text:
Talk:Operation Tonga

Untitled
You know, I cannot prove a negative, but....

I never heard of an operation called Coup de Main. The term is French for "slap" (more or less) and is the military term for a high-risk, high-payoff commando-style operation.

Can anyone provide cite for "Operation Coup de Main?"

 * I think Operation Coup-de-Main never exist. Regards, John N. 12:38, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * I've corrected factual errors about the Coupe de Main operation. Operation name itself was wrong, plus glider and platoon numbers.

coup de main Rufjbn 06:51, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Wasn't "coup de main" simply the name given by the planners to distinguish (from other parts of Operation Tonga, such as the attack on the Merville Battery) the attack on the bridges by the glider-borne troops of D Company 2nd Ox & Bucks? Rufjbn 23:28, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes. -- John N. 09:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

removed books
I dont know who added them but i dont see any reason why the following books should be in the referance section since they dont cover the subject and especially since they havent been used once in the footnotes.

Storage:

 * Ah, that'd be me. I always do that prior to writing the article and then clean them up, but thanks for doing it now. I added them weeks ago when I thought I would have time to do the article, but got sidetracked. However, this is now my next project - hence reorganizing the structure of the page. Perhaps we could work on it together, as we did Operation Varsity? Skinny87 (talk) 14:10, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough i do that myself :)
 * When i get some spare time (other then when am in work like now lol) ill try and put some citations in the article from Ellis, Wilmot and Ambrose (not really his work however).--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 14:22, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * God, I don't even know where to begin with this article. I might just start re-writing it, section by section like I did with all the other articles I've edited. Skinny87 (talk) 19:03, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Is there anything i can help with?--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 00:33, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Hey, any and all help is appreciated. I'm trying to find casualty figures for both sides, and if you could look through Ellis to see if they're mentioned that would be ace. Skinny87 (talk) 08:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * will do :)--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 10:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Pass
Alright, after those few quick fixes, everything looks good. Thanks for being so responsive (again, I apologize for taking a while to get to this). Regards, Cam (Chat) 22:29, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Canadian participation
Just to make a note, I'm removing the Canadian flag from the infobox for the moment. I'm more than open to discussion, but my reasoning is thus: the Canadian airborne battalion was not an independent formation, but integrated into 6th Airborne Division, which to me doesn't seem to warrant a Canadian flag. Skinny87 (talk) 19:26, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

92nd (Loyals) Light Anti-Aircraft Regiment, Royal Artillery
Interesting little article 92nd (Loyals) Light Anti-Aircraft Regiment, Royal Artillery AA unit that helped defend Pegasus Bridge --Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:40, 3 May 2009 (UTC)

Removed 'Analysis' section
The length of time the 6th Airborne Division spent deployed as regular infantry after D-Day, and the consequent casualties, had implications for its further deployability during much of 1944, and there has been historical interest in whether this part in the plan was intentional. General Gale, writing his memoirs after the war as a serving officer, avoids mentioning how long he was actually told to expect to hold the eastern flank. Major John Howard has noted that he believed Gale had told him to expect a much earlier recovery, and indeed the standing orders of the 21st Army Group were very clear, and support Howard’s interpretation. These arguments suggest that it was the difficulties involved in taking the town of Caen - originally part of the COSSAC airborne assault plan for the first day of the division - that led to the 6th Airborne remaining in place so long. General Montgomery was however inclined to present the 6th Division's prolongued presence on the eastern flank as intentional; indeed, the general was well known for his preference for utilising airborne forces as elite regular infantry at several points in the 1944-5 campaigns.

further work needed
Information on the planning and support of this operation is woefully lacking. Trainng and rehearsals? How many aircraft? How many gliders? Orders of battle for British and German units? Casualties? Losses of aircraft and gliders?--Buckboard 15:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC

The Royal Engineers at Pegasus Bridge were from 9 Independant Parachute Squadron, Royal Engineers. As this unit played a key role in the defence of the bridge and this particular battle is one of the most important parts of the Squadron's history they should be named directly in the articleTomrowley1234 (talk) 22:50, 17 May 2009 (UTC).

Coupe de Main needs to be rewritten, because it reads like a story.

Many of Buckboard's comments seem to have been taken into consideration in recent revisions. The article might be improved further by a more balanced description of the activities of the various units that were involved. The article represents an adequate account from the point of view of British forces but actions of forces of other nations also should be considered. Actions that were militarily important could emphasized further.

Typically, authors emphasize colorful but minor aspects of the operation (e.g., the capture of "Pegasus Bridge", the destruction of artillery at Merville, and the destruction of bridges on the River Dives). Militarily, the most important goal of the operation was the defense of the bridgehead against counterattacks, especially counterattacks by infantry supported by tanks (e.g., by 21 Panzer Division). The defense of the bridgehead involved the most intense fighting and caused the majority of casualties (German, eastern European, Canadian, British, etc.).

With the benefit of hindsight, the common contention that the parachute battalions of 6 Airborne were "scattered and dropped incorrectly" seems misleading except perhaps in a narrow sense. Before 6 June 1944, no other parachute assault of this size had been attempted. Similarly, night-time drops of more than a few paratroopers were rare. Thus, no large-scale, night-time drop had been attempted previously. Thus, information from similar operations could not be considered during the planning of the operation. Some senior planners had predicted the destruction of Allied parachute battalions on 6 June, given that Panzer divisions were known to be nearby. Furthermore, the drop was made under cloudy, stormy, wet, windy conditions on an area well-defended by anti-aircraft guns. Parachute battalions were very unlikely to reach 50% of their total strength by daybreak but this was achieved in 6 Airborne. The scattering of American paratroopers was far greater which also suggests that the British drop was remarkable for its accuracy, given prevailing conditions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rufjbn2 (talk • contribs) 20:42, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, as the primary editor of this article, I'd firstly like to say - welcome to wikipedia! I've moved this section to the bottom of the talkpage where it's meant to be. I do agree that the article needs more information about the German side of the operation; it's something I've had in the back of my mind for a while. Unfortunately, I don't know of many sources for their side of the battle, but I will look for them; can you suggest any? As for the fighting for the bridgehead, I recently expanded it as I felt it needed more detail. But I don't think it needs more expansion here, and should instead go into more detail on the page for 6th Airborne Division, as this article is about Tonga and not the fight for the bridgehead (which, to think about it, looking at my sources, could probably be a seperate article, or at the very least a large portion of 6th Airborne's article). As to the 'scattered and dropped incorrectly' I can only go by what the WP: Reliable Sources say, which is reflected in the article; I will of course go through them again and check them against the article to see if anything can be changed, but as I remember it they do seem to have a consensus that the drops by 6th Airborne were very scattered, although of course nowhere near that experienced by their American counterparts. I hope that this answers at least some of your questions, and would welcome further dialogue. Skinny87 (talk) 20:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

 * Hello Skinny. Thanks for the welcome. I agree that most (all?) authors conclude that the British parachute drop was inaccurate and scattered. I also agree that accounts of Operation Tonga typically focus on bridges and batteries. Some preliminary information on the German units faced by 6th Airborne in Normandy might be unearthed by searching on: Edgar Feuchtinger, Hans von Luck, Erich Diestel, and Wilhelm Richter. One description of the attack by 21 Panzer on 12th Parachute Battalion positions early on 06 June can be found in von Luck's book. I'll try to cobble something together regarding the German units that were in the area on D-Day.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rufjbn2 (talk • contribs) 02:01, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, no problem. If you put your findings in a section here on the talkpage, we can find out the best place to put it all, how to merge it in with the existing text. Cheers, Skinny87 (talk) 08:50, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I think I'd like to do a little merging and editing myself. After all, that is the point of this exercise isn't it?
 * For further inforamtion; the next stage of the fighting in the bridgehead is covered, to some extent, in the Operation Perch article, which is sourced and referenced.--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 20:57, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, cheers for that, hadn't actually realised there was stuff about 6th Airborne in there. I might add some bits about the 7-10 June attacks against the bridgehead into this article, but the existence of Perch confirms my thoughts that the details of the bridgehead need to be in 6th Airborne's own article. I might expand the 7-14 June period, but before the late-August breakout offensive the division was largely static, and there's only so much you can write about a static defence :) Still, I will add more details about Ranville and the like in the next few days, and try and find more German sources. Skinny87 (talk) 21:12, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

(od) Right. I've fished out Buckingham's D-Day: The First 24 Hours and purchased a copy of D'Este's Decision in Normandy which will hopefully allow me to fill out details during the landings, as well as stuff about the bridgehead battles; although I won't do a huge expansion of the latter, as I still think that deserves to go in the Operation Perch article, and 6th Airborne Division's own article in more detail. Skinny87 (talk) 12:14, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Ugh. I hadn't realized how long ago I wrote this - one of my first major article back in mid-2008. I might rewrite the whole battle and aftermath section in a sandbox and then present it here for analysis. How does that sound to everyone? Skinny87 (talk) 12:33, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Right, I've added it to one of my sandboxes, which can be found here, but I have to warn everyone, it might take a while; it's a complex operation at times, and I've also got other projects going on at the same time, as well as that pesky real life that interferes from time to time! Skinny87 (talk) 21:50, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Under the British Preparation heading, should the sentence-plus-fragment ("The division was allotted three specific tasks to achieve as a part of Operation Tonga. Apart from protecting the eastern flank of the Allied seaborne landings and taking control of the areas of strategic importance to the east of Caen.") be connected as a sentence (comma after "Tonga", de-capitalise "Apart")? Perhaps "apart from" should be replaced with "towards" as the 3 specific tasks seem to be aimed at the objectives of protecting the flank and controlling strategic areas. I've just finished reading Ambrose, Stephen (2003), Pegasus Bridge. I was reading this article to get some extra information. "Pij" (talk) 17:08, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, admittedly I'm not a grammar expert :) but I tried that out in the preview and it looked a tad odd, especially with the 'towards' added in. I mean, I think it's okay as it is, but as I said I'm no expert. I hope you found the article informatuve, although as I've stated above I will be rewriting some of it and expanding the 'Ground role' section. Skinny87 (talk) 17:15, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh dear god, I'm an idiot! Pijuvwy, thank-you very much for catching that; I can't believe I missed that, especially in the preview box. Apologies. Skinny87 (talk) 17:19, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

German units
The section that deals with German units should be revised substantially: much of the information is incorrect. On D-Day, the 711th Infantry Division (not the 709th Infantry Division) was in the vicinity of the Orne River on D-Day. On D-Day, 352nd Infantry Division was engaged by American 1st Infantry Division at Omaha beach and had no contact with 6th Airborne near Caen. No mention is made of 346th Infantry Division (stationed near Le Havre on D-Day). It arrived at the River Dives on about D+2. Between 10th and 12th, the 346th was the most important German unit engaged by 6th Airborne. No mention is made of 21st Panzer Division. It was the German unit that the British paratroopers were most concerned about. They knew that it had been moved to the vicinity of Caen within the previous month. Consequently, it was the first armoured division to counter-attack 6th Airborne. Battlegroup von Luck of 21 Panzer was the most important German unit engaged by 6th Airborne on D-Day. 6th Airborne had little contact with 12th SS Panzer Division because the 12th engaged Canadian west of the Orne (not east). --Rufjbn2 (talk) 22:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Based on Allied intelligence assessments, General Gale anticipated (on 01 June 1944) that German infantry would be capable of counter-attacking at company strength within 30 minutes after the landing of paratroopers. German infantry supported by tanks might be capable of counter-attacking within an hour. As of 03 November, 2009, this information could be found online in a document containing a top secret intelligence assessment (dated 01 June 1944) of expected reactions of German troops to British airborne operation in Normandy. See Airborne Forces Archive at www.paradata.org.uk. --Rufjbn2 (talk) 22:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

 * A good site but it would be difficult to include as we need reliable secondary sources --Jim Sweeney (talk) 22:49, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

 * If you get a secondary source, will you then need a tertiary? Are statements never included in a Wikipedia article without the support of reliable secondary sources? Are there reliable secondary sources that confirm that 709th or 352nd Infantry Divisions were important in Operation Tonga? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rufjbn2 (talk • contribs) 23:01, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Why would you need a secondary source to support information contained in a photographic image of an original document? Exactly what would be confirmed? That the image is not counterfeit? That the original document is not counterfeit? Are all statements in this Wikipedia article supported by reliable secondary sources?  --Rufjbn2 (talk) 23:11, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

 * To answer this question - yes, they are indeed, or it wouldn't have passed it's Good Article nomination; I've written a number of articles, and always make sure that they're sourced to reliable sources every time. I think my only problem here was that I used Otway during the German preparation section when I shouldn't, as he is perhaps a bit too dated for that. But that will be rectified shortly. Skinny87 (talk) 09:37, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

 * I would ask that this statement ("A good site but it would be difficult to include as we need reliable secondary sources --Jim Sweeney") be retained so that other potential contributors can be made aware of possible guidelines for contributions to this article.

Information regarding other Allied units involved in Operation Tonga (e.g., Lord Lovat's 1st SS Bde) should be added. --Rufjbn2 (talk) 23:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

 * All articles should rely on reliable secondary sources see Reliable sources --Jim Sweeney (talk) 23:35, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

The statement that "airborne troops of the 6th Airborne Division would be opposed by the Wehrmacht formations stationed in the area around Caen and the River Orne, which by June 1944 consisted of the 709th and 716th Infantry Divisions" (see the first paragraph of the section "German Preparation") is not supported by the source (i.e., Harclerode, 2005; p 320). Harclerode (2005; p 320) describes the position of "enemy forces" (not simply Wehrmacht formations) in January 1944 (not June) in the area in which Allied landings (not airborne landings) would take place. Rufjbn2 (talk) 06:57, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Erm, I should point out that what you've got above is mistaken! Harclerode, p. 320 isn't used at all to source German dispositions; most of the German preparation section is sourced to Otway and Buckingham. Harclerode, p. 320 is used to (accurately) describe the assault on the village of Le (La?) Plein. And WP:Reliable Sources, which are usually secondary and (hopefully) academic in nature, are preferable to primary sources such as Paradata, because they are more reliable and less biased! Skinny87 (talk) 09:23, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

 * What other enemy forces were there ? Wehrmacht is the name for the unified armed forces of Germany from 1935 to 1945 and I think Allied landings also covers the airborne landings. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:42, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, this is partly my fault for using Otway, who is out of date really for Wehrmacht dispositions. Of course, although we can't use Paradata information, the first paragraph of that German preparation section does need to be updated; now then, whilst writing about Operation Dragoon's airborne landings, I was fortunate enough to be told about the official German military history of the period, published a few years ago and available on Google Books. I think this would be the best secondary Reliable Source to use, don't you? As such, I'll quickly put together an expanded (and accurate!) paragraph about the German forces in the area. I'll pop it below here when I'm done; shouldn't be long! Skinny87 (talk) 09:19, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, well Boog et al in the official history have been spectacularly unhelpful, but fear not! I shall therefore simply therefore move onto other reliable sources, like Harclerode, Buckingham and a few other books I have around here! I'll try and have a new paragraph up as soon as possible! Skinny87 (talk) 09:27, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

"German Preparation" "The airborne troops of the 6th Airborne Division would be opposed by the Wehrmacht formations stationed in the area around Caen and the River Orne, which by June 1944 consisted of the 709th and 716th Infantry Divisions, both of which were static formations whose manpower consisted of medically-downgraded troops and conscripts recruited from the Soviet Union or Eastern Europe.[20] -from Wikipedia, Operation Tonga; retrieved 2009/11/04 According to the article, the source for this information (i.e., [20]) is the following paragraph from Harclerode (2005, page 305): "By the beginning of 1944, enemy forces in the area where the [seaborne] landings would take place comprised five divisions and a number of independent units whose total strength equated to that of a further division. Two of the divisions, the 709th and 716th, based respectively in the areas of Bayeux and Caen, were static formations whose manpower was largely composed of medically down-graded formations or conscripts from Russia or Eastern Europe. Two more, the 77th and 352 Infantry Divisions, were deployed to the rear of the 716th and 709th, while the fifth formation, the 243rd Infantry Division was deployed on the west coast of the Contentin Peninsula". - Harclerode 2005 p 305. Leaving aside problems with plagiarism, it is clear that the passage in the Wikipedia article is not supported by the source to which it refers. However, all of this is a red herring, of course. The point is that the German divisions that were encountered in Normandy by 6th Airborne in June 1944 included 711th Infantry Division (not 709th), 716th Infantry Division, 346th Infantry Division (not 352nd), and 21 Panzer Division (not 12th SS Panzer Division). These facts are not stated simply and clearly in the article in its current form or in the proposed revision. Information that is not pertinent to Operation Tonga (such as the identity of the German divisions on the Contentin peninsula or the OOB of German forces in Normandy) should be omitted. Rufjbn2 (talk) 23:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm sorry, I don't know what to say. I've taken that information from Buckingham (2003) who is one of the latest historians to analyse the D-Day landings, and he gives a detailed analysis of the German formations in the area. Also, please don't accuse other editors (ie. me) of plagarism (please see WP:AGF). If you have your own sources, then please write and show your own preferred version of the German preparation section. At the moment, the one proposed below is based on uptodate, reliable sources, and another editor has found no problems with it. I do see what you mean by having the Cotentin Peninsula units but I'm of the opinion that putting in all of the units in the area would be more helpful in showing the reader the entire situation; individual German units and their actions can then be shown throughout the rest of the article. Skinny87 (talk) 08:30, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I'll have limited internet access for the next few days, so if I don't respond for a while, I won't be ignoring anyone. I've asked for some wider opinions for this situation from WP:MILHIST on the wikiproject's talkpage, as at the moment there's just the three of us. Skinny87 (talk) 08:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Consider a source reliable if it reports that the most important German divisions involved in Operation Tonga were 21st Panzer Div, 716th Infantry Div, and 711th Infantry Div. Be even more sure of its reliability if it mentions that the 346 Infantry Division joined the fight on about June 8. A source is unreliable or misconstrued if it describes intense fighting in Normandy between 6th Airborne and 709th Infantry Division, 352nd Infantry Division, or 12th SS Panzer Division. As the primary editor of this article (which has passed a Good Article nomination) you will no doubt have no trouble tracking down one or two of the many available reliable sources (see for example Zetterling, Nevenkin, von Luck, Harrison, Meyer, Blumentritt, Hargreaves, Kershaw, Isby, Speidel, Guderian, Mitcham, Wilt, Ruge, etc.). If you still can't find reliable sources that accurately describe the disposition of German troops in the vicinity of 6th Airborne's drop zones, you might consider leaving it to someone who can. Or not. You'll be glad to know that I will be moving on to an article that might benefit from my help. Good luck. Rufjbn2 (talk) 20:53, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, thanks for that. I'll start on a rewrite/revamp as soon as I am able; will need to round up a few more books from libraries and bookshops before I start that, however. But many thanks for raising these points. Skinny87 (talk) 21:05, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

 * If we have a order of battle we need to include all troops in the area available the Cotentin Peninsula is in Normandy --Jim Sweeney (talk) 08:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Commenting in response to request for outside opinion: The proposed revision below looks good to me. The only alteration I'd make would be to start the section with the British intelligence estimate of what they expected to face on landing, before going into detail about the German forces actually stationed in the area. I think the section title is possibly misleading, because it implies the Germans were expecting 6th Airborne; maybe "German precautions" or something similar might be more accurate? In this context (of the general German precautions taken against an expected - but unspecific - Allied invasion) I see no problem with mentioning the forces immediately available to Rommel and von Rundsdtedt in Normandy, including those in the Cotentin. Regarding which units 6th Airborne actually encountered, as Skinny says the proper place for mentioning those is further on when the article examines what happened. Rufjbn2, if you have information that contradicts the sources currently used in the article, you need to present it with the sources you are using so we can evaluate its weight. Generally we assign the most weight to recent reputable scholarship, and decreasing weight to older/less academic sources (ie peer-reviewed academic journals and books are near the top of the list, and websites near the bottom). I hope this helps. EyeSerene talk 10:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

German preparation
The coastline of Northern France was defended by two German Armies. The first was the German Fifteenth Army, commanded by Colonel General Hans von Salmuth and responsible for all of the coastline that stretched from the east of Cabourg in Normandy to the River Scheldt in Holland. Fifteenth Army was formed of some eighteen divisions, fifteen Army infantry divisions and three Luftwaffe Field divisions; eleven of these were positioned around the Pas de Calais area, which the German High Command believed to be the most likely area that the Allies would invade. Defending the rest of the coastline in Northern France was Colonel General Friedrich Dollmann's German Seventh Army. To defend this stretch of coastline, which encompassed all the territory from the west of Cabourg to the River Loire, Dollmann possessed only 13 divisions. Five of these, along with a mobile infantry brigade and three independent regiments, formed 84 Korps under the command of General Erich Marcks, who had his headquarters in St Lo; 84 Korps was responsible for defending all of the coastline between Cabourg and the Cotentin Peninsula. (Buckingham, p. 44)

The Korps had three divisions stationed throughout the Cotentin Peninsula. The 243rd Static Infantry Division defended the western portion of the Peninsula, and the 709th Static Infantry Division the eastern side as far south as the River Douve, including the city of Cherbourg. Both divisions were static defence, or Bodenstandige, formations which were comprised of overage conscripts, physically unfit soldiers, and recovering casualties from other sectors. As a result, they were only two-thirds the size of a normal infantry division and did not possess a reconnaissance battalion or a great deal of artillery. The third division in the area was Seventh Army's reserve formation, 91st Luftlande Division, which had arrived in the middle of May and was based around the town of Carentan. Between Arromanches and the River Vire was the 352nd Infantry Division, formed in November 1943 from an experienced cadre of personnel from a division that had served on the Eastern Front and been dissolved due to high casualties. Although many of its soldiers had poor physical fitness and it was short of equipment, the division had been classified as an 'attack division' and was at te highest possible state of combat readiness by February 1944. In the middle of March it was ordered to the coast; seven of its battalions manned coastal defences, with the other three stationed in Bayeux as a reserve.(Buckingham, pp. 44-45)

Three Panzer Divisions were stationed in the area and acted as reserves. The 21st Panzer Division, commanded by Lieutenant General Edgar Feuchtinger, was Army Group B's reserve division and was stationed in Caen. Outfitted with a number of relatively obsolete German and captured French vehicles. By June, however, these had been supplemented with 90 Panzer Mk IV's. The other two Panzer Divisions were attached to the OKW reserve and came under the command of Panzer Group West. The first was the 12th SS Panzer Division 'Hitlerjugend', based around Falaise by June and comprised of 20,000 troops and nearly 500 tanks and armoured vehicles. Lastly, there was the Panzer Lehr Division, stationed approximately 100 miles from the coast around Chartres and Le Mans. Commanded by Lieutenant General Fritz Bayerlain, it fielded more than 800 vehicles, including 200 tanks, and was the only completely armoured and mechanized formation in the Wehrmacht.(Buckingham, pp. 46-47)

The British airborne troops would also face a large number of static defensive positions and obstacles which had been erected under the orders of Field Marshal Erwin Rommel.(Buckingham, p. 37) Rommel had been appointed Inspector General of Coastal Defences and commander of Army Group B in November 1943 by order of Adolf Hitler. On his arrival he had assessed the existing defences in the region and had immediately begun the process of improving them, particularly those situated inland as he believed no more than thirty percent of the German defences were adequate.(Buckingham, p. 37) These anti-airborne measures consisted of planting a large number of mines to create minefields as well as the erection of wire-braced poles up to two metres in height, a great many of which were laced with mines or other booby-traps aimed at destroying gliders and killing or wounding airborne troops.(Harclerode, p. 308) Rommel noted in his diary during an inspection of one area that a division had placed over 300,000 stakes in the ground to deter airborne landings, and a corps had erected over 900,000.(Devlin, p. 369) The Merville artillery battery, the destruction of which was one of the main objectives of the 6th Airborne Division, was a particularly heavily fortified position. From the beach it was protected by two strong points, which included approximately thirty bunkers as well as an observation post, and the battery itself consisted of a bunker containing the battery's command post, two blockhouses, a light flak emplacement and four casemates able to contain artillery pieces up to dimensions of 150 mm.(Buckingham, p. 41) The entire battery covered an area roughly four hundred metres in diameter and was surrounded by an inner perimeter of barbed wire, a minefield, and an outer perimeter of barbed wire as well as an anti-tank ditch.(Buckingham, p. 41)

 * This is what I propose should replace the current 'German preparation' section. It is almost completely cited to Buckingham, who has written a detailed and, as far as I know, one of the most current sources of information about the initial Normandy landings. It is, I believe, comprehensive and far better than what I wrote about 18 months ago with the use of Otway. What do people think? Skinny87 (talk) 12:01, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Added some links but look good --Jim Sweeney (talk) 12:33, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It may be worth mentioning that 5th Panzer Army (Germany) was being held in reserve. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 12:41, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Was that the formation that the other two German Panzer Divisions came under? I don't have any mention of it in Buckingham, Hastings or Harclerode. Do you have a cite handy? Skinny87 (talk) 12:54, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

 * There is a good breakdown of the mobile divisions here [] page 11 5th Panzer Army (Germany) was at the tome called Panzer Group West. --Jim Sweeney (talk) 13:25, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, added something into the section above; didn't need to cite it, as PGW is mentioned by him. Does that sound okay now? Skinny87 (talk) 13:30, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Yes look good --Jim Sweeney (talk) 13:35, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

 * I dont have the time right now to take a detailed look through everything, but i have a quick question on the opening para. Do we need that much info on the 15th Army? Couldnt it be something to the effect of (in shorthand) France defended by two armiesm the 7th and 15th. 15th defended from a-b, 7th covered c-d. The go into talking about the 7th as you do.
 * Also i believe the Germans used Roman numerals not arabic ones for their Corps, could this be changed? 84 -> LXXXIV Corps.--EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 12:57, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm with EnigmaMcmcx, all that info on the troops deployed in the Cotentin Peninsula isn't relevant to this particular article and the Germans do use Roman numbers for their corps designations. Trim the defenses section down to those that were close to the Orne. The best single source for German OB data is unless you have the book version by Zetterling. It's RS and it gives detailed strength, composition data as well as locations. I also think that the article is very one-sided as there aren't any details of how the Germans reacted or how the British landing messed with their plans; your reading has naturally been very airborne-centric. The memoirs of Hans von Luck, commander of 125 PzGren. Reg't, IIRC are readily available and Fire Brigades, by Nevenkin, has good OB data for the panzer divisions as well as accounts of their battles. And there's a history of the 21st Panzer in French and German available, IIRC, that probably has more detailed accounts. The Germans in Normandy, by Richard Hargreaves, might have some useful first-hand accounts. David Isby has republished reports from German commanders in Normandy, perhaps one of them covers the Orne River sector. And a really good general history of the whole campaign, like D'Este's, might have more references to German sources that you might profitably consult. Heck, Buxton in Big Gun Monitor, might even have some information on naval gunfire support for the paras! This sort of stuff is why I haven't tackled a major battle article, you have to master the literature for both sides and in multiple languages!

Thank you all for your advice; I think it's clear this needs something of a large-scale rewrite with new sources. The problem with it was it was the first major article I wrote when I started on wikipedia, and I didn't have the sources I do now, or know that I could get more people involved. I've started a rewrite in a sandbox linked somewhere up above, but this will probably be more than a one-person job. I'm currently two-thirds of the way through writing the Operation Dragoon airborne landings, but I'll make this my next priority after that. If anyone wants to make a start here, either on the article page or on this talkpage, then please go ahead. I'm without most of my books, but I do have Harclerode with me, and I can obviously access web resources. So if I get time, I'll try and put together another German preparation section below, unless someone beats me to it of course. Hopefully a lot of the text that's in the article can be saved, just with a German viewpoint added and more details included. Skinny87 (talk) 17:49, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Your proposed rewrite looks good Skinny; don't get yourself bulldozed by people merely citing websites. However I'm with Enigma and the others; use Roman numerals and you do not need that amount of info on 15th Army. Come directly to me if you encounter difficult further issues. Buckshot06(prof) 03:15, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I think the rewrite looks fine. Thin out the Fifteenth Army stuff, but don't remove it altogether as it has a nice breakdown from the top command to the units on the front line.  Also, if you do use roman numerals, I'd put 84 in brackets for the benefit of those who can't follow them as easily (LXXXIV is a lot more complicated than most two figure designations).  Personally I'd go for German forces, rather than precautions, but that's just an opinion. Otherwise it looks fine.  I sometimes think people forget that this is a voluntary website where people do what they can with the sources available to them, and not an ego contest for historians. If you left it to someone else to do, this page might very well still be a stub. Ranger Steve (talk) 18:54, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Operation names
Hi all

Some info for the article:

It would appear that Operation Deadstick was the name for the coup de main assualt as thus:

"Brigadier Poett informed Howard that his company had been selected to seize the Orne bridges on 2 May 1944, and stressed that they were to be seized intact al all costs, even though they were rigged for demolition: the primary rask of the sappers from 249 Field Comapny RE was to neutralise the demoolition charges. Howard's briefing also included full details of the upcoming invasion, making him the only BIGOT-cleared officer in the Benouville operation, which was code-named DEADSTICK. He was thu forbidded to remove his written orders, notes, or any intelligence material ... . A 12-ft scale model of the bridges and surrounding area was constructed to the smallest detail ..." etc -Buckingham, D-Day The first 72 hours, pp. 73-74 (the final line of the above coming from page 74 to be precise.)

Intresting earlier on in his work Buckingham notes that Tonga was the codename only for the first airborne lift into Normandy, not the overall missions etc:

"Other units attached to 3rd Parachute Brigade for Operation TONGA, as the first British lift into Normandy was codenamed,22 included the 3rd Parachute Squadron RE ..." Ibid, p. 71 Footnote 22 reads: "Shannon and Wright, One Night in June, p. 18" (Ibid, p. 296) Going off the bibliography that would be: Shannon, Kevin and Stephen Wright, One Night in June (Shrewsbury: Airlife Publishing 1994)

Hope this helps.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 22:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

 * To note, especially, pp.122-123 confirmed that the Ox and Buck force assigned to capture the bridges across the Orne river and canal were deffo codenamedDEADSTICK. RegardsEnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:15, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

External links link not working
Not working

http://www.dnd.ca/dhh/collections/books/files/books/Victory_e.pdf

Document now appears to be here.

http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/docs/Victory_e.pdf

I tried to edit the page myself but I couldn't get it to save. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Threebs (talk • contribs) 15:44, 8 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Nice catch. I have updated the link and reference.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 20:31, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

Archive
Per edits to the article:

"Although the three gliders carrying the coup-de-main force targeting the Caen Canal bridge were supposed to land at 00:20 at LZ X, the lead glider was actually released slightly earlier, at 00:07, and landed at 00:15, using a specially designed parachute which deployed from the rear of the glider (fitted to compensate for heavily laden troopers) to slow its speed and ensure it was not destroyed by the impact. However, the glider still impacted at considerable speed against an earth bank near to the bridge, the resulting impact throwing both pilot and co-pilot through the windscreen and knocking them unconscious and stunning the passengers. The second glider landed precisely sixty seconds later, swerving to avoid hitting the first and breaking in two as a result. The third glider landed successfully at 00:18, but skidded into a pond, causing several injuries and a single fatality amongst the occupants. The airborne troops emerged from the gliders and formed up, the noise of the gliders landing having been ignored by the sentry on patrol, who believed the sound to be that of a bomber crashing. One platoon opened fire on the sentry and threw grenades into a concrete bunker believed to hold the triggering equipment for the bridge demolition charges, a second platoon began to assault a number of trenches and gun-pits on the eastern bank of the canal, and a third began moving towards the bridge. One sentry fired a flare-gun, whilst a second was killed when he opened fire at the airborne troops and a third retreated.

After a brief fire-fight with an NCO who appeared on the scene and who retreated unhurt after expending all his ammunition, the airborne troops were able to secure the bridge, which they discovered was not rigged with explosives as had been believed. The bridge was secured by 00:24. The second coup-de-main force suffered more difficulties than the first in their attempt to capture the Orne River Bridge. Whilst two gliders landed intact at 00:20 at LZ Y, the third glider was released off-target when the aircraft towing the glider mistook the River Dives for the Orne, and the glider landed eight miles (13 km) east of its intended target. However, the occupants captured the bridge and then headed for the Orne River. At the Orne River bridge, a machine-gun nest was suppressed with mortar fire but no other defenders were found, and the two platoons captured the bridge before radioing Major Howard and informing him of their success. Both bridges had been secured within fifteen minutes by the coup-de-main forces at the cost of only a small number of casualties. The forces held the bridges until the arrival of reinforcements from 7th Parachute Battalion, but in the meantime had to repel several spontaneous attempts by the Germans to re-take the bridges; at 01:30 two German tanks attempted to drive onto the bridge, but were repelled with the loss of one tank to a PIAT anti-tank weapon. "

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Operation Tonga. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.army.mod.uk/para/history/normandy.htm
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080713214902/http://web.telia.com/~u18313395/normandy/gerob/gerob.html to http://web.telia.com/~u18313395/normandy/gerob/gerob.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) 20:08, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Operation Tonga


text:
Lists of television channels in India

There are currently 900 permitted private satellite television channels in India. Numerous regional channels are available throughout India, often distributed according to languages.

By video technology

 * 4K
 * HD

By language

 * Assamese
 * Bengali
 * Bhojpuri
 * English
 * Gujarati
 * Hindi
 * Kannada
 * Konkani
 * Malayalam
 * Marathi
 * Meitei (Manipuri)
 * Odia
 * Punjabi
 * Tamil
 * Telugu
 * Urdu

By category

 * News

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

title: Lists of television channels in India


text:
Concordant coastline

In coastal geography, a concordant, longitudinal, or Pacific type coastline occurs where beds, or layers, of differing rock types are folded into ridges that run parallel to the coast. The outer hard rock (for example, granite) provides a protective barrier to erosion of the softer rocks (for example, clays) further inland. Sometimes the outer hard rock is punctured, allowing the sea to erode the softer rocks behind. This creates a cove, a circular area of water with a relatively narrow entrance from the sea.

Lulworth Cove in Dorset is situated on a concordant coastline. The outer hard rock is Portland limestone. The sea has broken through this barrier and easily eroded the clays behind it. A chalk cliff face at the back of the cove slows further erosion. Erosion is just starting to the west, where the sea has again broken through the Portland limestone barrier at Stair Hole.

The concordant coast may take one of two landform types. The Dalmatian type, named from Dalmatia on the Adriatic Sea, features long offshore islands and coastal inlets that are parallel to the coastline. The Adriatic Sea itself is a concordant landform, consisting of a body of water between parallel ranges. These Dalmatian types normally occur in high energy environments from where there is eustatic or isostatic change creating a submerging coastline. The second landform is the Haff type as in the Haffs, or lagoons, of the southern shore of the Baltic Sea, which are enclosed by long spits of sand parallel to the low coast.

The converse of concordant coastline is a discordant coastline.

title: Concordant coastline


text:
Worshipful Company of Fan Makers

The Worshipful Company of Fan Makers is one of the Livery Companies of the City of London. The company was incorporated by a Royal Charter in 1709. As fan making is now done by machines rather than by craftsmen, the company is no longer a trade association for fan makers. Instead, the Company functions as a charitable establishment.

The Fan Makers' Company ranks seventy-sixth in the order of precedence for Livery Companies. Its motto is Arts and Trade United.

title: Worshipful Company of Fan Makers


text:
Worshipful Company of Carmen

The Worshipful Company of Carmen is one of the Livery Companies of the City of London, whose origins date back to 1517.

Carmen, or drivers of carts, caused upset in 1481. The King conscripted carts to carry his wine allowing rural carters to force food prices up. By offering to provide the King's carriage and clean the streets the Fellowship of Carmen was established in 1517 with authority to control the cartage trade. Carmen organised themselves into a fraternity and plied for hire. However, this was contested by the Woodmongers' Company, who owned more carts. The Carmen turned to Christ's Hospital, who were short of cash at the time. However, by 1597 the Carmen had fallen out with Christ's Hospital, the Woodmongers asserted their control again, and absorbed the Carmen in 1605. However alongside other rearrangements in the haulage trade, the Carmen separated and formed their own fellowship in 1668, but were unsuccessful in gaining the power to regulate carmen, until the Woodmongers became defunct in 1746. The Carmen did not acquire a Royal Charter until 1946.

Now that carts have been rendered obsolete by trucks and vans, the Carmen remain as a charitable and ceremonial institution with over 500 Liverymen, 180 Freemen plus additional 23 apprentices. The Carmen organise the ceremony of Cart Marking, which originated in the rule that no cart could ply for hire within the City of London unless licensed by the Corporation. Presently, the ceremony involves human powered, horsed, steam, fossil fuelled or electric, old and new vehicles rather than carts.

The Carmen's Company ranks seventy-seventh in the order of precedence for Livery Companies. Its motto is Scite, Cite, Certo, Latin for Skilfully, Swiftly, Surely. It was granted a livery in 1848; there would not be another new livery company until the Honourable Company of Master Mariners, formed in 1932.

title: Worshipful Company of Carmen


text:
Teoberto Maler

Teobert Maler, later Teoberto (12 January 1842 – 22 November 1917), was an explorer who devoted his energies to documenting the ruins of the Maya civilization.

Biography
Teobert Maler was born in Rome to German parents. His father was a diplomat for the Duchy of Baden. Maler studied architecture and engineering in Karlsruhe, then at the age of 21 moved to Vienna where he took a job with architect Heinrich von Ferstel, and became an Austrian citizen.

He was eager to see more of the world and went to Mexico as a soldier with Emperor Maximilian. He rose from Cadet to Captain. After surrendering to the Mexican Republican forces, Maler opted to stay in Mexico rather than being exiled back to Europe. Maler later obtained Mexican citizenship and changed his first name to "Teoberto", more easily pronounced in the Spanish language. Maler developed interests in photography and in the antiquities of Mesoamerica. In 1876 he made detailed photos of the structures at Mitla. In the summer of the following year he moved to San Cristóbal de las Casas, and in July set out to visit the ruins of Palenque. While several accounts of the site had been published by this time, it was still little visited, and Maler needed to employ a team of the local Indios to open a path to the ruin with machetes. He spent a week at Palenque, sketching, measuring, and photographing the site, and became aware that earlier published accounts were inadequate, and that most earlier visitors had limited their descriptions to only a portion of the buildings observed there. While Maler was there another visitor came to the ruins, Gustave Bernoulli, a Swiss botanist who shared his interest in Maya sites, and had recently made a visit to Tikal. Bernoulli confirmed Maler's suspicion that there was much work that needed to be done to document the area's ruins.

In the spring of 1878, Maler was obliged to return to Europe to settle his father's estate, which was tied up in considerable legal difficulties. While the lawyers he hired sorted it out, Maler lived in Paris, where he gave lectures on Mexican antiquities and studied and read everything about Mesoamerica he could find in the city. In 1884 the estate was settled, with Maler inheriting a small fortune, and he returned to Mexico to devote himself to study of the Maya.

He settled in Yucatán with small house in the town of Ticul, where he set up a photographic studio and learned the Maya language. However he spent most of his time in the forests, accompanied by a few Maya to help clear the jungle from the ruins and carry Maler's photographic equipment. He started off visiting major sites already well-known, such as Chichen Itza and Uxmal, but zealously followed all leads and became the first to document many new ruins. At Chichen, he lived in the ruins for 3 months, and documented the site much more fully than had earlier visitors.

Over the next years, Maler also made investigations of many remote sites in the el Petén region of Guatemala and along the course of the Usumacinta River.

Maler became disgusted by the then common practice of 19th century antiquarians and archeologists of removing interesting sculptures from the sites to send to cities in Europe or North America. Maler noted the damage to the sites this often caused. He became dedicated to the notion that the ruins should be preserved intact, and wrote extensively to the Mexican government advocating that approach. Maler's views are now considered ahead of their time.

Maler realized the importance of publishing his investigations, but had somewhat mixed success. The Peabody Institute of Harvard University arranged to publish his reports starting in 1898. A series of important books resulted, but the relationship between Maler and the Peabody was strained. Maler tried to insist that the books contain more minute detail and illustrations than the Peabody editors wished to include, and communications were difficult as Maler often left to make new expeditions in the forests and could not be contacted for months at a time for proofreading. The Peabody ended their agreement with Maler in 1909, although it took them until 1912 to finish the publication of the material they had received from him. The books are still an important reference in Maya studies.

Maler ended his physically demanding expeditions in the jungles in 1905 and retired to his home in Mérida, Yucatán.

In 1910 Maler made a trip to Europe in hopes of finding patrons for publishing more of his reports, but had no success other than to sell some of his photographs to the Bibliothèque nationale in Paris.

In his later years Teoberto Maler was known as something of a misanthrope. His money apparently gone due to some poor money investments and the economical crisis of 1907 in Yucatán, he made a modest living selling copies of his photographs to tourists and young archaeologists and giving lectures on Maya art and architecture at the Mérida school of fine arts. Maler died in Mérida, aged 75.

Many of his accounts were published posthumously, one batch in the 1930s, more in the 1970s and 1990s.

title: Teoberto Maler


text:
Talk:Subobject classifier

Introductory example
This sentence "Since in any category subobjects are identified as monic arrows, we identify the value true with the arrow: true: {0} → {0, 1} which maps 0 to 1. " has to be modified, no logical link. Moreover where are now explicitly in the category of sets. Noix07 (talk) 14:21, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

 * Oh, I got it now, it means that the object "true" (here {0}) is identified with the arrow from 0 to 1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noix07 (talk • contribs) 15:05, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

don't have time to correct this.... what is that axiom business?? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Noix07 (talk • contribs) 15:25, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

?
What is the map 1 -> Ω used in the pullback diagram?

 * It intuitively represents the "true" point in the subobject classifier [StefanLjungstrand 84.217.41.47 20:51, 1 February 2006 (UTC)]

More examples?
Anybody think there should be more examples (at the very least, the 'classical' subobject classifier in Set, and maybe one nonclassical example with no topology?) BenetD 21:00, 20 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Yes, especially since many subobject classifiers have structure beyond the set {true,false}. As it sits, I think the article is a bit misleading, at least for people who can't follow the topology example. But unfortunately, my topos theory isn't quite good enough to improve this article yet. -emk (talk) 18:20, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Within a topos, every pair of subobject classifiers are categorically isomorphic.

Some other examples are Z2 (the cyclic ab. group) in AbGrp, the Be(1/2) (this is the coin) in the Prob category or a simple two vertex connected graph for FinGraph category. All of them have their own internal structure. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.58.250.87 (talk) 20:58, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Example Wrong?
I don't think the definition of the subobject classifier of sheaves of sets on a space X is correct. Under the definition given, Ω would have only one global section, but the map of global sections from a sheaf A to the subobject classifier should provide information about where restrictions of the global sections of A belong to the subsheaf. For instance, for the one point set, Ω would be the one point set, not the two point set. I think the correct definition should be the sheaf that assigns an open set to it's set of open subsets, restricting by taking intersections.

For instance, to get the map which represents the subsheaf H^0(X) of constant functions inside C(X), we would take each function to the subset on which it is constant. Right? I'll change the page and add this example if no one objects. Holomorphic (talk) 07:27, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

You are quite right. I went ahead and made a correction. You might want to give a fuller description and add your example. But it will need to say `locally constant.' —Preceding unsigned comment added by Colin McLarty (talk • contribs) 17:37, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Definition
The references Mac Lane (1998) p.105 and Pedicchio & Tholen (2004) p.330 both define a subobject classifier not as just a special object Ω but as a monomorphism t:1 → Ω where 1 is a terminal object (here t is interpreted as the "truth" map), such that every mono is a pullback of t. Deltahedron (talk) 20:55, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

title: Talk:Subobject classifier


text:
BBC Monitoring

BBC Monitoring (BBCM) is a division of the British Broadcasting Corporation which monitors, and reports on, mass media worldwide using open-source intelligence. Based at New Broadcasting House, the BBC's headquarters in central London, it has overseas bureaux in Cairo, Delhi, Istanbul, Jerusalem, Kyiv, Miami, Nairobi, Ramallah, Tashkent and Tbilisi.

A signals-receiving station for BBC Monitoring is at Crowsley Park in South Oxfordshire, close to BBCM's former (1943–2018) headquarters at Caversham Park. The service's first home (1939–1943) was at Wood Norton Hall in Worcestershire.

BBC Monitoring selects and translates information from radio, television, the press, news agencies and online outlets from 150 countries in up to 100 languages. Reporting produced by the service is used by the government of the United Kingdom and commercial customers such as Oxford Analytica, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism and Liverpool John Moores University. The BBC announced in July 2017 that it planned to sell the site at Caversham Park and move employees to London, which took place in May 2018.

History
The organisation was formed in 1939 to provide the British Government with access to foreign media and propaganda. It provided the government with valuable information during World War II, particularly in places where foreign journalists were banned. The organisation played an important role in helping observers keep track of developments during the Cold War, the disintegration of the Iron Curtain and collapse of the Soviet Union. Also monitored were the Yugoslav Wars and the Middle East. They also had 7 decades of collaboration with the CIA Foreign Broadcast Information Service.

Funding
Although administratively and editorially part of the BBC, until 2013 BBC Monitoring did not receive any funding from the licence fee; instead it was funded directly by its stakeholders as well as by subscriptions from official and commercial bodies throughout the world. The principal stakeholder is the Cabinet Office and subscriptions were also received from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Ministry of Defence and the BBC World Service. Other customers include other government departments, private sector and voluntary sector organisations.

In the 2010 BBC licence fee settlement, the BBC agreed to take on the government's funding of BBC Monitoring from 2013/2014, finding the £25 million required from the licence fee.

Reported on BBC News (17 January 2011), BBC Monitoring cut 72 posts following a £3 million cut in funding over the next two years. Director of BBC Monitoring, Chris Westcott, said: "Regrettably service cuts and post closures are inevitable given the scale of the cut in funding."

The proposal was to cut £3m from the service's costs by closing the 72 posts — about 16% of its staff — but expected to create 18 new posts. The BBC agreed to finance Monitoring from 2013/14 as part of the 2010 licence fee settlement which froze the annual colour licence fee at £145.50 for six years. The agreement also saw the corporation agree to take over the Foreign Office-funded World Service from 2014.

The House of Commons Foreign Affairs and Defence Committees strongly condemned the gradual scaling down of BBC Monitoring's capabilities in two separate reports published in late 2016. The reports claimed that BBC Monitoring's operations have been adversely affected by cuts. Both Committees demanded proper funding to ensure BBC Monitoring's future.

Leadership
BBC Monitoring has been led by the following directors:

 * Liz Howell has served as director since March 2019
 * Sara Beck served as the director from February 2016
 * Lucio Mesquita served as director until 2016
 * Chris Westcott served as director from April 2003 to March 2015.
 * Andrew Hills served as director from 1996 to 2003

title: BBC Monitoring


text:
Talk:Outline of animal-powered transport

Early comments
Yes, we are talking about non-human animals, that will be understood by all readers. The point that humans are animals can be made much more subtly than moving the entire article to something unwieldy.

I added a see also human-powered transport

See Naming conventions (common names)

dml

merge Donkey/Mule/A** ? --Rj 01:32, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

This article should be "List of animals used for transport"...
My first reaction to this article was a deep disappointment that I could not read how, exactly, buffalo have been used for transport. Then I realized a more accurate title and context of this article would be if it were simply titled "List of animals used for transport". This isn't an article about "animal powered transport". Tempshill 05:19, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Buffalo
Can someone please explain this: "buffalo (as distinct from bison)." American bison opens: "The American Bison (Bison bison), also called Buffalo, ...," which is a contradiction of this statement (or perhaps the statement in this article needs to be clarified). btm 04:23, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Ostrich
Can it be added to the article? Or ain't it really used for transport? 189.5.143.155 02:27, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Requested move to "Animal-powered transport"
The page should be moved to animal-powered transport" (with the -). This so it aligns to other articles (Human-powered transport, ...)

KVDP (talk) 09:16, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

 * Support -- so I've put the move request and banner in place... EdJogg (talk) 23:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

 * Page move has been completed. (Required admin assistance.) EdJogg (talk) 06:54, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

 * I agree. Why is this still at nonhuman_animal-powered transport? I'll re-move it. Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 18:58, 15 April 2010 (UTC)


text:
Talk:Iris recognition

Untitled
Why no mention of phones? This article reads as though public/building security usage is the only usage for iris scanning. But some modern phones (for example the Galaxy S8 I am writing this on) come with iris scanners for use in device security. Some discussion of the features and problems with the technology in that context would be good (for example privacy concerns are presumably irrelevant in that usage, but false positives may be quite important). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.17.148.109 (talk) 07:29, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 one external links on Iris recognition. 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/20120514201806/http://www.catsa-acsta.gc.ca/page.aspx?id=35&pname=IdentityCard_CarteIdentite&lang=en to http://www.catsa-acsta.gc.ca/page.aspx?id=35&pname=IdentityCard_CarteIdentite&lang=en
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080501055546/http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk:80/managingborders/technology/iris/ to http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/managingborders/technology/iris/

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 03:34, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Iris recognition. 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/20140407083831/http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/08/11/4227398/novants-new-iris-scan-connects.html to http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2013/08/11/4227398/novants-new-iris-scan-connects.html#.Uooqf8ScGv0

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 20:21, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 3 one external links on Iris recognition. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20120523164722/http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hufsqDnRxwRxWXjzxkY0tYwNctYw?docId=N0564021329395750612A to http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hufsqDnRxwRxWXjzxkY0tYwNctYw?docId=N0564021329395750612A
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20060616125811/http://iris.nist.gov:80/ice to http://iris.nist.gov/ice/
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20100825212112/http://iris.nist.gov:80/irex/ to http://iris.nist.gov/irex/

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 08:02, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

in popular culture
how about ready player one? I seem to recall that it had some sort of eyeball scanning, and it isn't featured here. SubstantialCitrusFruit (talk) 05:27, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Iris recognition


text:
Penn Masala

Penn Masala is an American a cappella group. It is the world's first and premier  South Asian a cappella group. Formed in 1996 by students at the University of Pennsylvania, Penn Masala's music has been influenced by the Eastern and Western cultures that represent the group's membership. The group was featured on the soundtrack of American Desi, and has released twelve full-length albums: Awaaz, 11 PM, Soundcheck, The Brown Album, Pehchaan, On Detours, Panoramic, Kaavish, Resonance,Yuva, Musafir, Midnight Oil, an EP titled Vol. 1 and the compilation album Out of Stock. The group has performed at the White House (in October 2009 via invitation of Barack Obama and June 2023 via invitation from Joe Biden). Penn Masala has also performed for the Indian Filmfare Awards, and for prominent leaders including Henry Kissinger, Ban Ki-moon, Mukesh Ambani, and Narendra Modi. The group also had a cameo role in Pitch Perfect 2, released in May 2015.

History
Penn Masala, often stylized as pennmasala, was formed in 1996 by students at the University of Pennsylvania who wanted to represent their subcontinental heritage and music through a cappella singing. Among other, more long-standing a cappella groups, Penn Masala stood out as the only one in the world that sang Hindi music. This defining characteristic of the group brought it immediate attention as members fused Hindi and English music in original song formats. Soon, the group began to bill itself as "The world's first and premier Hindi a cappella group". Within just four years of its inception, Penn Masala had gained close to 15 members. By 2002, the group released its first two CDs: Awaaz (Hindi for sound) was released in 1999, and 11 PM was released in 2001. Over the next 3 years, Penn Masala released two more full-length albums, Soundcheck and The Brown Album, and a compilation CD entitled Out of Stock, which included favorites from the first 3 albums. In 2007, the group released its fifth studio album, Pehchaan (Hindi for identity). The group followed up the success of Pehchaan with their sixth album, On Detours, which was released in March 2009 and Panoramic, released in 2011. In 2013, they released their eighth studio album titled Kaavish, which features the hit single "Fix You / Ishq Bina". In March 2014, Penn Masala released The Evolution of Bollywood Music video, which has since received over 1 million views on YouTube. They were invited to perform at the 2014 IIFA Awards as a result of the media attention they subsequently received. In the fall of 2014, Penn Masala released a music video for their cover of Manwa Laage from the movie Happy New Year, featuring prominent artist Jonita Gandhi. The track was selected to be on the Best of College A Cappella (BOCA) album in 2015. In March 2015, Penn Masala released The Bollywood Breakdown, a compilation of contemporary songs that combine elements of hip-hop with Bollywood music. In May 2015, Penn Masala released the music video for Tonight (I’m Lovin’ You) / Dilliwaali Girlfriend, a mix featured on their ninth album, Resonance. The group had a cameo role in Pitch Perfect 2, released in May 2015, as competitors to the Barden Bellas. The soundtrack for the movie included Penn Masala's Hindi version of "Any Way You Want It", and won the award for the Best Soundtrack at the American Music Awards in 2015. Their tenth studio album, Yuva, was released in 2017. An EP, Vol. 1, was released in 2018, their eleventh album, Musafir, was released in 2020, and their twelfth and most recent album, Midnight Oil, was released in 2022. In 2023, President Joe Biden invited them to the White House; they sang "Chaiya Chaiya" for Prime Minister Modi when Modi visited the United States in June of that year. Eminent dignitaries were also there at the state dinner that day including tech leaders such as Sundar Pichai (who later congratulated them on the occasion), Tim Cook, Satya Nadella, and Raj Subramaniam; and musicians such as the violinist, Joshua Bell, who shook hands with all the members.

Performances

Penn Masala performs around the world, with much of their traveling done in the United States; the group performs at numerous universities and events across the world, spanning cities from Kolkata to London to Montreal and San Francisco.

In 1998, soon after the release of Awaaz, Penn Masala went on its first international tour to the United Kingdom, hitting the airwaves and performing all across the United Kingdom. The group gave two particularly noteworthy concerts in New York City: once in 2000 at the Zee Gold Bollywood Awards in the Nassau Coliseum, and again in 2002 at the Bollywood Music Awards in the Hammerstein Ballroom.

India tours
The group has traveled to India multiple times. In 2002, the group traveled to Mumbai, India to perform at the Star Screen Awards, during which time the members appeared on MTV Asia. In 2006, the group celebrated its 10th anniversary with a tour of India. The men performed at such venues as the National Centre for the Performing Arts at Nariman Point in Mumbai and Swabhumi in Kolkata. In January 2010, the group did another tour across India, selling out the Hard Rock Cafes in New Delhi and Mumbai. Penn Masala also performed at the Oberoi Trident at a ceremony honoring the achievements of Reliance Industries Chairman Mukesh Ambani. Present were many notable personalities, including Nita Ambani, director Rajkumar Hirani, director/producer Vidhu Vinod Chopra, former Chief Minister of Jammu and Kashmir Farooq Abdullah, actors Imran Khan, Rahul Bose and Vinod Khanna, and cricketer Sachin Tendulkar among others. The group also performed at the well-known Lumbini Park Amphitheatre in Hyderabad, and were featured in numerous media outlets, including NDTV, CNBC TV 18, BBC Asia, The Hindustan Times, Zee TV, and CNN-IBN among others. Penn Masala's fourth India tour took place in January 2013, where they shot a music video of "Fix You / Ishq Bina" and performed in five cities across all of the Hard Rock Cafes in the entire country. The January 2013 tour was covered by many major India new outlets, including The Times of India and DNA India, who met with members Ram Narayan and Sam Levenson to write about the tour. Their most recent tour to India was in May 2023.

United Kingdom and Canada tours
After its initial United Kingdom tour, Penn Masala continued reaching out to audiences abroad with a tour of the nation in March 2010. Among others, two notable performances were at St. James Piccadilly in central London, and in Hammersmith, where the group headlined a nationwide music competition. In November 2010 Penn Masala performed in Montreal, their first Canadian performance in ten years. Then again in 2012, Penn Masala toured the United Kingdom and did a show for The Rajasthani Foundation's Diwali Charity Gala Ball. Audience members included the Hinduja Brothers of the Hinduja Group, Lakshmi Narayan Mittal, Europe's richest man and CEO of ArcelorMittal, as well as the company's CFO Aditya Mittal. The group performed in the United Kingdom in October 2018 as well.

Domestic tours
Every semester, Penn Masala tours at a few university campuses. For example, in 2011, Penn Masala performed full-length shows at University of Michigan, Vanderbilt University, Ohio University, University of Houston, Rutgers University, Philadelphia Museum of Art, University of North Carolina, University of Maryland and a second performance at Rutgers University, as well as an international gig in the United Kingdom. The group performed at Southern Methodist University for Bhangra Blitz in April 2013. However, on top of these routine performances, Penn Masala has also performed for a number of famous individuals ranging from Anderson Cooper to Henry Kissinger to Ban Ki-moon.

On October 14, 2009, Penn Masala performed at the White House in Washington, D.C. for the White House's celebration of Diwali and the signing ceremony of the Initiative on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. The event took place in the East Room, with attendees including President Barack Obama, the Secretary of Commerce and Secretary of Education, Associate Director of Public Engagement Kalpen Modi (also known as Kal Penn), members of Congress, and distinguished community members. Penn Masala opened the ceremony with a performance which was followed by a speech by President Obama, who commended their creative energy and contributions to the Asian American community. In fact in 2012, it was leaked that along with artists such as Jay-Z, Adam Levine, Fergie, Arcade Fire and others, Penn Masala was to be courted by President Barack Obama's team in order to obtain their celebrity endorsement. In 2011, Penn Masala was invited to perform for the presidents of universities all over the world as well as UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon.

Penn Masala also holds a large annual spring concert at the University of Pennsylvania in the university's largest performance venue, Irvine Auditorium. The concert features a wide selection of their songs, and incorporates humor throughout the show using skits and videos that often parody or spoof popular culture. The end of the show is usually marked by a traditional gathering of Masala alumni and current members of the group on stage to commemorate the group and its extensive alumni network

Music
Penn Masala combines various musical traditions, including Hindi film music, pop, hip-hop, R&B, rock, and Indian classical styles. The group also uses a wide array of languages in their songs. Their compositions are primarily sung in English or Hindi, but certain songs include Arabic, Punjabi, Kannada, and Tamil as well.

Penn Masala blends popular songs to create its own independent version, which is melodically and thematically unified. Most songs fuse popular Hindi and English songs (in the past the group has covered songs by artists such as U2 and Justin Timberlake), into an a cappella rendition. Some songs are purely Hindi; for example, "Bahara" on Panoramic, and "Yeh Honsla" on On Detours and others purely English, such as "What Goes Around Comes Around" on On Detours. Other songs, such as "Aicha" and "Is Pal Mein", incorporate Hindi and English lyrics into a single song. "Aankhon Mein Tu Hai" also includes Tamil verses, "Saade Dil Te", "Kangna" and "Tere Werga" incorporate Punjabi songs, while "Masala Dosa" begins with the Kannada hymn "Krishna Ni Begane", "Aicha" includes Arabic verses and "Fix You - Ishq Bina" includes Bengali. While most of the group's songs are interpretations of already-existing songs, the group also composes originals (one or two per album), such as "Main Tanha" and "Pehchaan" on the album Pehchaan, "Kal Ka Sapna" and "Distant Places" on On Detours, "Is Pal Mein" and "Kaash" on Panoramic, "Mann Mein Ujaala" on Kaavish, "Reflection (In Your Eyes)" on Resonance, "Ishaara" on Yuva and "Meant To Be/Chalta Raha" on Musafir.

Penn Masala's music has been popularly and critically acclaimed. "Meri Sapno Ki Rani" and "Aap Jaise Koi" were both featured in American Desi, while a music video for "Chamak Challo" debuted in the Top 10 on Channel [V] India. Both "Chamak Challo" and "Bharat Humko Jaan Se Pyara Hai", a celebration of India's 50th anniversary of independence, brought immediate attention to the group in the fall of 1997, and have been fan favorites ever since. Penn Masala songs have been routinely selected for Varsity Vocals' Best of Collegiate A Cappella CD. "Bharat Humko Jaan Se Pyara Hai" was the first Penn Masala song to be honored. After that, " "Pehchaan" from Pehchaan, "Lovestoned/Ya Ali" from On Detours, "Is Pal Mein" from Panoramic, and "Manwa Laage" from Resonance have all been selected to be on the Best of Collegiate A Cappella CD for their respective years.

In 2012, the group was named one of the five best college a cappella groups in the United States by USA Today and twelve best college a cappella groups by online magazine Her Campus.

Members
Penn Masala is a living, evolving group. Made up of University of Pennsylvania students, the group's membership constantly changes as veteran members graduate and new members enter the group through an audition process. Although the majority of Penn Masala's members are of Indian descent, non-Indian members such as Brian Hong, Sam Levenson, Brendan McManus, and Albert Gu have been a part of the group. Former members also occasionally perform with the group when they tour different cities.

Penn Masala currently consists of: Saaketh Narayan, Albert Gu, Vishvesh Dhar, Sachit Gali, Riju Datta, Venugopal Chillal, Samarth Nayak, Ajay Kilambi, Prateek Adurty, Raghunandan Raman, Aryaman Meswani, Gaurish Gaur, and Rohit Rajagopalan.

Alumni
The group also gives special thanks to the following: Santosh Govindaraju, Siddhartha Khosla, Swapnil Shah, Sameer Mungur, Ananda Sen, Vishal Oberoi

Albums

 * Midnight Oil (2022)
 * Musafir (2020)
 * Penn Masala, Vol.1 (2018)
 * Yuva (2017)
 * Resonance (2015)
 * Kaavish (2013)
 * Panoramic (2011)
 * On Detours (2009)
 * Pehchaan (2007)
 * Out of Stock (2005)
 * The Brown Album (2005)
 * Soundcheck (2003)
 * Aap Jaisa Koi (2001) (from American Desi)
 * 11 PM (2001)
 * Awaaz (1999)

Midnight Oil (2022)

Musafir (2020)

Penn Masala, Vol.1 (2018)

Yuva - (2017)

Resonance - (2015)

Kaavish - (2013)

Panoramic - (2011)

On Detours - (2009)

Pehchaan - (2007)

The Brown Album - (2005)

title: Penn Masala


text:
Chloroplast membrane

Chloroplasts contain several important membranes, vital for their function. Like mitochondria, chloroplasts have a double-membrane envelope, called the chloroplast envelope, but unlike mitochondria, chloroplasts also have internal membrane structures called thylakoids. Furthermore, one or two additional membranes may enclose chloroplasts in organisms that underwent secondary endosymbiosis, such as the euglenids and chlorarachniophytes.

The chloroplasts come via endosymbiosis by engulfment of a photosynthetic cyanobacterium by the eukaryotic, already mitochondriate cell. Over millions of years the endosymbiotic cyanobacterium evolved structurally and functionally, retaining its own DNA and the ability to divide by binary fission (not mitotically) but giving up its autonomy by the transfer of some of its genes to the nuclear genome.

Envelope membranes
Each of the envelope membranes is a lipid bilayer that is between 6 and 8 nm thick. The lipid composition of the outer membrane has been found to be 48% phospholipids, 46% galactolipids and 7% sulfolipids, while the inner membrane has been found to contain 16% phospholipids, 79% galactolipids and 5% sulfolipids in spinach chloroplasts.

The outer membrane is permeable to most ions and metabolites, but the inner membrane of the chloroplast is highly specialised with transport proteins. For example, carbohydrates are transported across the inner envelope membrane by a triose phosphate translocator. The two envelope membranes are separated by a gap of 10–20 nm, called the intermembrane space.

Thylakoid membrane
Within the envelope membranes, in the region called the stroma, there is a system of interconnecting flattened membrane compartments, called the thylakoids. The thylakoid membrane is quite similar in lipid composition to the inner envelope membrane, containing 78% galactolipids, 15.5% phospholipids and 6.5% sulfolipids in spinach chloroplasts. The thylakoid membrane encloses a single, continuous aqueous compartment called the thylakoid lumen.

These are the sites of light absorption and ATP synthesis, and contain many proteins, including those involved in the electron transport chain. Photosynthetic pigments such as chlorophylls a,b,c and some others, e.g., xanthophylls, carotenoids, phycobilins are also embedded within the granum membrane. With exception of chlorophyll a, all the other associated pigments are "accessory" and transfer energy to the reaction centers of Photosytems I and II.

The membranes of the thylakoid contain photosystems I and II which harvest solar energy to excite electrons which travel down the electron transport chain. This exergonic fall in potential energy along the way is used to draw (not pump!) H+ ions from the lumen of the thylakoid into the cytosol of a cyanobacterium or the stroma of a chloroplast. A steep H+ gradient is formed, which allows chemiosmosis to occur, where the thylakoid, transmembrane ATP-synthase serves a dual function as a "gate" or channel for H+ ions and a catalytic site for the formation of ATP from ADP + a PO43− ion.

Experiments have shown that the pH within the stroma is about 7.8, while that of the lumen of the thylakoid is 5. This corresponds to a six-hundredfold difference in concentration of H+ ions. The H+ ions pass down through the ATP-synthase catalytic gate. This chemiosmotic phenomenon also occurs in mitochondria.

title: Chloroplast membrane


text:
Honourable Company of Master Mariners

The Honourable Company of Master Mariners is one of the livery companies of the City of London. While the other livery companies are entitled to the style Worshipful, the Master Mariners are styled Honourable, King George V having granted them that honour in 1928.

The Company aids nautical schools and promotes nautical research. Members meet regularly to socialise, discuss technical issues and assist with the mentoring and training of young officers, who will train at sea to reach master mariner status.

The Honourable Company ranks seventy-eighth in the order of precedence for livery companies. Its motto is Loyalty and Service. The organisation nominally has the right to allow two of its Masters to serve as nautical assessors in the Admiralty Court.

The company works with other industry organisations such as the International Federation of Shipmasters' Associations. This includes the organisations of lectures and command seminars.

History
The company was formed and incorporated in 1926. In February 1928, His Royal Highness, Edward, Prince of Wales was elected Master of the company. The company was made an official Livery Company by the City of London in 1932, making it the first new Livery Company to be formed since 1746.

In February 1952 Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II became royal patron of the company. In June 1954, His Royal Highness Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh was made a Master of the company.

From 2005 to 2007, Her Royal Highness Anne, Princess Royal served as Master of the company.

Clerks

 * 1926–1959: W T C Smith Esq
 * 1959–1967: M H Disney Esq
 * 1968–1991: D H W Field Esq
 * 1991–2002: J A V Maddock Esq
 * 2002–2005: Cdr I S Gregory RN
 * 2005–2008: Cdr R W W Craig RN
 * 2009–2020: Cdre A Menzies RN
 * 2020–present: S Hanlon

HQS Wellington
Between 1948 and 2023, instead of the usual livery hall, the Honourable Company of Master Mariners had a headquarters ship, HQS Wellington, moored on the Thames at Victoria Embankment. The Company purchased the Grimsby-class sloop sloop from the Admiralty in 1947 following donations from their members. She was subsequently converted for use as a floating livery hall in Chatham Dockyard. The conversion was paid for by donations from Lloyd's of London, private benefactors, shipping companies and other livery companies. In December 1948, the ship was moved to her permanent mooring along the Victoria Embankment. In 1991, the ship was extensively refurbished following a period of dry-docking in the private yards at Sheerness Dockyard.

In July 2005, ownership of HQS Wellington was transferred from the Honourable Company to a new organisation, the Wellington Trust, although the company retained its home onboard and was largely responsible for leadership within the trust. On 6 April 2023, it was announced that, due to safety concerns, the Honourable Company would leave the ship, though they were developing plans for a new floating livery hall.

On display on the ship was the steering wheel of the ship Otago, the Master Joseph Conrad having sailed on the Otago. Following her destruction in 1931, the wheel was presented to the Honourable Company.

title: Honourable Company of Master Mariners