text:
British Standards

British Standards (BS) are the standards produced by the BSI Group which is incorporated under a royal charter and which is formally designated as the national standards body (NSB) for the UK. The BSI Group produces British Standards under the authority of the charter, which lays down as one of the BSI's objectives to: "Set up standards of quality for goods and services, and prepare and promote the general adoption of British Standards and schedules in connection therewith and from time to time to revise, alter and amend such standards and schedules as experience and circumstances require."

Formally, as stated in a 2002 memorandum of understanding between the BSI and the United Kingdom Government, British Standards are defined as: "'British Standards' means formal consensus standards as set out in BS 0-1 paragraph 3.2 and based upon the principles of standardisation recognised inter alia in European standardisation policy."

Products and services which BSI certifies as having met the requirements of specific standards within designated schemes are awarded the Kitemark.

History
BSI Group began in 1901 as the Engineering Standards Committee, led by James Mansergh, to standardize the number and type of steel sections, in order to make British manufacturers more efficient and competitive. Over time the standards developed to cover many aspects of tangible engineering, and then engineering methodologies including quality systems, safety and security.

Creation
The BSI Group as a whole does not produce British Standards, as standards work within the BSI is decentralized. The governing board of BSI establishes a Standards Board. The Standards Board does little apart from setting up sector boards (a sector in BSI parlance being a field of standardization such as ICT, quality, agriculture, manufacturing, or fire). Each sector board, in turn, constitutes several technical committees. It is the technical committees that, formally, approve a British Standard, which is then presented to the secretary of the supervisory sector board for endorsement of the fact that the technical committee has indeed completed a task for which it was constituted.

Standards
The standards produced are titled British Standard XXXX[-P]:YYYY where XXXX is the number of the standard, P is the number of the part of the standard (where the standard is split into multiple parts) and YYYY is the year in which the standard came into effect. BSI Group currently has over 27,000 active standards. Products are commonly specified as meeting a particular British Standard, and in general, this can be done without any certification or independent testing. The standard simply provides a shorthand way of claiming that certain specifications are met, while encouraging manufacturers to adhere to a common method for such a specification.

The Kitemark can be used to indicate certification by BSI, but only where a Kitemark scheme has been set up around a particular standard. It is mainly applicable to safety and quality management standards. There is a common misunderstanding that Kitemarks are necessary to prove compliance with any BS standard, but in general, it is neither desirable nor possible that every standard be 'policed' in this way.

Following the move on harmonization of the standard in Europe, some British Standards are gradually being superseded or replaced by the relevant European Standards (EN).

Status of standards
Standards are continuously reviewed and developed and are periodically allocated one or more of the following status keywords.

 * Confirmed - the standard has been reviewed and confirmed as being current.
 * Current - the document is the current, most recently published one available.
 * Draft for public comment/DPC - a national stage in the development of a standard, where wider consultation is sought within the UK.
 * Obsolescent - indicating by amendment that the standard is not recommended for use for new equipment, but needs to be retained to provide for the servicing of equipment that is expected to have a long working life, or due to legislative issues.
 * Partially replaced - the standard has been partially replaced by one or more other standards.
 * Proposed for confirmation - the standard is being reviewed and it has been proposed that it is confirmed as the current standard.
 * Proposed for obsolescence - the standard is being reviewed and it has been proposed that it is made obsolescent.
 * Proposed for withdrawal - the standard is being reviewed and it has been proposed that it is withdrawn.
 * Revised - the standard has been revised.
 * Superseded - the standard has been replaced by one or more other standards.
 * Under review - the standard is under review.
 * Withdrawn - the document is no longer current and has been withdrawn.
 * Work in hand - there is work being undertaken on the standard and there may be a related draft for public comment available.

Examples

 * BS 0 A standard for standards specifies development, structure and drafting of standards.
 * BS 1 Lists of rolled sections for structural purposes
 * BS 2 Specification and sections of tramway rails and fishplates
 * BS 3 Report on influence of gauge length and section of test bar on the percentage of elongation
 * BS 4 Specification for structural steel sections
 * BS 5 Report on locomotives for Indian railways
 * BS 7 Dimensions of copper conductors insulated annealled, for electric power and light
 * BS 9 Specifications for bullhead railway rails
 * BS 11 Specifications and sections of Flat Bottom railway rails
 * BS 12 Specification for Portland Cement
 * BS 15 Specification for structural steel for bridges, etc., and general building construction
 * BS 16 Specification for telegraph material (insulators, pole fittings, et cetera)
 * BS 17 Interim report on electrical machinery
 * BS 22 Report on effect of temperature on insulating materials
 * BS 24 Specifications for material used in the construction of standards for railway rolling stock
 * BS 26 Second report on locomotives for Indian Railways (Superseding No 5)
 * BS 27 Report on standard systems of limit gauges for running fits
 * BS 28 Report on nuts, bolt heads and spanners
 * BS 31 Specification for steel conduits for electrical wiring
 * BS 32 Specification for steel bars for use in automatic machines
 * BS 33 Carbon filament electric lamps
 * BS 34 Tables of BS Whitworth, BS Fine and BS Pipe Threads
 * BS 35 Specification for Copper Alloy Bars for use in Automatic Machines
 * BS 36 Report on British Standards for Electrical Machinery
 * BS 37 Specification for Electricity Meters
 * BS 38 Report on British Standards Systems for Limit Gauges for Screw Threads
 * BS 42 Report on reciprocating steam engines for electrical purposes
 * BS 43 Specification for charcoal iron lip-welded boiler tubes
 * BS 45 Report on Dimensions for Sparking Plugs (for Internal Combustion Engines)
 * BS 47 Steel Fishplates for Bullhead and Flat Bottom Railway Rails, Specification and Sections of
 * BS 49 Specification for Ammetres and Voltmetres
 * BS 50 Third Report on Locomotives for Indian Railways (Superseding No. 5 and 26)
 * BS 53 Specification for Cold Drawn Weldless Steel Boiler Tubes for Locomotive Boilers
 * BS 54 Report on Screw Threads, Nuts and Bolt Heads for use in Automobile Construction
 * BS 56 Definitions of Yield Point and Elastic Limit
 * BS 57 Report on heads for Small Screws
 * BS 70 Report on Pneumatic Tyre Rims for automobiles, motorcycles and bicycles
 * BS 72 British Standardisation Rules for Electrical Machinery,
 * BS 73 Specification for Two-Pin Wall Plugs and Sockets (Five-, Fifteen- and Thirty-Ampere)
 * BS 76 Report of and Specifications for Tar and Pitch for Road Purposes
 * BS 77 Specification. Voltages for a.c. transmission and distribution systems
 * BS 80 Magnetos for automobile purposes
 * BS 81 Specification for Instrument Transformers
 * BS 82 Specification for Starters for Electric Motors
 * BS 84 Report on Screw Threads (British Standard Fine), and their Tolerances (Superseding parts of Reports Nos. 20 and 33)
 * BS 86 Report on Dimensions of Magnetos for Aircraft Purposes
 * BS 153 Specification for Steel Girder Bridges
 * BS 308 a now deleted standard for engineering drawing conventions, having been absorbed into BS 8888.
 * BS 317 for Hand-Shield and Side Entry Pattern Three-Pin Wall Plugs and Sockets (Two Pin and Earth Type)
 * BS 336 for fire hose couplings and ancillary equipment
 * BS 372 for Side-entry wall plugs and sockets for domestic purposes (Part 1 superseded BS 73 and Part 2 superseded BS 317)
 * BS 381 for colours used in identification, coding and other special purposes
 * BS 476 for fire resistance of building materials/elements
 * BS 499 Welding terms and symbols.
 * BS 546 for Two-pole and earthing-pin plugs, socket-outlets and socket-outlet adaptors for AC (50–60 Hz) circuits up to 250V
 * BS 857 for safety glass for land transport
 * BS 970 Specification for wrought steels for mechanical and allied engineering purposes
 * BS 987C Camouflage Colours
 * BS 1011 Recommendation for welding of metallic materials
 * BS 1088 for marine plywood
 * BS 1192 for Construction Drawing Practice. Part 5 (BS1192-5:1998) concerns Guide for structuring and exchange of CAD data.
 * BS 1361 for cartridge fuses for a.c. circuits in domestic and similar premises
 * BS 1362 for cartridge fuses for BS 1363 power plugs
 * BS 1363 for mains power plugs and sockets
 * BS 1377 Methods of test for soils for civil engineering.
 * BS 1380 Speed and Exposure Index of Photographic Negative Materials.
 * BS 1572 Colours for Flat Finishes for Wall Decoration
 * BS 1881 Testing Concrete
 * BS 1852 Specification for marking codes for resistors and capacitors
 * BS 2979 Transliteration of Cyrillic and Greek characters
 * BS 3621 Thief resistant lock assembly. Key egress.
 * BS 3943 Specification for plastics waste traps
 * BS 4142 Methods for rating and assessing industrial and commercial sound
 * BS 4293 for residual current-operated circuit-breakers
 * BS 4343 for industrial electrical power connectors
 * BS 4573 Specification for 2-pin reversible plugs and shaver socket-outlets
 * BS 4960 for weighing instruments for domestic cookery
 * BS 5252 for colour-coordination in building construction
 * BS 5400 for steel, concrete and composite bridges.
 * BS 5499 for graphical symbols and signs in building construction; including shape, colour and layout
 * BS 5544 for anti-bandit glazing (glazing resistant to manual attack)
 * BS 5750 for quality management, the ancestor of ISO 9000
 * BS 5837 for protection of trees during construction work
 * BS 5839 for fire detection and alarm systems for buildings
 * BS 5930 for site investigations
 * BS 5950 for structural steel
 * BS 5993 for Cricket balls
 * BS 6008 for preparation of a liquor of tea for use in sensory tests
 * BS 6312 for telephone plugs and sockets
 * BS 6651 code of practice for protection of structures against lightning; replaced by BS EN 62305 (IEC 62305) series.
 * BS 6879 for British geocodes, a superset of ISO 3166-2:GB
 * BS 7430 code of practice for earthing
 * BS 7671 Requirements for Electrical Installations, The IEE Wiring Regulations, produced by the IET.
 * BS 7799 for information security, the ancestor of the ISO/IEC 27000 family of standards, including 27002 (formerly 17799)
 * BS 7901 for recovery vehicles and vehicle recovery equipment
 * BS 7909 Code of practice for temporary electrical systems for entertainment and related purposes
 * BS 7919 Electric cables. Flexible cables rated up to 450/750 V, for use with appliances and equipment intended for industrial and similar environments
 * BS 7910 guide to methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures
 * BS 7925 Software testing
 * BS 7971 Protective clothing and equipment for use in violent situations and in training
 * BS 8110 for structural concrete
 * BS 8233 Guidance on sound insulation and noise reduction in buildings
 * BS 8484 for the provision of lone worker device services
 * BS 8485 for the characterization and remediation from ground gas in affected developments
 * BS 8494 for detecting and measuring carbon dioxide in ambient air or extraction systems
 * BS 8546 Travel adaptors compatible with UK plug and socket system.
 * BS 8888 for engineering drawing and technical product specification
 * BS 9251 for safety guidelines on fire sprinkler systems in residential buildings
 * BS 15000 for IT Service Management, (ITIL), now ISO/IEC 20000
 * BS 3G 101 for general requirements for mechanical and electromechanical aircraft indicators
 * BS EN 12195 Load restraining on road vehicles.
 * BS EN 60204 Safety of machinery
 * BS EN ISO 4210 - Cycles. Safety Requirements for Bicycles

PAS documents
BSI also publishes a series of Publicly Available Specification (PAS) documents.

PAS documents are a flexible and rapid standards development model open to all organizations. A PAS is a sponsored piece of work allowing organizations flexibility in the rapid creation of a standard while also allowing for a greater degree of control over the document's development. A typical development time frame for a PAS is around six to nine months. Once published by BSI, a PAS has all the functionality of a British Standard for the purposes of creating schemes such as management systems and product benchmarks as well as codes of practice. A PAS is a living document and after two years the document will be reviewed and a decision made with the client as to whether or not this should be taken forward to become a formal standard. The term PAS was originally an abbreviation for "product approval specification", a name which was subsequently changed to "publicly available specification". However, according to BSI, not all PAS documents are structured as specifications and the term is now sufficiently well established not to require any further amplification.

Examples

 * PAS 78: Guide to good practice in commissioning accessible websites
 * PAS 440: Responsible Innovation – Guide
 * PAS 9017: Plastics – Biodegradation of polyolefins in an open-air terrestrial environment – Specification
 * PAS 1881: Assuring safety for automated vehicle trials and testing – Specification
 * PAS 1201: Guide for describing graphene material
 * PAS 4444: Hydrogen fired gas appliances – Guide

Availability
Copies of British Standards are sold at the BSI Online Shop or can be accessed via subscription to British Standards Online (BSOL). They can also be ordered via the publishing units of many other national standards bodies (ANSI, DIN, etc.) and from several specialized suppliers of technical specifications.

British Standards, including European and international adoptions, are available in many university and public libraries that subscribe to the BSOL platform. Librarians and lecturers at UK-based subscribing universities have full access rights to the collection while students can copy/paste and print but not download a standard. Up to 10% of the content of a standard can be copy/pasted for personal or internal use and up to 5% of the collection made available as a paper or electronic reference collection at the subscribing university. Because of their reference material status standards are not available for interlibrary loan. Public library users in the UK may have access to BSOL on a view-only basis if their library service subscribes to the BSOL platform. Users may also be able to access the collection remotely if they have a valid library card and the library offers secure access to its resources.

The BSI Knowledge Centre in Chiswick, London can be contacted directly about viewing standards in their Members' Reading Room.

title: British Standards


text:
Building society

A building society is a financial institution owned by its members as a mutual organization, which offers banking and related financial services, especially savings and mortgage lending. They exist in the United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand, and formerly in Ireland and several Commonwealth countries, including South Africa as mutual banks. They are similar to credit unions, but rather than promoting thrift and offering unsecured and business loans, the purpose of a building society is to provide home mortgages to members. Borrowers and depositors are society members, setting policy and appointing directors on a one-member, one-vote basis. Building societies often provide other retail banking services, such as current accounts, credit cards and personal loans. The term "building society" first arose in the 19th century in Great Britain from cooperative savings groups.

In the United Kingdom, building societies compete with banks for most consumer banking services, especially mortgage lending and savings accounts, and regulations permit up to half of their lending to be funded by debt to non-members, allowing societies to access wholesale bond and money markets to fund mortgages. The world's largest building society is Britain's Nationwide Building Society. In Australia, building societies also compete with retail banks and offer the full range of banking services to consumers.

History in the United Kingdom
Building societies as an institution began in late-18th century Birmingham – a town which was undergoing rapid economic and physical expansion driven by a multiplicity of small metalworking firms, whose many highly skilled and prosperous owners readily invested in property. Many of the early building societies were based in taverns or coffeehouses, which had become the focus for a network of clubs and societies for co-operation and the exchange of ideas among Birmingham's highly active citizenry as part of the movement known as the Midlands Enlightenment. The first building society to be established was Ketley's Building Society, founded by Richard Ketley, the landlord of the Golden Cross inn, in 1775. Members of Ketley's society paid a monthly subscription to a central pool of funds which was used to finance the building of houses for members, which in turn acted as collateral to attract further funding to the society, enabling further construction. By 1781 three more societies had been established in Birmingham, with a fourth in the nearby town of Dudley; and 19 more formed in Birmingham between 1782 and 1795. The first outside the English Midlands was established in Leeds in 1785.

Most of the original societies were fully terminating, where they would be dissolved when all members had a house: the last of them, First Salisbury and District Perfect Thrift Building Society, was wound up in March 1980. In the 1830s and 1840s a new development took place with the permanent building society, where the society continued on a rolling basis, continually taking in new members as earlier ones completed purchases, such as Leek Building Society. The main legislative framework for the building society was the Building Societies Act 1874 (37 & 38 Vict. c. 42), with subsequent amending legislation in 1894, 1939 (see Coney Hall), and 1960.

In their heyday, there were hundreds of building societies: just about every town in the country had a building society named after that town. Over succeeding decades the number of societies has decreased, as various societies merged to form larger ones, often renaming in the process, and other societies opted for demutualisation followed by – in the great majority of cases – eventual takeover by a listed bank. Most of the existing larger building societies are the end result of the mergers of many smaller societies.

All building societies in the UK are members of the Building Societies Association. At the start of 2008, there were 59 building societies in the UK, with total assets exceeding £360 billion. The number of societies in the UK fell by four during 2008 due to a series of mergers brought about, to a large extent, by the consequences of the financial crisis of 2007–2008. There were three further mergers in each of 2009 and 2010, a demutualisation and a merger in 2011, and four further mergers 2013–2018 which resulted in there being only one building society headquartered respectively in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Since then, the only merger has been in 2023, when the Manchester society merged with the Newcastle society.

Demutualisation
In the 1980s, changes to British banking laws allowed building societies to offer banking services equivalent to normal banks. The management of a number of societies still felt that they were unable to compete with the banks, and a new Building Societies Act was passed in 1986 in response to their concerns. This permitted societies to 'demutualise'. If more than 75% of members voted in favour, the building society would then become a limited company like any other. Members' mutual rights were exchanged for shares in this new company. A number of the larger societies made such proposals to their members and all were accepted. Some listed on the London Stock Exchange, while others were acquired by larger financial groups.

The process began with the demutualisation of the Abbey National Building Society in 1989. Then, from 1995 to late 1999, eight societies demutualised accounting for two-thirds of building societies assets as at 1994. Five of these societies became joint stock banks (plc), one merged with another and the other four were taken over by plcs (in two cases after the mutual had previously converted to a plc).

As mentions, demutualisation moves succeeded immediately because neither Conservative nor Labour party UK governments created a framework which put obstacles in the way of demutualisation. Political acquiescence in demutualisation was clearest in the case of the position on 'carpetbaggers', that is those who joined societies by lodging minimum amounts of £100 or so in the hope of profiting from a distribution of surplus after demutualisation. The deregulating Building Societies Act 1986 contained an anti-carpetbagger provision in the form of a two-year rule. This prescribed a qualifying period of two years before savers could participate in a residual claim. But, before the 1989 Abbey National Building Society demutualisation, the courts found against the two-year rule after legal action brought by Abbey National itself to circumvent the intent of the legislators. After this the legislation did prevent a cash distribution to members of less than two years standing, but the same result was obtained by permitting the issue of 'free' shares in the acquiring plc, saleable for cash. The Thatcher Conservative government declined to introduce amending legislation to make good the defect in the 'two-year rule'.

1980s and 1990s
Building societies, like mutual life insurers, arose as people clubbed together to address a common need interest; in the case of the building societies, this was housing and members were originally both savers and borrowers. But it very quickly became clear that 'outsider' savers were needed whose motive was profit through interest on deposits. Thus permanent building societies quickly became mortgage banks and in such institutions there always existed a conflict of interest between borrowers and savers. It was the task of the movement to reconcile that conflict of interest so as to enable savers to conclude that their interests and those of borrowers were to some extent complementary rather than conflictive. Conflict of interest between savers and borrowers was never fully reconciled in the building societies but upon deregulation that reconciliation became something of a lost cause. The management of building societies apparently could expend considerable time and resources (which belonged the organisation) planning their effective capture—of as much of the assets as they could. If so, this is arguably insider dealing on a grand scale with the benefit of inside specialist knowledge of the business and resources of the firm not shared with outsiders like politicians and members (and, perhaps, regulators). Once the opportunity to claim was presented by management the savers in particular could be relied upon to seize it. There were sufficient hard-up borrowers to take the inducement offered them by management (in spite of few simple sums sufficing to demonstrate that they were probably going to end up effectively paying back the inducement).

Management promoting demutualisation also thereby met managerial objectives because the end of mutuality brought joint stock company (plc) style remuneration committee pay standards and share options. Share options for management of converting societies appear to be a powerful factor in management calculation. refers to this in the following terms:

"' ... perks do not rise in proportion to [mutual] bank size. If a mutual is large, or is expected to grow if it can raise capital by a conversion, its managers derive more value from a conversion but do not suffer much loss of perks than if the bank were small. Their benefit is in the right to purchase the new stock, which are valuable because the new issues are consistently underpriced [referring to USA mutual bank conversions]. Moreover, by no means are all mutual managers incompetent, and conversions allows the bank to expand more easily and to grant executive stock options that are valuable to skilled managers'."

Instead of deploying their margin advantage as a defence of mutuality, around 1980 building societies began setting mortgage rates with reference to market clearing levels. In sum they began behaving more like banks, seeking to maximise profit instead of the advantages of a mutual organisation. Thus, according to the Bank of England's :

""... there was virtually no difference between banks and building society 'listed' interest rates for home finance mortgage lending between 1984 and 1997. This behaviour resulted in a return on assets for building societies which was at least as high as Plc banks and, in the absence of distribution, led to rapid accumulation of reserves"."

As also observe:

""... accumulation of reserves in the early-1990s, beyond regulatory and future growth requirements, is difficult to reconcile with conventional theories of mutual behaviour"."

draws a rather more direct and cynical conclusion:

"By adopting a policy of building up reserves by maintaining an excess margin, building societies simultaneously allowed banks to compete and may have undermined the long run viability of mutuality. A more cynical approach is that some societies may have adopted an excess-margin strategy simply to enhance their value for conversion."

Some of these managements ended up in dispute with their own members. Of the first major conversion of the Abbey in 1989, observed:

"[T]he paradox of the Abbey members who campaigned against flotation [conversion to a shareholder-owned bank] of their building society. They were fighting to preserve a degree of accountability to the membership which the management of the Society patently did not feel. For incumbent management, the contrary views of some of their members were not matters to be weighed in the balance and taken account of in formulation of policy. They were a nuisance to be dealt with by the costly use of public relations advisers and legal processes."

In the end, after a number of large demutualisations, and pressure from carpetbaggers moving from one building society to another to cream off the windfalls, most of the societies whose management wished to keep them mutual modified their rules of membership in the late 1990s. The method usually adopted were membership rules to ensure that anyone newly joining a society would, for the first few years, be unable to get any profit out of a demutualisation. With the chance of a quick profit removed, the wave of demutualisations came to an end in 2000.

One academic study found that demutualised societies' pricing behaviour on deposits and mortgages was more favourable to shareholders than to customers, with the remaining mutual building societies offering consistently better rates.

2000s and 2010s
The Building Societies (Funding) and Mutual Societies (Transfers) Act 2007, known as the Butterfill Act, was passed in 2007 giving building societies greater powers to merge with other companies. These powers have been used by the Britannia in 2009 and Kent Reliance in 2011 leading to their demutualisation.

Prior to 31 December 2010, deposits with building societies of up to £50,000 per individual, per institution, were normally protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme (FSCS), but Nationwide and Yorkshire building societies negotiated a temporary change to the terms of the FSCS to protect members of the societies they acquired in late 2008/early 2009. The amended terms allowed former members of multiple societies which merge into one to maintain multiple entitlements to FSCS protection until 30 September 2009 (later extended to 30 December 2010), so (for example) a member with £50,000 in each of Nationwide, Cheshire and Derbyshire at the time of the respective mergers would retain £150,000 of FSCS protection for their funds in the merged Nationwide. On 31 December 2010 the general FSCS limit for retail deposits was increased to £85,000 for banks and building societies and the transitional arrangements in respect of building society mergers came to an end.

Current
, there are 42 independent building societies, all of which are members of the Building Societies Association.

Demutualised
Ten building societies of the United Kingdom demutualised between 1989 and 2000, either becoming a bank or being acquired by a larger bank. By 2008, every building society that floated on the stock market in the wave of demutualisations of the 1980s and 1990s had either been sold to a conventional bank, or been nationalised.

No longer exist
The following is an incomplete list of building societies in the United Kingdom that no longer exist independently, since they either merged with or were taken over by other organisations. They may still have an active presence on the high street (or online) as a trading name or as a distinct brand. This is typically because brands will often build up specific reputations and attract certain clientele, and this can continue to be marketed successfully.

Australia
In Australia, building societies evolved along British lines. Following the end of World War II, the terminating model was revived to fund returning servicemen's need for new houses. Hundreds were created with government seed capital, whereby the capital was returned to the government and the terminating societies retained the interest accumulated. Once all the seed funds were loaned, each terminating society could reapply for more seed capital to the point where they could re-lend their own funds and thus became a permanent society.

Terminating loans were still available and used inside the permanent businesses by staff up until the 1980s because their existence was not widely known after the early 1960s. Because of strict regulations on banks, building societies flourished until the deregulation of the Australian financial industry in the 1980s. Eventually many of the smaller building societies disappeared, while some of the largest (such as Advance and St George) attained the status of banks.

More recent conversions have included Heritage Bank which converted from building society to bank in 2011, Hume in 2014, while Wide Bay Building Society became Auswide Bank and IMB followed suit in 2015, and Greater Building Society became Greater Bank in 2016. Building societies converting to banks are no longer required to demutualise.

A particular difference between Australian building societies and those elsewhere, is that Australian building societies are required to incorporate as limited companies.

Current building societies are
 * Bass & Equitable Building Society (Tasmania)
 * Maitland Mutual Building Society (Maitland)

Eswatini
The Building Societies Act of 1962 allowed for the registration of building societies in Eswatini. For a long time the country only had one building society. A second was registered in late 2019.

 * Swaziland Building Society: Registered in the 1960s, this is the first and oldest building society in Eswatini. It has branches in almost every town and city within the Kingdom and has been known to be conservative. There have been many rumours of this institution wishing to demutualise to the extent that an amendment to the Building Societies Act was passed in 2019 permitting building societies to demutualise and apply for banking licences.
 * Status Capital Building Society: Status Capital Building Society was registered as the country's second building society and granted a licence in 2019 by the Financial Services Regulatory Authority after approval and recommendation from the Minister of Finance.

Ireland
The Republic of Ireland had around 40 building societies at the mid-20th century peak. Many of these were very small and, as the Irish commercial banks began to originate residential mortgages, the small building societies ceased to be competitive. Most merged or dissolved or, in the case of First Active plc, converted into conventional banks. The last remaining building societies, EBS Building Society and Irish Nationwide Building Society, demutualised and were transferred or acquired into Bank subsidiaries in 2011 following the effects of the Irish financial crisis.

Leeds Building Society Ireland and Nationwide UK (Ireland) were Irish branches of building societies based in the United Kingdom; both have since ceased all Irish operations.

Society closures

 * Ballygall Building Society, 1977
 * City and Provincial Building Society, 1978
 * Dublin Model Building Society, 1984
 * Dublin Savings Building Society, 1977
 * Four Provinces Building Society, 1978
 * Independent Building Society, 1977
 * Irish Savings Building Society, 1984
 * National Provincial Building Society, 1977
 * Progressive Building Society, 1977
 * West of Ireland Building Society, 1977

Jamaica
In Jamaica, three building societies compete with commercial banks and credit unions for most consumer financial services:

 * Jamaica National Building Society
 * Victoria Mutual Building Society
 * Scotia Jamaica Building Society

Regulation
In New Zealand, building societies are registered with the Registrar of Building Societies under the Building Societies Act 1965. Registration as a building society is merely a process of establishing the entity as a corporation. It is largely a formality, and easily achieved, as the capital requirement is minimal (20 members must be issued shares of not less than NZ$1,000 each, for a total minimum foundation share capital of NZ$200,000).

As regards prudential supervision, a divide exists between building societies that operate in New Zealand, on the one hand, and those that (although formally registered in New Zealand) operate offshore:
 * Building societies that accept deposits from members of the public in New Zealand are regulated as "non-bank deposit takers" under the Non-bank Deposit Takers Act 2013. Such building societies must (unless they qualify for a particular exemption) comply with the prudential regulations. The Reserve Bank of New Zealand monitors compliance with the prudential regulations, but does not prudentially supervise individual building societies for financial soundness. Most such building societies are supervised for compliance with the terms of their debt securities by trustees appointed under securities legislation, and those trustees have various reporting requirements to the Reserve Bank.
 * Building societies that accept deposits only from offshore customers are not regulated under the Non-bank Deposit Takers Act 2013 or New Zealand's financial markets legislation. Consequently, they are not prudentially monitored by the Reserve Bank or by the Financial Markets Authority. The Reserve Bank cautions on its website that it does not monitor transactions undertaken by New Zealand registered building societies operating in overseas markets. The Department of Internal Affairs is ultimately responsible for all entities that do not expressly fall into other categories for anti money laundering purposes.

Building societies' registration details and filed documents are available in the Register of Building Societies held at the New Zealand Companies Office.

Individual building societies
Over the years, a number of building societies were established.

Some, including Countrywide Building Society and United Building Society, became banks in the 1980s and 1990s. Heartland Building Society (created in 2011 through a merger of Canterbury Building Society, Southern Cross Building Society, and two other financial institutions) became Heartland Bank on 17 December 2012.

Remaining building societies include:
 * Pacific Eagle Capital (formerly General Equity Building Society)
 * Heretaunga Building Society
 * Kiwi Deposit Building Society (in the process of dissolution since 2013)
 * Manawatu Permanent Building Society
 * Nelson Building Society
 * Southland Building Society, which in October 2008 became a registered bank known as SBS Bank. However, it remains a building society and retains its mutual structure.
 * Hastings Building Society merged with SBS Bank in October 2010, but with the Hastings Building Society brand continuing to operate as a building society under the name of HBS Bank. In November 2015, HBS Bank brand was discontinued.
 * Wairarapa Building Society.

Zimbabwe
In Zimbabwe, Central Africa Building Society (CABS) is the leading building society offering a diverse range of financial products and services that include transaction and savings accounts, mobile banking, mortgage loans, money market investments, term deposits and pay-roll loans.

Similar organisations in other countries
In other countries there are mutual organisations similar to building societies:
 * Austria: In Austria there are four co-operative banks: Allgemeine Bausparkasse (ABV), Raiffeisen-Bausparkasse, Bausparkasse Wüstenrot AG and Bausparkasse der Sparkassen (savings bank).
 * Finland: In Finland the Mortgage Society of Finland, a permanent building society, was founded in 1860. Since 2002 mortgage loans are handled by Suomen AsuntoHypoPankki, the licensed bank owned by the society.
 * Germany: In Germany there are 8 Bausparkassen of the Sparkassen-Finanzgruppe named Landesbausparkassen (LBS) and 12 private Bausparkassen, for example Schwäbisch Hall, Wüstenrot, Deutsche Bank Bauspar AG and so on.
 * United States: In the United States, savings and loan associations, as well as credit unions, have a similar organisation and purpose.
 * Other: See Cooperative banking.

Roll numbers
Because most building societies were not direct members of the UK clearing system, it was common for them to use a roll number to identify accounts rather than to allocate a six-digit sort-code and eight-digit account number to the BACS standards.

More recently, building societies have tended to obtain sort-code and account number allocations within the clearing system, and hence the use of roll numbers has diminished. When using BACS, one needs to enter roll numbers for the reference field and the building society's generic sort code and account number would be entered in the standard BACS fields.

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

title: Building society


text:
Blue Steel (missile)

The Avro Blue Steel was a British air-launched, rocket-propelled nuclear armed standoff missile, built to arm the V bomber force. It allowed the bomber to launch the missile against its target while still outside the range of surface-to-air missiles (SAMs). The missile proceeded to the target at speeds up to Mach 3, and would trigger within 100 m of the pre-defined target point.

Blue Steel entered service in 1963, by which point improved SAMs with longer range had greatly eroded the advantages of the design. A longer-range version, Blue Steel II, was considered, but cancelled in favour of the much longer-range GAM-87 Skybolt system from the US. When development of that system was cancelled in 1962, the V-bomber fleet was considered highly vulnerable. Blue Steel remained the primary British nuclear deterrent weapon until the Royal Navy started operating Polaris ballistic missiles from Resolution-class submarines.

Development

Blue Steel was the result of a Ministry of Supply memorandum from 5 November 1954 that predicted that by 1960 Soviet air defences would make it impossible for V bombers to attack with nuclear gravity bombs. The answer was for a rocket-powered, supersonic missile capable of carrying a large nuclear (or projected thermonuclear) warhead with a range of at least 50 mi. This would keep the bombers out of range of Soviet ground-based defences installed around the target area, allowing the missile to "dash" in at high speed.

There would have to be a balance between the size of the warhead, the need for it to be carried by any of the three V-bomber types in use, and that it should be able to reach Mach 3. At the time the only strategic warhead available in the UK was the Green Bamboo, which was very large and so required a large missile fuselage to carry it. The Air Staff issued this requirement for a stand-off bomb as OR.1132 in September 1954.

The Ministry of Supply selected Avro out of the British manufacturers, although it had no experience in working on guided weapons other than some private venture work; Handley Page had suggested a 500 nmi missile, but the Elliots gyro based guidance system was inaccurate beyond 100 nmi. Avro began work proper in 1955, with the assigned Rainbow Code name of "Blue Steel" which it would keep in service. With Elliots working on the guidance system, Armstrong Siddeley would develop the liquid fuel engine. The design period was protracted, with various development problems exacerbated by the fact that designers lacked information on the actual size and weight of the proposed boosted fission warhead Green Bamboo, or its likely thermonuclear successor derived from the Granite series. The large girth of Blue Steel was determined by the 45 in implosion sphere diameter of Green Bamboo.

Avro proposed that Blue Steel would evolve over time, subsequent versions increasing speed (to Mach 4.5) and range. The ultimate Blue Steel would be a 900 nmi range weapon that could be launched by the supersonic Avro 730 under development. They were told to limit themselves to the specification of OR.1132. The project was delayed by the need to develop the required stainless steel fabrication techniques; this would have been gained in building the Avro 730 but that had been cancelled by then. The Elliots guidance system was plagued by accuracy problems, delaying test flights.

As it turned out, neither of the originally-proposed UK-designed warheads were actually fitted, being superseded by Red Snow, an Anglicised variant of the U.S. W-28 thermonuclear warhead of 1.1 Mt yield. Red Snow was smaller and lighter than the earlier warhead proposals. The missile was fitted with a state-of-the-art inertial navigation unit. This system allowed the missile to strike within 100 metres of its designated target. In addition, the pilots of the Avro Vulcan or Handley Page Victor bombers could tie their systems into those of the missile and make use of the guidance system to help plot their own flight plan, since the unit in the missile was more advanced than that in the aircraft.

Blue Steel emerged as a pilotless, winged aircraft roughly the size of the experimental Saunders-Roe SR.53 interceptor, with clipped delta wings and small canard foreplanes. It was powered by a two-chamber Armstrong Siddeley Stentor Mark 101 rocket engine, burning a combination of hydrogen peroxide and kerosene. The fuel was a considerable operational problem, because fuelling the missile before launch took nearly half an hour and was quite hazardous. It required the fuelling site to be flooded with water, and during the trials campaigns in Australia very early morning preparations because of the heat experienced during the Australian summer. Another issue was the very small ground clearance when attached to the Handley Page Victor, and Victor aircrews were especially aware of the dangers when taking off. The Vulcan had a much higher ground clearance, and ultimately proved a better platform.

On launch the rocket engine's first chamber developing 24000 lbf thrust would power the missile along a predetermined course to the target at around Mach 1.5. Once close to the target, the second chamber of the engine (6,000 lbf) would accelerate the missile to Mach 3. Over the target the engine would cut out and the missile would free-fall before detonating its warhead as an air burst.

To speed the trials at Woomera, the test rounds were flown there by Victors and Vulcans in Operation Blue Ranger. The trials began in 1960 about the time the original requirement expected the weapon to be in service. The missiles were prepared at the Weapons Research Establishment near Salisbury South Australia, and flown to be launched at the Woomera range from RAAF Edinburgh. A specialist unit, No. 4 Joint Services Trials Unit RAF, was established to carry out preparatory and operational tasks.

Blue Steel finally entered service in February 1963, carried by Vulcans and Victors, although its limitations were already apparent. The short range of the missile meant that the V bombers were still vulnerable to enemy surface-to-air missiles. A replacement for Blue Steel, the Mark 2, was planned with increased range and a ramjet engine, but was cancelled in 1960 to minimise delays to the Mk.1. The UK sought to acquire the much longer-ranged United States AGM-48 Skybolt air-launched ballistic missile and was greatly frustrated when that weapon was cancelled in late 1962.

Blue Steel required up to seven hours of launch preparation, and was highly unreliable. The Royal Air Force estimated in 1963 that half the missiles would fail to fire and would have to be dropped over their targets, contradicting their purpose of serving as standoff weapons. Even as it deployed Blue Steel as a high-altitude weapon, that year the government decided that because of anti-aircraft missiles' increasing effectiveness, V bombers would have to convert from high-altitude to low-altitude attacks. These trials were conducted in 1964 and concluded in 1965 With no effective long-range weapon the original Blue Steel served on after a crash programme of minor modifications to permit a low-level launch at 1000 ft, even though its usefulness in a hot war was likely limited. A stop-gap weapon (WE.177B) was quickly produced to extend the life of the V-bomber force in the strategic role until the Polaris missile was deployed. This WE.177 laydown weapon supplemented the remaining modified Blue Steel missiles, using a low-level penetration followed by a pop-up manoeuvre to release the weapon at 1000 ft. One live operational round was deployed on each of forty-eight Vulcan and Victor bombers, and a further five live rounds were produced as operational spares. An additional four non-nuclear rounds were produced for various RAF requirements, and there were sixteen other unspecified training rounds.

Blue Steel was officially retired on 31 December 1970, with the United Kingdom's strategic nuclear capacity passing to the submarine fleet.

Operator

 * Royal Air Force - (V bombers)
 * Royal Air Force - (V bombers)

Specifications

 * Length: 10.7 m
 * Wingspan: 4 m
 * Diameter: 1.22 m minimum
 * Launch Weight: 7270 lb
 * Speed: Mach 2.3
 * Ceiling: 21500 m
 * Maximum Range: 240 km
 * Guidance: Inertial
 * CEP: ~100 metres
 * Warhead: Red Snow thermonuclear (1.1 Mt)

title: Blue Steel (missile)


text:
Branch Davidians

The Branch Davidians (or the General Association of Branch Davidian Seventh-day Adventists) are an apocalyptic cult or doomsday cult founded in 1955 by Benjamin Roden. They regard themselves as a continuation of the General Association of Davidian Seventh-Day Adventists, established by Victor Houteff in 1935.

Houteff, a Seventh-day Adventist, wrote a series of tracts titled the "Shepherd's Rod", which called for reform of the Seventh-day Adventist Church. After his ideas were rejected, Houteff and his followers formed the group that became known as "Davidians" and some moved onto land outside Waco, Texas. They built a community called the Mount Carmel Center, which served as headquarters for the movement. After Houteff's death in 1955, his wife Florence took control of the organization. That same year, Roden, a follower of Houteff, proclaimed what he believed to be a new message from God and wrote letters presenting it to Davidians. He signed these letters "The Branch" believing that to be the new name Jesus had taken to reflect a new stage of his work in the heavenly sanctuary. Those who accepted Roden's teachings became known as Branch Davidians Seventh Day Adventists.

In 1957, Florence sold the Mount Carmel Center and purchased 941 acres near Elk, Texas – 13 miles northeast of Waco – naming it New Mount Carmel Center. After the failure of Florence's prophecy of apocalyptic events on or near April 22, 1959, she dissolved the Davidian Association in 1962 and sold all but 77.86 acres of the New Mount Carmel property. Roden took possession of it in 1962 and began efforts to purchase the remaining 77.86 acres. On February 27, 1973, New Mount Carmel was sold to Benjamin, his wife Lois Roden, and their son George Roden. From then on, the property was simply known as Mount Carmel. Upon the death of Roden in 1978, Lois became the next Davidian prophet at the compound.

In 1981, a young man named Vernon Howell, later known as David Koresh, came to Mount Carmel and studied biblical prophecy under Lois Roden. By 1983, Howell had gained a group of followers and they separated from Lois' organization to form "The Davidian Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventist Association." Meanwhile, Lois continued to operate the Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventist Association from Mt. Carmel Center near Waco. Howell's group and the Branch Davidians (Lois's group) were two separate organizations with different leaders, names and locations from 1983. It was not until 1987, after Lois died, that Howell filed a document claiming to be the president of the Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventist Association. Koresh and followers also went to Mt. Carmel center and engaged in a shootout with George Roden that eventually resulted in Koresh's group occupying the land. These actions are regarded by Branch Davidians who remained loyal to Lois as an act of identity theft against them.

Koresh's leadership ended at the Waco siege of 1993, a 51-day standoff between the sect and federal agents. Four agents of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) and two residents were killed by the sect during the initial raid, while four sect members were killed by ATF agents on February 28, 1993. 76 members of Koresh's group, many children, died in a fire that erupted during the siege on April 19, 1993.

Early history
In 1929, Victor Houteff, a Bulgarian immigrant and a Seventh-day Adventist Sabbath School teacher from southern California, claimed that he had a new message for the entire Adventist church. He presented his views in a book, The Shepherd's Rod: The 144,000 – A Call for Reformation. The Adventist leadership rejected Houteff's views as contrary to the church's basic teachings, and local church congregations disfellowshipped Houteff and his followers.

In 1934, Houteff established his headquarters to the west of Waco, Texas, and his group became known as the Davidians. In 1942, he renamed the group the General Association of Davidian Seventh-day Adventists – 'Davidian' which indicated its belief in the restoration of the Davidic Kingdom of Israel. Following Houteff's death in 1955, his wife Florence usurped the leadership believing herself to be a prophet. Convinced that an apocalypse would occur in 1959, a date which is not found in her husband's original writings, Florence and her council gathered hundreds of their faithful followers at the Mount Carmel Center, the group's compound which was located near Waco, for the fulfillment of the prophecy which is written in Ezekiel 9.

The anticipated events did not occur, and following this disappointment, Benjamin Roden formed another group which he called the Branch Davidians and succeeded in taking control of Mount Carmel. The name of this group is an allusion to the anointed 'Branch' (mentioned in Zechariah 3:8; 6:12). When Benjamin Roden died in 1978, he was succeeded by his wife Lois Roden. Members of the Branch Davidians were torn between allegiance to Ben's wife or to his son, George. After Lois died, George assumed the right to the Presidency. However, less than a year later, Vernon Howell rose to power and became the leader over those in the group who sympathized with him.

Rise of David Koresh
Howell's arrival at Mount Carmel in 1981 was well received by nearly everyone at the Davidian commune. He had engaged in an affair with Lois Roden while he was in his early 20s and she was in her late 60s. Howell wanted to father a child with her, who, according to his understanding, would be the Chosen One. When she died, George Roden inherited the positions of prophet and leader of the sect. A power struggle ensued between Roden and Howell, who soon gained the loyalty of the majority of the Davidians. In 1984, Howell and his followers left Mount Carmel (Roden accused Howell of starting a fire that consumed a $500,000 administration building and press ), which Roden subsequently renamed "Rodenville". Another splinter group, led by Charlie Pace, also left, and settled in Alabama.

As an attempt to regain support, Roden challenged Howell to raise the dead, going so far as to exhume the corpse of a two-decades deceased Davidian in order to demonstrate his spiritual supremacy (Roden denied this, saying he had only been moving the community cemetery). This illegal act gave Howell an opportunity to attempt to file charges against Roden, but he was told that he needed evidence in order to substantiate the charges. On November 3, 1987, Howell and seven of his followers raided Mount Carmel, equipped with five .223 caliber semi-automatic rifles, two .22 caliber rifles, two 12-gauge shotguns and nearly 400 rounds of ammunition, in an apparent attempt to retake the compound. Although Howell's group claimed that it was trying to obtain evidence of Roden's illegal activities, its members did not take a camera with them.

The trial ended with the jury finding Howell's followers not guilty, but the jury members were unable to agree on a verdict for Howell himself. After his followers were acquitted, Howell invited the prosecutors to Mount Carmel for ice cream.

It is claimed that Howell was never authorized to name his breakaway sect the "Branch Davidians", and the church which bears that name continues to represent the members of the Branch church who did not follow him.

As a spiritual leader
Howell, who acquired the position of spiritual leader from Roden, asserted it by changing his name to David Koresh, suggesting that he had ties to the biblical King David and Cyrus the Great (Koresh is the Hebrew version of the name Cyrus). He wanted to create a new lineage of world leaders. This practice later served as the basis for allegations that Koresh was committing child abuse, which contributed to the siege by the ATF.

Interpreting Revelation 5:2, Koresh identified himself with the Lamb mentioned therein. This is traditionally believed to symbolize Jesus Christ; however, Koresh suggested that the Lamb would come before Jesus and pave the way for his Second Coming.

By the time of the 1993 Waco siege, Koresh had encouraged his followers to think of themselves as "students of the Seven Seals," rather than as "Branch Davidians." During the standoff, one of his followers publicly announced that he wanted them to thereafter be identified by the name "Koreshians".

Federal siege
On February 28, 1993, at 4:20 am, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms attempted to execute a search warrant relating to alleged sexual abuse charges and illegal weapons violations. The ATF attempted to breach the compound for approximately two hours until their ammunition ran low. Four ATF agents (Steve Willis, Robert Williams, Todd McKeehan, and Conway Charles LeBleu) were killed and another 16 agents were wounded during the raid. The five Branch Davidians killed in the 9:45 am raid were Winston Blake (British), Peter Gent (Australian), Peter Hipsman, Perry Jones, and Jaydean Wendell; two were killed by the Branch Davidians. Almost six hours after the ceasefire, Michael Schroeder was shot dead by ATF agents who alleged he fired a pistol at agents as he attempted to re-enter the compound with Woodrow Kendrick and Norman Allison. His wife said he was merely returning from work and had not participated in the day's earlier altercation.

After the raid, ATF agents established contact with Koresh and others inside of the compound. The FBI took command after the deaths of federal agents, and managed to facilitate the release of 19 children (without their parents) relatively early into the negotiations. The children were then interviewed by the FBI and the Texas Rangers. On April 19, 1993, the FBI moved for a final siege of the compound using large weaponry such as .50 caliber (12.7 mm) rifles and armored combat engineering vehicles (CEV) to combat the heavily armed Branch Davidians. The FBI attempted to use tear gas to flush out the Branch Davidians. Officially, FBI agents were only permitted to return any incoming fire, not to actively assault the Branch Davidians. When several Branch Davidians opened fire, the FBI's response was to increase the amount of gas being used. Around noon, three fires broke out simultaneously in different parts of the building. The government maintains that the fires were deliberately started by Branch Davidians. Some Branch Davidian survivors maintain that the fires were started either accidentally or deliberately by the assault. Of the 85 Branch Davidians in the compound when the final siege began, 76 died on April 19 in various ways, from falling rubble to suffocating effects of the fire, or by gunshot from fellow Branch Davidians. The siege had lasted 51 days.

Aftermath
In all, four ATF agents were killed, 16 were wounded, and six Branch Davidians died in the initial raid on February 28. 76 more died in the final assault on April 19. The events at Waco spurred criminal prosecution and civil litigation. A federal grand jury indicted 12 of the surviving Branch Davidians – including Clive Doyle, Brad Branch, Ruth Riddle, and Livingstone Fagan – charging them with aiding and abetting in murder of federal officers, and unlawful possession and use of various firearms. Eight Branch Davidians were convicted on firearms charges, five convicted of voluntary manslaughter, and four were acquitted of all charges. As of July 2007, all Branch Davidians had been released from prison.

Civil suits were brought against the United States government, federal officials, former governor of Texas Ann Richards, and members of the Texas Army National Guard. The bulk of these claims were dismissed because they were insufficient as a matter of law or because the plaintiffs could advance no material evidence in support of them. One case, Andrade v. Chojnacki, made it to the Fifth Circuit, which upheld a previous ruling of "take-nothing, denied".

After the siege
There are several groups that claim descent from the Branch Davidians today. The group that retains the original name "Branch Davidian Seventh Day Adventist" regards Lois Roden's immediate successor to have been Doug Mitchell (who joined the Branch Davidians in 1978 and led the group from 1986 until his death in 2013) and Mitchell's successor to be Trent Wilde (who has led the group since 2013). This group never followed David Koresh. Another group exists under the leadership of Charles Pace, called The Branch, The Lord Our Righteousness. It is a legally recognized denomination with 12 members. Pace, while regarding Koresh as appointed by God, says that Koresh twisted the Bible's teachings by fathering more than a dozen children with members' wives. Pace believes that the Lord "has anointed me and appointed me to be the leader", but he says he is "not a prophet" but "a teacher of righteousness". Others, once led by Clive Doyle, continue to believe Koresh was a prophet and await his resurrection, along with the followers who were killed. Both of these groups are still waiting for the end of times. Doyle died in June 2022.

Relationship with Seventh-Day Adventists
The Seventh-day Adventist Church, the main church in the Adventist tradition, rejected Victor Houteff's teachings and revoked his membership in 1930.

Houteff then went on to found the Davidian Seventh Day Adventist Association (an offshoot which is also known as the Shepherd's Rod). The Branch Davidians are an offshoot of the Davidians and they are also a product of a schism which was initiated by Benjamin Roden, after Houteff's death and in light of Florence's (Houteff's wife) usurpation of power.

Florence believed that she was a prophet. But her prediction of the demise of the Seventh Day Adventist Church, which according to her should have occurred 42 months after Houteff's death (1959) failed to materialize. Likewise, Ben Roden believed that he was a prophet as well as a rightful heir to the leadership of the Davidians.

While they were still formally members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, the Branch Davidian leaders demanded a reform of the church and when their demand was met with opposition (by both the Seventh-day Adventists and the Davidians), they decided to leave that denomination and at the same time, they widely distanced themselves from the Davidians.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church deprived both the Branch Davidians and the Davidians of their membership in the denomination, in spite of this fact, the Branch Davidians actively continued to "hunt" members of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, and encourage them to leave it and join their group. The Seventh-day Adventists were reportedly "apprehensive" about the group's views because Branch Davidians claimed that they were the "only rightful continuation of the Adventist message", based on their belief that Victor Houteff was the divinely selected prophet and the successor of Ellen G. White. Both the Davidians and the Branch Davidians claimed that Houteff was their spiritual inspiration, as the founder of the Davidians. The Seventh-day Adventist Church issued warnings about the Branch Davidian sect's views to its members on a regular basis.

Schisms within the Branch Davidian sect
There is documented evidence (FBI negotiation transcripts, during the standoff, with Kathryn Shroeder and Steve Schneider with interjections from Koresh himself) that David Koresh and his followers did not call themselves Branch Davidians. In addition, David Koresh, through forgery, stole the identity of the Branch Davidian Seventh-day Adventists for the purpose of obtaining the New Mount Carmel Center's property.

title: Branch Davidians


text:
Burwash Hall

Burwash Hall refers to both Burwash Dining Hall and Burwash Hall proper, the second oldest of the residence buildings at Victoria University in Toronto, Canada. Construction began in 1911 and was completed in 1913. It was named after Nathanael Burwash, president of Victoria from 1887 to 1912. The building is an extravagant Neo-Gothic work with turrets, gargoyles, and battlements. The architects were Messrs. Sproatt & Rolph.

History
In 1910, seven years after the opening of the women's residence, Annesley Hall, the administrators of Victoria University began plans for an elaborate men's residence building on the campus. The project was funded by the estate of Mr. Hart A. Massey, an alumnus from Victoria's early days in Cobourg. The full cost of the project is unknown to the public, but the asset was valued at $450,000 in 1913. Famous residents of Burwash include Vincent Massey, Lester B. Pearson, Don Harron, and Donald Sutherland.

Architecture
The building is described as Collegiate Gothic, intended to include all the developments of the Tudor style. Burwash Hall was designed to resemble the residences in Oxford and Cambridge, with modifications to the stair-case system and the division of houses. Sproatt & Rolph avoided architecture of commercial appearance, envisioning a structure that was academic in feeling. Burwash Hall was not intended to replicate Oxford buildings, but to "prove that academic Gothic can be indigenous in Canada as well as in England, and that it can be perfectly adapted to the exigencies of [Canada's] climate and life". Constructed of Bedford Indiana cut stone and Georgetown rubble masonry, the residence houses and adjoined dining hall intended to prove that beauty and efficiency were not antithetical.

Design
The building is divided between the large dining hall in the northwest and the student residence proper. The residence area is divided into two sections: the Upper Houses, built in 1913, and the Lower Houses, built in 1931.

To the west the Upper Houses look out on the Vic Quad and the main Victoria College building across it. West of the Lower Houses is the new Lester B. Pearson Garden of Peace and International Understanding and the E.J. Pratt Library beyond it. From the eastern side of the building, the Upper Houses look out at Rowell Jackman Hall and the Lower Houses see the St. Michael's College residence of Elmsley. The only exception is the view from Gate House Tower which looks down St. Mary's Street.

Burwash Dining Hall
The dining hall is perhaps the best known part of the building to outsiders. It is the University of Toronto's largest, holding some 250 students and sixteen large tables. Hanging on the western wall is Queen Victoria's burial flag, given to the college soon after her death. Under the flag is the high table where the professors and college administration lunch. Historically, the Upper Houses each had their own table. Gate sat in the southwest corner, Middle sat in the far northeast, South sat in the table to the west of Middle, while North sat to the west of the southeast corner. The only lower house to have had a designated table was Caven, in the northwest corner beside the alumni table. (Note that prior to the 1995 renovations, some of these houses, particularly North and Caven, 'traditionally' sat elsewhere).

Upper Houses
Adjoined to Burwash Dining Hall and completed in 1913, the upper houses were originally known as the Men's Residences. The four houses are: North House, Middle House, Gate House, and South House. The upper houses were gutted and renovated in 1995.

Each Upper House consists of three floors. The lower floor contains a common room equipped with kitchen facilities, couches and a television. The upper floors each have their own kitchen and dining area. All houses have a very high bathroom ratio, with many single-use washrooms and a communal washroom on each floor. Upper Houses are divided between double rooms and singles, with about sixty percent of the population being in doubles. Unlike the Lower Houses, the hallways of each Upper House are connected, a feature that was added in the 1995 renovations.

There is typically an upper-year Residence Don for each of the Upper Houses. This has been the case since the building's construction in 1913, when specific rooms were included for Dons. The original location of these rooms has since changed with recent renovations.

North House
At the corner of Burwash Dining Hall and the Upper Houses lies North House. The emblem of North House is an oil lamp, originally used to represent Victoria's Faculty of Theology, established in 1871. North has an extended hallway and larger common room than the other Upper Houses due to its position on the corner of the building.

Middle House
The largest of the Upper Houses due to its incorporation of two battlements which divide North and Gate House, Middle House is the centre of the Upper Houses. The owl is the emblem of Middle House, sourced from the Victoria College coat of arms, and originally used to represent the Faculty of Arts. The Don's room in Middle House was originally the room reserved for the Dean of Men at Victoria, fit with a fireplace and seating area.

Gate House
Gate House is one of the four Upper Houses of the Burwash Hall residence. Until 2007, when Victoria administration made it co-ed, Gate House was one of the last remaining all-male residence building in the University of Toronto. The Gate House emblem is the Phoenix, visible in the bottom-right corner of the Victoria College insignia.

Gate House, with the rest of Upper Burwash, opened in 1913 and has held students every year since then except 1995, when it was renovated. As an all-male residence from 1913 to 2007 it held a number of unique traditions. For 20 years Gate House hosted an annual party called Novemberfest in the Burwash dining hall. The Victoria Dean of Students cancelled Novemberfest in 2003, when police discovered widespread underage drinking and over 800 people in the dining hall, in violation of the fire code. Another Gate House tradition that no longer occurs is the "stirring the chicken," a dinner and keg party where house members cook chicken fajitas for hundreds of guests. Until 2007, Gate House held secretive first-year initiation ceremonies called Traditionals, which involved writing slogans on campus buildings in chalk, singing songs to the all-women's residence (who would then sing back to them), and leading first-years around the house blindfolded. Since Novemberfest, Gate House continued to have conflict with the Administration. In 2004 the Dean evicted three Gate House residents for allegedly "hog-tying" a first-year student. In 2007 President Paul W. Gooch wrote that Gate House undertook an "escalating series of actions" that were "defiant" and "disparaging of women", in response to Gate members constructing a 2.5-metre snow penis and placing a cooked pig's head in an Annesley bathroom. As punishment, during the fall exam period Gooch evicted two residents and relocated the remainder of Gate House to other places in the residence system, banned all current Gate House students from entering the building in 2008. Since this decision Gate House has become a co-ed residence identical to the other Upper Burwash houses. Notable residents of Gate House include Lester B. Pearson, former Prime Minister of Canada, and Simon Pulsifer, who Time magazine nicknamed "The Duke of Data" for his contributions to Wikipedia.

During its 93 years as a men's residence, Gate House developed a distinct character and reputation. These antics included pranks, toga parties, streaking, caroling to other residences, hazing rituals, "beer bashes" and "incessant pounding" on the Gate House table in the dining hall. Paul Gooch wrote that these traditions gave Gate House an "ethos" that contradicted his vision of residence life.

The all-male Gate House was known as a social centre and spirited, tight-knit community. According to Grayson Lee, who created the snow penis sculpture in 2007, most of its residents were "heartbroken" to leave. Former Gate House President Dave Ruhl commented that "the Gate House camaraderie is unique" and that living there was "one of the most important parts of the university experience" for many.

The Reuters news agency nicknamed Gate House "U of T's Animal House" because Donald Sutherland's memories of its parties are said to have influenced the script of the 1978 movie. The Toronto Star described Gooch's decision to put an end to its traditions, activities and distinguishing characteristics as "neutering Animal House."

Gate House has three floors which house 28 students, as well as a don and the Victoria College Residence Life Co-ordinator. Above the gate there is a tower that rises three stories higher and has a turret-style roof.

The first floor has one double room and one bathroom available to students. About half of the floor is taken up by the apartment of the Residence Life Coordinator. Lastly, on the first floor there is a house common room with a kitchen and two couches. The second floor has three double rooms and seven single rooms. It has three single washrooms and one larger communal one, as well as its own kitchen. This floor is home to the residence don, who has a larger room with a private washroom. The third floor is identical to the second except that in place of the don's room there are two single rooms.

South House
Adjoining St. Mary's Arch and Lower Houses, South House is the furthest Upper House from Burwash Dining Hall. The emblem of the house is a sphinx, which was originally used to represent Victoria's Faculty of Law, established in 1860.

Lower Houses
The Lower Houses, originally the Emmanuel College Residences, were intended to house theology students at Emmanuel College, whose current building was opened the same year. Ryerson House (renamed to First House in 2021), Nelles House, Caven House, Bowles-Gandier House are now mostly home to undergraduate arts and science students. One story lower than the Upper Houses, they consist of four floors in order to reach the same height. All five houses are connected underground via the basement. The lower houses have only been partially upgraded. Before the renovations the entire building was exclusively male, but now every house is co-ed.

The Lower Houses each have four floors, but are much narrower with each level having only four rooms. Each level also has its own kitchen, but these are much smaller than in the Upper Houses. The Lower Houses do have far larger and better fitted common rooms that are similar to the ones the Upper Houses had before the renovations. The rooms in the Lower Houses are also considered more luxurious with hardwood floors and large sizes. Rooms in the Lower Houses are more expensive, however. Until 2003 the Lower Houses were restricted to upper year students but with the double cohort of graduates from Ontario schools many of the rooms were transformed into doubles and now hold first years.

There is typically one upper-year Residence Don for First, Nelles, and Caven House, and a second upper-year Residence Don for Bowles-Gandier House.

First House (Ryerson House)
First House connects the Upper and Lower Houses, and was originally named after the first principal of Victoria College, Egerton Ryerson. The house was renamed for the 2021–2022 school year, after an investigation into the legacy of Ryerson and his role in the Canadian residential school system. The Victoria University Students' Administrative Council initially called for a renaming in February 2019, which was followed by the Victoria University Research Panel on the Legacy of Egerton Ryerson in 2020, and ultimately the Presidential Report on the Legacy of Egerton Ryerson in 2021 which resulted in the change.

Although the house had been named Ryerson since 1933, all five Lower Houses were temporarily named First House, Second House, Third House, Fourth House, and Fifth House from 1931 until 1933. The Board of Regents used these placeholder names until they decided upon better alternatives. In 2021, the name of Ryerson House was reverted to its original title, First House.

Nelles House
Named for Victoria principal, president, and chancellor Samuel S. Nelles, Nelles House echoes the position of Middle House amongst the Upper Houses. Like Middle, Nelles House sits between the first and third houses in the set. However, Nelles is the exact same size and shape as Ryerson and Caven House.

Caven House
The only Lower House to not be named after a Victoria College student or administrator, Caven House comes from presbyterian minister William Caven, the second principal of Knox College, Toronto. Although he was not directly involved with the affairs of Victoria, he consulted President Nathanael Burwash and Rev. Alfred Gandier about the division of Arts and Theology at Victoria. After great discussion, this spawned Emmanuel College, Victoria's Faculty of Theology. Since the Lower Houses were originally built for Emmanuel students, it is likely that this is the reason for naming the House after William Caven.

Name
Bowles House is named after Victoria president and chancellor Richard Pinch Bowles, the first-cousin once-removed of Lester B. Pearson.

Gandier House is named after Alfred Gandier, the first principal of Emmanuel College.

Exterior Design
The very last house in Burwash Hall has a unique style to the other three Lower Houses. Rather than continuing the trend of Upper and Lower Houses in a straight line on the East side of the property, Bowles-Gandier House, colloquially "BG", juts out on the West side of the Southern edge of Burwash Hall. Enclosing the residence structure along the property line where Victoria meets St. Michael's College, the house forms an L shape with the other three Lower Houses.

Interior Layout
Unlike Ryerson, Nelles, and Caven House—which are all identical in layout—Bowles-Gandier is the amalgamation of Gandier House and Bowles House, which operated independently until the 1995 renovations.

The floor plan for Bowles-Gandier varies from the other Lower Houses, with a significantly larger common room and two triple-bedrooms on the main floor: each with an in-suite kitchen and bathroom.

The Bowles and Gandier stairwells are connected by a hallway on the second, third, and fourth floors. Each of these floors has a shared kitchen, and two bedrooms at the end of each hall with a connected bathroom, much like the other Lower Houses. They also have two double-rooms in the middle of the hall, which have a connected bathroom and kitchen, meaning BG has the highest kitchen-to-student ratio in Burwash.

Vic One Program
Bowles-Gandier is sometimes referred to as the Vic One House, since it is mostly reserved for students in the Vic One program. While not a requirement to live in BG, it has historically consisted of > 80% Vic One students.

title: Burwash Hall


text:
Talk:Benoit Mandelbrot

Traded Clothes?
"His family was Jewish and had a strong academic tradition — his mother was a dental surgeon, and his father made his living trading clothing"

Trading clothing now requires a degree of some kind?

Perhaps the sentence ought to read 'although his father etc.'

As it stands, the sentence lies somewhere between clumsy and comic, almost as though Woody Allen had authored it:

'Mandelbrot's father was a brilliant rocket scientist, though his mother still had to take in washing.' 'Mandelbrot's mother was a mathematician of international repute, while his father mended shoes and danced for throw-money outside movie theatres.' 121.44.223.71 (talk) 21:34, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

I agree completely with the above comment. This sentence is really jarring. I would also note that being Jewish and the family's academic tradition are two different ideas. I propose changing:

"His family was Jewish and had a strong academic tradition — his mother was a dental surgeon, and his father made his living trading clothing."

to:

"His family was Jewish. Although his father made his living trading clothing, the family had a strong academic tradition and his mother was a dental surgeon." Any objections or comments?
 * The suggested phrasing would be a good improvement. --Light show (talk) 18:48, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

 * Of course the unsigned commenter is correct. I've boldly made the change. Carlstak (talk) 23:55, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Taking this up again a few years later, I have taken out that statement about "strong academic tradition". I don’t see any basis for that in the reference given (The Wolf Prizes, 2002) and nothing is lost without it. So I have rewritten the passage, including a little more detail about his education and one of those two uncles on the by. I’ve left out the entire following sentence – as I don’t think there’s anything noteworthy in a mathematician loving mathematics, and the autobiography is still referenced in other paragraphs – but here it is for your easier consideration: "According to Mandelbrot's autobiography, The Fractalist - Memoir of a Scientific Maverick,[14] "[t]he love of his [Szolem's] mind was mathematics".[8]:16 Geke (talk) 00:10, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Benoit Mandelbrot. 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/20101023201028/http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/5372968a-ba82-11da-980d-0000779e2340,dwp_uuid=77a9a0e8-b442-11da-bd61-0000779e2340.html to http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/5372968a-ba82-11da-980d-0000779e2340,dwp_uuid=77a9a0e8-b442-11da-bd61-0000779e2340.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:20, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Remove picture or correct caption
The picture "File:Newton-lplane-Mandelbrot.jpg" is not part of the Mandelbrot set, as far as I understand it. So why is it in here? I propose to remove it. Even if it’s in some way significant, it certainly shouldn’t be captioned "A Mandelbrot set".--Geke (talk) 00:20, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

G L E?
the google doodle has a rather prominent "G L E" displayed behind him. what is this?

google gives us a choice of "Ginzburg-Landau Equation", which relates to chaos in electrodynamics, and "Generalized Langevin Equation", which has some relation to Gaussian and Lévy distributions. me, i'd prolly cut out the middle man and go direct to "Gaussian-Lévy Equation", tho absolutely nothing googles up with that.

NONE of these are in his wiki, btw, nor does anything signidicant google up using "mandelbrot...g l e"! so what the heck IS it, important enuf to be in his portrait?! 66.30.47.138 (talk) 09:06, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

 * aw geesh, it was the G L E in "G O O G L E"!!

 * the time i wasted on this!! >:( 66.30.47.138 (talk) 12:43, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Protect Page?
Should this page be semi-protected, at least while Mandelbrot is the subject of today's (Nov 20, 2020) google doodle? There seems to be a lot of vandalism from IP addresses, including one edit that removed the infobox and the first paragraph of the intro. Paul1764 (talk) 13:06, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Benoit Mandelbrot