text:
Talim (Soulcalibur)

Talim (タリム) is a character in the Soulcalibur of fighting games. Created by Namco's Project Soul division, she first appeared in Soulcalibur II and in most subsequent titles for the series. The Filipino daughter of a shaman and trained to be a Priest of the Wind, after encountering a fragment of the cursed sword Soul Edge she travels the world to return it to its rightful place. In English, Talim has been voiced by Julie Parker and Kira Buckland, while in Japanese she is voiced by Yukari Tamura.

The character has received positive reception since her debut, warmly received as the first Filipino character in video games and a popular subject of cosplay amongst fans. Her character design has also been praised, described as "almost too cute" for the franchise and for the attention to detail in her clothing. However, this has also received some backlash due to her young age, particular for how sexualized many of her outfits are. University of Delaware professor Rachael Hutchinson meanwhile examined Talim's design through the scope of Japanese views towards other Asian cultures, and also how players reacted to a shorter character against much larger opponents in the context of the Soulcalibur series.

Conception and design
As a character introduced in Soulcalibur II, Talim's weapons, a pair of elbow blades, were decided upon before other aspects of the character were. Originally considered for the first Soulcalibur, the weapons were selected to be unique amongst the others characters' weapons in the title. Her design and concept were built to revolve around them, starting with gender, then physical measurements, and lastly background details. Once established her appearance and movement were fleshed out by the team's concept artist Aya Takemura and rendered as a 3D model by a design team that worked solely on the character. Talim was then animated by a motion designer using motion capture and working directly with the team. During this phase the team additionally worked with the Soulcalibur story creators, refining the character's own role in the plot as needed throughout development.

Talim's weapons were built around the concept of dual-weapon usage, with special emphasis that while bladed, the weapons themselves were not actual tonfa, intended more as ritual items used in ceremonial dances. During development it was considered to allow them to transform and be sentient, however the idea was abandoned. In artwork of an early character lineup, her weapons were significantly larger and extending the length of her whole arm. The weapons were shortened as development progressed, due to concerns that their length should cause her "stomach to be sliced open" when she used them and how they restricted her character movement. However, this iteration made it farther into the design process, as finalized concept sketches of her outfit shown in The Art of Soulcalibur II feature the longer blades.

Talim's character concept was designed around the idea of introducing a young female character that the developers felt the series lacked, though due to her design some of the development team confused her for a boy. Early character drafts also gave her a more "determined" personality, emphasized by her facial expressions. Her outfits were based on a "Priestess of the Wind" motif, and meant to represent attire worn by her village during rituals. For her appearance in Soulcaibur VI they focused on a refinement of her costume from Soulcalibur II, incorporating a large hat and ribbons into the design to better emphasize the wind theme. She stands at 144 cm (4 ft 8 in) tall, making her the second shortest playable character in the series, and has a bust size of 70 cm (27 in).

Appearances
Talim was introduced in Soulcalibur II, growing up in a South-East Asian village in the Philippine Visayan Islands. The only daughter of the local shaman, she was trained to be a Wind Priestess, which relied on two elbow blades as part of its ceremonial dance. When a stranger brought a shard of the cursed sword Soul Edge to her village, she sensed the danger from the fragment and left her village to return it where it belonged. Talim later appeared in subsequent entries in the Soulcalibur series with the exception of Soulcalibur V, each time venturing to find the source of Soul Edge, or in the case of Soulcalibur IV preventing fellow character Yun-Seong from falling under its influence. In English she was voiced by Julie Parker until the release of Soulcalibur IV where she was voiced by Kira Buckland, while in Japanese for all appearances she is voiced by Yukari Tamura.

Her movement and fighting style were designed around her culture and a bird-theme, emphasizing close horizontal strikes upon opponents as well as freedom of movement. Talim is very quick and evasive, with moves such as "Wind Sault" allowing her to close the distance between herself and the opponent quickly. She has additional moves that allow her to either stun the opponent temporarily or knock them down, with former allowing her to chain into subsequent attacks and apply consecutive stun. However this also makes her a more difficult character to use, and causes her gameplay to have to rely on tricks, gimmicks, and stuns to do significant damage.

Critical reception
Described by The Art of Game Characters as having "hints of manga in those big eyes", Talim has been positively received since her debut. In 2015 she was voted the most popular Soulcalibur character in the West in an official poll by Namco Bandai, and has been cited as a popular subject of cosplay in literature. GameSpy's Christian Nutt stated Talim's "unpredictable nature" made her interesting, though added "she's almost too cute to fit in" alongside the other characters. Tim Rogers in a review for Insert Credit called Talim "the cutest of the young girl characters [in Soulcalibur II] by far," and stated a preference for her symmetrical outfits. Hungarian magazine MultiPlay described her fighting style as one of the most unique introduced in fighting games in the last quarter century, and felt her "lightning-quick" attacks made her the most interesting character in Soulcalibur II. The book The Rough Guide to Videogames meanwhile praised the physical diversity she brought to the cast compared to more voluptuous characters in thee series, feeling it was one of aspects that made Soulcalibur II great.

She has also been cited as the first visible Filipino character in video games, and has been described in a study of the series' characters as "created for the Philippine market". The book Open World Empire: Race, Erotics, and the Global Rise of Video Games noted that her appearance and ability to control the wind gave her ethnic background "a campy cultural 'fragrance' that invites humorous parodies and irreverent performances as well as objectifying gazes," but due to the race's scarcity in video games, she also garnered pride. Game writer Pat Miller in an interview for Polygon stated regarding her cultural background he "was really stoked to see that...I like having those points of identification". Himself part Filipino, he added that her inclusion made it easier to bring new people into the fighting game community.

Talim's image has also been utilized in material revolving around her sex appeal as a female character, by publications such as Play and PSM. Gadget Review writer Kristie Bertucci stated that while she was the "girliest" character of the franchise, "that doesn’t mean she doesn’t have a sexy side to her", naming her one of the hottest female characters in gaming due to being "built quite nicely with curves in all the right places" and her attire. Matt Sainsbury of DigitalDownloaded.net in multiple articles praised her, calling her "the perfect fighting game character" due to her high speed and how she added to the series' fanservice. He particularly praised her as a "nice, normal-proportioned girl who just happens to wear a harem-style outfit", a clothing style he felt represented "a sensuality and exotic sexuality that is simultaneously more subtle and more typical" of other examples in gaming such as bikinis and schoolgirl uniforms.

However, some criticisms were raised against the character's sexualization. Brazilian Professor Georgia da Cruz Pereira stated that despite representing "a bit of differentiation compared to most of the characters in the game" due to a lack of breasts and hips coupled with her young age, "she is still inserted within a context of sexualization and standardization of the female body" in the series. The Village Voice described her as "mixing it up in see-through pants and a bra top", further calling her a "troubling" example of over-sexualization and costume fetish in the game. Maddy Myers in an article for Kotaku echoed these concerns, stating in Soulcalibur VI she "wears a tiny X-shaped tube top that criss-crosses over her nipples and a string bikini bottom that pokes out of low-slung shorts. Putting the series’ [...] youngest and most innocent characters in bikinis seems unnecessary."

Contrary to both viewpoints, University of Delaware professor Rachael Hutchinson noted elements of her design suggest innocence, namely the pink ribbons in her hair, and observed that Talim's costume was not as revealing as other female characters within the series. While discussing her design, she stated that as the series progressed Talim's black hair shifted to a more blue hue, and believes this was meant to signify her as the "Other" to Japanese viewers: Asian, but not Japanese. In another study, Hutchinson emphasized Talim's height against the series' much taller male characters, stating that being able to fight them with her "inverts stereotypical gender expectations and provides entertainment through deviation from the norm", due to the expectation male opponents should win due to their superior size.

title: Talim (Soulcalibur)


text:
File:Brian Keith Jones (mugshot).jpg

Fair use rationale for Brian Keith Jones

 * It is believed that the use of this image on the English-language Wikipedia to illustrate a section of the article on the person depicted falls under the "Non-profit educational" clause of the Fair Use doctrine currently upheld by United States law. (17 U.S.C. § 107)
 * It is unlikely that a freely-licensed image suitable for illustrating the section of the article describing the subject's arrest and incarceration will be found, owing to the nature of the section (unlikely that there are any freely-licensed images taken during this period). As such, the photograph can be reasonably described as "irreplaceable".
 * Owing to the limited web-resolution of the image, only a small portion of a copyrighted work is used.
 * For the same reasons, the portion of the copyrighted work used is of inherently lower quality than the original, reducing the risk of competitiveness and therefore the effects of this copy on the market for or value of versions held by the owner of the copyright.

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

title: File:Brian Keith Jones (mugshot).jpg


text:
Eastern Division, Fiji

The Eastern Division of Fiji (Hindi: फ़िजी का पूर्वी प्रभाग) is one of Fiji's four divisions. It consists of Kadavu Province, Lau Province, Lomaiviti Province and Rotuma.

The capital of the division is Levuka, on the Ovalau island. Other islands in the division include Kadavu, Gau, Koro, Nairai, Moala, Matuku, Vatu Vara, Naitaba, Mago, Cicia, Tuvuca, Lakeba, Vanua Vatu, Oneata, Vuaqava, Kabara, Moce, and Fulaga.

The division is the largest by area (including the sea), but has the smallest land area. The division has sea borders with Central, Northern and Western Divisions.

title: Eastern Division, Fiji


text: User talk:69.228.130.56

title: User talk:69.228.130.56


text:
Figure skating at the 1992 Winter Olympics

The figure skating events at the 1992 Winter Olympic Games were held at the Halle Olympique located next to the Théâtre des Cérémonies, two kilometres southwest of downtown Albertville.

The final placements were decided by factored placements. In the men's singles, ladies' singles and the pairs event, the short program (SP) was factored by 0.5, one-third (33.3%) of the total score, while the free skating (FS) was factored by 1.0, two-thirds (66.7%) of the total score. In ice dance, the two compulsory dances (CD) were factored by a total of 0.4 (0.2 each dance), which was 20% of the total score (10% each dance). The original dance (OD) was factored by 0.6 (30% of the total score), while the free dance (FD) was factored by 1.0 (50% of the total score). In the result of factored placements being tied, the free skating was the tie-breaker.

At the 1992 Winter Olympics, the short program was called the original program. The 1992 Winter Olympics was also the first time that the men's and ladies' events did not include a compulsory figures competition.

Participant NOCs
Twenty eight nations sent figure skaters to compete in the events at Albertville.

Men
13, 15 February 1992

Referee:
 * International Skating Union.svg Jürg Wilhelm

Assistant Referee:
 * International Skating Union.svg Tsaja Andrée

Judges:
 * 🇦🇺 Frank Parsons
 * 🇫🇮 Hely Abbondati
 * 🇷🇺 Tatiana Danilenko
 * 🇮🇹 Fabio Bianchetti
 * 🇨🇦 Jean Matthews
 * Felicitas Babušíková
 * 🇯🇵 Hideo Sugita
 * 🇺🇸 Hugh C. Graham Jr.
 * 🇫🇷 Josette Betsch
 * 🇬🇧 Wendy Utley (substitute)

Ladies
19, 21 February 1992

Referee:
 * International Skating Union.svg Benjamin T. Wright

Assistant Referee:
 * International Skating Union.svg Monique Georgelin

Judges:
 * Reinhard Mirmseker
 * 🇨🇦 Mary Pearson
 * 🇨🇳 Yang Jiasheng
 * 🇫🇷 Monique Petis
 * 🇯🇵 Mieko Fujimori
 * Ingelise Blangsted
 * Felicitas Babušíková
 * 🇬🇧 Vanessa Riley
 * 🇷🇺 Marina Sanaya
 * 🇺🇸 Maragaret Ann Wier (substitute)

Pairs
9, 11 February 1992

Referee:
 * International Skating Union.svg Walburga Grimm

Assistant Referee:
 * International Skating Union.svg Sally-Anne Stapleford

Judges:
 * 🇫🇷 Anne Hardy-Thomas
 * Felicitas Babušíková
 * 🇦🇺 Frank Parsons
 * 🇺🇸 Joan Gruber
 * 🇩🇪 Ulf Denzer
 * 🇨🇦 Dennis McFarlane
 * 🇮🇹 Miranda Marchi
 * 🇷🇺 Mikhail Drei
 * 🇬🇧 Wendy Utley
 * 🇯🇵 Hideo Sugita (substitute)

Ice dance
14, 16, 17 February 1992 During a practice session on 10 February, Jacqueline Petr's right skate hit her left calf, requiring 22 stitches.

Referee:
 * International Skating Union.svg Lawrence Demmy

Assistant Referee:
 * International Skating Union.svg Lysiane Lauret

Judges:
 * 🇷🇺 Elena Buriak
 * 🇬🇧 Brenda Long-Simpson
 * 🇫🇮 Marie Lundmark
 * 🇨🇦 William McLachlan
 * 🇭🇺 István Sugár
 * 🇫🇷 Armelle van Eybergen
 * 🇺🇸 Mary Louise Wright
 * Olga Záková
 * 🇮🇹 Olga Giardini
 * 🇩🇪 Ulf Denzer (substitute)


text:
Talk:Talim (Soulcalibur)

Pending changes
This article is one of a number selected for the early stage of the trial of the Pending Changes system on the English language Wikipedia. All the articles listed at Pending changes/Queue  are being considered for level 1 pending changes protection.

The following request appears on that page:

Comments on the suitability of theis page for "Pending changes" would be appreciated.

Please update the Queue page as appropriate.

Note that I am not involved in this project any much more than any other editor, just posting these notes since it is quite a big change, potentially

Regards, Rich Farmbrough, 00:16, 17 June 2010 (UTC).

"In the Village of the Wind Deity, Samar (Nayong Anito ng Hangin)"
It doesn't say Samar anywhere on her character profile. Blueknightex (talk) 08:11, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Remove "This article is about the video game character. For the typhoon, see Typhoon Talim (2005). For the island, see Talim Island."
None of these things was ever named "Talim (Soul series)". --94.246.150.68 (talk) 12:48, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Talim (Soul series). 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/20080430085431/http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/docs/20011228/sc2.htm to http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game/docs/20011228/sc2.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081029010716/http://www.insertcredit.com/reviews/scii/index2.html to http://www.insertcredit.com/reviews/scii/index2.html

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) 11:03, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Unlock this article
SNAAAAKE!! (talk) 09:02, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 13 December 2023
Please can someone exchange Category:Fictional melee weapons practitioners for Category:Fictional tonfajutsuka. Her melee weapons are tonfa. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 177.189.154.193 (talk) 18:25, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * The sources themselves as cited in the article state they aren't tonfa, just similar, so the category would likely not apply.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:53, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I understand. But she also uses a pair of weapons called "Tonfa". 177.189.154.193 (talk) 22:49, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Kung Fu Man! 177.189.154.193 (talk) 00:48, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. M.Bitton (talk) 01:46, 17 December 2023 (UTC)
 * @M.Bitton I went ahead and did it. He is correct that one of her weapons is named that directly, as shown in this player's guide for Soulcalibur II, despite the concept artist's claim that they aren't such.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:56, 17 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Talim (Soulcalibur)


text:
Talk:Kamil Sonad

Untitled
A very short stub, but not deletion material. Bill 11:15, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kamil Sonad


text:
Austrian Silesia

Austrian Silesia, officially the Duchy of Upper and Lower Silesia, was an autonomous region of the Kingdom of Bohemia and the Habsburg monarchy (from 1804 the Austrian Empire, and from 1867 the Cisleithanian portion of Austria-Hungary). It is largely coterminous with the present-day region of Czech Silesia (with a smaller part in Poland) and was, historically, part of the larger Silesia region.

Geography
Austrian Silesia consisted of two territories, separated by the Moravian land strip of Moravská Ostrava between the Ostravice and Oder rivers.

The area east of the Ostravice around Cieszyn reached from the heights of the Western Carpathians (Silesian Beskids) in the south, where it bordered with the Kingdom of Hungary, along the Olza and upper Vistula rivers to the border with Prussian Silesia in the north. In the east the Biała river at Bielsko separated it from the Lesser Polish lands of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, incorporated into the Austrian Kingdom of Galicia and Lodomeria upon the First Partition of Poland in 1772.

The territory west of the Oder river stretching from the town of Opava up to Bílá Voda was confined by the Jeseníky mountain range of the eastern Sudetes in the south, separating it from Moravia, and the Opava river in the north. In the west the Golden Mountains formed the border with the County of Kladsko.

History
The area originally formed the south-eastern part of the Medieval Duchy of Silesia. During the 14th century the Dukes of Silesia were vassals of the King of Bohemia. As part of the Lands of the Bohemian Crown, Silesia was inherited by the Habsburg Archduke Ferdinand I of Austria in 1526, after King Louis II of Bohemia had died at the Battle of Mohács. With the female succession of the Habsburg empress Maria Theresa to the throne in 1740, the Prussian king Frederick the Great laid claim to the Silesian province and, without waiting for any reply, on 16 December started the First Silesian War, thereby opening the larger War of the Austrian Succession. His campaign was concluded in 1742 with the Prussian victory at the Battle of Chotusitz leading to the treaties of Breslau and Berlin, in which Silesia was divided. Under the terms of the treaty, the Kingdom of Prussia received most of the territory including the Bohemian County of Kladsko, while only a small part of southeastern Silesia remained with the Habsburg monarchy, consisting of: forming the Duchy of Upper and Lower Silesia, which remained a Bohemian crown land with its capital in the city of Opava. In 1766 the title of a Duke of Teschen was granted to Prince Albert of Saxony, son-in-law of Maria Theresa, while the title of a Duke of Troppau and Jägerndorf remained with the House of Liechtenstein. The Nysa territory was held by the Bishops of Wrocław with their residence at Castle Jánský Vrch (Johannisberg).
 * the Upper Silesian duchy of Teschen (Cieszyn)
 * parts of the former Moravian Duchy of Opava with Duchy of Krnov south of the Opava River, comprising several Moravian enclaves.
 * the southern part of the Lower Silesian Duchy of Nysa around Jeseník

When in 1804 the Habsburg emperor Francis II established the Austrian Empire, his title would include the "Duke of Upper and Lower Silesia". Austrian Silesia was connected by rail with the Austrian capital Vienna, when the Emperor Ferdinand Northern Railway line was extended to Bohumín station in 1847. In the course of the Austro-Hungarian Compromise of 1867 the Duchy of Upper and Lower Silesia became a crown land of Cisleithanian Austria.

In November 1918 the Dual Monarchy was abolished. The major part of Austrian Silesia was ceded to the newly created state of Czechoslovakia by the 1919 Treaty of Saint-Germain-en-Laye, with the exception of Cieszyn Silesia (the former Duchy of Teschen), which after the Polish–Czechoslovak War was split in 1920 along the Olza river with its eastern part falling to the Autonomous Silesian Voivodeship of Poland. Smaller parts of the duchy also became a part of Poland, while the adjacent Hlučín Region of Prussian Silesia fell to Czechoslovakia.

Demographics
According to an Austrian census, Austrian Silesia in 1910 was home to 756,949 people, speaking the following languages:
 * 43% - German
 * 31% - Polish
 * 24% - Czech

Major towns
Towns with more than 5,000 people in 1880:

Administration
The Duchy of Upper and Lower Silesia was originally divided into the two districts/'circles' (Kreise, kraje) of Teschen (Teschner Kreis, Těšínský kraj, pop. 213,040 in 1847) and Troppau (Kreis Troppau/Troppauer Kreis, Opavský kraj, pop. 260,199) with its seat at Krnov. In eastern Teschen, the autonomous Duchy of Bielsko was established in 1754. From 1784 it was administered with Moravia (Moravia-Silesia (1782-1850)), with its Kreise subordinate to the Mährischschlesisches Landesgubernium in Brünn. Following the Revolutions of 1848, Austrian Silesia was separated administratively from Moravia, its Kreise and the Duchy of Bielsko were disbanded and it was re-organised into political districts (Bezirke or Bezirkshauptmannschaften). The first division consisted of seven districts – Troppau, Freiwaldau, Jägerndorf, Freudenthal, Teschen, Friedek and Bielitz – which were each constituted from several judicial districts (Gerichtsbezirke).

In Bach's reforms of 1854 it was reorganised into 22 districts or Amtsbezirk (Habsburg monarchy) (distinct from the political districts listed above, rather corresponding to the judicial districts (Gerichtsbezirke)) plus the statutory city of Troppau: • # Jauernig (Javorník)

• # Weidenau (Vidnava)

• # Freiwaldau (Frývaldov)

• # Zuckmantel (Cukmantl)

• # Hotzenplotz (Osoblaha)

• # Olbersdorf (Město Albrechtice)

• # Jägerndorf (Krnov)

• # Freudenthal (Bruntál)

• # Benisch (Horní Benešov)

• # Troppau (Opava)

• # Wigstadtl (Vítkov)

• # Odrau (Odry)

• # Wagstadt (Bílovec)

• # Königsberg (Klimkovice)

• # Oderberg (Bohumín)

• # Friedeck (Frýdek)

• # Freistadt (Fryštát)

• # Teschen (Cieszyn/Těšín)

• # Jablunkau (Jablunkov)

• # Schwarzwasser (Černá Voda)

• # Skotschau (Skoczów/Skočov)

• # Bielitz (Bielsko).

These districts were grouped into five Bezirksämter ('district offices'):
 * The Landesgericht in Troppau, covering the city and district of Troppau and the districts of Wigstadtl, Odrau, Wagstadt and Königsberg
 * Jauernig: Jauernig, Weidenau, Freiwaldau and Zuckmantel districts
 * Jägerndorf: Jägerndorf, Hotzeplotz, Olbersdorf, Benisch and Freudenthal districts
 * Teschen: Teschen, Oderberg, Friedek, Freistadt and Jablunkau districts
 * Bielitz: Bielitz, Schwarzwasser and Skotschau districts

Judicially the Landesgericht in Troppau and Kreisgericht in Teschen remained separate, each covering one of the two disconnected parts of the crown land.

In 1860 administrative responsibility for Silesia returned to the Moravian Statthalterei in Brünn/Brno; however, it remained a formally separate crown land and its administrative divisions remained unchanged.

Following the compromise of 1867 the political districts were re-established and continued in some form until Austria-Hungary's dissolution, with the following districts used at various times:
 * Bielitz (Bielsko)
 * Freistadt (Fryštát)
 * Freiwaldau (Frývaldov)
 * Freudenthal (Bruntál)
 * Friedek (Frýdek)
 * Jägerndorf (Krnov)
 * Teschen (Cieszyn/Těšín)
 * Troppau (Opava)
 * Wagstadt (Bílovec).

For example, in 1900, there were 8 Bezirkshauptmannschaften in Austrian Silesia (in comparison to above list without Frydek).

title: Austrian Silesia


text:
East Mani

East Mani (Ανατολική Μάνη - Anatolikí Máni) is a municipality in Laconia, Peloponnese, Greece. Its seat of administration is the town Gytheio (before 2011 the small town Kotronas). The municipality covers the southeastern part of the Mani region. It is a mountainous and rocky area. Its economy relies on fishing, olive oil and tourism.

History
The town of Kotronas was founded in around 1500 BC. It emerged to become a major port. Kotronas was named by Homer. Part of the Mycenaean navy that sent out to Troy was stationed there. When the Dorians took over Mani, Laconia and parts of Messenia, Kotronas' role as a major port was replaced by Gytheio. In the Roman period, Teuthrone, the ancient name of Kotronas, was a member of the Koinon of Free Laconians. Kotronas suffered greatly from pirate raids.

Municipality
The municipality East Mani was formed at the 2011 local government reform by the merger of the following 4 former municipalities, that became municipal units:
 * East Mani
 * Gytheio
 * Oitylo
 * Sminos

The municipality has an area of 619.277 km2, the municipal unit 108.879 km2.

Population
The population development of the municipal unit and the larger municipality East Mani are listed below.

title: East Mani


text:
AC/DC Live

AC/DC Live is the second live album by Australian hard rock band AC/DC, released in October 1992. Two versions were released, one containing a single CD, with the second version being a double album on LP and CD known as AC/DC Live: 2 CD Collector's Edition. A feature-length live video, AC/DC: Live at Donington, was released concurrently. The double album AC/DC Live: 2 CD Collector's Edition was released a month after the single-disc version, in a slipcased two-disc "book" (similar in shape to old CD longboxes) and containing an AC/DC dollar note known as "Angus Bucks". Both editions of the album were re-released in 2003 as part of the AC/DC Remasters series.

Reception
Barry Weber of AllMusic writes: "All too often, a live album is a cheaply made, rushed recording that only serves as a testament to a band's decline. AC/DC Live, however, shows what makes this band different from their peers - here they are still entirely capable of pulling off a great live show. This ranks among the best live metal albums of the '90s." Classic Rock wrote that "Live is a triumphant refutation to anyone who still claims 'DC died with Bon. Jonno [Brian Johnson] is in fine voice and good humour throughout, and the live setting gives Angus space to stretch out a bit."

2 CD "Collector's Edition"

 * The Japanese version includes the bonus track "Hell Ain't a Bad Place to Be" (Donington Park, Leicestershire, England; 17 August 1991) which was the b-side of the "Highway To Hell" (live) single. This track was later included on the deluxe edition of Backtracks in 2009.
 * Even though "Sin City" appears to be performed at the Point Theatre in Dublin on 26 April 1991, as Brian Johnson says in the intro on the album, "We've got a song for you, Dublin", at the real Dublin show he actually said, "OK Dublin, we've got a song especially for you" (a bootleg recording of the show exists). The intro on the album is taken from the performance at King's Hall in Belfast on 27 April 1991 - Johnson mentioning Dublin is a genuine mistake. The performance itself was recorded at the NEC in Birmingham on 23 April 1991.
 * The sound of the audience and guitar feedback at the very start of "Shoot to Thrill" is taken from the Donington performance where the previous track, "Thunderstruck", was recorded. The performance itself was recorded at the NEC in Birmingham on 23 April 1991.

Vinyl 2 LP "Collector's Edition"

 * "Moneytalks" and "Are You Ready" were excluded from the vinyl set.

Personnel

 * Brian Johnson – lead vocals
 * Angus Young – lead guitar, backing vocals on "T.N.T." and "Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap"
 * Malcolm Young – rhythm guitar, backing vocals
 * Cliff Williams – bass, backing vocals
 * Chris Slade – drums, percussion

title: AC/DC Live


text:
Packet trade

Generally, packet trade is any regularly scheduled cargo, passenger and mail trade conducted by boat or ship. The boats or ships are called "packet boats or packet ships" as their original function was to carry mail.

A "packet ship" was originally a vessel employed to carry post office mail packets to and from British embassies, colonies and outposts. In sea transport, a packet service is a regular, scheduled service, carrying freight and passengers. The ships used for this service are called packet ships or packet boats. The seamen are called packetmen, and the business is called packet trade.

"Packet" can mean a small parcel but, originally meant a parcel of important correspondence or valuable items, for urgent delivery. The French-language term "paquebot” derives from the English term "packet boat," but means a large ocean liner.

This sense became extended to mean any regularly scheduled ship, carrying passengers, as in packet trade. The word "packet" is frequently modified by the destination, e.g. Sydney packet, or by motive force, e.g. "steam packet".

History
Many states, civilisations and organisations set up mail systems for high value goods, especially confidential correspondence and bullion. In times of war, regular shipments ran the gauntlet of warships and privateers, and even in peacetime, pirates could be a threat on some routes. In 1829, the pirate Mansel Alcantra captured the packet Topaz and killed her crew after looting her.

In Britain, the Post Office Packet Service used small, fast, lightly armed ships to carry state papers to overseas destinations on a regular schedule. This service operated from Tudor times until 1823, when the Admiralty assumed the responsibility for running the service. During the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars the packet ships were targets for privateers and warships seeking prize money. Although some were captured, others managed to fight back. In the 1850s the Post Office moved to using contract carriers.

Other European states with overseas colonies also developed packet mail systems. Eventually, however, commercial steam liners began to work regular international schedules and received contracts from governments to carry mail as well as passengers and high-value cargo. Their services retained the name "Packet".

Companies
Packet shipping companies included:
 * Baltimore Steam Packet Company
 * Black Ball Line (trans-Atlantic packet)
 * City of Dublin Steam Packet Company
 * Cunard Line
 * Isle of Man Steam Packet Company
 * Swallowtail Line (trans-Atlantic packet)
 * Woolwich Steam Packet Company
 * Robert Kermits Red Star Line

Black Ball line
In 1818, ships of the Black Ball line began regularly scheduled trips between Britain and the United States. These "packet ships" (named for their delivery of mail "packets") were infamous for keeping to their disciplined schedules. This often involved harsh treatment of seamen and earned the ships the nickname "bloodboat".

The original Black Ball Line was founded by a group of New York Quakers, but later a rival service founded by James Baines of Liverpool also styled itself the Black Ball Line, despite the protests of the original company of that name.

United States
In the United States, "packet trade" is often used to refer to the Atlantic (or Western) Ocean packets which traded with Europe and Africa (notably Cape Verde). Packet boats, smaller vessels designed for domestic use, also were extensively used in the 19th century for internal mail and scheduled service using rivers and canals, such as along the Erie Canal, which cut travel time across New York state in half; the Pennsylvania Canal, the James River and Kanawha Canal, and navigable rivers.

During the 18th century ships carrying cargo, passengers and mail between Europe and America would sail only when they were full. Starting in the early 19th century, as trade with America became more common, schedule regularity became a priority.

Australia
The first seagoing ship built in Van Diemens Land (in 1812) was named the Henrietta Packet by virtue of the fact that she offered a regular passenger service between Hobart, Tasmania and Sydney, New South Wales. From the 1830s the term "steam packet" was commonly applied to early steam ship services that, at least in theory, offered a regular and reliable service, and is perpetuated today by many waterfront establishments around Australia bearing such names as the "Steam Packet Inn" or "Steam Packet Hotel".

Both fast sailing ships and early steam ships holding mail contracts between Great Britain and Australia were also often referred to as packets. These included several ships of James Baines' Black Ball Line and the Orient Line.

Netherlands
In the late 15th to mid 16th century the Dutch system of the beurtvaart developed, a related system for mostly inland navigation. Ships of the beurtvaart carried passengers, livestock and freight along fixed routes at fixed prices with scheduled departures. Organised by the cities, it grew to an extensive and reliable network over the following century. Some of the cities arranged for international (seagoing) connections as well.

In the second half of the 19th century authorities withdrew from intervening and a lot of steamship companies sprang up, offering much the same services. Some carried freight and livestock only, some of them were mainly for passenger transport, becoming more like public transport. They would call their service beurtvaart or occasionally use the word 'packet' as did Alkmaar Packet.

Cape Verde
Because of the influence of whaling and several local droughts, there was substantial migration from Cape Verde to America, most notably to New Bedford, Massachusetts. This migration built strong ties between the two locations. A strong packet trade between New England and Cape Verde developed during the early-to-mid-19th century.

Modern day
In the 21st century, ePacket delivery became available through the US Postal Service as a deal with China Post, Hongkong Post, and the Korean postal service in order to support internet commerce between East Asia and the United States. Vendors in those countries can sell goods directly to American customers while enjoying delivery rates that are often less even than domestic US vendors would pay to deliver the same parcel. These low rates and the current lack of protective tariffs on imported goods from foreign countries make the service controversial because it apparently gives foreign vendors, especially in mainland China and Hong Kong, a competitive advantage in the still-growing online market. The USPS has complained of inability to effectively negotiate prices with the Chinese postal services, and was losing millions of dollars on the service each year.

title: Packet trade


text:
Pe̍h-ōe-jī

 (, English approximation: ; abbr. POJ; lit. 'vernacular writing'), sometimes known as Church Romanization, is an orthography used to write variants of Hokkien Southern Min, particularly Taiwanese and Amoy Hokkien, and it is widely employed as one of the writing systems for Southern Min. During its peak, it had hundreds of thousands of readers.

Developed by Western missionaries working among the Chinese diaspora in Southeast Asia in the 19th century and refined by missionaries working in Xiamen and Tainan, it uses a modified Latin alphabet and some diacritics to represent the spoken language. After initial success in Fujian, POJ became most widespread in Taiwan and, in the mid-20th century, there were over 100,000 people literate in POJ. A large amount of printed material, religious and secular, has been produced in the script, including Taiwan's first newspaper, the Taiwan Church News.

During Japanese rule (1895–1945), the use of was suppressed and Taiwanese kana encouraged; it faced further suppression during the Kuomintang martial law period (1947–1987). In Fujian, use declined after the establishment of the People's Republic of China (1949) and by the early 21st century the system was not in general use there. However, Taiwanese Christians, non-native learners of Southern Min, and native-speaker enthusiasts in Taiwan are among those that continue to use. Full computer support was achieved in 2004 with the release of Unicode 4.1.0, and POJ is now implemented in many fonts, input methods, and is used in extensive online dictionaries.

Versions of have been devised for other Southern Chinese varieties, including Hakka and Teochew Southern Min. Other related scripts include for Gan,  for Hakka,  for Hainanese,  for Fuzhou,  for Teochew,  for Northern Min, and  for Pu-Xian Min.

In 2006, the Taiwanese Romanization System, a government-sponsored successor based on , was released. Despite this, native language education, and writing systems for Taiwanese, have remained a fiercely debated topic in Taiwan.

POJ laid the foundation for the creation of new literature in Taiwan. Before the 1920s, many people had already written literary works in POJ, contributing significantly to the preservation of Southern Min vocabulary since the late 19th century. On October 14, 2006, the Ministry of Education in Taiwan announced the Taiwanese Romanization System or based on POJ as the standard spelling system for Southern Min.

Name
The name  means "vernacular writing", written characters representing everyday spoken language. The name vernacular writing could be applied to many kinds of writing, romanized and character-based, but the term is commonly restricted to the Southern Min romanization system developed by Presbyterian missionaries in the 19th century.

The missionaries who invented and refined the system used, instead of the name, various other terms, such as "Romanized Amoy Vernacular" and "Romanized Amoy Colloquial." The origins of the system and its extensive use in the Christian community have led to it being known by some modern writers as "Church Romanization" and is often abbreviated in POJ itself to. There is some debate on whether "" or "Church Romanization" is the more appropriate name.

Objections to "" are that it can refer to more than one system and that both literary and colloquial register Southern Min appear in the system and so describing it as "vernacular" writing might be inaccurate. Objections to "Church Romanization" are that some non-Christians and some secular writing use it. POJ today is largely disassociated from its former religious purpose. The term "romanization" is also disliked by some, who see it as belittling the status of by identifying it as a supplementary phonetic system instead of a standalone orthography.

History
The history of has been heavily influenced by official attitudes towards the Southern Min vernaculars and the Christian organizations that propagated it. Early documents point to the purpose of the creation of POJ as being pedagogical in nature, closely allied to educating Christian converts.

Early development
The first people to use a romanized script to write Southern Min were Spanish missionaries in Manila in the 16th century. However, it was used mainly as a teaching aid for Spanish learners of Southern Min, and seems not to have had any influence on the development of. In the early 19th century, China was closed to Christian missionaries, who instead proselytized to overseas Chinese communities in South East Asia. The earliest origins of the system are found in a small vocabulary first printed in 1820 by Walter Henry Medhurst, who went on to publish the Dictionary of the Dialect of the Chinese Language, According to the Reading and Colloquial Idioms in 1832.

This dictionary represents the first major reference work in POJ, although the romanization within was quite different from the modern system, and has been dubbed Early Church Romanization by one scholar of the subject. Medhurst, who was stationed in Malacca, was influenced by Robert Morrison's romanization of Mandarin Chinese, but had to innovate in several areas to reflect major differences between Mandarin and Southern Min. Several important developments occurred in Medhurst's work, especially the application of consistent tone markings (influenced by contemporary linguistic studies of Sanskrit, which was becoming of more mainstream interest to Western scholars). Medhurst was convinced that accurate representation and reproduction of the tonal structure of Southern Min was vital to comprehension: "Respecting these tones of the Chinese language, some difference of opinion has been obtained, and while some have considered them of first importance, others have paid them little or no intention. The author inclines decidedly to the former opinion; having found, from uniform experience, that without strict attention to tones, it is impossible for a person to make himself understood in." The system expounded by Medhurst influenced later dictionary compilers with regard to tonal notation and initials, but both his complicated vowel system and his emphasis on the literary register of Southern Min were dropped by later writers. Following on from Medhurst's work, Samuel Wells Williams became the chief proponent of major changes in the orthography devised by Morrison and adapted by Medhurst. Through personal communication and letters and articles printed in The Chinese Repository a consensus was arrived at for the new version of POJ, although Williams' suggestions were largely not followed.

The first major work to represent this new orthography was Elihu Doty's Anglo-Chinese Manual with Romanized Colloquial in the Amoy Dialect, published in 1853. The manual can therefore be regarded as the first presentation of a pre-modern POJ, a significant step onwards from Medhurst's orthography and different from today's system in only a few details. From this point on various authors adjusted some of the consonants and vowels, but the system of tone marks from Doty's Manual survives intact in modern POJ. John Van Nest Talmage has traditionally been regarded as the founder of POJ among the community which uses the orthography, although it now seems that he was an early promoter of the system, rather than its inventor.

In 1842 the Treaty of Nanking was concluded, which included among its provisions the creation of treaty ports in which Christian missionaries would be free to preach. Xiamen (then known as Amoy) was one of these treaty ports, and British, Canadian and American missionaries moved in to start preaching to the local inhabitants. These missionaries, housed in the cantonment of Gulangyu, created reference works and religious tracts, including a bible translation. Naturally, they based the pronunciation of their romanization on the speech of Xiamen, which became the de facto standard when they eventually moved into other areas of the Hokkien Sprachraum, most notably Taiwan. The 1858 Treaty of Tianjin officially opened Taiwan to western missionaries, and missionary societies were quick to send men to work in the field, usually after a sojourn in Xiamen to acquire the rudiments of the language.

Maturity
Quanzhou and Zhangzhou are two major varieties of Southern Min, and in Xiamen they combined to form something "not Quan, not Zhang" – i.e. not one or the other, but rather a fusion, which became known as Amoy Dialect or Amoy Chinese. In Taiwan, with its mixture of migrants from both Quanzhou and Zhangzhou, the linguistic situation was similar; although the resulting blend in the southern city of Tainan differed from the Xiamen blend, it was close enough that the missionaries could ignore the differences and import their system wholesale.

The fact that religious tracts, dictionaries, and teaching guides already existed in the Xiamen tongue meant that the missionaries in Taiwan could begin proselytizing immediately, without the intervening time needed to write those materials.

Missionary opinion was divided on whether POJ was desirable as an end in itself as a full-fledged orthography, or as a means to literacy in Chinese characters. William Campbell described POJ as a step on the road to reading and writing the characters, claiming that to promote it as an independent writing system would inflame nationalist passions in China, where characters were considered a sacred part of Chinese culture. Taking the other side, Thomas Barclay believed that literacy in POJ should be a goal rather than a waypoint: "Soon after my arrival in Formosa I became firmly convinced of three things, and more than fifty years experience has strengthened my conviction. The first was that if you are to have a healthy, living Church it is necessary that all the members, men and women, read the Scriptures for themselves; second, that this end can never be attained by the use of the Chinese character; third, that it can be attained by the use of the alphabetic script, this Romanised Vernacular."

A great boon to the promotion of POJ in Taiwan came in 1880 when James Laidlaw Maxwell, a medical missionary based in Tainan, started promoting POJ for writing the Bible, hymns, newspapers, and magazines. He donated a small printing press to the local church, which Thomas Barclay learned how to operate in 1881 before founding the Presbyterian Church Press in 1884. Subsequently, the Taiwan Prefectural City Church News, which first appeared in 1885 and was produced by Barclay's Presbyterian Church of Taiwan Press, became the first printed newspaper in Taiwan, marking the establishment of POJ in Taiwan, giving rise to numerous literary works written in POJ.

As other authors made their own alterations to the conventions laid down by Medhurst and Doty, evolved and eventually settled into its current form. Ernest Tipson's 1934 pocket dictionary was the first reference work to reflect this modern spelling. Between Medhurst's dictionary of 1832 and the standardization of POJ in Tipson's time, there were a number of works published, which can be used to chart the change over time of : Competition for POJ was introduced during the Japanese era in Taiwan (1895–1945) in the form of Taiwanese kana, a system designed as a teaching aid and pronunciation guide, rather than an independent orthography like POJ.

During the Japanese rule period, the Japanese government began suppressing POJ, banning classes, and forcing the cessation of publications like the Taiwan Church News. From the 1930s onwards, with the increasing militarization of Japan and the movement encouraging Taiwanese people to "Japanize", there were a raft of measures taken against native languages, including Taiwanese. While these moves resulted in a suppression of POJ, they were "a logical consequence of increasing the amount of education in Japanese, rather than an explicit attempt to ban a particular Taiwanese orthography in favor of Taiwanese kana".

The Second Sino-Japanese War beginning in 1937 brought stricter measures into force, and along with the outlawing of romanized Taiwanese, various publications were prohibited and Confucian-style  – private schools which taught Classical Chinese with literary Southern Min pronunciation – were closed down in 1939. The Japanese authorities came to perceive POJ as an obstacle to Japanization and also suspected that POJ was being used to hide "concealed codes and secret revolutionary messages". In the climate of the ongoing war the government banned the Taiwan Church News in 1942 as it was written in POJ.

After World War II
Initially the Kuomintang government in Taiwan had a liberal attitude towards "local dialects" (i.e. non-Mandarin varieties of Chinese). The National Languages Committee produced booklets outlining versions of Zhuyin fuhao for writing the Taiwanese tongue, these being intended for newly arrived government officials from outside Taiwan as well as local Taiwanese. The first government action against native languages came in 1953, when the use of Taiwanese or Japanese for instruction was forbidden. The next move to suppress the movement came in 1955, when the use of POJ for proselytizing was outlawed. At that point in time there were 115,000 people literate in POJ in Taiwan, Fujian, and southeast Asia.

Two years later, missionaries were banned from using romanized bibles, and the use of "native languages" (i.e. Taiwanese Hokkien, Hakka, and the non-Sinitic Formosan languages) in church work became illegal. The ban on POJ bibles was overturned in 1959, but churches were "encouraged" to use character bibles instead. Government activities against POJ intensified in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when several publications were banned or seized in an effort to prevent the spread of the romanization. In 1964, use of Taiwanese in schools or official settings was forbidden, and transgression in schools was punished with beatings, fines and humiliation. The Taiwan Church News (printed in POJ) was banned in 1969, and only allowed to return a year later when the publishers agreed to print it in Chinese characters. In the 1970s, the Nationalist government in Taiwan completely prohibited the use of POJ, causing it to decline.

In 1974, the Government Information Office banned A Dictionary of Southern Min, with a government official saying: "We have no objection to the dictionary being used by foreigners. They could use it in mimeographed form. But we don't want it published as a book and sold publicly because of the Romanization it contains. Chinese should not be learning Chinese through Romanization." Also in the 1970s, a POJ New Testament translation known as the "Red Cover Bible" was confiscated and banned by the Nationalist regime. Official moves against native languages continued into the 1980s, the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of the Interior decided in 1984 to forbid missionaries to use "local dialects" and romanizations in their work.

It was not until the late 1980s, with the lifting of martial law, that POJ slowly regained momentum under the influence of the native language movement. With the ending of martial law in 1987, the restrictions on "local languages" were quietly lifted, resulting in growing interest in Taiwanese writing during the 1990s. For the first time since the 1950s, Taiwanese language and literature was discussed and debated openly in newspapers and journals. There was also support from the then opposition party, the Democratic Progressive Party, for writing in the language. From a total of 26 documented orthographies for Taiwanese in 1987 (including defunct systems), there were a further 38 invented from 1987 to 1999, including 30 different romanizations, six adaptations of bopomofo and two hangul-like systems. Some commentators believe that the Kuomintang, while steering clear of outright banning of the native language movements after the end of martial law, took a "divide and conquer" approach by promoting Taiwanese Language Phonetic Alphabet (TLPA), an alternative to POJ, which was at the time the choice of the majority within the nativization movement.

Native language education has remained a fiercely debated topic in Taiwan into the 21st century and is the subject of much political wrangling.

Current system
The current system of has been stable since the 1930s, with a few minor exceptions (detailed below). There is a fair degree of similarity with the Vietnamese alphabet, including the $\langleb/p/ph\rangle$ distinction and the use of $\langleơ\rangle$ in Vietnamese compared with $\langleo͘\rangle$ in POJ. POJ uses the following letters and combinations: Chinese phonology traditionally divides syllables in Chinese into three parts; firstly the initial, a consonant or consonant blend which appears at the beginning of the syllable, secondly the final, consisting of a medial vowel (optional), a nucleus vowel, and an optional ending; and finally the tone, which is applied to the whole syllable. In terms of the non-tonal (i.e. phonemic) features, the nucleus vowel is the only required part of a licit syllable in Chinese varieties. Unlike Mandarin but like other southern varieties of Chinese, Taiwanese has final stop consonants with no audible release, a feature that has been preserved from Middle Chinese. There is some debate as to whether these stops are a tonal feature or a phonemic one, with some authorities distinguishing between $\langle-h\rangle$ as a tonal feature, and $\langle-p\rangle$, $\langle-t\rangle$, and $\langle-k\rangle$ as phonemic features. Southern Min dialects also have an optional nasal property, which is written with a superscript $\langleⁿ\rangle$ and usually identified as being part of the vowel. Vowel nasalisation also occurs in words that have nasal initials (⟨m-⟩, ⟨n-⟩, ⟨ng-⟩), however in this case superscript $\langleⁿ\rangle$ is not written, e.g.. The letter appears at the end of a word except in some interjections, such as , however more conservative users of Pe̍h-ōe-jī write such words as.

A valid syllable in Hokkien takes the form, where items in parentheses indicate optional components.

The initials are: Vowels: Coda endings:

POJ has a limited amount of legitimate syllables, although sources disagree on some particular instances of these syllables. The following table contains all the licit spellings of POJ syllables, based on a number of sources:

Tone markings
In standard Amoy or Taiwanese Hokkien there are seven distinct tones, which by convention are numbered 1–8, with number 6 omitted (tone 6 used to be a distinct tone, but has long since merged with tone 7 or 2 depending on lexical register). Tones 1 and 4 are both represented without a diacritic, and can be distinguished from each other by the syllable ending, which is a vowel, $\langle-n\rangle$, $\langle-m\rangle$, or $\langle-ng\rangle$ for tone 1, and $\langle-h\rangle$, $\langle-k\rangle$, $\langle-p\rangle$, and $\langle-t\rangle$ for tone 4.

Southern Min dialects undergo considerable tone sandhi, i.e. changes to the tone depending on the position of the syllable in any given sentence or utterance. However, like pinyin for Mandarin Chinese, POJ always marks the citation tone (i.e. the original, pre-sandhi tone) rather than the tone which is actually spoken. This means that when reading aloud the reader must adjust the tone markings on the page to account for sandhi. Some textbooks for learners of Southern Min mark both the citation tone and the sandhi tone to assist the learner.

There is some debate as to the correct placement of tone marks in the case of diphthongs and triphthongs, particularly those which include $\langleoa\rangle$ and $\langleoe\rangle$. Most modern writers follow six rules:

 * 1) If the syllable has one vowel, that vowel should be tone-marked; viz. $\langletī\rangle$, $\langleláng\rangle$, $\langlechhu̍t\rangle$
 * 2) If a diphthong contains $\langlei\rangle$ or $\langleu\rangle$, the tone mark goes above the other vowel; viz. $\langleia̍h\rangle$, $\langlekiò\rangle$, $\langletáu\rangle$
 * 3) If a diphthong includes both $\langlei\rangle$ and $\langleu\rangle$, mark the $\langleu\rangle$; viz. $\langleiû\rangle$, $\langleùi\rangle$
 * 4) If the final is made up of three or more letters, mark the second vowel (except when rules 2 and 3 apply); viz. $\langlegoán\rangle$, $\langleoāi\rangle$, $\langlekhiáu\rangle$
 * 5) If $\langleo\rangle$ occurs with $\langlea\rangle$ or $\langlee\rangle$, mark the $\langleo\rangle$ (except when rule 4 applies); viz. $\langleòa\rangle$, $\langlethóe\rangle$
 * 6) If the syllable has no vowel, mark the nasal consonant; viz. $\langlem̄\rangle$, $\langleǹg\rangle$, $\langlemn̂g\rangle$

Hyphens
A single hyphen is used to indicate a compound. What constitutes a compound is controversial, with some authors equating it to a "word" in English, and others not willing to limit it to the English concept of a word. Examples from POJ include $\langlesì-cha̍p\rangle$ "forty", $\langlebé-hì-thôan\rangle$ "circus", and $\langlehôe-ho̍k\rangle$ "recover (from illness)". The non-final syllables of a compound typically undergo tone sandhi, but exact rules have not been clearly identified by linguists.

A double hyphen $\langle--\rangle$ is used when POJ is deployed as an orthography (rather than as a transcription system) to indicate that the following syllable should be pronounced in the neutral tone. It also marks to the reader that the preceding syllable does not undergo tone sandhi, as it would were the following syllable non-neutral. Morphemes following a double hyphen are often (but not always) grammatical function words. Some authors use an interpunct $\langle·\rangle$ in place of the second hyphen.

Regional differences
In addition to the standard syllables detailed above, there are several regional variations of Hokkien which can be represented with non-standard or semi-standard spellings. In the Zhangzhou-type varieties, spoken in Zhangzhou, parts of Taiwan (particularly the northeastern coast around Yilan City), and parts of Malaysia (particularly in Penang), there is a final $\langle-uiⁿ\rangle$, for example in "egg" $\langlenūi\rangle$ and "cooked rice" $\langlepūiⁿ\rangle$, which has merged with $\langle-ng\rangle$ in mainstream Taiwanese. Zhangzhou-type varieties may also have the vowel /ɛ/, written as $\langleɛ\rangle$ or $\langlee͘ \rangle$ (with a dot above right, by analogy with $\langleo͘ \rangle$), which has merged with $\langlee\rangle$ in Taiwanese.

Texts
Due to POJ's origins in the Christian church, much of the material in the script is religious in nature, including several Bible translations, books of hymns, and guides to morality. The Tainan Church Press, established in 1884, has been printing POJ materials ever since, with periods of quiet when POJ was suppressed in the early 1940s and from around 1955 to 1987. In the period to 1955, over 2.3 million volumes of POJ books were printed, and one study in 2002 catalogued 840 different POJ texts in existence. Besides a Southern Min version of Wikipedia in the orthography, there are teaching materials, religious texts, and books about linguistics, medicine and geography.
 * (1873 translation of the New Testament)
 * , by George Gushue-Taylor, 1917
 * Chinese–English dictionary of the vernacular or spoken language of Amoy, by Carstairs Douglas, 1873
 * , translation of King Lear by Tē Hūi-hun

Computing
POJ was initially not well supported by word-processing applications due to the special diacritics needed to write it. Support has now improved and there are now sufficient resources to both enter and display POJ correctly. Several input methods exist to enter Unicode-compliant POJ, including OpenVanilla (macOS and Microsoft Windows), the cross-platform Tai-lo Input Method released by the Taiwanese Ministry of Education, and the Firefox add-on Transliterator, which allows in-browser POJ input. When POJ was first used in word-processing applications it was not fully supported by the Unicode standard, thus necessitating work-arounds. One employed was encoding the necessary characters in the "Private Use" section of Unicode, but this required both the writer and the reader to have the correct custom font installed. Another solution was to replace troublesome characters with near equivalents, for example substituting $\langleä\rangle$ for $\langleā\rangle$ or using a standard $\langleo\rangle$ followed by an interpunct to represent $\langleo͘\rangle$. With the introduction into Unicode 4.1.0 of the combining character in 2004, all the necessary characters were present to write regular POJ without the need for workarounds. However, even after the addition of these characters, there are still relatively few fonts which are able to properly render the script, including the combining characters.

Unicode codepoints
The following are tone characters and their respective Unicode codepoints used in POJ. The tones used by POJ should use Combining Diacritical Marks instead of Spacing Modifier Letters used by bopomofo. As POJ is not encoded in Big5, the prevalent encoding used in Traditional Chinese, some POJ letters are not directly encoded in Unicode, instead should be typed using combining diacritical marks officially.

Superscript n is also required for POJ to indicate nasalisation:

Characters not directly encoded in Unicode (especially O͘ series which has 3 different permutations) requires premade glyphs in fonts in order for applications to correctly display the characters.

Font support
Fonts that currently support POJ includes:
 * Charis SIL
 * DejaVu
 * Doulos SIL
 * Linux Libertine
 * Taigi Unicode
 * Source Sans Pro
 * I.Ming (8.00 onwards) from Ichiten Font Project
 * Fonts made by justfont foundry
 * Fonts modified and release in GitHub repository POJFonts : POJ Phiaute, Gochi Hand POJ, Nunito POJ, POJ Vibes, and POJ Garamond.
 * Fonts modified and released by But Ko based on Source Han Sans: Genyog, Genseki, Gensen ; based on Source Han Serif: Genyo, Genwan, Genryu.

Han-Romanization mixed script
One of the most popular modern ways of writing Taiwanese is by using a mixed orthography called, and sometimes Han-Romanization mixed script, a style not unlike written Japanese or (historically) Korean. In fact, the term does not describe one specific system, but covers any kind of writing in Southern Min which features both Chinese characters and romanization. That romanization is usually POJ, although recently some texts have begun appearing with Taiwanese Romanization System (Tâi-lô) spellings too. The problem with using only Chinese characters to write Southern Min is that there are many morphemes (estimated to be around 15 percent of running text) which are not definitively associated with a particular character. Various strategies have been developed to deal with the issue, including creating new characters, allocating Chinese characters used in written Mandarin with similar meanings (but dissimilar etymology) to represent the missing characters, or using romanization for the "missing 15%". There are two rationales for using mixed orthography writing, with two different aims. The first is to allow native speakers (almost all of whom can already write Chinese characters) to make use of their knowledge of characters, while replacing the missing 15% with romanization. The second is to wean character literates off using them gradually, to be replaced eventually by fully romanized text. Examples of modern texts in include religious, pedagogical, scholarly, and literary works, such as:

Adaptations for other Chinese varieties
POJ has been adapted for several other varieties of Chinese, with varying degrees of success. For Hakka, missionaries and others have produced a Bible translation, hymn book, textbooks, and dictionaries. Materials produced in the orthography, called, include: A modified version of POJ has also been created for Teochew.

Current status
Most native Southern Min speakers in Taiwan are unfamiliar with POJ or any other writing system, commonly asserting that "Taiwanese has no writing", or, if they are made aware of POJ, considering romanization as the "low" form of writing, in contrast with the "high" form (Chinese characters). For those who are introduced to POJ alongside and completely Chinese character-based systems, a clear preference has been shown for all-character systems, with all-romanization systems at the bottom of the preference list, likely because of the preexisting familiarity of readers with Chinese characters.

POJ remains the Taiwanese orthography "with the richest inventory of written work, including dictionaries, textbooks, literature [...] and other publications in many areas". A 1999 estimate put the number of literate POJ users at around 100,000, and secular organizations have been formed to promote the use of romanization among Taiwanese speakers.

Outside Taiwan, POJ is rarely used. For example, in Fujian, Xiamen University uses a romanization known as, based on Pinyin. In other areas where Hokkien is spoken, such as Singapore, the Speak Mandarin Campaign is underway to actively discourage people from speaking Hokkien or other non-Mandarin varieties in favour of switching to Mandarin instead.

In 2006, Taiwan's Ministry of Education chose an official romanization for use in teaching Southern Min in the state school system. POJ was one of the candidate systems, along with, but a compromise system, the Taiwanese Romanization System or , was chosen in the end. Tâi-Lô retains most of the orthographic standards of POJ, including the tone marks, while changing the troublesome $\langleo͘\rangle$ character for $\langleoo\rangle$, swapping $\langlets\rangle$ for $\langlech\rangle$, and replacing $\langleo\rangle$ in diphthongs with $\langleu\rangle$. Supporters of Taiwanese writing are in general deeply suspicious of government involvement, given the history of official suppression of native languages, making it unclear whether or POJ will become the dominant system in the future.

title: Pe̍h-ōe-jī


text:
Talk:Rochester, Kent

Population?
Any clues as to how many people? 219.77.100.155 (talk) 22:39, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

The Dutch Raid
I've removed the reference to 'the last successful invasion of British soil' (the Dutch landed in Sheppey and killed a few sheep - hardly a successful invasion, and nothing to do with Rochester anyway) but I query whether the Dutch raid should be mentioned at all in an article on Rochester. Wouldn't it be better dealt with under the River Medway or Chatham Dockyard? JMB196 (talk) 23:34, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You are wrong. de Ruyter took Sheerness fort 10 Jun 1667 - and Sheppey does count. (source Pepys diaries) They also were unopposed when they put landing parties ashore at Grain. The question about whether it should be mentioned in a Rochester article is more interesting. The action took place in Upnor Reach, and off the Frindsbury peninsula- which would be in the parish of Frindsbury Extra, Frindbury parish was in the City of Rochester as was Strood. Rochester was involved in that its citizen fled. When one speaks of Rochester-upon-Medway, then all these locations were within the limits. It is relevant to Rochester when one considers the after affects which included the construction of Fort Clarence and Fort Borstal. -- ClemRutter (talk) 00:21, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Bob Marshall-Andrews QC MP
I've removed the external link for Bob, he is no longer the city's MP (following the 2010 general election) and the link was broken in any case. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 11:35, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The broken link reason is fine- the other reason would have needed discussion --ClemRutter (talk) 12:29, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

LOL —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.7.179.112 (talk) 15:50, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Parishes
There is a discrepancy in the section "Parishes". The WP page says:

There were three parishes within the city of Rochester, St Margaret's, St Nicholas' and the Cathedral.

and yet the Rochester Cathedral Website says:

Owing to the fact that Rochester Cathedral is not a parish church ...

both can't be right. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:49, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

 * The diocesan website lists three parishes: St Justus, St Margaret and St Peter. St Justus is the new church on the Tideway estate.  St Margaret's and St Peter's form a joint parish (St Peter with St Margaret) with the vicar based at the new church of St Peter in Delce Road. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:59, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

History
There are a few issues with the early history that don't quite make sense.

... but there was no bridge in AD 43.

At what date was Durobrivae recorded? The first bridge was built very soon after the invasion, and if the name dates from much after AD 44 there would be a bridge there.

Again, without knowing the date at which Durobrivae was first recorded then

... it is assumed that Rochester was a fortified Roman town, but no evidence has been found of such fort.

doesn't quite tie up with:

* 190+: Systematic earthen fortifications were established. * 225+: These were replaced by stone, which are still extant.

Finally, the landing place of Hengist and Horsa is disputed. As well as Ebbsfleet, there is a claim for Castle Rough near Milton Regis. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

New page
The three WikiProjects boxes above all request that the history is moved to a new page. The ToDo list requests the replacement of bullet points with prose, suitable wikified. I have started work to do this by taking a snapshot of the existing history into sandbox2 and will launch it as a new page once I feel it is in basic shape.

If anyone has any comments pertinent to this please leave them on my talk page. If I am treading on anyone's toes or there are other good reasons I've not thought about, please let me know as soon as possible and I'll endeavour to accomodate changes. Ditto if anyone thinks this is a bad idea, but please be constructive! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 18:15, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Support:--ClemRutter (talk) 22:53, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
 * New page created. It still needs a lot of work but is at least readable as prose.  I'll trim the history section in this page later, unless someone wants to do it for me first! Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:42, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Trim done. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:15, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Cleanup tag
I've removed the old cleanup tag for the following reasons:
 * It was dated November 2007, the page has changed significantly since then.
 * The tag is being considered for deletion.
 * There were no specific reasons given.

If anyone disgrees, please feel free to revert or, preferably, select a more appropriate tag. See also the top of this talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martin of Sheffield (talk • contribs) 12:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

City status?
I was surprised to read the information about Rochester's present non-status as a city. It is my understanding that any English town with a Church of England cathedral is considered to be a city. Is this not actually the case (at least these days)? Afterwriting (talk) 13:37, 17 February 2012 (UTC)
 * No, never has been. City status is given by royal charter, and in Rochester's case predates the CoE by the best part of a millenium. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 15:12, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the clarification on this point. But your inference that the "CofE" only came into being in the 16th century is not that of the church itself, which asserts that it is (both theologically and legally) the continuation of the English Church prior to the English Reformation. Afterwriting (talk) 16:21, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

 * I've just looked at the City_status_in_the_United_Kingdom article which seems to support my belief that, at least from the beginnings of the English Reformation period until the 20th century, that being a cathedral town did in fact grant city status. Afterwriting (talk) 16:32, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

 * Section 1.1.1 first sentance: "In the 16th century, a town was recognised as a city by the English Crown if it had a diocesan cathedral within its limits. This association between having a cathedral and being called a city was established when Henry VIII founded dioceses (each having a cathedral in the see city) in six English towns and also granted them city status by issuing letters patent". So the status is granted by the letters patent or recognition by the Crown.  The Crown chose to give city status to those towns which had a diocesan cathedral.  The cathedral of itself does not confer city status.

 * The Official website of the Church of England refers to the roots as going back to Roman times, but then continues: "The religious settlement that eventually emerged in the reign of Elizabeth I gave the Church of England the distinctive identity that it has retained to this day. It resulted in a Church that consciously retained a large amount of continuity with the Church of the Patristic and Medieval periods in terms of its use of the catholic creeds, its pattern of ministry, its buildings and aspects of its liturgy, but which also embodied Protestant insights in its theology and in the overall shape of its liturgical practice. The way that this is often expressed is by saying that the Church of England is both 'catholic and reformed.'" The CoE appears to regard itself as having a distict identity only from Elizabeth's time.  Over the years I have heard the "Church in England" and the "English Church" to refer to the pre-reformation era.  All these terms are anachronistic though, at the time people simply referred to it as "The Church" or "Holy Mother Church".  See Chaucer or Langland for example. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 17:01, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

 * (1) The essential point is that cathedral towns were granted city status and this appears to be the basis on which the letters patent were issued . So my original comments on this matter were factually correct until more recent times. (2) The Church of England's "distinctive identity" as it developed after the English Reformation is a separate issue from that of its origins and history.  The Preface to the Book of Common Prayer makes it clear that the church considers itself to be the continuation of the Patristic and Medieval church in England.  The Reformation in England did not create a "new" church but "reformed" an already existing one.  This is also what the Church of England website's comments affirm. Nothing in the church's formularies suggests that it only came into being in the 16th century - just the opposite in fact.  Afterwriting (talk) 15:05, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

Move from Kent to Medway
There has been a proposal to move Rochester, Kent to Rochester, Medway in accordance with WP:UKPLACE. This has led to objections.

WP:UKPLACE states (slightly edited):

Where possible, articles on places in the United Kingdom use placename.

Disambiguation should never be to post town, former postal county or postcode district.

For localities requiring disambiguation:

Martin of Sheffield (talk) 10:33, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
 * (1) The usual convention is to use placename, ceremonial county . For example, Halling, Kent.
 * (2) When the city and the county use variants of the same name (and disambiguation is required) disambiguate with England for clarity throughout the English-speaking world; thus Lincoln, England, not Lincoln, Lincolnshire.
 * (3) For localities unambiguously located within a town/city settlement (according to reliable, external sources) placename, town/city is used. For example, within the borough of Milton Keynes, for localities in the defined new city area placename, Milton Keynes is used, as with Bradwell, Milton Keynes. Localities within the borough but outside the city area continue to be disambiguated by ceremonial county, as with Olney, Buckinghamshire.
 * (4) When further disambiguation is required district/unitary is used. Example: two Belmonts in London become Belmont, Sutton and Belmont, Harrow. If there are two places of the same name in the same district/unitary then parishes, wards, or lowercase compass directions are used as appropriate to identify the relative locations. Example: two Woolstons in Shropshire unitary authority become Woolston, north Shropshire and Woolston, south Shropshire.

 * This discussion has moved to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_UK_geography. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 12:20, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

coFWD and Rochester People
Rochester People still appear to be active and so I've reversed user Scattyjan's deletion. coFWD was listed as a level 2 heading under Culture thus making Dickens onwards into subsections of it. I've brought both these groups together under a single heading, they are of minor significance but worth recording. To avoid edit warring, could editors (perhaps including Scattyjan) care to comment here please. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 13:36, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

 * It looks like spam to me- no merit in keeping. If any of these guys disagrees they come over to my place and discuss it over a glass of wine --ClemRutter (talk) 15:44, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

 * @Martin, if you are around the towns it would be great to meet up and you could share some of my paper resources. --ClemRutter (talk) 15:44, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

2014 edit
Basically a nice bit of work- and one in progress. It does illustate just how much work needs to be done. I looked at Lincoln, England(C) and then Norwich(B) for a comparison. We complain we are hindered by not knowing where the boundaries are- but have no Demography section, Industry is weak and there is nothing on climate in spite of the Gravesend climate being the most benign in the land The elephant in the room is the lack Governance or any political information, the 2014 Rochester& Strood Election finally brought the area to international attention setting two turning points and many records, Bob Marshall=Andrew tenure as MP was also notable and indeed Anne Kerr (politician) as the MP who was beaten up by the Chicago police.

I'll hold back just now and do pick up a couple of pieces when you are taking a breather. -- Clem Rutter (talk) 16:33, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Weather box
User:Martinevans123 User:PaleCloudedWhite I do not think that a settlement should have a weather box referenced to a weather station outside the area concerned, rather weather boxes should only be used if the weather station is inside the area covered by the article. Hence countries and regions could justifiably have one, but not villages nor many towns. The one in this article should be removed, perhaps leaving a link to a page which justifiably includes one. SovalValtos (talk) 12:43, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

 * No. That is the weather in Rochester calculated from a station just outside the border. That is how it is done- Kent weather is notable, Gravesend and thus parts of Strood do obtain the UK records on a almost daily basis, but that is frequently ammended when the weekly reporting station at Brogdale tops them. The fact is that most UK climate statistics (Towns etc) are extrapolated from out of area recordings and Rochester is no different.-- Clem Rutter (talk) 06:56, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Rochester, Kent. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.medway.gov.uk/index/leisure/localhistory/timeline/17909.htm

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 14:07, 1 April 2016 (UTC)

Notable People
Your edits are destroying formatting and not replacing it with a consistent style. The first two entries are in your preferred style, then there is a random line you've cut off, then two entries in the old style, two in the new, one in the old and finally one in the new. This hotchpotch is unacceptable. If you wish to change the list to "list guidelines" (which?) seek consensus to do so, but don't mess up the existing system and then wander off. See MOS:DEFLIST, the existing list is in an acceptable style. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 08:48, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I was in the middle of re-arranging the whole list. It was not sensible to do it all in one hit because what was, and now is again, there was such a muddle. By doing two edits I thought it was obvious I was working through the whole list. Do you really believe that what is there now is better than the usual list structure that is common in numerous articles? See WP:LISTPEOPLE, or better, see Dartford for a neat tidy list of notable residents. What is the point, for example, of a three line ramble about Dickens with a few of his works referenced by commercial websites? His own article is linked for anyone who wants to know more, which is the point of only listing people with their own article - they are notable enough. Short lists with basic facts with no titles is all that is needed, which also avoids any hint of undue weight and personal preference seeping in (as to who deserves more detail). Roger 8 Roger (talk) 09:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It can help prevent premature reversions if one places or  banners on the article.SovalValtos (talk) 09:42, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Maybe consider in use? I'd seen your revert to 08:53 and this mish-mash had been around 50 minutes so it looked like you had just gone on to pastures new leaving others to comply with the instruction "section needs a re-write to comply with list guidelines".  Whilst I'm not entirely sure I agree with you, I am certain that WP:RF is a priority and the intermediate mess wasn't helpful.  Have you come across WP:BRD?  If you'd come to the talk page after the first revert then any interested parties could decide on the best way forward.  If you want to go ahead and change the format to a perceived better way please do so, but I would strongly recommend either using "In use" to let readers and editors know what is happening, or else do the job in one hit. Martin of Sheffield (talk) 09:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
 * To both, yes, thanks, I will try to use some sort of 'in progress' marker next time. Yes, 50 minutes was perhaps a lengthy gap. Roger 8 Roger (talk) 01:53, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rochester, Kent