ducados.) The US mint link doesn't source anything relevant at all; the dimensions of the coin are irrelevant since what mattered was the gold content. (The coins would've varied outside the level of specificity provided anyway, through clipping and wear.) — Llywelyn II   00:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Fraud
Someone Edited enacted treaty information, coordinates ,longitudes and latitudes, removed kings queens, journeys. Changed storys? Law abiding treatys are alterable? Good to know. 174.247.208.191 (talk) 22:41, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

 * Do you have a specific objection to the content that was changed? Updating the coverage of historical topics is quite normal, both when considering historians revising previous studies and Wikipedia articles being improved through iterative editing. The recent edits cite what appear to be reliable sources, do you have any critiques of them? signed,Rosguill talk 23:12, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Related discussion at Lines_of_amity
There is a discussion about a related topic at Talk:Lines of amity; your feedback would be appreciated. Mathglot (talk) 00:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Treaty of Tordesillas


text:
Talk:Four Georgians

Cleanup
I have cleaned the article up a little, some might want to clean it up more Ted BJ 09:32, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Colors
What does "colors" mean? Lack of gold ore, other ores? Hypeer 19:12, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup 2
I'm going to take off the cleanup tag, it seems to be understandable now. Hypeer 19:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Four Georgians. 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/20140928173013/http://deq.mt.gov/abandonedmines/linkdocs/98tech.mcpx to http://deq.mt.gov/abandonedmines/linkdocs/98tech.mcpx

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 23:22, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Four Georgians


text:
List of airports in Iran

This is a list of airports in Iran, grouped by type and sorted by location.

As of 2013, Iran had 319 airports which made Iran the 22nd country in the world with most airports.

Iran, officially the Islamic Republic of Iran, is a country in Central Eurasia and/or Western Asia. It is bordered on the north by Armenia, Azerbaijan, the Caspian Sea and Turkmenistan, on the east by Afghanistan and Pakistan, on the south by the Gulf of Oman and the Persian Gulf, on the west by Iraq and on the northwest by Turkey. The country's largest and capital city is Tehran.

Airports

Airport names shown in bold have scheduled passenger service on commercial airlines.

title: List of airports in Iran


text:
Talk:Argentine rock

Original Talk Correspondence
The standard for Argentina-related articles is 'Argentine'. The usual (less-favoured) alternative is Argentinian. Therefore this page should be moved to Argentine rock. Mtiedemann 09:37, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Moved Argentine rock to Argentine rock music -- a bit more specific that way ;) Jmax- 10:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

 * Nationality rock is the standard format. Plase don't move pages with standard names without consulting it on the Talk page. Mariano (t/c) 12:16, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Way to many red links.--Jersey Devil 04:56, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Revamping this article
I could expand this article a very great deal. But it would mean pretty much braking up what has been written here. I do not know what the etiquette to follow is in this case. What is written here is mostly good, a couple of things need correction, but in order for me to expand this article much more I would need completely change what is here now, and I'm skiddish of doing this to something someone else or others wrote. Any advice would be appreciated. The dugout 19:19, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

 * I will be working in the next few days to create a few specific articles. I also will create at least stubs to some of the red inks on this page. Eventually I will expand some of those too. It will just take a little bit, so give me slack. The dugout 06:41, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * No problem! Just don't forget to add them to the Notice Noard. good wiking, Mariano (t/c) 08:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Really a Book or is it a Sound Recording?
I'm attempting to clean up problematic ISBNs and have come across the following from this article:

Polimeni, Carlos (2000). Demasiado Artista. Sony Discos. ISBN 037628369424.

As I understand things, if this item has an ISBN, it is an invalid ISBN because it is too long. My hunch, though, is that Sony Discos produces sound recordings, so this item may not have an ISBN at all. Might you be more clever than me at figuring out what is going on here? I'd like to find either a valid ISBN that goes with this book, or better identifying information so if this is a CD or DVD or something an average reader would be able to locate the source. Thanks for any help you can give. Kind Regards, Keesiewonder 11:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Update: I am not getting anywhere with this. I am looking for a proper citation for this quote from the article:
 * For example, Charly Garcia got together with his old Seru Giran partner Pedro Aznar and recorded "Tango 4", whose name accurately suggests the style of the album.

In addition to my own looking high and low for this "book," I exchanged correspondence with a journalist who has written about Argentine rock who also was not able to confirm the book's title, author, ISBN, etc. I'd like to get to the bottom of this, so with the current, unverifiable citation above for safe keeping, I will next edit the above fact to one needing a reference ... hoping answers will turn up. I know there are people named Carlos Polimeni who show up on the web and on sound recordings ... but I have not been able to connect the article's facts with a book authored by a Carlos Polimeni. Maybe I need CD jackets? Keesiewonder 11:23, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Mystery solved (maybe). I restored the reference to Carlos Polimeni's Demasiado Artista ('Too Much Artist'), without an ISBN, and included a link to an excerpt that I found on the web. The book is not in the Argentine National Library, but other works of Polimeni are found there. The funny code that was too long to be an ISBN is the UPC code of a reissue collection of Charly Garcia's music, called 'Obras Cumbres Vol. 1', released in 2000 by Sony Discos, that has nothing to do with Polimeni's book. I found it just by Googling for the number part of the bogus ISBN. The point of the Polimeni reference is to justify the statement that the name Tango 4 'accurately suggests the style of the album', which hopefully it does, though the book used is (evidently) hard to find. The album 'Tango V.4' appeared in 1990, so there is no point in citing the Sony Discos record as a reference. Its name means 'Greatest Hits Vol. 1', and it in any case does not contain all the songs from 'Tango V.4'. There is a lengthy discography in Charly Garcia, though without any code numbers, which could be a blessing, given how hard it is to get them right. EdJohnston 05:37, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

This works for me! Since there is no ISBN to cause anyone problems in the article. I saw the web link a week or so ago that you've used as a citation, and in part, didn't go with it myself since there is no date or a source for the quotations on the page, such as the one from Garcia. (Maybe its something Garcia said in an interview or that was printed in a newspaper or on a recording jacket?) I am not yet convinced that Polimeni wrote a book about which Garcia has commented. Polimeni has certainly written something (music, lyrics) that Garcia speaks about. No worries; this one is off our list for now! Thanks! Keesiewonder 11:20, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Fleeting afterthought ... so, where does the 2000 come from in the existing citation? Keesiewonder 11:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The 'Obras Cumbras Vol. 1' recording DID come out in 2000, so maybe that is the source of the date. I agree that using an unverifiable book as a reference is not too desirable, so I would not object if you want to take it out. But the number of citations of the possible book is large enough that we now know it's not a record. EdJohnston 14:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Polimeni is certainly a rock author, because of 'Bailando sobre los escombros: Historia critica del rock latinoamericano', ISBN 9507862986, available from Amazon. EdJohnston 14:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi EdJ, I do not see any reason to make any changes in our citation of interest. I am not yet following your reasoning in this statement: "But the number of citations of the possible book is large enough that we now know it's not a record." But, I'm more than happy to move on! Thanks for your input on this one! Keesiewonder 23:21, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Nice!
Very good article, congrats to the Argentinians. With a few pics and a little work I would nominate it for the main page. Che q articulo tan boludo! xD--ometzit<col> 02:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

 * As the author of the article I fully understand this is only above 'first draft' quality. I did extensive research as you can see, so I'm happy and satisfied with the results. I think to take the next leap the article needs the following:

 * 1. More 'book' sources along side the internet sources. The only reason I have not done so is just lack of time, as some of the books needed are somewhat scarce to find and demand a trip to a city library and a good deal of time to find and research and cite.

 * 2. As mentioned, pictures. But lets be honest about this: it is utterly impossible to expect normal people like me to understand the incredible legalese of posting pictures in Wikipedia. Obviously we don't want to copyright infringe, but Wikipedia cannot expect me or most other people to figure out what picture (besides Wikipedia Commons), can go and which cannot. In fact the laws vary depending on countries and languages too, it's just waaaay to complicated. Something needs to be done there to help us.

 * 3. I'm not a proffessional writer, therefore I also understand the article may be in some ways bias towards the main concept or specific bands. It is my hope someome with equal or preferably superior writing skills to myself and knowledge in this subject will correct any such bias to make the article as disspasionate and impartial as possible.

 * If we can do those three things, I think we can make this article feature material. The dugout 05:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Please ! some native English speaker, take a look at this page and correct the mispellings and typos. PPPPLLLLEASE!!! It's a shame. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 190.8.159.18 (talk) 19:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

Winds and war of change, learn history!
England didnt recapture the Falklands Islands so stop writing that, the task forced liberated the islands. Margret Thatcher was an asshole but she was democratically elected. Galtieri (also an asshole) wasnt democratically elected. Therefore got say recaptured. When the British Empire invaded the Falklands a long time ago they did it under "Rule of Conquest", back in the day it was ok to kick other countries in the balls, but that was the 19th century. 1982 is a bit different. yo respect to todos tos mertos. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.171.30.26 (talk • contribs).

 * Please, take a look at 1833 invasion of the Falkland Islands. I will re-phrase it anyway. --Mariano (t/c) 13:22, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
 * "Rule of Conquest" is not a legal justification. is not different from "Rule of Ethnic Cleansing" to justify the Jew Holocaust. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.132.109.103 (talk) 13:33, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Failed GA

 * GA review (see here for criteria)

I've failed this article for GA status. Here are some things to improve before nominating again. The prose needs work. Sentences should not start with "and" ("And for the first time..."). The tense often shifts: "In 1964...Argentina is shaken", "The definitive breakthrough...would be", "the music would continue its development" (italics added to show use of present and journalistic conditional). There are also several one-sentence paragraphs. Many of the dates that should be linked aren't (March 24, 1976; March 26, 1988; December 21, 1988). The referencing also needs a lot of work. Wikipedia articles are not reliable sources. Citations should contain all of the following information (as appropriate): author, link and title, publisher, date of publication, retrieval date for link. "(Spanish)" should be replaced with es icon. There are many statements that, without references, are original research (e.g. "While Beatlesque, their sound was not an ordinary or rough copy"). Image:Sui Generis.jpg needs a detailed fair use rationale. The copyright status of Image:Luca prodan.jpg needs to be clarified (an image can't be both PD and CC). Between the prose and the referencing, this needs a lot of work before it can reach GA. ShadowHalo 12:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * a (fair representation): b (all significant views):
 * 1) It is stable.
 * 2) It contains images, where possible, to illustrate the topic.
 * a (tagged and captioned): b lack of images (does not in itself exclude GA):  c (non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * 1) Overall:
 * a Pass/Fail:
 * a Pass/Fail:

Fair use rationale for Image:Sui Generis.jpg
Image:Sui Generis.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 05:02, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Biassed article and non-reliable sources
This article has serious neutrality problems, some dead urls, sources that do not support what is contained in the article and dubious or non-reliable sources. Specially, the Argentine Invasion section (a term not supported by the references) contains a lot of promotional text. Defining Argentine rock as a worldwide phenomenon, as the very best Spanish-language scene among others controversial sentences. I'm still surprised how this could pass the neutrality check in the 'good article revision'. I Blame the fact that the reviewer probably could not speak Spanish so he could not be able to check the sources. --Batamamma (talk) 23:36, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

 * No place of the article "defines Argentine rock as a worldwide phenomenon", neither explicitly or implicitly.
 * Batamamma attitude is common anti argentine xenophobia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.20.134.199 (talk) 06:21, 10 February 2018 (UTC)

 * Are you freaking kidding me? There is no "Argentine xenophobia" but a lot of fakely referenced stuff. Argentine rock being "commercially successful overseas" or considered an "international genre" (usage of a non-English language doesn't mean it is a genre by itself) are not just biassed but also absolutely false. Personal opinions are not valid on wikipedia, all the information must be supported by external sources (and no matter how you get triggered about it).
 * By the way, I'll bring you some examples ('cause obviously you didn't bother to read the whole article):
 * - "It [Argentine rock] would create some of the most enjoyable and brilliant albums in the history of the music, acclaimed nationally and by progressive rock fans worldwide"
 * - "[Argentine rock,]Despite its 'underground' status, it has fervent followers in Chile, Uruguay, Mexico and a plethora of countries worldwide"
 * - "The Cadillacs, with their ska-rock with a heavy Latin infusion, turned instant rock stars across Latin America and eventually worldwide."
 * - "The band [Soda Stereo] would continue their worldwide success well into the 1990s, and evolving their musical sounds unlike almost any other Rock en Español band".
 * Claiming these sentences (among others that I removed) don't define Argentine rock as a worldwide phenomenon really lands on the scope of fanboyism. --Batamamma (talk) 21:13, 17 February 2018 (UTC)

 * The internationality cannot be argued. International doesn't means worldwide, and no place in the article "defines it as a worldwide phenomenon", so you are just vandalizing the article.
 * Please abstain or you will be banned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.20.179.249 (talk) 02:50, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

 * Don't try to remove part of my old messages, it can be easily recovered from the talk page history. Assuming good faith is important on wikipedia and please, stop trying to turn the situation around or your IP will be banned. (and yes, internationality can be argued) --Batamamma (talk) 12:37, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Origins of Argentine Rock
I'm unsure what needs to be merged to the parent article, however it is clear that this does duplicate information already present in the main article and wouldn't make for a good content fork on its own. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  18:51, 20 June 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Klbrain (talk) 10:32, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Argentine rock. 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/20061103193408/http://www.elortiba.org/ayernomas.html to http://www.elortiba.org/ayernomas.html
 * Added tag to http://www.virtshops.com/cds/reviews/B00009Y2JA.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061011173543/http://www.nucleusprog.com.ar/ingles/progressiveargentina.htm to http://www.nucleusprog.com.ar/ingles/progressiveargentina.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061103193408/http://www.elortiba.org/ayernomas.html to http://www.elortiba.org/ayernomas.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070105204516/http://www24.brinkster.com/songsandpoems/chwz/chwzsoviw.htm to http://www24.brinkster.com/songsandpoems/chwz/chwzsoviw.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061027194309/http://www.fabulosos-cadillacs.com/bio.htm to http://www.fabulosos-cadillacs.com/bio.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060901112124/http://www.copesa.cl/sodastereo/ to http://www.copesa.cl/sodastereo/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:10, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Argentine rock. 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/20070216004007/http://www.museorock.com/pelo/ to http://www.museorock.com/pelo/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:52, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Argentine rock


text:
User talk:Angel12~enwiki

Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. See the welcome page to learn more. Thanks.

The onelittleangel site appears to be a collection of material from elsewhere on the web, and also pops up what appears to be an advertisement. It looks like you are trying to drive up your Google rating, or maybe your hits directly.-gadfium 09:36, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello Gadfium.

I am working on the onelittleangel project together with other people around the world. The goal onelittleangel is to create a place of dialogue between different religion and traditions through quotations from the main saints, poets, and philosophers.

Yes, you are correct that onelittleangel includes an add and biographies from different books or Websites but it also include some quotations, pictures and sometimes a bibliography which are very complementary with the Wikipedia biography. Much more then some other external links. For Bodhidharma for instance the existing link http://www.onmarkproductions.com/html/daruma.shtml talk less about Bodhidarma then http://www.onelittleangel.com/wisdom/quotes/bodhidharma.asp. Right ?

If you look at the others pages. Onelittleangel add more to the biography then many other existing links. For St francis for example: http://www.poetseers.org/spiritual_and_devotional_poets/christian/st__francis_of_asissi/poems/ or http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=50 Onelittleangel still add more (pictures, quotes or poems, and a bibliography)

For the advertisment. I understand completely and have made the neccessary changes. I have change my statistics provider so there is no more add.

I am really committed to make this Website working and I sincerely believe that it has his place in some of the Wikipedia biographies.

Onelittleangel includes thousands of pages and I am only trying to add a link where it make more sense for the Wikipedia content. Not everywhere. It might seems that this can be qualified as spamming but this is only due to the fact that onelittleangel have a lot of very interesting content so a lot of potential links. It already have a good google rank of 5. So it is already been accepted by the net and especially google.

What do you think ?

 * If someone else had added the link, the pop-up would probably have caused iot to be removed. You, however, have spammed the link to your own site across a number of Wikipedia articles, and that's not allowed. Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 11:43, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I understand that adding too much unrelated links is not allowed, so I will re-add it only where it make the most sense. For instance, where the following Website (http://www.poetseers.org/ ), which have very interesting quotations too, has been accepted as External links.

 * I doubt that they'll be allowed to stay. You seem to have started editing Wikipedia (and opened a User account) purely in order to add your links, not to join the Wikipedia community in trying to improve the encyclopædia.  Were you genuinely to become involved in editing, then at some point your links might be accepted, but as things stand (and especially given your earlier behaviour) I think that your cause is lost. Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 13:04, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello Mel,

I understand my behaviour might not have been in accord with the policy. I regret it and this is why I am trying to open this discussion because whatsoever I believe that the links make sense in most of the case.

Don't you think that quotations or poemes, pictures, and a bibliography are a good plus to the Wikipedia biographies ? Not to speak to the website that is a really good tool for philosophical or more specifically spiritual debate (http://www.onelittleangel.com/wisdom/quotes/philo.asp?mc=12, http://www.onelittleangel.com/wisdom/quotes/philo.asp?mc=47, ...) ?

Please have a look at some exemples, see the quotations and pictures and please tell me if this is worth or not ?

Bodhidharma: - pictures: http://www.onelittleangel.com/wisdom/quotes/bodhidharma.asp - quotations: http://www.onelittleangel.com/wisdom/quotes/saint.asp?mc=338

Saint John of the cross: - pictures: http://www.onelittleangel.com/wisdom/quotes/saint_john_of_the_cross.asp - quotations: http://www.onelittleangel.com/wisdom/quotes/saint.asp?mc=177 and many more ...

Misterhope
I've just permanently blocked your sock puppet User:Misterhope (talk • contribs) from editing. You're coming perilously close to a block yourself. We will not tolerate spamming articles with links to your Web-site, no matter how good and useful you think it is, and we will certainly not tolerate your creating extra accounts to do so. Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 20:51, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have tried hard to put valuable links to Wikipedia but have been blocked from various people. Obviously I was wrong so I stop right now. I admit I might have use the wrong way to do it and this is what we call the learning phase. If anyone think the links are valuable please add it because I won't try anymore. Also, I will come back to my old stactics providers, which is very good despite the adverstisement.

Gadfium, Mel, Wikibob, Goethean, Keep up your good work. Wikipedia is a fantastic project. I only regret I failed to add valuable link to it.

 * I don't think anyone else has made it clear what the problem is, so I'll try. There's no issue with whether the links are valuable or not. It is simply that you are the operator of the site to which you are linking. The consensus opinion is that if a website has content valuable to Wikipedia, that someone other than the site owner will eventually think so and add a link to it on Wikipedia. If the site owner adds the link instead, though, we can only assume that it is because they have a vested interest in having their site linked by Wikipedia. Thus, only links that are added by neutral third parties are allowed to survive. — Saxifrage | ☎ 17:15, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Angel12. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Angel12~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 21:57, 19 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 10:29, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Angel12~enwiki


text:
Beshtau

Beshtau (Бештау, from Turkic beş 'five' and tau 'mountain') is an isolated five-domed igneous mountain (volcano) in the northern vicinity of Pyatigorsk (after the Russian term Pyatigorye 'area of five mountains') in the Northern Caucasus. Its height is 1401 m. The slopes are forested with ash, oak, hornbeam, and beech deciduous forests, and the summit is treeless. Beshtau used to have uranium mines, which were closed in 1975.

title: Beshtau


text:
Talk:Sylvester's law of inertia

This isn't as clear as it might be. Nowhere is it said that A is a symmetric matrix. If A is symmetric one can get away with saying the eigenvalues of A are also its diagonal entries when thought of as a quadratic form. If not, then the quadratic form interpretation picks up only the symmetric part of A, throwing away the anti-symmetric part.

The simplest thing would be to clarify by making A symmetric at the outset.

Charles Matthews 09:37, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

much more general and without eigenvalues
Hello Sorry but i am always looking for more general definitions. On one hand this avoids confusion, on the other hand it becomes increasingly difficult to understand a simple case of something.

Anyway, the form of the law i use in my Symmetric bilinear form article, only uses ordered fields, and orthogonal basisses. Eigenvalues need not exist.

different theorem?
According to Horn and Johnson Thm 4.5.8, Sylvester's law of inertia says two Hermitian matrices A and B are unitarily similar iff they have the same inertia. If I'm not mistakened, what is here is trivial-- eigenvalues don't change under similarity transforms, so of course the inertia doesn't change. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Swiftset (talk • contribs) 22:21, 5 March 2007 (UTC).

 * I agree with this, and I'm going to change the statement of the theorem to one based on congruence transformations and emphasize the difference you pointed out. Akriasas 18:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Diagonalization for eigenvalues
Someone just added this explanation to the statement that "the law can be formulated in terms of the eigenvalues":
 * Let Q be a matrix that diagonalizes A, i.e., QAQT = D is diagonal. Then A can also be diagonalized by any matrix of the form WQ where W is any diagonal matrix at all, i.e., WQAQTWT = WDWT is diagonal. Since WDWT = DWWT, the signs in W can have no effect, since two negatives multiplied together produces a positive. The matrix Q consists of A's eigenvectors. When two or more of the eigenvalues along the diagonal have the same value, the associated eigenvectors can form combinations that are eigenvectors too. Other than that, the eigenvectors are unique for a given symmetric A except that each eigenvector can be rescaled and sign-flipped arbitrarily.

Apart from the tone being more appropriate for a textbook than for an encyclopedia (where results are usually stated without proof), I wonder whether this description is correct, since the diagonalization for eigenvalues usually has S-1 rather than ST on the right side. If the passage is OK, please forgive my ignorance; but perhapt it should be rephrased and provided with a reference. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 18:01, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The matrix in question is symmetric, and the eigendecompositon of a symmetric matrix is of the form QDQT, as stated at Eigendecomposition_of_a_matrix. I don't think the above statement is in need of a reference because, for anyone who knows what an eigendecomposition of a matrix is, it's an elementary, obvious statement. For anyone who doesn't know what eigenvalues are, it's unintelligible and no reference could redeem it. Symmetric matrices loom large in eigenvalue studies. I'm well able to forgive your ignorance about this but I also believe you shouldn't be spending your time editing this kind of material -- I believe you'd be better off spending your time learning it, or else editing other material where you're more knowledgeable. Seanwal111111 (talk) 18:00, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I forgot that the matrix was symmetric. I will try to restore the paragraph. All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 20:32, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Restored it, please check. By the way, the eigendecomposition of a matrix article was incorrect: it said orthogonal matrix, should be orthonormal matrix.  All the best, --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 20:58, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

The current section entitled "Statement in terms of eigenvalues" doesn't actually state the law -- added a concise statement along with a reference. Adam Marsh (talk) 01:37, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

Why is S^T interpreted as a change of basis as opposed to S^-1?
I am confused about the statement that S A S^T can be interpreted as a change of basis. Should it not be S A S^-1? This appears also in another comment below. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rejapoci (talk • contribs) 15:38, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

 * If a change of coordinate sends a vector x to xS then a bilinear form expressed xAx^T will change to xSA(xS)^T = x(SAS^T)x^T. The effect is the same as changing A to SAS^T.  Deltahedron (talk) 19:15, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Generalization to arbitrary fields
Is there any published work on the generalization to arbitrary fields (presumably with the exception of fields of characteristic 2)? This seems fairly straightforward, and seems like an appropriate generalization to include in this article. —Quondum 21:54, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

 * Nice idea! I think a good starting point could be this answer at MO: http://mathoverflow.net/questions/105870/over-which-fields-is-the-sylvester-law-of-inertia-valid Saung Tadashi (talk) 23:58, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

 * That seems to confirm it (for all fields), and I can see smatterings of this in various books, but I don't see anything that I can interpret directly. See, for example, The Collected Mathematical Papers of Leonard Eugene Dickson, Volume 6, p. 330. It seems to be true for all fields, with characteristic 2 only having the quirk that not all symmetric bilinear forms can be diagonalized, so I suppose a signature is difficult to define for those that cannot.  Perhaps we could put it in, and hope someone will reference it?  There are a few caveats to mention, such as with complex numbers, where every number is a square, so the signature and rank are the same (only the number of 0s and 1s count, not −1s).  Unfortunately, I do not have enough knowledge to include this all in the article.  —Quondum 02:38, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sylvester's law of inertia


text:
Theta Kappa Nu

Theta Kappa Nu (ΘΚΝ) fraternity was an American national collegiate fraternity founded in 1924 by delegates from eleven local fraternities. It merged with Lambda Chi Alpha in 1939.

History
Winslow S. Anderson, a faculty member of Rollins College and founder of Tau Lambda local fraternity, had an idea for a new national fraternity to expand to large universities and small colleges in 1921.

In 1924, he found three like-minded men, Otho Robert McAtee of Springfield, Missouri, Jerry Homer Krenmyre, vice president of Iowa Wesleyan College, and Donald Fisher Lybarger, an attorney and founder of Phi Sigma. These men were members of three different local fraternities.

Theta Kappa Nu fraternity was founded when delegates from eleven local fraternities from nine different states united to form the new fraternity. The organizing meeting took place in Springfield, Missouri on June 9, 1924. The organizations included:
 * Kappa Delta Psi at Iowa Wesleyan College
 * Kappa Phi at Oklahoma City University
 * Phi Alpha Sigma at Drury College
 * Phi Beta Omega at Baker University
 * Phi Kappa Nu at Howard College
 * Phi Sigma at Gettysburg College
 * Sigma Delta Chi at Simplson College
 * Tau Lambda at Rollins College, the University of Florida, and North Carolina State University
 * Tri Kappa at Hanover College

The representatives from the various organizations became the charter members of Theta Kappa Nu. The charter members were: • Winslow S. Anderson, Tau Lambda

• Earl N. Arbaugh, Phi Alpha Sigma

• Paul Barnett, Phi Kappa Nu

• Paul R. Dick, Phi Beta Omega

• Raymond E. Doyle, Phi Sigma

• G. Lemuel Fenn, Kappa Phi

• William W. Frye, Kappa Delta Psi

• Leroy B. Hurd, Kappa Phi

• Charles A. Karnak, Phi Sigma

• J. H. Krenmyre, Kappa Delta Psi

• W. Harry Lennard, Phi Beta Omega

• Donald F. Lybarger, Phi Sigma

• Otho R. McAttee, Phi Alpha Sigma

• George Neely, Phi Kappa Nu

• W. H. Rockey, Sigma Delta Chi

• Henry Seaman, Tau Lambda

• Aaron F. Shreve, Tau Lambda

• J. Raymond Smith, Sigma Delta Chi

• Arthur A. Whitlatch, Tri Kappa

• Arthur H. Wilson, Tri Kappa

Anderson was selected as the fraternity's Grand Archon (chairman), McAttee was the Grand Scribe (secretary), Lybarder was the Grand Treasurer, and Krenmyre was the Grand Oracle. Anderson, Krenmyre, Lybarger, and McAtee drafted its constitution, ritual, and business system. On October 11, 1924, where the local chapters officially changed their names with an installation ceremony, along with a "badging out ceremony" held where members received their Theta Kappa Nu badge. In the meantime, the first charter was granted to Missouri Beta at Westminster College on October 6, 1924.

Theta Kappa Nu had, over its first decade, become the fastest-growing fraternity until that time, chartering forty chapters with almost 2,500 initiates by the close of 1926. Most of Theta Kappa Nu's chapters were established at small, private colleges as local fraternities.

The fraternity placed great emphasis on academics, offering graduate scholarships throughout its history, even during dire financial crises. Its quarterly magazine was The Theta News. Its headquarters were in Cleveland, Ohio.

The Great Depression significantly impacted the small colleges where most Theta Kappa Nu chapters were located. Expansion nearly ceased and chapters began closing in the early 1930s. The Grand Council reduced membership fees in 1933 and 1935 with hopes of maintaining its membership, covering the reduction in income from its "permanent fund". Over seven years, the fraternity's permanent fund was reduced from $28,500 to $12,200. By the end of the decade, fraternity leaders realized that a merger with another fraternity was necessary to continue solvency.

Merger with Lambda Chi Alpha
Throughout its lifetime, leaders of Theta Kappa Nu had established numerous friendships with peers within Lambda Chi Alpha, whose expansion program had preferred chapters at larger institutions. Initial informal talks quickly led to a formal merger committee. In 1939, Lambda Chi Alpha merged with the Theta Kappa Nu in what was regarded as the largest fraternity merger to date. The ceremony was held in Birmingham, Alabama, at Howard College (now Samford) at the home of the oldest chapter among the original founding chapters of Theta Kappa Nu, Alabama Alpha chapter, where the documents were signed.

The union of Lambda Chi Alpha and Theta Kappa Nu resulted in 105 active chapters for the combined fraternity and over 27,000 initiates. Theta Kappa Nu's heritage entered that of the united fraternity with additions to the coat of arms, the white tudor rose, a new pledge pin (now the associate member pin) design, a new pledge ceremony (Now the associate member) which is a condensed version of Theta Kappa Nu's ritual, and the Latin open motto Vir Quisque Vir, or "Every man a man". It also brought an infusion of leadership to Lambda Chi Alpha that helped steer the united fraternity through the end of the Depression Era and World War II.

Symbols
The fraternity's colors were argent, sable, and crimson. Its flower was the white Tudor rose. Its motto was Vir Quisque Vir Est or "Every man is a man". Its flag featured three horizontal stripes–white on top, crimson in the center, and black on the bottom–with gold letters ΘΚΝ on top, diagonally from upper left to bottom right.

The Theta Kappa Nu badge consisted of three equilateral triangles that were joined at their top, underneath a fourth triangle. The triangles are filled with black enamel and have one of the Greek letters Θ, Κ, or Ν in gold on the outer triangles. The inner triangle features a Tudor rose and a mystical symbol. The badge can be jeweled with pearls and diamonds. The fraternity's pledge pin was a silver circle with four raised black enameled triangles, separated by crossed silver bars. The fraternity also had a recognition pin for alumni and active members; it was a small coat of arms in either silver or gold.

The coat of arms featured a shield with eleven chevrons in argent and sable, with a red inescutcheon in the center. Above, is a red lion rampant holding a white rose. Benneath the shield, is a scroll with the motto Vir Quisque Vir Est.  It was designed by Emily Helen Butterfield.

Alumni clubs
Theta Kappa Nu had alumni clubs in Birmingham, Alabama; Chicago, Illinois; Cleveland, Ohio; Detroit, Michigan; DeMoines, Iowa; Indianapolis, Indiana; Kansas City, Missouri; Los Angeles, California; New York City, New York; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; Portland, Oregon; Richmond, Virginia; St. Louis, Missouri; Shreveport, Louisiana; Springfield, Missouri; and, Washington, D.C.

Notable members

 * Ernest R. Breech (Missouri Alpha), business executive with Ford Motor Company and Trans World Airlines
 * Forrest C. Donnell, Governor of Missouri and United States Senator
 * Jimmy Doolittle (California Alpha) United States Air Force general and Medal of Honor recipient
 * Dabbs Greer, flm character actor
 * Amos W. Jackson, judge on the Indiana Supreme Court
 * Abe Mickal, football player
 * James Tilghman Lloyd, United States House of Representatives
 * Edwin Markham, poet
 * George S. Sexton, president of Centenary College of Louisiana
 * Joseph Truskowski, college athlete and head baseball coach at Iowa State and Wayne State
 * John H. Wood, president of Culver–Stockton College

title: Theta Kappa Nu


text:
User talk:Markyen

I saw your name change request. The service is suspended however; and since you have only a few contributions attached to your current username, I suggest you register User:Mark Yen right away and start using that name from now on. Later the edits of your current account can be attributed to your new one.

Welcome to Wikipedia, by the way! 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, you can always ask me on my Talk page. Kind regards, — mark ✎ 09:40, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style
 * If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Topical index.

title: User talk:Markyen