text:
Talk:Royal Standard of the United Kingdom

The page describes the Royal Standard as "the personal flag" of Her Majesty. Actually, a blue flag with a golden "E" surrounded by a wreath of gold roses serves as the personal flag. Lord Emsworth 23:17, Dec 7, 2003 (UTC)

Yeah. It should read official flag of the monarch I think. FearÉIREANN 01:33, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Its says that the Royal stamdard never files at half mast, this is not true, when a monarch dies the royal standard is loweres to half mast. tony jones
 * That is not true. The Royal Standard is the flag of the monarch, and thus when one king dies, the flag becomes the standard of his successor, who is very much alive. A personal standard can fly at half mast tho, when the holder dies. This is because no other person can hold that flag. eg the Queen Mum's standard flew at half mast on her death (but only over her offical residence, Clarence House). When QEII dies, the Royal Standard will be lowered at the place she dies, and raised at the place of her successor. Astrotrain 20:09, May 12, 2005 (UTC)

 * Flying the Royal Standard at half mast would technically mean the end of the monarchy itself! David

AFAIK it has only been flown at half mast twice, both by a junior staffer whose act was immediately reversed. When Edward VII died in 1910 someone lowered the standard to half mast. George V noticed it and had it raised to full mast again. In 1997 it was lowered wrongly after the death of Diana, Princess of Wales. Within minutes it was raised again.

Fear ÉIREANN SOLIDARITY WITH THE PEOPLE OF LONDON\(caint)  8 July 2005 20:35 (UTC)
 * When was it raised after the death of Diana? At Balmoral Castle? Astrotrain 13:24, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Irish Version

I have seen a version of the Royal Standard which contains a gold harp of Ireland on a blue field in the first and fourth quadrants, and the English and Scottish flags in the other two quadrants, was this a version for Ireland or is it still used when the Queen is in Northern Ireland? Keith 11:17, 24 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Where did you see this? There is no Royal Standard for Ireland, or Northern Ireland in use. Astrotrain 18:11, August 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * 'Keith' above is correct, you can see versions with two harp quarters. There's even one with two English and two Irish quarters pictured here (and on many McEwan's beer taps, which also use other Royal and British symbolism). Unfortunately, this was never an official flag - so can at best be considered a patriotic banner. --Breadandcheese 14:32, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Formatting
This article really needs to have the flags in the appropriate sections. Might need a bit of work though to get stuff not overlapping? Morwen - Talk 23:22, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Channel Islands
Is there a special Royal Standard used in the Channel Islands? The World Flag database only shows the flags of the Lieutenant Governors of Guernsey and Jersey (it seems to be the same) but nothing flown by the queen herself.--Hun2 14:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

 * As the Channel Islands are not seperate relams, they are possessions of the British crown, so the Queen would use the main Royal Standard while present on the islands. There may have been a flag for the Duke of Normandy at one point, but I am not sure what that would have been. Astrotrain 14:12, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

New image
Please take a look at this page.

 * I much prefer it to the older image. The colours are better. A good replacment Sotakeit 14:04, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Past standards
Maybe infromation on past royal standards would be interesting, what to yout think? Sotakeit 14:06, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
 * There are four: Malta (SVG flag on the commons), Mauritius (GIF flag at FOTW), Sierra Leone (GIF flag at FOTW) and Trinidad and Tobago (GIF flag at FOTW). Would be great if you could add material on that to the article! — Nightst a  llion  (?) 20:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Image:Royal Standard of Malta (1964).svg has been uploaded (found on Queen of Malta) Brian | (Talk) 22:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I have removed the template as this article talks about Royal Standards from across Commonwealth Realms; not just in the UK Brian | (Talk) 01:40, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

 * But, some of the Royal Standards are flags of the UK, and others are flags of Canada, which is why I inserted .  Should we include all available templates, or simply leave them all out? --gbambino 15:28, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Leave all of them out, I'd say. — Nightst a  llion  (?) 20:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

 * Canada, Australia and New Zealand have their own national Royal Standard articles, with the respective flag templates placed. The UK article is here so should have the UK template for navigational purposes. Astrotrain 12:33, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

It seems odd that the oldest of the royal standards doesn't have its own article. --gbambino 14:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Move the Queen's UK flag to its own article imo Brian | (Talk) 21:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

 * This article is not just about UK flags; it is about Royal Standards; there for the template should not be added; or the NZ flags, Canada Flag, Aussie Flag templates will have to be added. Brian | (Talk) 20:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

half staff
Guys, I don`t know how to correct a mistake in this article...the Royal Standard didn't fly half staff when HRH Princess Diana died. The Union Jack did. The thing is that till that moment when the Queen was not at Buck Palace any flag flown in Buckingham Palace. That's why there was no flag at the palace when Di died as the Queen was in Balmoral. An the Queen order to place the Union Jack half staff but never the Royal Standard. It's impossible to put the Royal Standard half mast.
 * Agreed; thats what I thought; was not 100% sure; I'll fix Brian | (Talk) 06:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Great, Brian!!!! Thanks a lot...the article looks much better now!!!

Please help correct the language …

A flag flown from a ship is referred to being flown at “mast”

A flag flown from a pole on land is referred to being flown on a “staff”

Saw the flags flying upon the death of Queen Elizabeth II are flying at “half staff” not half mast. Unless the flag in question is on a ship. According to The Sextant, the Naval History and Heritage Command's blog, half-mast refers to lowered flags on a ship, while half-staff is a pole in the ground.

This article repeatedly refers incorrectly using the word mast.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Half-mast Erikleenelson (talk) 17:58, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

HRH
Is there a technical reason for the heavy use of HRH here? Normally it is discouraged by the manual of style. --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 18:41, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Copyright violation?
Parts of this article (most of the introductory section, and perhaps the images, at least) appear to be copied from www.royal.gov.uk. Can the author confirm that he has the necessary permission to copy, and add an acknowledgement to the text? JCBradfield 19:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

England is not the world
If there were such a thing as a "Presidential Standard", and the Wikipedia page on it was devoted entirely to the Presidential Standard of the United States when other countries had their own Presidential Standard, no one would stand for it. So why's it OK for "Royal Standard" to be sole preserve of the English(/British/Commonwealthers)? The Netherlands and Norway, to name just two, are countries that fly their own Royal Standards. This is a neutral, international encyclopedia. England is not the world. Let's not apply double standards.

 * What do you mean know one would stand for it? If the president of the United States had his own standard I’m sure there would be an article on it.
 * This is an encyclopaedia which lets people know relevant information not a site where people can enforce their own opinions about President Bush, so if he had his own standard I’m sure there would be an article on it. There is Evan a page with information about Adolf Hitler's personal standard.
 * This page is giving information about the standard of the Monarch of the United Kingdom -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lee setters (talk • contribs)
 * You seem to have got the wrong end of the stick here. The original user was commenting on this page when the article entitled Royal Standard was soley devoted to infomation about the British royal standard (seen here when it was redirected to the current page. -- DWR talk  13:27, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Standard used in Commonwealth Realms without their own
The article does not make it clear what flies in Commonwealth Realms with the Queen as head of state should they not have their own Royal Standard. Is it the Personal 'E' flag, the UK Royal Standard or nothing?--Breadandcheese 14:22, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The answer is not that clear on my end too. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 21:50, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Standard at half mast

 * The Queen planned to be at Balmoral at the time, which allowed the Royal Standard to fly at half mast over Buckingham Palace for the first year anniversary of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales.([])

I don't think that's correct. Protocol was changed so that the union flag is flown whenever the Queen is not at the palace, and it has been ever since. The union flag could therefore be flown at half mast on the anniversary (and it has flown at half mast on other occasions too). The Royal Standard was not flown at half mast and never has been. It did get stuck once in 1997, but that was rectified within minutes, as someone mentions above.

I have read the BBC article linked, but it is slightly ambogious as to which flag it was. I think that's just down to sloppy journalism (which the BBC is prone to at times).

I'm sure it was the union flag that was flown at half mast, so those sentences need to be changed.  J Rawle  (Talk) 18:27, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

 * I agree with your assessment. --Breadandcheese 19:21, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

 * In fact, the linked BBC article specifically says that the R.S. was not flown at half-staff on the first anniversary. - Montréalais 04:02, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Move
I propose that this article be renamed as "Royal Standards of the United Kingdom," since this article now focuses solely on those heraldic standards used in the UK, and it would then fall into format with those articles on standards used in other countries. If no one objects, I will go ahead with this in a few days. --G2bambino 17:15, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

 * Object- it is just known as the Royal Standard. Astrotrain 21:18, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

 * What is "it," and where is "it" known as "the Royal Standard"? --G2bambino 21:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

 * It is about the flags used by British monarchs, known as the Royal Standard. Astrotrain 21:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

 * How can the plural "flags" be known as the singular "Royal Standard"? There are not only two Royal Standards used by the sovereign of the United Kingdom, but variants of one used by other members of the Royal Family, and quite different ones used by royal consorts; all of which are covered here.  Plus, there are royal standards for other monarchs that are all called the "Royal Standard," why does this one have the monopoly on the term? --G2bambino 21:45, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

 * The article is about the Royal Standard, ie the British monarch's flag. It also covers the variants used by consorts and other British Royals. In English language it is always known as the Royal Standard, that is why it has been here for several years. It used to also show the other realm standards, but these were moved off to their own articles. Astrotrain 22:04, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

 * You haven't addressed my points: 1) there is more than one royal standard covered here, hence the singular "Royal Standard" is inappropriate, and 2) in the English language there are flags known as royal standards in other countries besides the United Kingdom; hence, Wikipedia has Royal Standard of the Netherlands, Royal Standard of Norway, and Royal Standard of Spain; why should this article not follow suit? As it currently stands, it appears this article is on royal standards in general, when, in fact, it is not. Previous incarnations of the article were just as misleading. --G2bambino 22:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

 * It follows the naming guidelines, using the most known name for the flag. Internationally it is considered and known as the Royal Standard. I believe the Netherlands standard is actually known as the Royal Flag, not sure about the others- although I believe the Spanish one is personal. Astrotrain 22:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

 * I believe that outside the UK it would be known as the "Royal Standard of Queen Elizabeth II," or the "British Royal Standard," so as not to confuse it with other royal standards of other monarchs. Then again, what Royal Standard are we talking about here? That for Scotland or that for the rest of the UK? You see, you still haven't addressed my point about there being more than one royal standard covered in this article. --G2bambino 22:48, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I agree that Royal Standard should be a disambig page and the current page could be moved to Royal Standard (United Kingdom) -- Barryob   Vigeur de dessus  13:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Graphic problem
I just compared the current graphic used for the Royal Standard for use in England or other areas, and it looks different to the one I took a photo of over Buckingham Palace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.192.216.174 (talk) 04:18, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes you are right I was going to raise this subject myself. The way the lions in the English quadrants and in the Scottish quadrant on this page is different to the way they look on the standards that are flown over royal residences. The design is the same but the lions in the English quadrants look actually quite different and the Scottish quadrant looks different as well. The design of the flag that flies over Buckingham palace is the one that will be seen on any other webpage but the way the standard is designed on this page is the only place I have seen it like this. -- —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lee setters (talk • contribs)

 * The issue here is that we cannot simply copy and paste images of the Royal Standard from elsewhere due to copyright restrictions, so I believe some ingenious Wikipedian has rendered his own. Whilst it may not be an exact replica of what is flown, it's a reasonably good representation and is heraldically accurate, remaining true to the blazon of the Royal Arms. --Breadandcheese (talk) 12:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Royal standard of the Prince of Wales for Canada
A user seems to feel the Prince of Wales' royal standard for Canada has some relevance to the standards used by the Prince of Wales in the United Kingdom. Of course, this is entirely erroneous and incongruous with the opening sentence of the section: "The Prince of Wales has a number of distinct standards and banners for use throughout the United Kingdom." Adding the Prince's standard for Canada here is as misleading and illogical as adding his standards for use in the UK to the article Prince of Wales' Personal Canadian Flag. At most, a "see also" link to the aforementioned page could be added to the head of the section. But nothing more than that. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  15:40, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The lead states "Different standards are used in the Queen's other Commonwealth realms, and the Royal Standard of the United Kingdom is varied for use in Scotland." My suggestion is to add a section for Canada, because it is pretty much the Royal Standard charged with a section of maple leaves at the bottom (with the addition of the personal cypher of the royal in question). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 22:43, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
 * But it's not the royal standard of the UK with maple leaves at the bottom. It's the arms of Canada in banner form, defaced by various elements. Additionally, this article is clearly, as evidenced by its title, about the royal standard of the UK and other flags used in the UK. There are already pages for each of the Queen's standards in various other Commonwealth realms. If the three royal standards for Canada are added to this page, then, so too must the Queen's Personal Australian Flag, the Queen's Personal Barbadian Flag, the Queen's Personal Jamaican Flag, and the Queen's Personal Flag for New Zealand, and, by the same logic, the royal standards of the UK must be added to Queen's Personal Canadian Flag and the Prince of Wales' UK standards added to Prince of Wales' Personal Canadian Flag, etc. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  02:24, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Then I would reword the lead section to make it where this article only applies to the UK. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:22, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The lead could be reworked. But, perosnally, I thought it was clear enough from various sentences that this article was about flags that are related only to the UK: "The Royal Standard of the United Kingdom is the flag used by Elizabeth II in her capacity as Sovereign of the United Kingdom and its overseas territories"; "The Prince of Wales has a number of distinct standards and banners for use throughout the United Kingdom."
 * As an aside: I wonder if the title of this page should be changed to "Royal Standards of the United Kingdom", given that there's such an array of flags shown here. -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  04:36, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I would not object to the rename (and that also might clear up some issues). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 05:33, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, that is another matter. To correct my deviation off course and get back more to the point of this discussion: Is it agreed that detailed information about royal standards for other countries don't belong on this page? -- Ħ   MIESIANIACAL  17:09, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:11, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Duchess of Cornwall
The article says that the Other Members banner will most likely function as Camilla's standard when she becomes Consort. Did Clarence House announce this? Couldn't the College of Arms (and Lord Lyon) grant her arms that could be impaled with the Royal Standard as has been done with the previous consorts?Goldnpuppy (talk) 21:55, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I would assume that this is an inaccuracy. Camilla has a coat of arms, as was announced on her 58th birthday by Clarence House. Given as the royal standards are essentially just the arms in banner form then it stands to reason that Camilla will be using her own standard. Psunshine87 (talk) 23:33, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I have added info on Camilla and Kate's arms. If Diana had a personal standard as Princess of Wales, wouldn't Cate also be eligible to have one after William becomes PW?Goldnpuppy (talk) 20:57, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

There's no source supporting the statement that Diana had a personal standard as Princess of Wales. Given as the standard that draped Diana's flag was the Royal Standard with an ermine border, instead of one personalized for her and as Camilla currently doesn't have a personal standard, I personally would question if Diana did in fact have a personal standard (or at least hope for a source). For Catherine, two assumptions are being made here: that her husband is going to be created Prince of Wales (it's not automatic) and that if and when this happens she is going to use a personalized standard instead of the royal standard. Given as one of the last two wives of the Prince of Wales did (or may have) use a personal standard, while the other did not, I wouldn't say it's safe to assume whether or not Catherine will use the royal standard or a personal one when she is the wife of the heir apparent. In contrast, it can be considered more of a given that Camilla and Catherine will have a personal standard when they're Queen consort, as the last four consorts to the monarch have had their own standard and both Camilla and Catherine have their own arms already. Psunshine87 (talk) 21:50, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Prince of Wales Standards
In section 3.1, the table states that the first standard is "For use in England and Northern Ireland" but the description states "This is the standard that is used outside the United Kingdom by the prince.". I don't know enough about the subject to know which is correct, but the two statements are mutually exclusive, seeing as both England and Northern Ireland are in the United Kingdom. m8e39 05:50, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

 * The PoW has specific Standards for use exclusively in Wales and Scotland, and a separate design for use in all other situations; this based upon the Royal Standard of the United Kingdom used outside Scotland. 82.132.222.147 (talk) 13:48, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Royal Standard of the United Kingdom. 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/20131228204007/http://www.stgeorges-windsor.org/worship-and-music/st-georges-chapel-feature/chapel-articles/prince-william-and-st-georges-chapel.html to http://www.stgeorges-windsor.org/worship-and-music/st-georges-chapel-feature/chapel-articles/prince-william-and-st-georges-chapel.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) 10:22, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Who may fly the Royal Standard?
Is anyone allowed to fly the royal standard? or is it reserved for the monarch? Op47 (talk) 15:04, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Dubious

The Royal Standard was not flown at the Barbadian Presidential inauguration in Bridgetown. It was the Prince of Wales's Personal Standard. If someone's got good eyes, go compare for yourself.  Peter Ormond 💬  05:33, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Prince Harry
The illustration for Prince Harry's standard shows a five-point label. Is this still correct? As he is now the child of the monarch and not the grandchild, has his standard changed? Goldnpuppy (talk) 04:21, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Queen Camilla
Currently the article states that she started using her own royal standard on becoming queen consort, but in her recent slew of solo engagements her limousine is clearly still flying the ermine flag. Robin S. Taylor (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2024 (UTC)


text:
Electricity sector in Norway

The electricity sector in Norway relies predominantly on hydroelectricity. A significant share of the total electrical production is consumed by national industry.

Production and consumption
Average annual hydropower generation capacity in 2019 was around 131 TWh, about 95% of total electricity production.

Of the total production in 2011 of 128 TWh; 122 TWh was from hydroelectric plants, 4795 GWh was from thermal power, and 1283 GWh was wind generated. In the same year, the total consumption was 114 TWh. Hydro production can vary 60 TWh between years, depending on amount of precipitation, and the remaining hydro potential is about 34 TWh.

In 2016, the Norwegian government published a white paper regarding their future energy intentions through 2030. This announcement emphasized four main goals, which were improving security in the supply of their power, improving the efficiency of their renewables, making their energy more efficient, and more environment- and climate-sensitive, and fostering economic development and value through fiscally responsible and renewable technology.

The annual electricity consumption was about 26-27 MWh per inhabitant during 2004-2009 when the European union (EU15) average in 2008 was 7.4 MWh. Norway’s consumption of electricity was over three times higher per person compared to the EU 15 average in 2008. The domestic electricity supply promotes use of electricity,Energy in Sweden, Facts and figures, The Swedish Energy Agency, (in Swedish: Energiläget i siffror), Table: Specific electricity production per inhabitant with breakdown by power source (kWh/person), Source: IEA/OECD 2006 T23, 2007 T25  , 2008 T26  , 2009 T25   and 2010 T49   and it is the most common energy source for heating floors and hot water.

Transmission
Statnett is the transmission system operator in Norway, operating 11,000 km of high power lines. There are plans to upgrade the western grid from 300 to 420 kV at a cost of 8 billion NOK, partly to accommodate cables to Germany and England.

Norway has an open electric market, integrated with the other Nordic countries over the Synchronous grid of Northern Europe. Export and import is routine over the direct power links to Sweden, Denmark, and the Netherlands. The market is handled by Nord Pool, and has 5 price zones in Norway. Financial future contracts are traded at NASDAQ OMX. Many of the hydroelectric plants in Norway are easily adjustable and can adapt well to variations in demand, and hence in price, but frequency stability is not satisfactory, and Statnett works with producers to minimize sudden changes in power flow. On a normal day, when price is low during nighttime, Norway normally imports power, and exports during daytime when the price is higher. Maintaining the grid in the harsh Norwegian nature is a compromise between stability desires and economy, and outages are expected in these circumstances. The IT-nett, about 70% of the grid, is not grounded.

West of Oslo, there is a small single-phase AC power grid operated with 16.7 Hz frequency for power supply of electric railways.

Price
In some years, a combination of high power prices in the market and less than usual rainfall renders the power system more vulnerable to power shortages. So far consumers in Norway have noted this by paying a higher price for electrical power during winter, however still a low price in international terms. Copious snow- and rain-fall in the mild winters of 2013-15 led to sharply lower prices, which was 26.7 øre per kWh in 2015.

New connections to other countries could stabilize available power levels and reduce price swings, however as these areas are more expensive, average price may rise in Norway. Grid strengthening may cost a few billion kroner.

Hydroelectricity
Hydroelectric power is the main mode of electricity production. Norway is known for its particular expertise in the development of efficient, environment-friendly hydroelectric power plants. Calls to power Norway principally through hydropower emerged as early as 1892, coming in the form a letter by the former Prime Minister Gunnar Knutsen to parliament. Ninety percent of hydropower capacity is publicly owned and distributed across municipalities and counties. Nationwide installed capacity of hydropower amounted to 33.8 GW in 2015. The maximum working volume of hydrologic storage power plants is 85 TWh, whereas the average seasonal cycle is 42 terawatt-hours (TWh). In 2015, hydroelectricity generated 144 TWh and accounted for 95.8% of the national electricity demand. In European markets, it is the single largest producer of hydropower. According to the IEA, Norway generated 4.3 percent of the worldwide hydropower in 2008 and ranked 6th for that year, behind China, Canada, Brazil, the United States and Russia.

Part of the reason that so much of Norway’s electricity can be generated from hydropower is due to the natural advantage of its topography, with abundant steep valleys and rivers. Due to climate change, the region is currently experiencing heavier rainfall and is projected to receive more in the future, further increasing its capacity for hydropower.

Wind power
Wind power capacity was at the end of 2019 2444 MW producing 5.5 TWh, an increase of about 780 MW (2.5 TWh) in 2019.

In 2021, 64 wind farms had total installed wind power capacity of 4,649 MW with 706 MW of onshore power being added in 2021. Electricity produced in 2021 being 11.8 TWh or 8.5% of Norway's needs.

Solar power
The national support for solar power is in place since 2008. For 2013, the European Photovoltaic Industry Association reports a negligible 0.02 watts per inhabitant or less than 0.1 megawatt (MW) of installed photovoltaic capacity in Norway. This is a hundred times less than in Finland (2 watts per inhabitant), two hundred times less than in Sweden (4 watts per inhabitant) and almost five thousand times less than in Denmark (98 watts per inhabitant). However, use of solar power is growing at an accelerated pace; in 2016, installed panel capacity grew by 366%. Proponents indicate that Norway has a surprisingly high capacity for solar energy capture. For instance, records from the city of Narvik show that the region can receive almost as much sunlight as southern Germany. However, this is still just above a third of the solar energy that an area that receives a high amount of solar energy would receive (based on received radiation from Australia.) Solar companies include Elkem Solar and NorSun. Renewable Energy Corporation REC was a solar power company with headquarters in Norway and Singapore. Elkem Solar was part of Norwegian Elkem. Orkla Group sold it with $2 billion in January 2011 to a Chinese chemical company China National Bluestar head office in Beijing. NorSun is a private solar cell producer.

Coal power
On the island of Svalbard about 0.108 TWh of electricity and heat is produced annually, in two coal fired power plants. The coal is mined on the island, where the surplus of coal (2/3 of production) is exported.

Other types
Norway has around 3 power plants burning natural gas, depending on how they are counted: Mongstad 280 MW CHP, Kårstø 420 MW (now closed), and Tjeldbergodden 150 MW (unused). They are rarely used, as hydropower is usually cheaper.

Statkraft experiments with osmosis at Tofte.

Export/Import
Norway has imported up to 10% of its electricity production during 2004-2009. According to IEA, in 2015, Norway exports about 15% of its electricity generation and imports about 5%, and the net electricity export was 14.645 TWh. In 2021, exports were 24.7 TWh and imports 7.6 TWh, mostly from Sweden.

Norway and Sweden's grids have long been connected across the 1630 km long border. A 1 GW 420 kV high-voltage link between Nea River station in Norway and Järpen (Järpströmmen station at Indalsälven river) in Sweden was commissioned in 2009. Beginning in 1977 the Norwegian and Danish grids were connected across the Skagerrak with 500 MW, growing to 1,700 MW in 2015. Norway's grid is connected to the Netherlands across the North Sea since 2008 with the 580-kilometre 700 MW High-voltage direct current cable NorNed. The slightly shorter but with 1400 megawatt twice as powerful NordLink HVDC undersea cable connection to Northern Germany began operation in 2021, more or less replacing the Brokdorf Nuclear Power Plant which was shut down at the end of 2021, and helping Norway save hydro power when Germany has a surplus of renewable energy.

The North Sea Link HVDC Norway to Great Britain cable was opened in October 2021, while the Scotland–Norway interconnector NorthConnect is on hold due to Norwegian policy.

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

title: Electricity sector in Norway


text:
List of monarchs of the Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia

The Armenian Kingdom of Cilicia was a state formed in the Middle Ages by Armenian refugees, who were fleeing the Seljuk invasion of Armenia. It was initially founded by the Rubenian dynasty, an offshoot of the larger Bagratid family that at various times held the thrones of Armenia and Georgia. While the Rubenian rulers were initially regional princes, their close ties with the Western world after the First Crusade saw the principality recognised as a kingdom under Leo I by the Holy Roman Empire in 1198. The Rubenid dynasty fell in 1252 after the death of the last Rubenid monarch Isabella, and her husband Hethum I became sole ruler, beginning the Hethumid dynasty. After the death of Leo IV in 1341 his cousin was elected to succeed him as Constantine II, the first king of the Lusignan dynasty. The kingdom fell at the beginning of Leo V's reign to the Mamluks, and henceforth title holders were only claimants to the throne. Charlotte of Cyprus ceded the throne to the House of Savoy in 1485, and the title fell out of use until after 1861.

Potential claimants today
The claim to the title passed to the House of Savoy, who were granted it by Charlotte in 1485. The Savoyard dynasts maintained their claim to the title "King of Cyprus, Jerusalem and Armenia" as late as the 20th century.


text: User talk:64.12.96.76

title: User talk:64.12.96.76


text:
Nauruan indigenous religion

Nauruan indigenous religion is an indigenous religion of the Nauruans.

Worldview
An offering to the female deity Eijebong was made. Dead spirits are believed to be invoked through trances by a medium, and those spirits were said to be living in the island of Buitani. Believers say that the sky and the earth were created by a spider called Areop-Enap.

Eigigu
Eigigu is a girl from Nauruan mythology, who is said to be the wife of the moon (maramen).

Detora
Detora is a boy in Nauruan mythology, who became the king of the sea.

Gaomodugudug
A figure in legend that exemplifies the role of frigate birds in Nauru.

Eyouwit
A young girl who lived in the sky.

Decline
There are very few, if any, people on the island who still subscribe to this religion, because of the dominant belief of Christianity imposed upon them by Christian colonization. Main sources for attestations of the religion in its old form comes from sources written by German ethnologist Paul Hambruch in 1914 and 1915 (available in German here: volume 1, volume 2), which was not well received by German missionary Alois Kayser.

title: Nauruan indigenous religion


text:
Mohammed Jamal Khalifa

Mohammed Jamal Khalifa (محمد جمال خليفه) (1 February 1957 – 31 January 2007) was a Saudi businessman from Jeddah who married one of Osama bin Laden's sisters. He has been accused of funding terror plots and groups in the Philippines in the 1990s while head of the International Islamic Relief Organization branch there. He was murdered in Madagascar in 2007.

Biography
Khalifa is said to have trained with Osama Bin Laden in the mujahideen camps in Afghanistan during the Soviet–Afghan War.

Philippines
Khalifa came to the Philippines in 1987 or 1988. He was the first head of the International Islamic Relief Organization’s Philippine branch, and also the IIRO's regional director for all of Southeast Asia.

Khalifa had married a local woman, Alice "Jameelah" Yabo, and frequently exited and entered the country for "business" reasons. Yabo was the sister of Ahmad al-Hamwi, better known as Abu Omar.

According to Zachary Abuza writing in 2003, Khalifa established several charities and Islamic organizations in the Philippines ostensibly for charity and religious reasons, but which channelled money to extremist groups. According to Newsweek, Filipino officials suspect Khalifa may have raised as much as several hundred thousand dollars during his eight years in the Philippines, but most of the money (as much as 70 percent, according to Wahab Akbar, governor of the Basilan region where the Abu Sayyaf is based) was spent funding Islamic extremists like Abu Sayyaf. One example of his syphoning off of charitable funds, according to Newsweek, was his reporting to his "Saudi sponsors" that he had built 33 orphanages across the southern Philippines with "the funds they had sent him", when in fact Khalifa had set up only one institution for orphans.

Khalifa founded the "Benevolence International Corporation" (BIC) in the Philippines in 1988, apparently to recruit people for the Afghan jihad against the Soviets. The BIC claimed to be an import-export company. In 1992, that group folded visible operations while another group known as the Islamic Benevolence Committee renamed itself to Benevolence International Foundation. What was left of the Benevolence International Corporation allegedly gave logistical support to terrorists, and has been accused of assisting the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and the Bojinka plot (of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, Ramzi Yousef to blow up 11 American jetliners killing 4,000 people in early 1995).

Another organization founded by Khalifa, the International Relations and Information Center, has been called (by Zachary Abuza) the "primary funding mechanism" for the Bojinka plan. Money was embezzled from the International Relations and Information Center through the bank account of Omar Abu Omar, an employee at the center, to an account under the name of Adel Sabah, an alias of Ramzi Yousef.

According to the Philippines National Security Advisor, Roilo Golez, Khalifa "built up the good will of the community through charity and then turned segments of the population into agents." A Philippines intelligence report claimed that "the IIRO which claims to be a relief institution is being utilized by foreign extremist as a pipeline through which funding for the local extremists are being coursed through".

A defector from the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) told authorities "The IIRO was behind the construction of Mosques, school buildings and other livelihood projects" but only "in areas penetrated, highly influenced and controlled by the Abu Sayyaf." According to the defector "Only 10 to 30% of the foreign funding goes to the legitimate relief and livelihood projects and the rest go to terrorist operations."

According to Rohan Gunaratna, Khalifa dispatched at least one Filipino youth to Tripoli, Libya, on an eight-month training course and on his return in 1990 urged him to join ASG. He sent other ASG members for religious training to the International Islamic University in Pakistan and for military training with Al Qaeda's International Islamic Brigade in Afghanistan, their visits being financed by IIRO.

From the Philippines, he "established links with Islamists in Iraq, Jordan, Turkey, Russia, Malaysia, the UAE, Romania, Lebanon, Syria, Pakistan, Albania, the Netherlands and Morocco, enabling the ASG to develop relationships with terrorist groups" throughout the Middle East and Asia.

According to Abuza, while Philippine government claimed to have shut down all the charities run by Khalifa to finance Abu Sayyaf, a senior Philippine intelligence official complained to him, "We could not touch the IIRO" because "intense diplomatic pressure" from Saudi Arabia kept the charity open. "Their most important source of leverage was the visas and jobs for several hundred thousand Filipino guest workers", which they could withhold if the Philippine government angered them.

Deportation and release
The first record U.S. authorities had of Khalifa reportedly came in 1992, when his alias "Barra" appeared on a bomb-making manual carried by Ahmed Ajaj who entered the United States on a false passport.

On 1 December 1994, Khalifa met Mohamed Loay Bayazid, the president of Benevolence International Foundation, in the United States. Khalifa and Bayazid were arrested on December 14, 1994, in Mountain View, California on charges related to the 1993 World Trade Center bombing. Khalifa was planning to fly to the Philippines.

When the FBI looked inside Khalifa's luggage, they found manuals in Arabic on training terrorists, which covered subjects such as bomb-making and other violent activities. Khalifa claims that his possession of the materials was innocent. They found a personal organizer with several contacts. One phone number was for Wali Khan Amin Shah, a member of the Manila cell, which was plotting Operation Bojinka at the time. There was also a listing for an unknown man, who might have been Khalid Sheik Mohammed. Khalifa was placed in solitary confinement and the contents of his luggage were logged and edited.

Khalifa was held without bail for several months, before being deported to Jordan. In Jordan, a court had convicted Khalifa in absentia for a string of theatre bombings. Khalifa faced a possible death sentence as a result. Khalifa first fought his deportation by suing the government.

On 6–7 January 1995, Operation Bojinka was discovered after a fire at Ramzi Yousef's Manila apartment. Investigators found evidence related to the plot. Abdul Hakim Murad, who was arrested at the apartment, had five phone numbers pointing to Khalifa. They also found logs of phone calls to and from Khalifa before his arrest and contact information on Yousef's computer.

Despite this evidence, forwarded to the United States from the Philippines in March 1995, suggesting Khalifa was funding the foiled Operation Bojinka plot, Khalifa was not arrested but his belongings were returned and he was deported to Jordan on May 5 by the INS as he requested. (Despite the fact that on 18 April, the conviction in Jordan was overturned as a key witness recanted his testimony.) In Jordan, a court acquitted Khalifa. Bayazid was also let go. Khalifa left for the Philippines and returned to Saudi Arabia. The US deported him to Lebanon where he had already been sentenced to death in absentia for conspiracy to carry out terrorist acts. He was re-tried and acquitted, then released to Saudi Arabia.

Khalifa was arrested in Saudi Arabia shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks, but was released without charges being filed. Later that year, he publicly condemned Osama Bin Laden and publicly distanced himself from Al Qaeda.

Death
On 31 January 2007, the day before his 50th birthday, Khalifa was killed while visiting a gemstone mine he owned in Sakamilko, near the town of Sakaraha in southern Madagascar. Reports state that around 25 to 30 armed men raided Khalifa's residence in the middle of the night, attacked him with various weapons, and removed his computer and other intelligence materials. His family came to believe that he was assassinated by operators from the Joint Special Operations Command.

title: Mohammed Jamal Khalifa


text:
Mohammed Khalifa

Mohammed Khalifa (born 10 July 1983) is a Canadian citizen who traveled to Islamic State-occupied territory, where he narrated Islamic State war videos.

Observers had long speculated that two important Islamic State war videos, Flames of War and Flames of War 2, were narrated by a Canadian. Khalifa was captured in a clash with the Syrian Democratic Forces in January 2019, and acknowledged he was the narrator.

The Flames of War was described as one of the most influential Islamic State war videos. It is 55 minutes long, much of the footage filmed with a GoPro style body-camera, worn by a fighter, who first digs in, then charges Syrian soldiers. Other footage records prisoners first being made to dig their own graves, then showing their brutal executions.

The New York Times hired three voice recognition experts, who had served as expert witnesses, Catalin Grigoras, Jeff M. Smith and Robert C. Maher, who all agreed recordings made when Rukmini Callimachi interviewed him matched the narration of the videos.

According to Charlie Winter, a counter-terrorism specialist from the International Center for the Study of Radicalization, "His voice is the most recognizable English-speaking voice to have ever appeared in Islamic State propaganda." Winter called The Flames of War

According to Amarnath Amarasingam, of the Institute for Strategic Dialogue, "He is a symbol — the voice coming out of ISIS, speaking to the English-speaking world, for the better part of the last four to five years."

In October 2021, Khalifa was flown to Virginia and arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Prosecutors charged him with "material terrorism support leading to death", alleging that he was responsible for publicising the infamous video of James Foley's beheading. Raj Parekh, acting US attorney, described Khalifa as "the voice behind the violence".

On December 10, 2021, Khalifa pleaded guilty to conspiring to provide material support to a terrorist organization, resulting in death. He was sentenced to life in prison on 29 July 2022.

title: Mohammed Khalifa


text:
User talk:Darren54

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Here are some useful links in case you haven't already found them;

 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Alexandros 23:34, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

title: User talk:Darren54


text:
Talk:Marvel Girl (comics)

This material is already covered at Jean Grey. RickK 23:36, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

title: Talk:Marvel Girl (comics)


text:
Premiership

Premiership (the state of being a premier) may refer to:

 * The post of premier or prime minister, who is the head of government in many parliamentary systems
 * Premier League, the highest-level football league competition in England (previously branded officially as the Premiership between 1993 and 2007)
 * Scottish Premiership, the highest level football league competition in Scotland
 * The Principality Premiership, the highest-level domestic rugby union competition (but secondary to the multinational Pro14) in Wales
 * Cymru Premier, the highest level football league competition in Wales
 * NIFL Premiership, the highest-level football league competition in Northern Ireland
 * South African Premier Division, the highest-level football league competition in South Africa
 * Premiership Rugby, known for sponsorship reasons as the Gallagher Premiership, the highest-level rugby union competition in England. "Premiership Rugby" is also the name of the company that operates the league.
 * NRL Premiership, the highest level rugby league competition in Australasia
 * Scottish Premiership (rugby union), the top amateur-level rugby union competition in Scotland (but below the multinational Pro14 and the semi-professional Super 6)
 * The Rugby League Premiership, a title that was available to English rugby league clubs from 1974 to 1997
 * Premier Soccer Saturday, RTÉ
 * The Mitre 10 Premiership, the top-tier competition within the Mitre 10 Cup in New Zealand rugby union
 * The Premiership, ITV's flagship football programme from 2001 to 2004
 * In the A-League of Australian soccer, the "premiership" is won by the team finishing first on the league table after the regular season
 * the title given to the Australian rules football team that won the title during a particular year via the AFL Grand Final

title: Premiership


text:
Dennis Eckersley

Dennis Lee Eckersley (born October 3, 1954), nicknamed "Eck", is an American former professional baseball pitcher and color commentator. Between 1975 and 1998, he pitched in Major League Baseball (MLB) for the Cleveland Indians, Boston Red Sox, Chicago Cubs, Oakland Athletics, and St. Louis Cardinals. Eckersley had success as a starter, but gained his greatest fame as a closer, becoming the first of two pitchers in major league history to have both a 20-win season and a 50-save season in a career.

Eckersley was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame in 2004, his first year of eligibility. He previously worked with NESN as a part-time color commentator for Red Sox broadcasts, and has also worked for Turner Sports as a game analyst for their Sunday MLB Games and MLB postseason coverage on TBS. He retired from NESN in 2022.

Early life
Eckersley grew up in Fremont, California, rooting for both the San Francisco Giants and the Oakland Athletics of Major League Baseball (MLB). Two of his boyhood heroes were the Giants' Willie Mays and Juan Marichal, and he later adopted Marichal's high leg kick pitching delivery.

Eckersley attended Washington High School in Fremont, California. He played for the football team as a quarterback until his senior year, when he gave up football to protect his throwing arm from injury. He won 29 games as a pitcher at Washington, throwing a 90 mph fastball and a screwball.

Cleveland Indians (1975–1977)
The Cleveland Indians selected Eckersley in the third round of the 1972 MLB draft; he was disappointed that he was not drafted by the Giants. He made his major league debut on April 12, 1975. He was the American League Rookie Pitcher of the Year in 1975, compiling a 13–7 win–loss record and 2.60 earned run average (ERA). His unstyled long hair, moustache, and live fastball made him an instant and identifiable fan favorite. Eckersley pitched reliably over three seasons with the Indians.

On May 30, 1977, Eckersley threw a no-hitter against the California Angels at Cleveland Stadium. He struck out 12 batters and only allowed two to reach base, Tony Solaita on a walk in the first inning and Bobby Bonds on a third strike that was a wild pitch. He earned his first All-Star Game selection that year and finished the season with a 14–13 win–loss record.

Boston Red Sox (1978–1984)
The Indians traded Eckersley and Fred Kendall to the Boston Red Sox for Rick Wise, Mike Paxton, Bo Díaz, and Ted Cox on March 30, 1978. Over the next two seasons, Eckersley won a career-high 20 games in 1978 and 17 games in 1979, with a 2.99 ERA in each year. However, during the remainder of his tenure with Boston, from 1980 to 1984, Eckersley pitched poorly. His fastball had lost some steam, as demonstrated by his 43–48 record with Boston. He later developed a very effective slider.

Chicago Cubs (1984–1986)
On May 25, 1984, the Red Sox traded Eckersley with Mike Brumley to the Chicago Cubs for Bill Buckner, one of several mid-season deals that helped the Cubs to their first postseason appearance since 1945. He won 10 games and lost 8, with a 3.03 ERA.

Eckersley remained with the Cubs in 1985, when he posted an 11–7 won-lost record with two shutouts (the last two of his career). Eckersley's performance deteriorated in 1986, when he posted a 6–11 record with a 4.57 ERA. After the season, he checked himself into a rehabilitation clinic to treat alcoholism. Eckersley noted in Pluto's book that he realized the problem he had after family members videotaped him while drunk and played the tape back for him the next day. During his Hall of Fame speech he recalled that time in his life, saying "I was spiraling out of control personally. I knew I had come to a crossroads in my life. With the grace of God, I got sober and I saved my life."

Oakland Athletics (1987–1995)
Eckersley was traded again on April 3,, to the Oakland Athletics, where manager Tony La Russa intended to use him as a set-up pitcher or long reliever. Indeed, Eckersley started two games with the A's before an injury to then-closer Jay Howell opened the door for Eckersley to move into the closer's role. He saved 16 games in 1987 and then established himself as a dominant closer in 1988 by recording a league-leading 45 saves. Eckersley recorded 4 saves against the Red Sox in the regular season, and he dominated once more by recording saves in all four games as the A's swept the Red Sox in the 1988 ALCS. (which was matched by Greg Holland in the 2014 ALCS), but he found himself on the wrong end of Kirk Gibson's 1988 World Series home run (Eckersley himself first coined the phrase "walk-off home run" to describe that moment) as the A's lost to the Dodgers in 5 games.

In the 1989 World Series he secured the victory in Game Two, and then earned the save in the final game of the Series, as the A's swept the San Francisco Giants in four games.

Eckersley was the most dominant closer in the game from 1988 to, finishing first in the A.L. in saves twice, second two other times, and third once. He saved 220 games during the five years and never posted an ERA higher than 2.96. He gave up five earned runs in the entire season, resulting in a 0.61 ERA. Eckersley's control, which had always been above average even when he was not otherwise pitching well, became his trademark; he walked only three batters in 57.2 innings in, four batters in 73.1 innings in 1990, and nine batters in 76 innings in 1991. Between August 7, 1989, and June 10, 1990, Eckersley appeared in 41 games without walking a single batter, setting a record which still stands and surpassing the previous mark set by Lew Burdette 23 years earlier. In his 1990 season, Eckersley became the first relief pitcher in baseball history to have more saves than baserunners allowed (48 saves, 41 hits, 4 walks, 0 hit by pitch). Perhaps interestingly, rounded to three decimal places, he had the same walks plus hits per innings pitched and ERA: both were 0.614.

Eckersley was the American League's Most Valuable Player and Cy Young Award winner in 1992, a season in which he posted 51 saves. Only two relievers had previously accomplished the double feat: Rollie Fingers in and Willie Hernández in. In the 1992 American League Championship Series against the Toronto Blue Jays, during Game 4 in what some considered the turning point in the series that the Jays won, Eckersley gave up a game-tying 2-run home run to Roberto Alomar and his team eventually lost 7–6 in 11 innings.

Eckersley's numbers slipped following 1992: although he still was among the league leaders in saves, his ERA climbed sharply, and his number of saves never climbed above 36.

On September 16, 1993, in a game against the Minnesota Twins, Eckersley allowed Dave Winfield's 3,000th career hit.

After the 1994 season, the Athletics elected not to exercise a $4 million option on Eckersley, making him a free agent. The team indicated that it would be interested in signing him at a lower salary. Oakland signed him to a one-year contract in early April 1995. His contract was the first major league deal after a three-month signing ban resulting from a labor dispute between owners and the players union.

St. Louis Cardinals (1996–1997)
When La Russa left the Athletics after the 1995 season to become the St. Louis Cardinals' new manager, he arranged to bring Eckersley along with him. Eckersley continued in his role as closer and remained one of the league's best, with 66 saves in two seasons in St. Louis.

Return to Red Sox (1998)

Following the 1997 season, he signed with the Red Sox for a final season, serving as a set-up man for Tom Gordon, as Boston qualified for the AL playoffs.

Eckersley announced his retirement in December 1998. He commented on his career, saying, "I had a good run. I had some magic that was with me for a long time, so I know that I was real lucky to not have my arm fall off for one thing, and to make it this long physically is tough enough. But to me it's like you're being rescued too when your career's over. It's like, 'Whew, the pressure's off'."

Career statistics
He retired with a career 197–171 win–loss record, a 3.50 ERA and 390 saves. As of the end of the 2023 season, Eckersley's career saves total ranks ninth on the all-time saves list. When he retired, Eckersley had appeared in more games (1,071) than any other pitcher in major league history, though he ranks fifth all-time through the 2023 season.

Pitching style
Eckersley's unusual delivery utilized a high leg kick along with a long, pronounced sidearm throwing motion. He had pinpoint accuracy, and fellow Hall of Famer Goose Gossage said of him, "He could hit a gnat in the butt with a pitch if he wanted to.” Eckersley was aggressive and animated on the mound, and he was known for his intimidating stare and pumping his fist after a strikeout. As a starter, Eckersley was able to throw four pitches for strikes, but as a reliever he narrowed his repertoire to two pitches; a sinker and a backdoor slider.

Post-playing career
In 1999, he ranked Number 98 on The Sporting News' list of the 100 Greatest Baseball Players. He was named to the Major League Baseball All-Century Team. On January 6, 2004, he was elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame in his first year of eligibility, with 83.2% of the votes. On August 13, 2005, Eckersley's uniform number (43) was officially retired by the Oakland Athletics. The baseball field at his alma mater, Washington High School, has been named in his honor.

In 2017, Eckersley rejoined the Athletics as the special assistant to Dave Kaval, the team's president.

Broadcasting
Eckersley began working as a studio analyst and color commentator for the Boston Red Sox on NESN in 2002. "Eck" became known for his easy-going manner and his own baseball vernacular, with Red Sox Nation attempting to keep up via "The Ecktionary," a defining list of his on-air sayings.

In the spring of 2009, when regular NESN commentator Jerry Remy took time off for health reasons, Eckersley filled in for him, providing color commentary alongside play-by-play announcer Don Orsillo. Eckersley was the primary substitute for Remy when he was unavailable, including filling in for the final two months of the 2013 season, when Remy took extended time off due to the murder indictment of his son, Jared. Eckersley continued to work with Orsillo's successor, Dave O'Brien, for various Red Sox games, and often worked with Remy and O'Brien in a three-man booth prior to Remy's death in 2021.

Eckersley also worked with TBS as a studio analyst from 2008 to 2012. In 2013, Eckersley moved to the booth with TBS, calling Sunday games for the network and also providing postseason analysis from the booth. In the 2017 postseason, he worked with Brian Anderson, Joe Simpson and Lauren Shehadi.

Eckersley announced his retirement from NESN on August 8, 2022. In a statement released by NESN, he said:

"After 50 years in Major League Baseball, I am excited about this next chapter of my life. I will continue to be an ambassador for the club and a proud member of Red Sox Nation while transitioning to life after baseball alongside my wife Jennifer, my children and my grandchildren. I’m forever grateful to NESN, the Red Sox, my family and the fans for supporting me throughout my career and through this decision and I look forward to remaining engaged with the team in a variety of capacities for years to come."

During an interview with The Boston Globe, Eckersley said, "I've been thinking about this for a long time. Not that it matters, but it's kind of a round number, leaving. I started in pro ball in '72, when I was a 17-year-old kid right out of high school. Fifty years ago ... So it's time." Following his announcement, Sean McGrail, NESN president and CEO said that NESN was "...fortunate that Dennis has been a part of our Red Sox coverage ... His unbridled passion, nuanced insights and Eck humor will be dearly missed and we are thankful for his many contributions to NESN. We wish him the best as he embarks on this next chapter of his life as a grandfather, father, husband and member of Red Sox Nation." Eckersley's final Red Sox broadcast as a NESN commentator was October 5, 2022.

Personal life
Eckersley married his first wife Denise in 1973 and they had a daughter, Mandee Eckersley. Denise left him for Rick Manning, his then–Cleveland Indians teammate, in 1978; the affair precipitated Eckersley's trade to the Red Sox that year. Two years later, Eckersley married model Nancy O'Neil. They adopted two children together, a son Jake and a daughter Alexandra. They divorced shortly after his retirement from baseball. His third wife, Jennifer, is a former lobbyist and manages Eckersley's business and charitable affairs.

During the first half of his career, Eckersley had problems with alcohol; he became sober in January 1987.

An MLB Network documentary about Eckersley, titled Eck: A Story of Saving, premiered on December 13, 2018.

In December 2022, Eckersley's adopted daughter Alexandra, a homeless person, was arrested on suspicion of abandoning her newborn in a wooded area in 18 degree weather and misleading authorities as to the infant's whereabouts. Alexandra had been homeless since 2018 and suffering from addiction and mental health issues.

title: Dennis Eckersley


text:
Talk:Office québécois de la langue française

comments
I removed the following because it is not encyclopedic, but rather is distorted rhetoric only:

"despite the fact that in that province they have access to education in their own language from kindergarten to university, have access to all of the Quebec government's services in English and have access to their business and cultural media in exactly the same way as in the rest of the continent, unlike any other linguistic minority in Quebec or any of the other nine provinces and the 50 states of the USA."

Note: the so-called rights are not granted by Quebec, they are the rights of all Canadians living in the Province of Quebec and each of these rights contains many variations according to circumstances. Angelique 23:41, 7 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * In that case it would be a good idea to specify why English Canadians feel they are discriminated against. Tremblay 00:35, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thank you, User:Tremblay, I will be pleased to elaborate as soon as I get a chance. Very kind of you to invite facts into an article instead of fiction. Angelique 01:14, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

 * The fundamental rights of all Quebecers are defined in the 1975 Quebec Charter of Human Rights and Freedoms and the linguistic rights of all Quebecers are defined in the 1977 Charter of the French Language. These Charters not only comply with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, they even comply with the 1982 Constitution, repatriated without the approval of the National Assembly of Quebec. Whatever you feel Angelique, you will not be able to go around these facts. -- Mathieugp 17:18, 8 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The Office was created in 1961 and started publishing lexicons in the 1960s. --Valmi 16:43, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Academy?
What's the relationship between the OLF and the Académie Française? Surely there must be quite a wide area of overlap in what they do. Does the OLF consider itself bound by the Académie's rulings? Do they compete? Do they coordinate their language planning? QuartierLatin1968 14:33, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

 * The OQLF is the Government of Quebec's branch responsible to enforce Quebec's language policy. The OQLF is bound to the law that created it, and this law was passed by the Parliament of Quebec. They do not truly compete, however were Quebec to give itself a truly independent language regulation body equivalent to the Académie française, this body would prevail on the territory of Quebec.

 * There is no coordination in terms of language planning as both institutions do not have the same mandate at all. The Académie française is not equipped to enforce France's language policy. There is however coordination were the interests are the same, for exemple, the OQLF and the Académie française both gave their approval to the latest "spelling reform". -- Mathieugp 15:37, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

POV and false information
The following paragraph poses a number of problems:

''Quebec's language policy is often viewed as a product of xenophobic tendency of rural quebecers and is also accused of having discriminatory intent. In 1993 the United Nations Human Rights Committee agreed that Quebec's language policy is discriminatory. The language policy is also unconstitutional under the Canadian constitution, which mandates an individual's right to choose which language to use.''

First, it presents a POV without citing any source, making it look as though such an opinion was generalized in population X. Second, it is prejudicial against rural Quebecers who are depicted as being favorable to discrimination against what we can only presume the author considers a minority group. The last two sentences are not based on facts. Here is a more accurate account of the events, taken in the Canadian Encyclopedia:

''In April 1993 the Committee made public an opinion that Bill 178 violated Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights in which a state, beyond the sphere of its own public action, may not restrict the freedom of expression in a language of one's choice. In response to other parts of McIntyre's complaint, the Committee did not consider that linguistic minorities' right to use their own language between themselves (Article 27 of the Covenant) was challenged since "English-speaking citizens of Canada cannot be considered a linguistic minority." Moreover, in the Committee's opinion, the right to equality (Article 26) was not jeopardized as restrictions about commercial signs applied equally to all Québec's residents.''

[...]

Read the full article here: Bill 86 - The Canadian Encyclopedia

Reading the actual opinion of the UN Committee, we find this:

11.1 On the merits, three major issues are before the Committee:

(a) whether Sec.58 of the Charter of the French Language, as amended by Bill 178, Sec.1, violates any right that the authors might have by virtue of article 27;

(b) whether Sec.58 of the Charter of the French Language, as amended by Bill 178, Sec.1, violates the authors' right to freedom of expression; and

(c) whether the same provision is compatible with the authors' right to equality before the law.

''11.2 As to article 27, the Committee observes that this provision refers to minorities in States; this refers, as do all references to the "State" or to "States" in the provisions of the Covenant, to ratifying States. Further, article 50 of the Covenant provides that its provisions extend to all parts of Federal States without any limitations or exceptions. Accordingly, the minorities referred to in article 27 are minorities withinsuch a State, and not minorities within any province. '''A group may constitute a majority in a province but still be a minority in a State and thus be entitled to the benefits of article 27. English speaking citizens of Canada cannot be considered a linguistic minority'''. The authors therefore have no claim under article 27 of the Covenant.''

''11.3 Under article 19 of the Covenant, everyone shall have the right to freedom of expression; this right may be subjected to restrictions, conditions for which are set out in article 19, paragraph 3. The Government of Quebec has asserted that commercial activity such as outdoor advertising does not fall within the ambit of article 19. The Committee does not share this opinion. Article 19, paragraph 2, must be interpreted as encompassing every form of subjective ideas and opinions capable of transmission to others, which are compatible with article 20 of the Covenant, of news and information, of commercial expression and advertising, of works of art, etc.; it should not be confined to means of political, cultural or artistic expression. In the Committee's opinion, the commercial element in an expression taking the form of outdoor advertising cannot have the effect of removing this expression from the scope of protected freedom. The Committee does not agree either that any of the above forms of expression can be subjected to varying degrees of limitation, with the result that some forms of expression may suffer broader restrictions than others.''

''11.4 Any restriction of the freedom of expression must cumulatively meet the following conditions: it must be provided for by law, it must address one of the aims enumerated in paragraph 3(a) and (b) of article 19, and must be necessary to achieve the legitimate purpose. While the restrictions on outdoor advertising are indeed provided for by law, the issue to be addressed is whether they are necessary for the respect of the rights of others. The rights of others could only be the rights of the francophone minority within Canada under article 27. This is the right to use their own language, which is not jeopardized by the freedom of others to advertise in other than the French language.''

''Nor does the Committee have reason to believe that public order would be jeopardized by commercial advertising outdoors in a language other than French. The Committee notes that the State party does not seek to defend Bill 178 on these grounds. Any constraints under paragraphs 3(a) and 3(b) of article 19 would in any event have to be shown to be necessary. The Committee believes that it is not necessary, in order to protect the vulnerable position in Canada of the francophone group, to prohibit commercial advertising in English. This protection may be achieved in other ways that do not preclude the freedom of expression, in a language of their choice, of those engaged in such fields as trade. For example, the law could have required that advertising be in both French and English. A State may choose one or more official languages, but it may not exclude, outside the spheres of public life, the freedom to express oneself in a language of one's choice. The Committee accordingly concludes that there has been a violation of article 19, paragraph 2.''

''11.5 The authors have claimed a violation of their right, under article 26, to equality before the law; the Government of Quebec has contended that Sections 1 and 6 of Bill 178 are general measures applicable to all those engaged in trade, regardless of their language. The Committee notes that Sections 1 and 6 of Bill 178 operate to prohibit the use of commercial advertising outdoors in other than the French language. This prohibition applies to French speakers as well as English speakers, so that a French speaking person wishing to advertise in English, in order to reach those of his or her clientele who are English speaking, may not do so. Accordingly, the Committee finds that the authors have not been discriminated against on the ground of their language, and concludes that there has been no violation of article 26 of the Covenant.''

12. The Human Rights Committee, acting under article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, is of the view that the facts before it reveal a violation of article 19, paragraph 2, of the Covenant.

13. The Committee calls upon the State party to remedy the violation of article 19 of the Covenant by an appropriate amendment to the law.

''14. The Committee would wish to receive information, within six months, on any relevant measures taken by the State party in connection with the Committee's Views. ''

[...]

Read the full opinion here: Human Rights Committee - 1989 Gordon McIntyre Complaint and Opinion of the Committee

This opinion was not unanimous, here are the dissenting/concurring opinions:

A. Individual opinion by Mr. Waleed Sadi (dissenting)

''I respectfully dissent from the Committee's decision and submit that it would have been appropriate to review the Committee's earlier decision on admissibility, on the basis of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies. My reasons are the following:''

''I am persuaded by the State party's contention that it would be open to the authors, under the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure, to apply for a declaratory judgment holding Bill 178 and the "notwithstanding" clause in Section 10 thereof to be invalid. Article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Optional Protocol requires the authors of communications to exhaust available domestic remedies; the Committee should not have proceeded with the examination of the merits of the cases in view of the availability of the domestic remedy in question.''

In my opinion, the authors have not been able to refute the State party's contention that a declaratory judgment would not only be an available but also an effective remedy. ''The Canadian judicial system should have the opportunity to pronounce upon the constitutionality of Bill 178 and its controversial "notwithstanding" clause before the Committee proceeds with a finding on the merits of the communications. The Committee's decision to adopt Views under article 5, paragraph 4, of the Optional Protocol, and to find a violation of article 19 of the Covenant has no precedent and is not, in my opinion, in accordance with the provisions of article 5, paragraph 2(b), of the Protocol. I thus register my disagreement with the Committee's opinion that recourse to the Canadian courts, including the Supreme Court of Canada, would be futile and therefore not required for purposes of the Optional Protocol.''

W. Sadi

[Done in English, French and Spanish, the English text being the original version.]

B. Individual opinion by Mr. Birame Ndiaye (dissenting)

''In accordance with article 27 of the Covenant, in those States in which ethnic, religious or linguistic minorities exist, persons belonging to such minorities shall not be denied the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion, or to use their own language. Through this provision, the Covenant categorically recognizes ("persons ... shall not be denied"), for every individual belonging to these three categories of minority, certain rights, namely, the right, in community with the other members of their group, to enjoy their own culture, to profess and practise their own religion and to use their own language.''

''These rights are recognized in respect of individuals for their own sake, but also and above all for the survival of the minority as an entity. Indeed, the existence of minorities such as those defined in article 27 cannot be imagined after the disappearance of the single element which constitutes them, namely, their ethnic character, religion or, lastly, language. The rationale of article 27 is the preservation of the three minorities referred to, and not the protection of the rights enunciated therein, merely for the sake of protection.''

''In the cases submitted to the Committee [Ballantyne/Davidson (359/1989) and McIntyre (385/1989)], Quebec considered that "historical developments since 1763 amply bear out the need for French-speakers to seek protection of their language and culture". Thus, the goal pursued by the Charter of the French Language, as amended by Bill 178, is the very same as that aimed at by article 27 of the Covenant, to which effect must be given, if necessary by restricting freedom of expression on the basis of article 19, paragraph 3. Under this provision "The exercise of the rights provided for in paragraph 2 of this article carries with it special duties and responsibilities. It may therefore be subject to certain restrictions, but these shall only be such as are provided by law and are necessary:''

(a)For respect of the rights or reputations of others;

(b)For the protection of national security or of public order (ordre public), or of public health or morals".

''The limitations embodied in article 19, paragraph 3(a) and (b), are applicable to the situation of the French-speaking minority in Canada. And as this country has maintained, albeit with too narrow a conception of freedom of expression, "the Charter of the French Language, as amended ...., may provide Quebec with a means of preserving its specific linguistic character and give French-speakers a feeling of linguistic security". This is reasonable and is geared to ends compatible with the Covenant, namely, article 27.''

''Unfortunately, the Human Rights Committee has not endorsed the State party's view and has not agreed to integrate the requirements of implementation of article 27 in its decision. For the Committee, there is no linguistic problem in Canada or, if it does exist, it is not so important as to merit the treatment which the authorities of that country have chosen to extend to it. I can only disassociate myself from its conclusions.''

B. Ndiaye

[Done in English, French and Spanish, the French text being the original version.]

C. Individual opinion by Mr. Kurt Herndl (dissenting/concurring)

I agree with the Committee's Views that the facts of the McIntyre case disclose a violation of article 19 of the Covenant. As to the communication of Mr. Ballantyne and Ms. Davidson, I believe that a question remains whether they are indeed "victims" within the meaning of article 1 of the Optional Protocol.

''With respect to the Committee's rationale in paragraph 11.2 of its Views, the communications in my opinion do not raise issues under article 27 of the Covenant. The question as to whether the authors can or cannot be considered as belonging to a "minority" in the sense of article 27 would seem to be moot in as much as the rights that the authors invoke are not "minority rights" as such, but rather rights pertaining to the principle of freedom of expression, as protected by article 19 of the Covenant, which obviously must be taken to include commercial advertising. On this account, as the Committee rightly states in paragraphs 11.3 and 11.4 of its Views, there has been violation of a provision of the Covenant, i.e. article 19.''

K. Herndl

[Done in English, French and Spanish, the English text being the original version.]

D. Individual opinion by Mr. Bertil Wennergren (concurring)

I concur with the Committee's findings in paragraph 11.2 of the Views that the authors have no claim under article 27 of the Covenant, but I do so because a prohibition to use any other language than French for commercial outdoor advertising in Quebec does not infringe on any of the rights protected under article 27. ''It is, under the circumstances, of no relevance, whether English speaking persons in Quebec are entitled to the protection of article 27 or not. I feel, however, that I should add that in my opinion, the issue of what constitutes a minority in a State must be decided on a case by case basis, due regard being given to the particular circumstances of each case.''

B. Wennergren

[Done in English, French and Spanish, the English text being the original version.]

E. Individual opinion by Mrs. Elizabeth Evatt, cosigned by Messrs. Nisuke Ando, Marco Tulio Bruni Celli and Vojin Dimitrijevic (concurring and elaborating)

It may be correct to conclude that the authors are not members of a linguistic minority whose right to use their own language in community with the other members of their group have been violated by the Quebec laws in question. This conclusion can be supported by reference to the general application of those laws - they apply to all languages other than French - and to their specific purpose - which attracts the protection of article 19.

''My difficulty with the decision is that it interprets the term "minorities" in article 27 solely on the basis of the number of members of the group in question in the State party. The reasoning is that because English speaking Canadians are not a numerical minority in Canada they cannot be a minority for the purposes of article 27.''

I do not agree, however, that persons are necessarily excluded from the protection of article 27 where their group is an ethnic, linguistic or cultural minority in an autonomous province of a State, but is not clearly a numerical minority in the State itself, taken as a whole entity. ''The criteria for determining what is a minority in a State ( in the sense of article 27) has not yet been considered by the Committee, and does not need to be foreclosed by a decision in the present matter, which can in any event be determined on other grounds. The history of the protection of minorities in international law shows that the question of definition has been difficult and controversial and that many different criteria have been proposed. For example, it has been argued that factors other than strictly numerical ones need to be taken into account. Alternatively, article 50, which envisages the application of the Covenant to "parts of federal States" could affect the interpretation of article 27.''

''To take a narrow view of the meaning of minorities in article 27 could have the result that a State party would have no obligation under the Covenant to ensure that a minority in an autonomous province had the protection of article 27 where it was not clear that the group in question was a minority in the State considered as a whole entity. These questions do not need to be finally resolved in the present matter and are better deferred until the proper context arises. ''

Consequently, I will remove the paragraph as it is a POV and worst is not based on fact but a prejudicial opinon held against the so called "rural Quebecers". Also, any information of this nature truly belongs to article Legal dispute over Quebec's language policy. -- Mathieugp 14:26, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

User: Lionel GM...
Has been changing every Quebec university page and now this to English equivalents. Should the OQLF send the hounds after him? What about his interpretation of the naming convention, is it justified? This issue seems to have been brought up before but never thoroughly discussed. I think it's time to do something about it... --132.206.150.33 19:37, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

 * I've moved it back, as discussed at Canadian wikipedians' notice board/discussion. Please ensure I've reverted the changes correctly.  (Looks right to me.)  --Stéphane Charette 04:55, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Ongoing problem !
I heard some anglophones question the use of the office and the loi 101 but even today go around Montreal westward boroughs and you'll have a hard time being served in the provincial only official language : French. Try it for yourself at the train central station, it's extremely insulting ! --DynV 09:28, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh boo freaking hoo. Cry me a river, please.74.56.218.173 (talk) 00:38, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I know folks 200 km north-west of Montreal, they hardly understands English and can say very few words of it but they won't as they're ashamed. They must feel like strangers in some parts of Quebec (not only Montreal) but this shouldn't be a problem as our provincial only official language is French, of course people have language liberty but definitively should greet in the official language. What would you think if you went on vacation and the hotel greeter wouldn't understand locals ? Like second-class citizens ! Same as I'm proud to have religious liberty, I'm proud that the national value of language is protected ; most people in their situation feel stupid to ignore the second language but in fact are just assimilated if they're constrained to learn it. --DynV 10:29, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

There's a slight discrepancy, as the article says the office was created in 1961, but then goes on to say:

"The OQLF was created by the sovereigntist Parti Québécois government as a way to promote the normal use of the French language in Quebec"

The PQ didn't get into power until the late 70s.

Peregrine981 04:47, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

The OQLF was created by a LIBERAL government! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.81.131.221 (talk) 20:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

^^^^ I'm also confused about that. The opening sentence says it was a liberal government, but under criticism it says it was a PQ government. Which is it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.213.2 (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Employees' rights
Under Bill 101, can employees be fined for speaking to each other in English? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Toddsschneider (talk • contribs) 16:20, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Um probably not, but a company can be fined for having an employee answer the phone with 'hello' or great a customer with english. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.81.131.221 (talk) 20:53, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

 * No. The Charter of the French language is not concerned with language in any private situation. A company cannot be fined for answering the phone or greeting customers in English. That is a misunderstanding of the law. Every person in Quebec can chose to enforce their right as consumer to be informed and served in French, the official language of Quebec. In a situation where a customer feels his right is being stepped on, he may file a complaint to the OQLF. If the complaint is valid, the OQLF can send someone to inform the owner of the commerce that there has been a complaint. The statistics of the OQLF indicate clearly that in the majority of the cases are resolved without ever requiring fines. When there are fines, it is not because a poor English speaker's right are being violated, it is because a commerce (or else) deliberately chose not to comply and continue to violate the linguistic human rights of Quebec consumers. Logically, the only thing required from any commerce owned by non-Francophones in Quebec is the hiring of bilingual employees to serve clients. -- Mathieugp (talk) 17:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Powers of the OLFQ
I question the reference stating that the OLFQ has the authority to close down a business for non-conformity with the Charter of the French Language.

Sec. 177 of the Charter states, "Where the Office is of the opinion that this Charter or a regulation thereunder has been contravened, it shall give the alleged offender formal notice to comply therewith within the time indicated. If the alleged offender fails to comply, the Office shall refer the matter to the Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions so that he may, where required, institute appropriate penal proceedings. In the case of a contravention of section 78.1, 78.2, 78.3 or 176, the Office shall refer the matter directly to the Director of Criminal and Penal Prosecutions, without giving prior formal notice."

Sec. 205, 205.1 and 208 refer to fines and other penalties that may be imposed by a court, which include ordering the removal or destruction of any poster, sign, advertisement, billboard, or illuminated sign determined to be non-compliant.

So, if the OLFQ "Language Police" doesn't get co-operation from an offending business, they can refer the matter to prosecutors for a decision on charges, but cannot order the business to close. Further, while a court's order to remove a non-compliant sign may result in a temporary decline in business until a new sign can be erected, there doesn't appear to be a provision which specifically authorizes a court, let alone the OLFQ, to order a business to shut down. Admitedly however, the fine system authorized by this law would make it very difficult for a business to remain open for very long. Canuck55 (talk) 16:28, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Pastagate
Seems like this incident which garnered international attention could be mentioned here. -- 65.92.180.137 (talk) 02:06, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
 * It made it onto Anthony Bourdain's CNN TV show as well, months after first appearing in the Italian newspapers. -- 65.94.76.126 (talk) 03:03, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Office québécois de la langue française. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20031023132329/http://www.canlii.org:80/qc/sta/ to http://www.canlii.org/qc/sta/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:23, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Neutrality disputed?
I see that a POV tag was added to the "Negative perception" section by back in January 2017, but there's nothing on this talk page to indicate what exactly she thinks is wrong with it. The incidents listed all seem to be properly cited, and are probably the only reason most foreigners (like me) have heard of the OQLF. There ought to be some mention within the article of the controversies surrounding this agency, and this section seems to do that job well enough. How might it be improved? Chuntuk (talk) 07:45, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm concerned that the section relies excessively on primary sources, namely news websites, and substitutes an overview of criticism of the language policy with a series of anecdotes. Since there aren't any scholarly secondary sources cited, it's difficult to tell whether these incidents are representative and provide due weight to the aspects of the conflict that they highlight. Please see English-only_movement for an example of a controversial language policy topic that was covered using scholarly secondary sources. Another reason this section is a problem re POV, is that not only is this the longest section in the article, there is no section covering the Francophone grievances that presumably caused the office to be established, or events which led Francophones to believe that their linguistic rights were not being respected. By omission, the article instead makes it seem that the office just enforces draconian pro-French policies for no real reason. Unfortunately, I am not an expert on the situation in Quebec and do not have the time at present for the kind of in depth research needed to improve this article. Kind regards, Catrìona (talk) 01:53, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Office québécois de la langue française. 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/20080528173404/http://www.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/office/rapports/rap20062007/rapport_annuel_20062007.pdf to http://www.oqlf.gouv.qc.ca/office/rapports/rap20062007/rapport_annuel_20062007.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:47, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Page's Title
I find it somewhat absurd that an ENGLISH Wikipedia article has a title in a foreign language. It'd make sense if it was a commonly known foreign name or term, but that's not the case. It'd be better to change the title to the office's English name as it is, after all, the English Wikipedia. --אדי97 (talk) 16:10, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I sometimes read or watch English Canadian media and the French name is always used. Also, I don't think the OQLF has an official English name. --Thibaut (talk) 12:33, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
 * WP:CANFRENCH. This is the COMMONNAME used in English-language media treated as if it was an English word and we stick with that:
 * "Note that Wikipedia's Use English guideline does mean that the words in an article title must invariably be English; it means that the title needs to be what an English speaker would most likely  as the usual name of the subject in  usage. For example, the Parti Québécois does not have a recognized English name—the standard usage by speakers of Canadian English  the untranslated name 'Parti Québécois'."
 * NM 08:52, 28 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Given its role it would be very unusual for it to have an official English name, but even English-language sources refer to it as either the Office québécois de la langue française, the OQLF, or both. - Aoidh (talk) 12:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

Language police in the lede
I've reverted this change to the lede for a few reasons. Firstly to address the edit summary, a redirect target is not a consensus for material in the lede of an article. Secondly, "language police" is an informal and derogatory phrasing that needs proper contextualization if included, which already occurs in the Controversy section. - Aoidh (talk) 22:10, 21 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I've again reverted this change as the reason for it being reverted remains the same. That Language police includes a link to this article is not a consensus in any way for what the lede of this article should contain. That's not what a consensus is nor is it how the lede of the article is determined. - Aoidh (talk) 02:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Revert all you want. A consensus was already reached. Stick to your own country's politics. 2604:3D09:6688:3E00:8C19:7F37:5DF7:F377 (talk) 23:08, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
 * There has been no consensus reached to change the lede of this article to add this derogatory term. If there has been a consensus reached, please link it, but the fact that Language police includes a link to this article is not a consensus regarding this article in any way, let alone the lede sentence. - Aoidh (talk) 01:57, 4 December 2023 (UTC)