text:
Green tea ice cream

Green tea ice cream (抹茶アイスクリーム) or Matcha ice (抹茶アイス Matcha Aisu) is an ice cream flavor popular in Japan and other parts of East Asia. Green tea ice cream is also sold in Monaka form. It has been available in the United States since the late 1970's, primarily in Japanese restaurants and markets, but was becoming more mainstream in the late 1990's.

Background
Matcha is powdered tea made from a special type of green tea called tencha (碾茶). Tencha is a tea grown in the shade and is one of the most expensive of all green teas, and is used in the Tea Ceremony in Japan.

Matcha is sweeter and less bitter, and is used today in a variety of sweets. In Japan, the Food Labeling Law prohibits the sale of powdered green tea made from any green tea other than Tencha as Matcha. Therefore, it is important to note that calling Matcha ice cream simply "green tea ice cream" may be misleading.

There is a theory that Toyotomi Hideyoshi (1537 - 1598) ate shaved ice with Matcha and millet sugar added. In the Edo period (1603-1867), there was also a shaved ice called Uji Kintoki (宇治金時) with Matcha and Anko (sweet bean paste) added.

Matcha ice cream was served as ice cream with hikicha (挽茶入氷菓子) at court luncheons and banquets in Japan during the Meiji era. Hikicha (挽茶) means ground tea, i.e., Matcha. For example, ice cream with Hikicha was listed on the menu of a court banquet for Prince Vittorio Emanuele, Count of Turin, a member of the Italian royal family, who visited Japan in 1898. In addition, a 1907 cookbook includes instructions for making Tencha ice cream. Tencha (碾茶) is tea before powdered Matcha.

Also in 1926, a proposal by a Japanese American living in Texas to advertise Matcha in the U.S. with a newspaper ad for "Matcha ice cream" was claimed in a Japanese tea industry report.

When Charles Lindbergh of the United States flew to Kasumigaura, Ibaraki Prefecture, in 1931, he was presented with Matcha ice cream by the Japanese tea association and was very pleased. He was the first American to eat Matcha ice cream on record.

In 1958, a tea company in Wakayama Prefecture developed and sold a soft serve ice cream containing Matcha named "Green Soft." A coffee shop menu book published in 1968 listed Matcha ice cream, which was already a standard ice cream served in coffee shops at that time.

In 1983, a confectionery store in Kyoto Prefecture sold Matcha ice cream and soft serve. In 1983, Meiji Dairies sold Matcha ice cream under the Lady Borden brand (the Japanese brand name of the American Borden Company).

The amount of imported ice cream increased in the Japanese market after the import liberalization act of ice cream in 1990. In 1995, Maeda-en USA in California began selling green tea ice cream in Japan. The same product was soon imported and distributed to convenience stores and supermarkets in Japan as well and it was introduced in some Japanese newspapers.

Häagen-Dazs Japan started producing green tea ice cream in 1996; it became an immediate hit, having twice as many sales as the previous favorite flavor, vanilla. The product is now sold in Japanese grocery markets and has become one of the company's most popular flavors.

Statistics from the Japanese Ice Cream Association show that green tea ice cream was ranked third in the "Favorite Ice Cream Flavor" study.

Popularity
Green tea ice cream has been available in the United States, the country with the largest ice cream consumption, since the late 1970's, primarily in Japanese restaurants and markets. It is becoming mainstream and can also be made at home.

The U.S. saw rapid growth in Japanese cuisine and sushi popularity in the mid-1990's, which resulted in a big expansion of the Japanese restaurant business in the U.S. This development gradually helped people learn about green tea, resulting in green tea ice cream becoming a typical dessert.

With other dishes
Green tea ice cream could easily be integrated into various decorations and arrangements with other ice cream flavors. It could be served with other Japanese sweets such as Azuki (小豆), Dango (団子), and Monaka (モナカ).

title: Green tea ice cream


text:
User talk:Venex

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! --Merovingian (t) (c) 13:57, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Megadiverse countries
Hello. Your edits to this article prompt these tips:

 * The title phrase, megadiverse coutries, should be set in bold at its first appearance in the article.
 * The initial "c" in "contries" should be in lower-case rather than capital in the article's title.

I took care of these and fixed the links to the article.

See Manual of Style for a fuller account of this sort of Wikipedia convention. Michael Hardy 22:02, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Venezuelan portal
Hi!

I noticed you are working in Venezuela-related articles...I think you should check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Venezuela. It wouldn't be bad if you had a in your profile...that way all Venezuelans can easily contact you and hopefully work together to expand the information about our country in this encyclopedia. --Espazolano 14:41, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Israel-Venezuela relations
I see that you are a Venezuelan Wikipedian. You may be interested in voting on whether or not to merge Israel-Venezuela relations into Foreign policy of Hugo Chávez. There are currently 10 oppose votes and 5 support votes, and I'm urging users to oppose the merge. You can vote at Talk:Israel-Venezuela relations. Respectfully, Republitarian 15:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Venex


text:
Talk:Letter of Lentulus

Ernst von Dobschűtz (Germany)
Actually you will find a new article about Prof.theol. Ernst von Dobschűtz in WIKIPEDIA (Germany). -- 80.185.204.235 13:57, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Consul during Augustus
The Deeds of Augustus list a Publius Lentulus as being elected as a Roman Consul during his reign (63 BC-14 AD) http://www.umich.edu/~classics/programs/class/cc/372/sibyl/db/H002.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Heptazane (talk • contribs)

Valerius Gratus was the Roman Prefect of Iudaea province under Tiberius from 15 to 26 AD. He succeeded Annius Rufus and was replaced by Pontius Pilate.Valerius Gratus--Markyw (talk) 12:01, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

A personal opinion)
The letter quotes how the Hebrews described Jesus not the Romans. Thus Publius Lentulus' recording of how they viewed the person of Jesus is descriptive but not necessarily the view of the Roman author. This does not invalidate the letter itself. Further, the term Jesus is translated from Yeshua or 'God rescues' in Hebrew and Aramic. Christ is taken from the Greek Christos meaning Messiah or 'anointed one'in Hebrew-Aramic. The name ascribed to the man described by Publius Lentulus 'Jesus the Christ' is therefore consistent with Jewish belief that an anointed one would rise up amongst the Jews as supreme king ruling over all Israel and heralding an era of lasting peace.

Name
Isn't his name Publius Lentutius?

Civil War
http://uncpressblog.com/2012/12/05/edward-j-blum-and-paul-harvey-white-jesus-and-the-publius-lentulus-letter/#more-10922

2000 years ago
Please, to be able know any information concerning Publius Lentulus, read; "2000 Years Ago" © 1939 ISBN 978-85-7328-697-7 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Estudioso13 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Friedrich Münter
The article grossly overstates Münter's confidence ("19th-century scholar Friedrich Münter believed he could trace the letter down to the time of Diocletian"), he quite explicitly couches his speculation in several layers of conditionals and subjunctives (see: https://www.digitale-sammlungen.de/de/view/bsb10222412?page=14,15): "Er könnte ja wohl ursprünglich griechisch geschrieben worden [...] seyn", "es wäre möglich, dass er aus derselben Fabrik wäre", "aus dem Namen Lentius könnte vielleicht der Namen Lentulus [...] entstanden seyn", "Wir könnten also vielleicht annehmen, dass er aus der Zeit Diocletians stamme". 2A01:C22:D586:BE00:9A5:F3:2A06:3F90 (talk) 19:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Letter of Lentulus


text:
Hamerton

Hamerton is a village in and former civil parish, now in the parish of Hamerton and Steeple Gidding, in Cambridgeshire, England. Hamerton lies approximately 8 mi north-west of Huntingdon. Hamerton is situated within Huntingdonshire which is a non-metropolitan district of Cambridgeshire as well as being a historic county of England. Hamerton Zoo is on the north side of the village. The village has a church dedicated to All Saints. In 2001 the parish had a population of 87.

The civil parish of Hamerton and Steeple Gidding incorporates the nearby hamlet of Steeple Gidding, which has a 14th-century church St Andrew's that is now redundant and preserved by the Churches Conservation Trust. Along with its nearby neighbour Great Gidding, Steeple Gidding forms part of a cluster of villages known as the Giddings.

History
Hamerton was listed in the Domesday Book in the Hundred of Leightonstone in Huntingdonshire; the name of the settlement was written as Hambertune in the Domesday Book. In 1086 there was just one manor at Hamerton; the annual rent paid to the lord of the manor in 1066 had been £12 and the rent was the same in 1086. The Domesday Book does not explicitly detail the population of a place but it records that there were 26 households at Hamerton. There is no consensus about the average size of a household at that time; estimates range from 3. 5 to 5. 0 people per household.

Steeple Gidding was listed in the Domesday Book in the Hundred of Leightonstone in Huntingdonshire; the name of the settlement was written as Redinges in the Domesday Book. In 1086 there was just one manor at Steeple Gidding; the annual rent paid to the lord of the manor in 1066 had been £5 and the rent was the same in 1086. The Domesday Book does not explicitly detail the population of a place but it records that there was 18 households and eight ploughlands at Steeple Gidding in 1086. In addition to the arable land, there was 20 acre of meadows and 40 acre of woodland at Steeple Gidding.

Government
Hamerton is part of the civil parish of Hamerton and Steeple Gidding; it does not have a parish council but just holds an annual parish meeting. On 1 April 2010 the parish of Hamerton was abolished to form "Hamerton and Steeple Gidding".

Hamerton was in the historic and administrative county of Huntingdonshire until 1965. From 1965, the village was part of the new administrative county of Huntingdon and Peterborough. Then in 1974, following the Local Government Act 1972, Hamerton became a part of the county of Cambridgeshire.

The second tier of local government is Huntingdonshire District Council which is a non-metropolitan district of Cambridgeshire and has its headquarters in Huntingdon. Huntingdonshire District Council has 52 councillors representing 29 district wards. Huntingdonshire District Council collects the council tax, and provides services such as building regulations, local planning, environmental health, leisure and tourism. Hamerton is a part of the district ward of Sawtry and is represented on the district council by two councillors. District councillors serve for four-year terms following elections to Huntingdonshire District Council.

For Hamerton the highest tier of local government is Cambridgeshire County Council which has administration buildings in Cambridge. The county council provides county-wide services such as major road infrastructure, fire and rescue, education, social services, libraries and heritage services. Cambridgeshire County Council consists of 69 councillors representing 60 electoral divisions. Hamerton is part of the electoral division of Sawtry and Ellington and is represented on the county council by one councillor.

At Westminster Hamerton is in the parliamentary constituency of North West Cambridgeshire, and elects one Member of Parliament (MP) by the first past the post system of election. Hamerton is represented in the House of Commons by Shailesh Vara (Conservative). Shailesh Vara has represented the constituency since 2005. The previous member of parliament was Brian Mawhinney (Conservative) who represented the constituency between 1997 and 2005.

Population
In the period 1801 to 1901 the population of Hamerton was recorded every ten years by the UK census. During this time the population was in the range of 129 (the lowest was in 1801) and 187 (the highest was in 1871).

From 1901, a census was taken every ten years with the exception of 1941 (due to the Second World War).

All population census figures from report Historic Census figures Cambridgeshire to 2011 by Cambridgeshire Insight.

In 2011, the parish covered an area of 3284 acre and the population density for Hamerton and Steeple Gidding in 2011 was 21.8 persons per square mile (8.4 per square kilometre).

title: Hamerton


text:
Talk:Circular dichroism

Application to 3D movies
This article now links from RealD Cinema but some aspects of the technology were better dealt with here than there, because they will be generic to all CD stereoscopy. The actual action of Real D spectacles does not correspond to that of the kind of spiralling waveform described here. Transmitting or blocking of light passed through two filters depends on the direction the light goes through the filters, not just their relative axial orientation, as in conventional polaristion, as if their action is analogous to a rectifying diode on direct current.--Hugh7 (talk) 00:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)

Untitled
Q: Can anyone tell me if CD spectroscopy has been tested on polymers, and not only on biological materials ? thank you. Guillom 13:59, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

A: Yes you can, provided the polymers you are performing the measurements on are not racemized during the polymerization reaction. Racemization can, for example, occur in concentrated NaOH solutions at high temperatures.

I think the link to ellipticity that is redirected to the flattening article should be removed because this parameter is different than the definition of elliptical polarization. --Bjsamelsonjones 6/28/06

Q: In the 'Experimental limitations' is this 0.1 mm pathlength correct? Or should it be 1 mm? Thanks A: It is correct. Both 1mm and 0.1 mm cuvettes are used. 0.1 mm cuvettes reduce the light scattering, leading to better spectra.

Cells are available with path lengths to .05mm (one cell manufacturer), and shorter paths may sometimes be used; there are practical difficulties, e.g. knowing the true path length, sealing the mating faces so that evaporation does not change the concentration. Non-demountnable cells also exist. They can be very difficult to clean, and are quite expensive. Not only is high-purity syntheic quartz needed, but the cells should be strain-free, and the faces should be parallel. The benefit of short paths is more related to lower solvent absorbtion, as mentioned in the article, than to scattering. It is a challenge to find an appropriate solvent for work below 200nm. Curtis Johnson would be one name to search for in the literarture to learn about appropriate techniques.

--AJim 04:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The article currently reads: "The ultraviolet CD spectrum of proteins can predict important characteristics..." This is misleading. The CD spectrum does not *predict* anything, rather it is a result of the secondary structure present in the protein. --128.227.142.130 21:01, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

CD Spectrometer
How does the CD spectrometer actually operate? What are the components that actually generate, process, and detect the light? It would be great if there was a schematic that explains how measurements are made. M stone 14:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree. An animation has been added but it doesn't explain much. LostLucidity (talk) 16:38, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Most of the components in a CD Spectromenter have articles that can be referenced. The most important exception is the photo-elastic modulator (PEM). I believe all current instruments use one to produce the alternating left and right circularly polarized light.

In terms of how measurements are actually made, this is a single-beam technique, so baseline correction needs to be discussed.

The definitions need to be extended to include mean residue elipticity because the protein structure estimation programs work on measurements in those units.

There is quite a bit of trouble in actually setting up an instrument and getting a good baseline. The measurement can be affected by any (inadvertent) poliarizer downstream of the modulator, such as a strained sample cell. --AJim (talk) 08:48, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

I was wrong about the PEM, Photoelastic modulator does exist.

I found it through the Lock-in amplifier article. Although commercial instruments generally do not use commercial lock in amplifiers, they do use phase sensitive detection. The reference signal is derived from the PEM.

The Polarizer, monochromator, and photomultiplier articles look useable.

The Cuvette article might usefully show some of the more exotic cells used in CD. --AJim (talk) 00:49, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I just discovered that there is a Category:Spectrometers now. Thus, there seems to be a reason to have specific articles on Circular Dichroism Spectrometers, and ORD spectrometers for that matter. The article on Magnetic circular dichroism is in a similar state; it talks about the technique, and describes the instrument, but is not actually about the spectrometer itself.

--AJim (talk) 18:34, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Inaccurate summary / article title: move, rewrite, merge?
While some of the article is about circular dichroism, the article summary inaccurately states "Circular dichroism [...] is a form of spectroscopy". No, circular dichroism spectroscopy is a form of spectroscopy, employing circular dichroism. Circular dichroism is an optical effect, in which a material absorbs light of one circular polarization differently from the other. Given that basically the whole article is "applied" (even the more theoretical first section is mostly about samples and experiments and quantities), I'd suggest that someone a bit more knowledgeable on the subject than I might do something like this:

 * 1) Move this article to a new Circular dichroism spectroscopy article, excising theoretical stuff and replacing it with links here and to Dichroism.
 * 2) Rewrite the existing theoretical/optical content into a new Circular dichroism, probably a stub or start-class article.
 * 3) Evaluate merging Circular dichroism into dichroism.
 * 4) Evaluate whether Circular dichroism spectroscopy needs to live.

Of course, if there's strong consensus on the third or fourth points, they may override the need to go through with the first or the second.

Andrew Rodland (talk) 21:10, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

I vote for the second option. Circular dichroism spectroscopy definitely needs to live and should focus on the applications of CD, as discussed in the NMR spectroscopy talk page. A good source for the Circular Dichroism article is chapter 8 of Optics by Hecht (4 ed.) --Biophysik (talk) 17:57, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Having looked at the page on polarization, it seems more sensible that the concept of circularly polarized light be dealt with there, and not in this article. This article should reference that one. A brief and mathematically light introduction would probably be appropriate to introduce the principle of the technique and the units, similar to what is currently in place. ravenacious (talk) 15:22, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Polarization is a big topic, so it is probably best to instead split the article into Circular dichroism and Circular dichorsim spectroscopy. --Biophysik (talk) 18:05, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Missing Images
This article lacks foremost CD-spectra of alpha-helix/beta-sheet/random coil... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.60.169.215 (talk) 14:09, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

I can probably contribute quite a bit to this page, especially in the diagram and illustration department. I have never edited a Wikipedia article before, so I don't really know what the etiquette is... do I just dive in and start editing things, or is there an agreed editor for the page or something? Firstly, I think that the diagram of electric field vectors should be replaced, as it is slightly mis-leading, secondly I have diagrams of representative spectra for protein secondary structure that was requested above. I also have made diagrams of the workings of a CD spectrometer and could post those. Any input on this would be appreciated, many thanks. Kevinchannon (talk) 13:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

1. Dive right in and start editing 2. The main issue here is copyright. Pictures from a website, journal article, or instructional manual are generally not useable unless permission is given. The exception I believe is NIH and other government websites, which I believe are in the puble domain (does someone know this for sure?)

It's OK, I can make my own images, thus avoiding the copyright issue :-)kevinchannon (talk) 23:51, 2 April 2009 (UTC)

Woody Citation
Woody is cited in over 30 papers in 1994. Could the reference be a little be more specific as to which paper/journal co-authors it was. 128.243.253.104 (talk) 21:56, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Should be better now (not sure about the page number though). Materialscientist (talk) 04:30, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Units of CD
There may be confusion in the article (and maybe also in the field) about the units of CD. It is stated: "Circular dichroism is the difference Δε ≡ εL- εR", but later it's said: "Then Δε ≡ εL- εR is the molar circular dichroism". So here's no difference between circular dichroism and molar circular dichroism. I guess the first statement should read: "Circular dichroism is the difference ΔA ≡ AL- AR"? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.238.59.124 (talk) 15:50, 29 August 2012 (UTC)

Sign of rotational strength
I believe the formula for the theoretical rotational strength should be negative, i.e. Rtheo = -Im ..., alternatively <Ψe|Mmagn.dip.|Ψg> should be used. The magnetic dipole operator is non-hermetian and exchanging wavefunctions leads to a minus. Ref.: William W. Parson: Modern Optical Spectroscopy, Springer 2007 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.238.59.124 (talk) 16:22, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

point gruops
According to the article: Symmetry restrictions for natural and induced circular dichroism and optical activity for all point groups, not only Dn and Cn groups show circular dichroism, but also T, O and K groups. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.255.155.158 (talk) 10:02, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Circular dichroism


text:
Mark Shaw (singer)

Mark Shaw (born Mark Robert Tiplady on 10 June 1961 in Chesterfield, Derbyshire, England ) is an English singer and songwriter who formed the 1980s rock band Then Jerico, which he continues to front.

Music career
After the original Then Jerico line-up split in early 1990, Shaw went solo releasing his only studio album, Almost for EMI in 1991.

A live album, Alive & Exposed, recorded in the summer of 1992 at The Grand Theatre, Clapham, London was released by Murder Records in 2000 under the 'Mark Shaw Etc., Then Jerico' banner featuring new song "Step into the Light". On 12 December 2012, via the official Then Jerico website, Shaw announced details of a 2013 "Reprise" tour consisting of 13 dates around the United Kingdom, culminating in a show at the Clapham Grand in London. The tour commenced on 7 May 2013, featuring the original line-up of the band.

Shaw later toured with a new line-up of Then Jerico. A number of acoustic shows were scheduled to take place in 2018.

In 2022, Shaw was part of Music 4 Ukraine's charity single "Heal This Broken Land". This was a version of "Broken Land" by Northern Irish band The Adventures, which also featured other artists including Nick Heyward, Carol Decker, The Christians and Nathan Moore of Brother Beyond.

Acting roles
In January 1994, Shaw made his acting debut as Johnny in the London production of Bad Boy Johnny and the Prophets of Doom by Daniel Abineri.

Other activities
In 2003, Shaw appeared in the Reborn in the USA reality television series, but abruptly quit the show after just one day of filming.

On 16 May 2020, Then Jerico appeared remotely on the line-up for the 80s Lockdown Fest organised by Let's Rock The Retro Festival. The event raised money for the Child Bereavement UK charity.

Albums

 * Almost (EMI, 1991)
 * Alive & Exposed - as Mark Shaw Etc. (Murder Records, 2000) (re-issued by Then Jerico Music in 2011)

Singles

 * "Love So Bright" (EMI, 1990)
 * "Under Your Spell" (EMI, 1991)

title: Mark Shaw (singer)


text:
Secretary of Foreign Affairs (Mexico)

The secretary of foreign affairs (Secretaria de Relaciones Exteriores) is the foreign secretary of Mexico, responsible for implementing the country's foreign policy. The secretary is appointed by the president of Mexico to head the Secretariat of Foreign Affairs (Secretaría de Relaciones Exteriores) and is a member of the federal executive cabinet. The secretary is commonly referred to as Canciller (Spanish for Chancellor) in Mexico.

List of secretaries

 * Ignacio Mariscal 1880–1883, 1885–1910
 * Enrique Creel 1910–1911
 * Francisco León de la Barra 1911, 1913
 * Victoriano Salado Álvarez 1911
 * 1911
 * 1911–1912
 * Pedro Lascuráin 1912–1913
 * Federico Gamboa 1913
 * Francisco Escudero 1913
 * Querido Moheno 1913–1914
 * José López Portillo y Rojas 1914
 * Francisco S. Carvajal 1914
 * Ignacio Borrego 1915
 * 1916, 1916–1917, 1918
 * 1920
 * Cutberto Hidalgo Téllez 1920–1921
 * Alberto J. Pani Arteaga 1921-1924
 * Aarón Sáenz Garza 1924–1927
 * Genaro Estrada 1930–1932
 * Manuel C. Téllez 1932 (interim)
 * José Manuel Puig Casauranc 1933–1934
 * Emilio Portes Gil 1934–1935
 * 1935–1940
 * Ezequiel Padilla Peñaloza 1940–1945
 * Francisco Castillo Nájera 1945–1946
 * Jaime Torres Bodet 1946–1951
 * Manuel Tello Baurraud 1951–1952
 * Luis Padilla Nervo 1952–1958
 * Manuel Tello Baurraud 1958–1964
 * José Gorostiza 1964 (interim)
 * Antonio Carrillo Flores 1964–1970
 * Emilio Óscar Rabasa 1970–1975
 * Alfonso García Robles 1975–1976
 * 1976–1979
 * Jorge Castañeda y Álvarez de la Rosa 1979–1982
 * Bernardo Sepúlveda Amor 1982–1988
 * Fernando Solana 1988–1993
 * Manuel Camacho Solís 1993–1994
 * Manuel Tello Macías 1994 (interim)
 * José Ángel Gurría 1994–1998
 * Rosario Green 1998–2000
 * Jorge Castañeda Gutman 2000–2003
 * Luis Ernesto Derbez 2003–2006
 * Patricia Espinosa 2006–2012
 * José Antonio Meade 2012–2015
 * Claudia Ruiz Massieu 2015–2017
 * Luis Videgaray Caso 2017–2018
 * Marcelo Ebrard 2018–2023
 * Alicia Bárcena 2023-

List of doctrines

 * Estrada Doctrine
 * Castañeda Doctrine

title: Secretary of Foreign Affairs (Mexico)


text:
Halobacteriales

Halobacteriales are an order of the Halobacteria, found in water saturated or nearly saturated with salt. They are also called halophiles, though this name is also used for other organisms which live in somewhat less concentrated salt water. They are common in most environments where large amounts of salt, moisture, and organic material are available. Large blooms appear reddish, from the pigment bacteriorhodopsin. This pigment is used to absorb light, which provides energy to create ATP. Halobacteria also possess a second pigment, halorhodopsin, which pumps in chloride ions in response to photons, creating a voltage gradient and assisting in the production of energy from light. The process is unrelated to other forms of photosynthesis involving electron transport; however, and halobacteria are incapable of fixing carbon from carbon dioxide.

Halobacteria can exist in salty environments because although they are aerobes they have a separate and different way of creating energy through photosynthesis. Parts of the membranes of halobacteria are purplish in color. These parts conduct photosynthetic reactions with retinal pigment rather than chlorophyll. This allows them to create a proton gradient across the membrane of the cell which can be used to create ATP for their own use. Some species in this order are used as model organisms to study how some microorganisms can survive in hypersaline environments, understand cellular processes and to research their physiology.

Habitats
Usually, Halobacteriales grow in aerobic and high salinity environments. Halobacteriales have been found in salt lakes, marine salterns, seawater, solar salts and salted food products. Mostly, members of the order Halobacteriales can be located in environments where concentration of salt (NaCl) exceeds 25%. However, they can also survive in environments with low concentrations of salt, between 1 and 3.5%. Studies show Halobacteriales can also be found in environments where sulfur reduction takes part as well as in salinity salterns,, seawater black smoker, coastal salt marshes and chimney structures. This results show Halobacteriales only need the enough amount of salt to prevent their lysis and thus can grow in environments with low salinity concentration.

Current taxonomy
Halobacteriales was a large phylogenetically diverse lineage encompassing all Halobacteria species. The wide variety of biochemical characteristics and different ecological niches of the class Haloarchaea proved to be an unreliable tool in clarifying the evolutionary relationships of Halobacteria above the genus level.

In 2015, Gupta et al. proposed the division of class Halobacteria into three orders, Halobacteriales, Haloferacales and Natrialbales based on comparative genomic analyses and the branching pattern of various phylogenetic trees constructed from several different datasets of conserved proteins and 16S rRNA sequences. This division greatly restricted the membership of the order Halobacteriales to include only species which were closely related to the type genus, Halobacterium.

A subsequent study examining higher taxonomic relationships within the order Halobacteriales resulted in the division of the order into three families, Halobacteriaceae, Haloarculaceae and Halococcaceae, each of which can be distinguished from each other and all other species through the presence of multiple highly specific molecular signatures, known as conserved signature indels.

Phylogeny
The currently accepted taxonomy is based on the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN) and National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI).

Note: * paraphyletic Halobacteriaceae

title: Halobacteriales


text:
User talk:Jakalsden

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Karmafist 14:05, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Articles on WP:AFD
A few of your articles (I assume they're yours) are up for deletion at WP:AFD. They may be moved to your user page. They may not be notable enough for Wikipedia. Jack Sauer, probably Jakal's Den soon. We appreciate your contributions, but these specific ones may have to be moved to your user space. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark) 14:30, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

 * I am not too sure about Jakal's Den. I have never heard of it, and it only gets about 60 google hits and zero Nexis hits, but I am not from the area, so will defer on this. You may want to voice your opinion at the article's entry at AfD. Thanks for being so understanding, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Cheers. -- Lord Vold e  mort  (Dark Mark) 15:33, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jakalsden


text:
Terri Gibbs

Teresa Fay Gibbs (born June 15, 1954) is an American country music artist. Between 1980 and 2017, she recorded eleven studio albums, including four for MCA Records and one for Warner Bros. Records. She also charted 13 singles on the Billboard country singles charts in that timespan, including her debut single, "Somebody's Knockin'", which reached No. 8 on the country charts, No. 13 on the pop charts and No. 3 on the Adult Contemporary charts. She also entered the country top 20 with "Rich Man", "Mis'ry River", "Ashes to Ashes" and "Anybody Else's Heart but Mine." Gibbs has been blind since infancy.

Biography
Gibbs was born in Miami, Florida, United States, but raised in the Augusta, Georgia, suburb of Grovetown. Although initially having eyesight, she had been born premature and subsequently lost her eyesight in an incubator accident. In her own words, "I was quite small (2 lbs., 11 ounces) and, so, they had to put me in an incubator. At that point in time, they did not know to cover the eyes and my retinas were damaged." At six months of age, Gibbs was diagnosed with retrolental fibroplasia and declared blind. She learned to play piano at age three. As a child, she sang in the church choir and at talent contests, and she opened for Bill Anderson at the age of 17. Her parents wanted her to be treated no differently from sighted people, so she was sent to public school and graduated from Butler High School in Augusta in 1972. She performed in and around the Augusta area and eventually, she met Chet Atkins, who advised her to move to Nashville, Tennessee, to pursue a country music career, which she did at age eighteen. After failing to find a record deal, she moved to Miami and joined a band called Sound Dimension. She continued to perform locally, later forming a band called the Terri Gibbs Trio, which performed at a Steak and Ale in Augusta, Georgia. Gibbs then sent a demo tape to record producer Ed Penney of MCA Records, signing to the label in 1980. Penney was a former Boston disc jockey and a long-time songwriter. He liked her voice on her demo, but he felt she needed stronger material. He co-wrote "Somebody's Knockin'" for her and also produced the song.

Musical career
Gibbs' first single release was "Somebody's Knockin'", which was also the title of her 1981 debut album. This song was a crossover hit upon its 1980 release, reaching No. 8 on the U.S. country charts, No. 13 on the Billboard Hot 100 and No. 3 on the Adult Contemporary charts. It was followed by "Rich Man", a No. 19 country hit which also entered the pop charts. Her debut album won her the Academy of Country Music's Top New Female Vocalist award. She was also the first winner of the Country Music Association's Horizon Award (which is awarded to emerging artists), and was nominated for a Grammy Award for Best Country Song and Best Female Country Vocal Performance for "Somebody's Knockin'." Gibbs performed on the Grand Ole Opry as well.

MCA released her second album, I'm a Lady, later in 1981. This album was less successful, although it produced a No. 12 hit in "Mis'ry River," its second and final single. 1982's Some Days It Rains All Night Long produced a Top 20 hit in "Ashes to Ashes" and a No. 45 in its title track. Also in 1981 and 1982, Gibbs toured with George Jones and sang duets with him onstage. Her final MCA album, Over Easy, also produced a minor hit in "Anybody Else's Heart but Mine", and after releasing a compilation called The Best of Terri Gibbs, she left the label.

Gibbs switched to Warner Bros. Records for her fifth album, 1985's Old Friends. All three of this album's singles — "A Few Good Men" (which featured Kathy Mattea on backing vocals ) "Rockin' in a Brand New Cradle" and "Someone Must Be Missing You Tonight" — missed the country Top 40.

Gibbs later shifted her focus to Contemporary Christian music, recording Turn Around and Comfort the People in 1987 and 1988, respectively, on Canaan Records. The former gave Gibbs her second Grammy nomination. What a Great Day, her third Christian album, followed in 1990 on the Morning Gate label. In 2002, Terri released the album, No Doubt About It, followed by the 2010 release of Your Grace Still Amazes Me. In 2014, The Best Of Terri Gibbs, featuring 10 of her best loved Country hits. In June 2017, Terri released her sixth Christian album, Sum It All Up.

Personal life
Gibbs married Grovetown, Georgia, city councilman David Daughtry on April 28, 1988, and remained married to him until his death in February 2008. They had one son, David Wayne Daughtry II, born October 20, 1989.

Awards and honors
Gibbs has won several industry awards. She won Academy of Country Music's Best New Female Vocalist and the Country Music Association's inaugural Horizon Award (for artists rising to new levels of prominence). Gibbs performed during the Artists Music Guild's 2012 AMG Heritage Awards on November 10, 2012, and upon the completion of her performance she was presented with a Lifetime Achievement Award for her years of dedication to her craft without having any prior knowledge that she would be receiving such honors.

title: Terri Gibbs


text:
F.C. Tirsense

Futebol Clube Tirsense, commonly known as just Tirsense, is a Portuguese football club from Santo Tirso, founded on January 5, 1938. They currently play in the Divisão de Elite of AF Porto. They currently play their home games in Abel Alves de Figueiredo with a capacity of 15,000 spectators. Their current chairman is Fernando Matos and their manager is Tonau.

History
The club's finest hour came without doubt in 1948–49 when, under the management of Artur Pinga, they knocked the all-conquering Sporting Clube de Portugal side of the "Five Violins" out of the Portuguese Cup with a 2–1 victory. In 1994–95, they finished eighth (one win away from a UEFA Cup position) in the First Division, their highest-ever position. The following year, however, they were relegated, in the first of four consecutive demotions, dropping from the main championship in 1996 to the regional championships in 1999. The following year, the club was promoted to the Third Division. In spite of this, Tirsense has a usual attendance of 1,500 to 2,000, among the best in Portuguese non-professional championships. Assuming an amateur status since 2004, the club is making a successful task honouring debts, and aspires to make a comeback to the top in a near future. Marcelo (who later played in England), along with Emerson Thome (better known in Portugal as Paredão), and Everton Giovanella (Celta de Vigo), are the most internationally known former club players. Recent names like Caetano, Rui Manuel, or Batista are also well remembered by the fans. From the more distant years, António Luís and Festa (former Portuguese international) are some of the most sounding names. Tirsense was coached by Joaquim Machado, who at his first season at the club as head coach (2006–07), managed to promote Tirsense to the Second Division, where the club competed in its Serie A.

Fans
The club has an organised fan group called Juve Negra and a small ultras group called the Black Lions, founded in 2012.

Total game history

 * Liga Portuguesa: 256 games, 65 wins, 73 ties, 118 losses, 219 GS 370 GA
 * Taça de Portugal 127 games, 58 wins, 18 ties, 51 losses, 183 GS, 180 GA
 * II Divisão B: 31 games, 15 wins, 6 ties, 10 losses, 38 GS, 32 GA
 * IV and III Divisão: 96 games, 46 wins, 21 ties, 29 losses, 134 GS, 93 GA

Former international footballers
The following footballers have been playing for their national football team while playing for Tirsense:
 * Tueba Menayane (1989–91)
 * 🇵🇹 Agostinho Caetano (1990–96)
 * 🇲🇦 Rachid Daoudi (1995–96)
 * 🇳🇬 Samson Siasia (1995–96)
 * 🇻🇨 Marlon James
 * 🇵🇹 Pisca

Honours

 * Segunda Liga
 * Winners (1): 1993–94
 * Segunda Divisão
 * Winners (1): 1969–70

Presidents

 * 🇵🇹 Alcindo dos Reis (until 2011)
 * Ricardo Rossi (from 2011)

Managers

 * 🇵🇹 Dinis Rodrigues (until 2011)
 * Quim Machado (from 2011))

title: F.C. Tirsense


text:
He Zhiwen

He Zhiwen (born January 31, 1962), or Zhiwen He in Western name order, is a Chinese-born Spanish male table tennis player. In 2006 he was ranked #41 in the ITTF world ranking. Due to the difficulty of pronouncing his name in Spanish he has been given the nickname Juanito.

He plays for Jura Morez TT club and his playing style is left handed short pips penholder. He represented Spain in the 2012 London Olympics where he lost to Romanian Adrian Crisan.

Sporting achievements

 * 1985: First position in the Championship of the World by team.
 * 1991-2005: Champion of Spanish League.
 * 1998: Twentieth position in the Championship of Europe by team.
 * 1999: First position in mixed doubles and by team.
 * 2000: Fifth position in the Championship of Europe in mixed doubles.
 * Ninth position the Championship of individual Europe in and double.
 * 21st position in the Championship of the World by team.

 * 2003: Seventeenth position in the World singles Championship.
 * 2004: Thirtieth third position in the Olympic Games of Athens in singles.
 * 2004: It occupies the sixtieth second position of the worldwide ranking.
 * 2005: Ninth position in the Championship of Europe in doubles.
 * Fourteenth position in the.
 * Sixty-sixth position in the Championship of Europe in mixed doubles.
 * Ninth position in the Championship of the World in singles.

title: He Zhiwen


text: Template:RfA/subst

title: Template:RfA/subst


text:
Herter Brothers

The firm of Herter Brothers, (working 1864–1906), was founded by German immigrants Gustave (1830–1898) and Christian Herter (1839–1883) in New York City. It began as a furniture and upholstery shop/warehouse, but after the Civil War became one of the first American firms to provide complete interior decoration services. With their own design office and cabinet-making and upholstery workshops, Herter Brothers could provide every aspect of interior furnishing—including decorative paneling, mantels, wall and ceiling decoration, patterned floors, carpets and draperies.

Beginnings
Gustave was born illegitimate in 1830, to Johanna Christiana Maria Barbara Hagenlocher and an unnamed father, in Stuttgart, Württemberg, Germany. Five years later, Johanna Hagenlocher married Christian Herter (1807–1874), a skilled cabinetmaker. Gustave took his stepfather's surname, and later added the "e" to the end of his given name. His half-brother, Christian Augustus Ludwig Herter, was born in 1839. The boys followed their stepfather/father in the furniture-making trade. Gustave Herter came to New York City in 1848, and by 1858 was working under his own name. Christian was in New York by 1859, and joined his brother in the firm (renamed Herter Brothers) by 1864.

The firm was at the forefront of the panoply of furnishing styles that preceded the Mission style: Renaissance Revival, Neo-Grec, Eastlake, the Aesthetic Movement, ebonized "Anglo-Japanese style" furnishings of the 1870s – 1880s for which the firm is best recognized today, and the wide range of furnishings in revival styles required for Gilded Age houses.

Prominent clients
Some of the Herter Brothers’ most prominent clients include J. Pierpont Morgan, Jay Gould, Cyrus McCormack. The Red Room of the White House was furnished with Herter Brothers furniture during the administration of Ulysses S. Grant. Several pieces of Herter Brothers furniture remain in the White House including a center table and a slipper chair. This center table bears the remains of the only known Herter Brothers paper label; generally the firm stamped their furniture, a common practice in the 19th century.

Among their most prominent clients were the Vanderbilts. Between 1879 and 1882, Herter Brothers decorated William Henry Vanderbilt's new Fifth Avenue mansion. However, many of the Herter Brothers’ original furnishings were dispersed between 1915 and 1916, when the house was redecorated.

At 634 Fifth Avenue, in 1880–1882, they decorated the mansion of Darius Ogden Mills, on the site of part of Rockefeller Center now occupied by the colossal bronze Atlas. Their bills came to US$450,000. At the same time they were furnishing the nearby Jay Gould residence at 579 Fifth Avenue, at Forty-seventh Street.

The White House's interiors were extensively renovated during the administration of Theodore Roosevelt. Executing the designs of architect Charles Follen McKim, Herter Brothers created the plaster ceiling and ornately carved oak paneling for the expanded State Dining Room. The firm's workshops also provided the heavily carved paneling for the renovated East Room.

Interiors and furniture
Very few Herter Brothers interiors remain extant. "Elm Park" in Norwalk, Connecticut was built 1864–68, and partially decorated by Herter Brothers. Open to the public as the Lockwood-Mathews Mansion Museum, the drawing room, music room and rotunda/art gallery are examples of the Herters' interior design schemes, including lavishly carved and inlaid woodwork and frescoed walls and ceilings. The drawing room was recently restored by John Canning & Co. (formerly John Canning Studios) and retains a suite of Herter furniture purchased for it by the home's second owner, Charles D. Mathews.

Furniture from an early Herter commission survives in Victoria Mansion in Portland, Maine.

A notable surviving Herter interior is the John Thatcher home, now the Rosemount Museum, in Pueblo, Colorado (however, this work was carried out by the firm after the death of Christian Herter and the retirement of his brother, Gustave; connoisseurs and collectors tend to concentrate on the furniture and interiors designed during the brothers' supervision of the firm).

Examples of Herter furniture are in major public collections in the United States. The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City presented an exhibition, "Herter Brothers: Furniture and Interiors for a Gilded Age," in 1995.

Herter Brothers closed in 1906. Christian's son Albert founded Herter Looms in 1909, a tapestry and textile design-and-manufacturing firm that was, in a sense, successor to his father's firm.

title: Herter Brothers


text: Talk:Alberton railway station, Adelaide

title: Talk:Alberton railway station, Adelaide


text:
Talk:Futurians

This page is misleading
This page is misleading. It sounds like the Futurians are a group of fans, but as soon as Donal Wollheim is mentioned it gets confusing. Did the Futurians start when he decided to make it political or did it start when they were a group of fans? The article does not make it clear.

 * Uh, what article were you reading?:

 * As described in Isaac Asimov's autobiography In Memory Yet Green, the Futurians spun off from the Queens Science Fiction Society (headed by Sam Moskowitz, later an influential SF editor and historian) over ideological differences. Asimov does not specify the differences but hints that they were political in character. Other sources indicate that Donald A. Wollheim was pushing for a more left wing direction with a goal of leading fandom toward a political ideal, all of which Moskowitz resisted. As a result, Wollheim broke off and began the Futurians.

 * How is that not clear enough? Runa27 21:17, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Why did this group break up?
Why this group ended in 1945 would be a very good addition to this article, if anyone knows about it enough to add this. Rlquall 13:03, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Knight's book is at my library, but I don't recall what reason he stated or if his perception is even accurate. Most things I've indicated is that they were like close-knit groups of friends in that they either drifted apart or got sick of each other. I think there was also some rivalries and fighting over women. (The group was predominately male)--T. Anthony 10:20, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

 * You may have heard: there was a war on. A lot of people left town, and by 1945 the membership was down pretty badly by then. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  20:26, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

John Michel
I am de-wikifying John Michel because the link currently points to an article about a British Field Marshal who died in 1886. This is obviously not the Futurian John Michel (who currently has no article). Pat Berry 22:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
 * There's now a dab page, with links to the Field Marshall and to the (as yet unwritten) article about the Futurian. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  05:48, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Dead Link
http://media-in-transition.mit.edu/science_fiction/profiles/pohl.html in the External links no longer works. Has this material been relocated? Anyone know? --Pleasantville 12:08, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Updated with information from Pohl's autobiography
I updated the page with info from Frederik Pohl's autobiography The Way the Future Was. I left the paragraph of info from Asimov's autobiography. However, that said. I think Pohl's info is going to be more accurate. Mainly because he was really involved directly in the day-to-day activities of the Futurians. Asimov wasn't very active, as In Memory Yet Green shows. David Reiss (talk) 20:14, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Little or no relationship to PSFS as originally written
I deleted what had been the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs under "Origins", which cite Ozzie Train (an unpublished cite - personal reminiscence? - original work?) and state a connection both with Lunarians, which was not founded until the '50s, and PSFS (Philadelphia Science Fiction Society), which, while founded at about the same time, by people who knew the principals of both Futurians and New Fandom, was not related to the NYC groups in the way suggested ... except that a group called the Philadelphia Futurians (which may have been an outgrowth of the very ambitious and very political original NYC group) merged with PSFS early in its history. MarkVolundNYC (talk) 05:08, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Futurians. 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/20080512005416/http://ebbs.english.vt.edu/20th/etudes/anderson/futurians.html to http://ebbs.english.vt.edu/20th/etudes/anderson/futurians.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20020611072342/http://media-in-transition.mit.edu/science_fiction/profiles/pohl.html to http://media-in-transition.mit.edu/science_fiction/profiles/pohl.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20011126190852/http://www.sff.net/people/Diccon/FOXTROT.HTM to http://www.sff.net/people/diccon/FOXTROT.HTM

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) 14:56, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Futurians


text:
Template talk:History of the Low Countries

Wow
Nice template! This should be included on all the historical Low Countries pages; i'll see if i can get round to doing that. One note though: surprised you didnt choose Orange as color for the Netherlands; maybe an idea? :-) --The Minister of War 14:11, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Traslation
Really nice schematic, i'm gonna use it for the spanish wikipedia. Greetings!!

Remarks
I guess this (pretty!) new template makes others like Template:Netherlands state obsolete. I have one remark: Spanish Netherlands and Austrian Netherlands are currently redirects to Southern Netherlands, which covers the history of the southern half of the Seventeen Provinces between 1579 (the treaties of Utrecht and Atrecht/Arras) and the defeat of Napoleon in 1815. This seems a sensible division to me, and the template should reflect that. BTW were the Seventeen Provinces referred to as such between 1556 and 1579?Markussep 11:16, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Image:Bishopric liege flag.gif
Image used in the template has no source information. Please use the image with appropriate copyrights, else it would effect the template because of deletion of the image. Thanks -- Shyam ( T / C ) 21:06, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Luxembourg
The template is nice but it says on History of Luxembourg that Luxembourg was one of the Seventeen Provinces. Crix 18:25, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, and it seems that it was part of the Austrian Netherlands as well. Furthermore, it seems that the Bishopric of Liège is now more or less co-extensive with the Belgian provinces of Limburg and Liège, and not with Luxembourg. On the other hand, Luxembourg always was a County and a Duchy of the Holy Roman Empire, so it probably should get its own column in the template, so the template could better reflect the various stages Luxembourg went through. From what it is said in History of Luxembourg, this would be:

 * 1) until 1354: County of Luxembourg / Imperial estate of the Holy Roman Empire
 * 2) until 1443: Duchy of Luxembourg / Imperial estate of the Holy Roman Empire
 * 3) until 1477: part of Burgundian Netherlands
 * 4) until 1556: part of the Seventeen Provinces
 * 5) until 1581: part of the Spanish Netherlands
 * 6) until 1713: part of the Southern Netherlands
 * 7) until 1794: part of the Austrian Netherlands
 * 8) until 1804: Département of Forêts, part of the First French Republic
 * 9) until 1815: Département of Forêts, part of the First French Empire
 * 10) until 1867: elevated to Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, under Dutch rule, but not part of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, it was rather part of the German Confederation, which lasted until 1866. In 1867, Luxembourg's independence was formally ratified. Crix 18:56, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I put a changed version of the template on User talk:Crix. Pls. comment, otherwise I will implement it in a few days. Crix 05:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Hallo Crix, I have seen your proposed template now and think it is an improvement. However, there are some problems I want to address:
 * Why do you write Spanish Netherlands only until 1581 and then Southern Netherlands. The Spanish possessions were restricted to the south, yes, but these were still the Spanish Netherlands. Otherwise, why should they become the Austrian Netherlands after 1713.
 * I don't like Belgium being split up like it currently is. You could move the Liege column to the left side, so at the bottom a combined Belgium emerges. Or the Luxemburg column. IMHO we should have three fields for Be, Ne and Lux at the bottom.
 * With Luxemburg, I don't think the German Confederation should be mentioned. The members of that body were all sovereign states. Luxemburg is only different in that its Duke/Grand Duke also was King of the Netherlands. But then again, the same applied for Hanover and Holstein. It should rather mention the personal union with NL.

Cheers, Str1977 (smile back) 08:59, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Spanish Netherlands / Southern Netherlands: that's what the original version said
 * Belgium / Liege: I agree with you that splitting up Belgium is not ideal. Moving Liege to the left though will result in tearing apart those periods in which Luxembourg was part of the Netherlands / Belgium but Liege was not. Maybe Liege should go entirely?
 * Regarding the German Confederation: it was a very important step between the Holy Roman Empire and the German Empire. Although legally its members were sovereign, it was dominated by Prussia and Austria. My main reason for including this was that the Luxembourg fortress was maintained by the Confederation. What I mean is that IMHO the political integration of Lux into the German Confederation (alongside with the economic integration which again did not include the Kingdom of the Netherlands) was more important than the personal union with the Netherlands. Crix 10:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I think the split fields problem can be solved by creating three main columns, ending at the bottom in (from left to right:) Belgium, Netherlands, Luxemburg. Further up Liege (which definitely should be included) would be placed on the left (but less broad than Belgium beneath, then the Netherlands (with the Spanish, Austrian Netherlands on the left, then the United NL on the right), and Luxemburg on the right. Granted, this would split for a while the Spanish NL from Luxemburg but it's better to split a conglomerate than an actual state like Belgium.
 * Yes, the membership in the Confed was important, especially because of the fortress (which was dismantled as part of the settlement of the Luxemburg crisis) but I think the personal union has more bearing on the "Low Countries" setting.
 * I am not happy with the whole distinctions between "Burgundian Netherlands", "Seventeen Provinces", "Spanish Netherlands", "Southern Netherlands" - I propose either:
 * "Burgundian NL" (until 1477) - "Habsburg NL" (whatever we call it) (1477-1581) - "Spanish NL" (1581-1713) || "United NL" (1581-1795), or
 * "Burgundian NL" (-1556) - "Spanish NL" (1556-1581) - "Spanish NL" (1581-1713) || "United NL" (1581-1795)
 * Finally, singeling out Luxemburg before its incorporation into Burgundy is not good - if we were consistent, we'd have to include every estate with its respective date, some of these were included later than Luxemburg. I propose ommitting a starting date for the Burgundian NL alltogether.
 * Str1977 (smile back) 10:54, 23 July 2006 (UT

I have drawn up a version of the template as well, along the lines outlined above. See: User:Str1977/Editing

What I am still unsure about is:
 * The distinction of the two Luxemburg fields at the bottom (if any)
 * The coats of arms of the Seventeen Provinces (but see my concerns for the distinction to the Burgundian NL) and the Spanish NL. We need more info on the actual historical place of the following flag: I can't see Charles V changing the CoA of these territories, so IMHO the Seventeen should still be represented by the Burgundian CoA
 * The hyphen in the bottom part of the French Empire should go. However, I haven't found out yet how to do it without deleting the whole line. (But I am still trying)
 * The Batavian/Holland colour should be improved (I just took the first I could get).

Str1977 (smile back) 21:01, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Wow, this surely turned out nice with the columns! Regarding the hyphen, I'm not sure but you could change the colour of it to be identical to the background.
 * about singling out Luxembourg before its incorporation into Burgundy: the template tries to combine three national histories and a shared common history, so from the point of view of Luxembourg's national history, it appears important to have the parts for the Duchy, which after all was one of the Imperial estates, if I'm not mistaken. After its incorporation into Burgundy it did not lose its Reichsummittelbarkeit/Imperial immediacy, but it nevertheless became just one of the many votes exercised by the Hapsburg prince. So I would strongly be in favour of including it. I know that this would create problems for the Netherlands, but I think that this is of some importance for the national history of Lux.
 * as for the CoAs and colours, I'm surely no expert in this. I got the Luxembourgian CoA from the German wikipedia, maybe they'll have more over there, or maybe on the Dutch one too.
 * now getting back to the Confed issue: I'm sorry I don't really know much about Luxembourg history, what I know is mostly from the West Germanic wikipedias (well, okay except for Frisian ;) ), but it seems that we have a complicated situation here:
 * in 1815 after the Congress of Vienna, Luxembourg became a sovereign nation, alongside with all the former constituent parts of the HRE.
 * from 1815-1890, it was also connected to the UK of the Netherlands, which until 1830 comprised present Belgium as well.
 * Luxembourg was divided at this time, into a Wallonic part and a German part. According to some articles, some considered Luxembourg to be a part of Belgium at the time, others mention that Luxembourgers felt German (at the time, of course).
 * in 1830, with the Belgian revolt, the UK fell apart, the revolt extended over to the Walloon part of Luxembourg, which was finally split off from Lux and merged with Belgium (where, if I am not mistaken, it forms the modern Belgian province of Luxembourg)
 * in 1839, one of those countless London Protocols confirmed the diminished Lux's sovereignty.
 * politically and economically, Lux was integrated into the Confed, as I have kept reiterating, customs territory wise and also military wise.
 * in 1867 with the dissolution of the German Confed, Lux finally became a completely sovereign country, even though the personal union with the Netherlands would last until 1890
 * Now I don't know enough to judge which of these factors should be more prominent, and why the Luxembourgers finally did not join the German Empire (since sources say, that contrary to today, at the time they felt like Germans). Also since many sources cite 1867 as the year of Lux independence, the scale should reflect that also. It's hard since Lux has been a source of contention between B, NL and G in this period.... Maybe we should wait for others to chime in though I have a feeling the discussion will not draw more people until we finally change the template ;)... Crix 01:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I am pleased to hear that you like the template draft. It was a lot of trial and error.
 * Re the inclusion of early Luxemburg I see your point and agree with it. Maybe we somehow make this clear, e.g. by wordings like "County of Luxemburg, since ... part ..." Template-wise an inclusion should be no problem, since the Luxemburg column is the one at the right.
 * Unfortunately I am not heraldics expert either.
 * Your outline of Luxemburg's history is quite accurate:
 * It was disputed between Prussia (who had received the Rhineland) and the Netherlands (who had wanted to receive the Rhineland) - the Personal union with a Prussian garrison was the compromise. Lux. was part of the Confed from the beginning.
 * After the Belgian revolution the Wallon parts were given to Belgium. As compensation, the King of NL also joined the Confed for the Duchy of Limburg.
 * The economic issue must be distinguished from the political-military issue. Politically and militarily Lux. was a member of the Confed and one of its fortresses. Economic it was independent and joined the Zollverein out of its own willing (and interest). It remained in the Zollverein until the First World War (when the body collapsed) - the only member not also a member of the German Reich.
 * In 1867 a crisis broke out about Lux. Napoleon III, who had remained neutral in the Prussian-Austrian war, hoped for gains in the Rhineland or Belgium. Bismarck had indeed fed his appetite and implied that Prussia wouldn't hinder expansion. Now, after the war, Bismarck denounced such promises. Napoleon wanted Luxemburg at least, but Bismarck couldn't allow the cessation of a German state such as Luxemburg to the French. Remember that Prussiuan troops still held the fortress and public sentiment in Germany demanded the integration of Lux. as well. At the same time, Prussia couldn't yield the fortress to any other power. In the end, a compromise was reached, with Lux. staying out of the North German Federation (but not out of the Zollverein). Prussian troops withdrawing and the fortress being demolished. Napoleon of course was less than pleased and this event fed into the development up to the war of 1870.
 * I will reply to your other comments elswhere. Cheers, Str1977 (smile back) 09:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

 * I have done some more work on the template, remaining problems are:
 * Colours: Batavian looks horrible, the grey not very nice (POV pushing? ;-) ) and the early Lux. is messed up with white edges because of the CoA.*
 * I don't know how to let the hyphen under French Empire disappear. (I don't know about letters in colour, but I'll keep trying)
 * The name between 1482 (actually this is the date when the last Burgundian died) and 1581. Note that Seventeen Provinces is a name used even after the Dutch rebellion. In a way Charles V was a Burgundian too. Note also, that Spanish and Austrian Netherlands redirect to Southern NL therefore I have now changed the upper Spanish NL link to Seventeen Provinces.
 * the size of the columns: for some reason columns are of different sizes even though they all have the "colspan=2" format (I thought about making Lux. smaller or the resulting BeNeLux columns all the same size, but it doesn't work out that way. Despite being German, I don't want the Dutch column to be smaller than the Lux. column. ;-)
 * Cheers, Str1977 (smile back) 15:10, 24 July cris2006 (UTC)

I need to correct somethin: Luxembourg was economically NOT part of the german confederation. However it joined the Zollverein indirectly in 1842, following an economic crisis and the signature of an economic union with Prussia, which is an ecnomic union. The reason why Luxembourg never was annexed by neither the Netherlands, France or Germany was because tis territory, and mainly the strong fortifications of the city of Luxembourg were disputed between France and the Germans. This was the reason of the crisis in 1867. I ignore if politically Luxembourg was part of the germand confederation. All I know is that the Germans helped Belgians and Luxemburgish to revolt against the Dutch rule. As far as I can remember, the inclusion into the confederation was limited to the city, not the whole country. --Jangli 18:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, Jangli, for clearing up and thanks for replying below. I tried to make it clear above that the economic ties to Germany was through the Zollverein - the Confed had no economic dimension, though I think the Bundesakte made some reference to economic cooperation as a possibility. Luxembourg joined the Zollverein and remained a member until the 1st World War (except for this, the Zollverein was identical to the German Reich). Luxembourg was a member of the Confed until 1866 - the entire Grand Duchy and after 1830 the diminished territory. It was never annexed because each power hindered the other - first Prussia the Dutch (1815), then Prussia the French and France the Prussians (1867). Though Bismarck never was enthusiastic about an annexation, he had to consider public opinion. Str1977 (smile back) 20:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes I should have remembered the Luxembourg Crisis.... argh... anyhow, I think we should just try changing the template to the latest version by Str1977 and see what happens. 'cause I think the big picture is about right now. So if the template changes throughout the wikipedia we might get more reactions, I suppose... Crix 10:13, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I will move it over, even though we have no solution for the remaining issues: Luxemburg after 1815 and distinction between Burgundian NL/Seventeen Provinces/Spanish NL yet. Str1977 (smile back) 15:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Answer to Str1977 about Luxembourg
This is in response to a request I got from Str1977.

The reason why Luxembourg was in the German confederation, is that the germans refused to see it annexed by the Netherlands. Therefore it remained in personal union with the king of the Netherlands, while Prussia had some military in the city of Luxembourg (strategic place).

The personal union was disrupted in 1860 because the family of Orange-Nassau had no direct male descendant. Adolphe from Nassau then became Grand-Duke of Luxembourg. Independance was acheived in several steps:

In 1830, the king of the Netherlands signed a "decrét" (don't remember how to spell the English word) which gave Luxembourg its autonomy. From that event on, the King send his son Henri to represent the king, instead of sending any governor. Henry was in favour of an independance for Luxembourg from the Netherlands. The treaty of London in 1839 confirmed the independance of the Grand-Duchy. A crisis between the country about its statute emerged in 1867 between France (Napoleon wanted to buy the country from the Netherlands) and Prussia, which eventually led to the second treaty of London confirming the neutrality of Luxembourg. Prussia withdraw its military.

French sources:

I think you should keep 1839 in your template, just as you did with 1830 for Belgium. The only reason why Luxembourg was in the German confederation was because it helped the Germans as a buffer. The personal union with the king of the Netherlands was between 1839 and 1890 only formal.

I hope I could answer your question. --Jangli 17:50, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Template in French
is better I thnik. You Should copy it. MaCRoEco 20:47, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Something I don't understand
The template mentions re. the Duchy of Luxemburg "integrated 1441". What exactly does this mean? I didn't see any mention of a particular event on that year in any of the articles about the duchy or the history of the Grand Duchy. Aviad2001 21:28, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Gap 1813-1815
The template now indicates that the whole Benelux area was part of the French Empire between 1810 and 1815. I wonder why this has not caused heated protests up to now :-) For the current Netherlands the incorporation lasted from the Rambouillet Decree of July 9, 1810 till the Proclamation by the Hogendorp triumvirate on November 17, 1813 of the provisional "General Administration of the United Netherlands" (though the newly-styled "Sovereign Prince" only arrived on November 30). By that time a large part of the country had already been evacuated by the French, though some fortresses like Gorinchem, Naarden and Den Helder had to be besieged to dislodge them. Admittedly, the interlude of the "Sovereign Prince" is a bit murky, as in Dutch mythology this period is retroactively merged with the United Kingdom of the Netherlands, but it is cerainly incorrect to extend the era of the Empire till 1815, because France formally surendered its claims by the Treaty of Paris of May 30, 1814. As far as present-day Belgium is concerned: the French empire ended there with Buelows proclamation of Feb. 1, 1814 in Brussels, which started the Governorate-general of Belgium. On the basis of the London Protocol of June 20 (or 21), 1814 the Sovereign Prince of the United Netherlands was appointed governor-general on August 1, 1814, putting the two countries under a single government in practice, though this was not formalized until the proclamation of the United Kingdom on March 16, 1815. Of course, this was all homologated by the Final Act of the Congess of Vienna of June 8, 1815, but it would be exceedingly formal to use this as the date of record (we don't give Sept. 3, 1783 as the date for American Independence either :-) In sum: I think in the columns for Belgium and the Netherlands there should be space in 1814 for the governorate-general and the "Sovereign Prince" (which should not make the Netherlands a "principality" by the way, though it is difficult to explain what the proper designation would be).--Ereunetes (talk) 20:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I strongly agree, and was trying to change it, but I'm not adept enough with table syntax to do it myself. My understanding is that the "Sovereign Prince" was sovereign prince over what was technically still the old Republic of the United Netherlands, although I'm not sure of that. I assume Belgium should be considered to be under some sort of provisional rule during that period. What was Luxembourg's status during this time, by the way? john k (talk) 04:19, 4 July 2009 (UTC)

L'bourg
why does it look like Luxemburg was spawnd out of belgium? I always thought they stayed in personal union with the netherlands untill the first female queen?--SelfQ (talk) 10:30, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Names different through piping
Hi, great template. Could someone explain why there are pipes, e.g. I read "United Netherlands" but the link is to "Dutch Republic". Thanx. -DePiep (talk) 19:43, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

United States of Belgium and the révolution brabançonne
Whilst all the Habsburg territories of the Southern Netherlands took part in the brief revolt against Habsburg rule to form the United States of Belgium in 1790, this template suggests that the Bishopric of Liège did too.

I'm pretty sure that Liège (and the County of Bouillon and the Imperial Abbey of Stavelot-Malmedy) didn't join the USB (having never been Habsburg territories in the first place). The French article fr:États-Belgiques-Unis — and the French version of this template (fr:Modèle:États du Benelux) don't list any of these three territories in the USB — indeed, they list Bouillon and Stavelot-Malmedy in the same box as Liège, suggesting that these territories were indeed independent of the révolution brabançonne. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 18:00, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

 * I've fixed this issue by importing and translating the French template. — OwenBlacker (Talk) 15:18, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Nazi Germany
I wonder why Nazi Germany is shown in the Belgium and Luxembourg columns but not in the The Netherlands. I should either be in all three or my preference would be to not show it at all. The Netherlands and Luxembourg never formally surrendered to Germany and in Belgium the King did but this was not recognised by the Government. All three governments went into exile. For Belgium there is also a discrepancy as the first period goes to 1944, then Nazi Germany goes to 1945 and the second period for Belgium starts at 1944.Bigar (talk) 23:54, 12 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I utterly agree with Bigar. Vb 20:32, 22 August 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.0.65.250 (talk)

That the governments went in exile is beside the point. These countries’ home territories were occupied and some of them even annexed by the Germans. I initially only detailed the actual annexations (which the Netherlands was not), but would suggest also showing their periods of military occupations. Now the creation of two German "reichsgaue" of Flanders and Wallonia in Belgium is an arguable case since these were only really established in exile by the Nazis, but Luxembourg was irrefutably absorbed into the Third Reich during the war.--Morgan Hauser (talk) 23:34, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

standardised images of coats of arms
I did not revert Adelbrecht's edit here as I do not wish to lower myself to his level. Therefore I will ask for consensus concerning which images should be used in this template. The standardised images created over the past few years, a mix of images of various styles, forms etc., or a new set of standardises images (for instance created by Adelbrecht). If the only objection to the current standardised images based on the french language heraldry project is its use of gradients I'd like to note that it's quite easy to a) download these vector images, b) edit them to remove or deactivate the gradient layers and c) upload the modified image to a new file at commons with appropriate licensing and d) link the new derivative image into this template (and other articles).--Caranorn (talk) 18:45, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The gradients and clarity are an objective argument. The subjective argument is that they're in my opinion (and quite a few others) ugly. The French wikiproject also has a lack of uniformity, especially with the lions.

 * The images I create are also kinda standardised, not as rigorously as the French style, but almost all of them use the same elements and colors as the users Sodacan, Heralder and Katapanomegas.

 * Also, it seems that someone has uploeded a new version of the Arms of Henri VII of Luxembourg over your file. Adelbrecht (talk) 19:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

 * I know concerning that file. I contacted the uploader about the issue. But I don't see how that file is an issue to this discussion.
 * Back to the topic. I agree that there are more beautiful images, I'd even consider your lion or that of Sodacan more beautiful. But that's not the issue really as that's a subjective interpretation, tastes vary and certainly none of us shoudl take unilateral issue based only on our taste. I also think it is far better to have small svg files rather than the large ones you've created (I downloaded one hoping it was an issue of unclean save, unfortunately that was not the case as making a clean save only reduced size marginally), in a small template/article like this it won't be a major issue, but in a larger page it will mean extremely slow loading. I think it's also more important to establish a standard within articles, series of articles etc to make the pages look harmonious and not mismatched with extremely varied styles. That's what the projet blason was founded for, just like similar groups here on en., on de., on commons and many other projects. The problem is that while your images I'm sure are indeed standardised, but you have not created a database yet ammounting to even 1/1.000.000 of that created by the hundred or so users from standardised projects. Anyhow, this particular template was probably the worst possible place to start this discussion and try and seek consensus. But I did not wish to alter the template and leave your recent edit here uncommented which might have looked like my endorsing your actions and I'm not willing to get overly involved in policy again as that's very tiring in the long run. So I'd rather find agreement among a small number of users and not seek either involvment of the local heraldry project or go to the administrators.--Caranorn (talk) 20:38, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

 * The German WikiProject (which may be more relevant to territories that were formerly within the Empire), also have a standardised template for arms. The 3D sheen (the gradient mentioned above) is also standard there, however a different shield shape is also, based from File:Wappen Schild Blank.svg, right. I have created many coats of arms using this template… — OwenBlacker (Talk) 00:01, 1 May 2011 (UTC)
 * You uploaded that 3D sheen in january. I have to admit that I've never seen this used before. I have the shape before in many arms, but without the 3D sheen. Do you have a link to the German heraldry project? Because it kinda seems like you're the only to use it, but I do admit that I have not searched all of commons. Adelbrecht (talk) 07:59, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Luxembourg II
It seems that there has been a minor mistake considering Luxembourg in this template. Luxembourg was under a personal union until 1839, but not part of the (United) Kingdom of the Netherlands. William I was both King of the Netherlands and Grand-Duke of Luxembourg. See also discussion above (2006) for more detail. effeietsanders 07:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Small size
I have recently reverted an edit by Watisfictie which made the template too small to read at all. Watisfictie, can you even read it at that size? I'm curious to hear why you thought it works well at that size when it works so poorly for me.  Oreo Priest  talk 15:58, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

 * I have no problem reading it, but I resized the font from 25% to 65%, Oreo Priest.
 * Watisfictie (talk) 16:40, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
 * That seems to have solved it.  Oreo Priest  talk 17:04, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

Excessive detail?
I'm concerned that with all the detail that's recently been added, the template has lost much of its simplicity and readability, and has now become a complex behemoth. That being said, I do recognize that this version is more accurate and exhaustive (while still not being 100% of either). I suppose I wanted to voice my concern and see what others think.  Oreo Priest  talk 14:03, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

 * I agree, the width of the template is starting to cause layout problems on certain articles (such as Duke of Bouillon). Perhaps we could not mention all of the Seventeen Provinces individually, in stead simply having them fall under Burgundian Netherlands and Habsburg Netherlands. Moreover, I'm not sure whether the Frankish and Roman Empires are of such importance in this context, so I suggest having the table start with the Burgundian Netherlands. Additionally, the texts should be centred and the cell borders consistent. (Luxorr (talk) 15:01, 10 April 2014 (UTC))

 * I have overlooked this discussion while editing the template the last couple of days. However a few of the concerns have been addressed. The size vertically and horizontally have been reduced by making the information more compact. In fact, the table is vertically even smaller than it has been before, although the problem lays manly in the horizontal dimension.

 * To meet your concerns I would like to suggest the following:
 * To reduce the width:
 * 1. combining Holland and Frisia/Friesland into one column; that would make sense, since the (Frankish) county of Holland was created out of the Kingdom of Frisia, and in the early middle ages the county was in fact known for a long time as 'West-Frisia'. The downside of combining the two however, is that Friesland (the rest of it outside the county of Holland) takes an exceptional development in the Middel ages, since it didn't have a feudal overlord and it successfully kept Holland and Utrecht out.
 * 2. removing one of the two columns of the old Duchy of Luxembourg. The downside is that reduction of Luxembourg to one column would leave out that half of Luxembourg became a province of Belgium.

 * To address the remarks of excessive detail:
 * 3. removing the subdivision of the Roman province Gallica Belgica into Belgica Secunda etc, but leave Gallica Belgica as a whole, since the influence of the Romans to the Low Countries (and Europe) is important. Also the name Belgica as a reference to the region stems from here.
 * 4. combining the Belgic tribes into one row 'Belgic tribes' instead of their individual names.
 * 5. as Luxor suggested, leaving out the provinces with no geopolitical significance in the early and high middle ages: Friesland, Groningen, Zeeland, Overijssel, Zutphen, Limburg, Artois, Mechelen, Tournaisis, Namur
 * 6. removing rows from the French Period section by combining Batavian Republic and Kingdom of Holland in one row.

 * Although the term 'Low Countries' stems from Burgundian times, I m not a favour starting the template with the Burgundian Netherlands as it is suggested. In the development of the Low Countries the Franks and the Romans play a key role, and to a lesser extend the Frisian, Belgic and Saxons tribes aswel. --Watisfictie (talk) 08:42, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
 * If you're even considering simplifying it in any way, then I think that's a step in the right direction and you should do it. Try also to remember the role of this template - it's a simple reference at the edge of the top of a page, and it should not attempt to be completely exhaustive or correct in every aspect.  Oreo Priest  talk 19:12, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

 * You clearly know more about this than I do. If you think these are acceptable measures to simplify the template, I support them. (Luxorr (talk) 11:43, 16 April 2014 (UTC))

Bishopric of Utrecht
I am currious about from where are the years, 695 and 1456, for the Bishopric of Utrecht sourced from? From what I have seen, it was established in 1024 and disestablished in 1528. Prior to its beginning part of its territory was divided from Lower Lorraine. At its end, in 1528, it was divided into the Lordship of Utrecht, Lordship of Overijssel, and the County of Drenthe. Please discuss on Talk:Bishopric of Utrecht if anyone has any additional information.

 * Source: History of Holland. Philip the Good of Burgundy increased Burgundian influence in Utrecht by securing in 1456 the election of his illegitimate son David, as Bishop of Utrecht. --Watisfictie (talk) 22:30, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

 * The Bishopric of Utrecht, a principality of the Holy Roman Empire, was not established in 695 but in 1024 and it was not disestablished in 1456 but in 1528. David's election did not change the Bishopric of Utrecht's status as a principality of the Holy Roman Empire. Why not use those years? —BoBoMisiu (talk) 02:38, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

Unpopulated?
I'm curious about the notion of the area of the Kingdom of Frisia - c. Zeeland, Holland, Friesland and Ostfriesland - being unpopulated (which, if you ask me, is better described as uninhabited, but that's just semantics). Does this mean literal lack of population due to the Migration Period, or does it mean lack of any true tribes with armies in the area? 86.86.215.140 (talk) 19:42, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

 * That information comes from the article History of the Netherlands, where the word "unpopulated" is used. But you might be right when it comes to semantics, I'm not a native speaker.--Watisfictie (talk) 09:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Demographics of Atlanta

I obtained the population figures and the 1900 comment from the New International Encyclopedia which was published in 1926. The 1940 population figure was taken from Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Fifth Edition, published in 1942. TooPotato 14:12, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Spacing Issues
There is something wrong with the formatting of this article, can someone fix the spacing issues? Ryoung 122 16:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Remove article and change to redirect
There is not any useful or more detailed information in this article that was not already mentioned on the main Atlanta page under Demographics. The information on the main page is not excessive either. It was always getting out of sync with the material in the main Atlanta article so better just to delete this article and make it a redirect, until someone really adds content that warrants a standalone demography article Keizers (talk) 01:44, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

AfD closed as "Keep"
Consensus has been shown to keep this article in place. Northamerica1000 (talk) 09:27, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Demographics of Atlanta. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090927002807/http://www.fbi.gov:80/ucr/08aprelim/table_4co-id.html to http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/08aprelim/table_4co-id.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:15, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Demographics of Atlanta. 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/20140815134909/http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk to http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=bkmk
 * Added tag to http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/reports/2003/11_livingcities_Atlanta/atlanta.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2011/1013_immigration_wilson_singer/1013_immigration_wilson_singer.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2011/1013_immigration_wilson_singer/1013_immigration_wilson_singer.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:05, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on Demographics of Atlanta. 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/20100530113853/http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Programs/Metro/state_of_metro_america/metro_america_chapters/metro_america_race.pdf to http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/Programs/Metro/state_of_metro_america/metro_america_chapters/metro_america_race.pdf
 * Added archive https://archive.li/20140913094510/http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2011/03/23/a-census-speeds-atlanta-toward-racially-neutral-ground/ to http://blogs.ajc.com/political-insider-jim-galloway/2011/03/23/a-census-speeds-atlanta-toward-racially-neutral-ground/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070702202709/http://www.law.ucla.edu/williamsinstitute/publications/SameSexCouplesandGLBpopACS.pdf to http://www.law.ucla.edu/williamsinstitute/publications/SameSexCouplesandGLBpopACS.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.census.gov/statab/ccdb/cit3060r.txt
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130814210044/http://digitalcollections.library.gsu.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/MapsTest/id/155/rec/126 to http://digitalcollections.library.gsu.edu/cdm/singleitem/collection/MapsTest/id/155/rec/126
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131210173311/http://gis.atlantaga.gov/apps/annex/index.php?a=view&recid=118 to http://gis.atlantaga.gov/apps/annex/index.php?a=view&recid=118
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131210172412/http://gis.atlantaga.gov/apps/annex/index.php?a=view&recid=119 to http://gis.atlantaga.gov/apps/annex/index.php?a=view&recid=119
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131210173458/http://gis.atlantaga.gov/apps/annex/index.php?a=view&recid=66 to http://gis.atlantaga.gov/apps/annex/index.php?a=view&recid=66
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/files/rc/papers/2011/1013_immigration_wilson_singer/1013_immigration_wilson_singer.pdf
 * Added tag to http://174.37.215.145/client_resources/government/planning/2010census/2010censusbroch_npu_n.pdf
 * Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/65PkAi6Pu?url=http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2011/1013_immigration_wilson_singer/1013_immigration_wilson_singer.pdf to http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/Files/rc/papers/2011/1013_immigration_wilson_singer/1013_immigration_wilson_singer.pdf

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) 13:45, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

"Irish Americans in Atlanta" listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Irish Americans in Atlanta and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 January 30 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. signed,Rosguill talk 18:33, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Demographics of Atlanta


text:
Talk:Hongkong Independence Movement

Who wrote this? Because i've never heard of this rubbish about the Republic of Hongkong. Besides, Hongkong should be spelt Hong Kong... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Larryau (talk • contribs). 14:14, October 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Please post your comment at talk:Hong Kong Front. Thanks. — Instantnood 17:09, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Hongkong Independence Movement


text:
Zucchini yellow mosaic virus

Zucchini yellow mosaic virus (ZYMV) is an aphid-borne potyvirus, regarded as a major pathogen of cucurbits in most regions of the world where these crops are cultivated.

ZYMV affects all cucurbits including pumpkins, squashes, vegetable marrows, courgettes, melons, watermelons, cucumbers, gherkins and various gourds especially zucchinis. The effects are severe leaf mosaic, yellowing and eventually "shoestring" symptoms in the leaves. The fruits are stunted, twisted and deformed by raised protuberances, which reduces yield and makes them unmarketable in some cultures. In cultivated crops plants cease producing marketable fruits within 1–2 weeks of infection and serious financial losses can occur, particularly in courgette and marrow crops.

Control
The disease may be introduced in infected seed, so sourcing clean seed can help prevent the disease. Control is largely dependent on using insecticides to control the aphid vectors. A form of "inoculation" or cross protection may also be used where seedlings are inoculated with a non-virulent strain of the virus (ZYMV-WK); this prevents infection with the severe strain.

A biotech yellow crookneck squash has been developed to resist zucchini yellow mosaic virus (and watermelon mosaic virus (WMV)). This contains the coat protein genes of the viruses. In 2009, relatively small amounts of this were grown commercially in the US.

It is similar to the watermelon mosaic virus.

title: Zucchini yellow mosaic virus


text:
Communist Organisation of India (Marxist–Leninist)

Communist Organisation of India (Marxist–Leninist) was a political organisation in India. COI (ML) was formed in May 1985 through the merger of six different groups;

 * Organising Committee of Communist Revolutionaries led by Kanu Sanyal
 * Communist Party of India (Marxist-Leninist) Kaimur Range led by Ravi Shankar.
 * Central Organising Committee, Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist) led by Umadhar Singh
 * A faction of Unity Centre of Communist Revolutionaries of India (Marxist–Leninist) led by Subodh Mitra
 * Indian Communist Party led by U. Krishnappa
 * Liberation Front led by Sabuj Sen

Kanu Sanyal was elected general secretary of COI (ML). COI (ML) participated in elections.

In 2003 COI (ML) merged with Communist Party of India (Marxist–Leninist) Unity Initiative to form a unified CPI (ML).

National question
COI (ML) held the position that India was multi-national, in which some nationalities dominated the government and suppressed less advanced national groups. The organisation supported the right to self-determination of Jammu & Kashmir, Nagaland and Mizoram.