text:
M-66 (Michigan highway)

M-66 is a north–south state trunkline highway on the Lower Peninsula of the US state of Michigan. It runs from the Indiana state line in the south to Charlevoix in the north. M-66 is the only state highway to run the north–south distance of the Lower Peninsula. It starts as a continuation of State Road 9 (SR 9), which provides access to the Indiana Toll Road. The total length is approximately 272.9 mi, which includes almost 3.4 mi of freeway between Interstate 94 (I-94) and downtown Battle Creek designated as I-194. A section of the highway immediately south of I-94 is an expressway, a type of divided limited-access highway, while the section along I-194 is a full freeway; otherwise M-66 is a two-lane rural highway. Two sections are listed on the National Highway System.

The first usage of the M-66 designation dates back to around July 1, 1919 with the rest of the original state highway system. At the time, the highway only extended between Lowell and Lakeview, a route now covered by M-91. The highway has been lengthened in a series of extensions north and south starting in 1925. A rerouting in 1944–45 removed M-66 from its original 1919 routing to replace another highway south of Six Lakes, the change that spawned M-91. The last big extension in 1965 resulted in the modern trans-peninsular highway route. The last modifications were shorter reroutings in the 1970s.

Route description
M-66 runs for 266.399 mi as an almost entirely a north–south undivided surface highway in western Michigan from the Indiana state line north to Lake Michigan at Charlevoix. Most of the highway is two-lane undivided rural highway. There is a section south of Battle Creek that is a four-lane expressway. Running north into the Cereal City, M-66 is concurrent with I-194, which is a full freeway. This section along I-194 is listed on the National Highway System (NHS), a system of highways important to the nation's economy, defense, and mobility. Another section of M-66 is included on the NHS where it is concurrent with either M-72 or U.S. Highway 131 (US 131) in Kalkaska or Antrim counties.

Indiana to Ionia
M-66 is a four-lane highway that connects with State Road 9 (SR 9) at the Indiana state line in southern St. Joseph County. The highway runs north to Sturgis through farm land where it turns east through town running concurrently with US 12 on Chicago Road. As it leaves Sturgis to the north it crosses a branch of the Michigan Southern Railroad, and it becomes a two-lane surface highway along Nottawa Street. The highway runs near several small lakes and crosses the Prairie River before meeting M-86. The two highways run north–south concurrently for about 1.9 mi along the Nottawa–Colon township line. Farther north, M-66 crosses the St. Joseph River and meets M-60. M-60/M-66 run together to the east, crossing Nottawa Creek, then turning northeasterly in Leonidas and crossing into the northwest corner of Branch County. M-60 and M-66 separate west of Union City, and M-66 turns north into Calhoun County.

Running through woodland terrain in southern Calhoun County, M-66 passes through Athens, along Graham Lake and continues to the outskirts of Battle Creek. The highway widens first to a four-lane, limited access expressway south of the Lakeview Square Mall before becoming a full freeway at the interchange with I-94. It is at the transition to freeway that M-66 starts its concurrency with I-194. I-194/M-66 is known as the Sojourner Truth Downtown Parkway, but the locals still use the former semi-official nickname, "The Penetrator". The southern section of the freeway has the highest traffic levels along M-66 as measured by average annual daily traffic (AADT) in the survey conducted in 2009. The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) calculates the AADT value as a tally of the average number of vehicles using a given stretch of roadway. I-194/M-66 carried 25,200 vehicles on the average day during the year; 980 trucks were included in that traffic. The freeway continues 3.374 mi north into downtown Battle Creek along part of the Kalamazoo River and crossing a branch of the Canadian National Railway and Norfolk Southern Railway before ending at the at-grade intersection with Hamblin Avenue. I-194 ends, and M-66 continues northeast out of the Cereal City on Division Street and then northeast on Capital Avenue along the Battle Creek River.

M-66 continues northward through Barry County on Capital Avenue which becomes 9 Mile Road north of Baseline Road. The highway passes through Assyria before meeting M-79, with which it has a short concurrency, in Nashville. On the north side of the village, M-66 crosses the Thornapple River and continues north through mixed rural forest land and farm fields. Near Woodland, M-66 joins M-43 and the two run to the northeast and along the Barry–Eaton county line. M-43/M-66 meets M-50 at a four-way intersection southwest of Lake Odessa near Woodbury, and M-43 turns east leaving M-66 in favor of a concurrency with M-50. M-66 crosses a rail line of CSX Transportation and the county line on State Road. It meets I-96 in a rural southern part of the Ionia County south of Ionia. On the south edge of town, the highway passes the county airport and curves to the northeast becoming Dexter Street. While entering downtown Ionia, the trunkline crosses the Grand River and the abandoned mainline of the Grand Rapids Eastern Railroad near the county fairgrounds. M-66 turns west along M-21 (Lincoln Avenue) for two blocks before turning back to the north along State Street. The trunkline runs through the northern part of the county and meets M-44's eastern terminus near Woodard Lake.

Montcalm County and northward
In Montcalm County, M-66 intersects M-57 in a rural area south of Sheridan before running north on Sheridan Road through Stanton. The highway jogs west along Main Street in Stanton before returning to a northerly course on a discontinuous section of Sheridan Road. The roadway curves around the west end of Hemmingway Lake near Cannonsville Road. West of Edmore, M-66 turns northwesterly along M-46 on Edmore–Howard City Road to Six Lakes. M-66 separates there and returns to its northerly journey along Six Lakes Road between Little Bass Lake and First Lake. The road crosses into Mecosta County as 30th Avenue north of Six Lakes. The highway intersects M-20 at the intersection with 9 Mile Road in Remus. This area of rural Mecosta County is more heavily forested with rolling hills and sporadic farms. In Barryton, the roadway crosses the Chippewa River. M-66 continues north passing Merrill Lake before crossing into rural eastern Osceola County at Mesceola Road.

The highway meets US 10 near Sears after crossing the Pere Marquette State Trail. M-66 crosses the Muskegon River near a separate 9 Mile Road in Osceola County. It meets both M-115 and M-61 (16 Mile Road) south of Marion. The highway continues north and crosses the Great Lakes Central Railroad for the first time in Marion, before entering Missaukee County. The trunkline then turns westward on Stoney Corners Road toward McBain through farm land. In town it runs along Maple Street and then runs north toward Lake City on Morey Road. South of the Lake City, M-55 runs concurrently with M-66 by Missaukee Golf Course and into town along the eastern shore of Lake Missaukee. North of town, M-55 splits off to the east on Houghton Lake Road, and M-66 continues north to an intersection with the eastern terminus of M-42 in a rural forest. M-66 leaves Morey Road and follows Pioneer Road to the county line.

As the highway crosses into Kalkaska County it crosses the Manistee River. M-66 runs through rolling hills in woodlands through the unincorporated farming community of Lodi north to an intersection with M-72. The two highways travel west together over the Great Lakes Central Railroad before turning north and merging with US 131 on a route parallel to the rail line. US 131/M-66/M-72 follows and crosses a branch of the Boardman River along Cedar Street through downtown Kalkaska. North of the central business district, M-72 separates to the west and US 131/M-66 crosses through the Pere Marquette State Forest on the way to Antrim and Mancelona in Antrim County. The highway follows Williams Street through the twin towns, meeting the southern terminus of M-88 and western terminus of C-38 at the intersection with State Street in Mancelona. M-66 separates from US 131 and follows Mancelona–East Jordan Road out of town.

The section of M-66 north of the US 131 split had the highway's lowest AADT levels in the 2009 survey. MDOT reported that only 1,500 vehicles use this stretch of road in 2009. Of these vehicles, only were 140 trucks that used the segment of highway in 2009. The highway meanders through more forest lands through the community of Green River to East Jordan. M-66 follows Lake Street and turns to follow the western shore of the South Arm of Lake Charlevoix. The roadway turns inland through Ironton before returning to the lakeshore the rest of the way to Charlevoix. M-66 ends at an intersection with US 31 south of downtown next to Lake Michigan.

Services
MDOT provides a number of different services to motorists traveling along the state trunkline highway system. Along M-66, there are six different carpool lots located near Nashville, Woodland, Belding, Sheridan, Sears and Marion. There are additional services provided to travelers in the form of roadside parks and rest areas. There are two roadside parks along the highway, one is between Woodland and Woodbury, and the second is in Sheridan. The roadway also provides access to the Ionia State Recreation Area and a state harbor on Lake Charlevoix.

History
M-66 was first signed along a roadway by July 1, 1919 between M-16 (now M-21) at Lowell and M-46 near Lakeview. The designation was extended in 1925 along M-46 to Six Lakes and then north to M-13 (now US 131) in Lodi. A further extension north from Lodi in 1929 or 1930 along M-131 to Mancelona, a short segment of M-88 and north to US 31 in Charlevoix. The southern end was extended to US 16 south of Lowell by 1931. A section of the northern extension was marked on maps through 1933 as "under construction". That section was cancelled in favor of another routing near Mancelona. A short bypass of Six Lakes added about a mile to the length of the roadway in 1936. The M-131 concurrency was switched to a US 131 concurrency when the latter was extended in 1939. This concurrency was shortened just before World War II when the Michigan State Highway Department (MSHD) rerouted US 131 along a new road between South Boardman and Kalkaska.

The MSHD completed a major rerouting of M-66 around 1944–45. The M-14 designation of the time was decommissioned and replaced with M-66. Starting at Six Lakes, M-66 turned west along M-46 instead of east and then turned south through Stanton and Ionia ending north of Battle Creek. The highway between Lowell and Lakeview was redesignated as M-91. A minor realignment in late 1950 removed two 90° curves near the Osceola–Missaukee county line and replaced them with a pair of sweeping curves.

The MSHD rerouted M-66 between Maple Grove and Nashville in mid-1953. In the changes, M-79 was extended along the new route of M-66 and then over M-214 to Hastings. M-66 was shifted off Assyria Road which was turned back to local control. Another realignment in 1954 shifted M-66 to the modern routing between the M-43 concurrency termini, removing M-43/M-66 from a section of M-50 in the process. The final section gravel section of M-66, approximately 11 mi in length, was paved near Nashville in 1957. M-32 was extended along the northernmost section of M-66 in 1963.

M-66 was extended southerly from Assyria through Battle Creek to the Indiana state line replacing sections of M-78 in 1965. M-66 turned south and west along M-60 and new highway to Colon. The segment of former M-78 not used by M-66 was transferred to local control. The final section of M-78's roadway given to M-66 extended it all the way to the state line, resulting in a north–south trans-peninsular highway from Lake Michigan near Charlevoix to Indiana. M-66 is the only such highway to run the length of the Lower Peninsula. The extension allowed the Green Arrow Association to promote the whole length of the Green Arrow Route with a single highway number. The next year, M-66 was rerouted through Battle Creek to use the completed I-194 freeway.

A 90° turn in Missaukee County was removed north of Lake City in 1972. In late 1973 or early 1974, M-66 and M-72 were shifted around the south side of Kalkaska. Later in 1974, the M-32 concurrency was removed when M-32 was scaled back to its former terminus. A project in 1981 furthered the 1972 realignment in Missaukee County. About 4 mi were shortened from the routing when the new alignment was built between Smithville and Phelps Road.

Memorial designations
To capitalize on the opening of the Mackinac Bridge in 1957, local leaders in Battle Creek wanted to promote M-66 as a route north from Indiana to the bridge. They named the highway the Green Arrow Route as part of this marketing strategy. The color was to evoke the forests in the area, and arrow was meant to play on several historical connections. One of these was the Pennsylvania Railroad's Northern Arrow passenger train that once operated in the area. The official explanation was to tie into the history of Native Americans in the area, but the route was also "straight as an arrow". The backers also promoted the highway as a direct and scenic route to vacation country in the northern Lower Peninsula, avoiding most of the larger cities in the area. M-66 was given the Green Arrow Route name in Public Act 170 of 1959 between the Indiana state line and Kalkaska. Despite these efforts, M-66 failed to attract much traffic. When the Michigan Legislature recodified the memorial highway names in Public Act 142 of 2001, the Green Arrow Route was truncated to the northern border of Calhoun County, a change confirmed by Public Act 138 of 2004.

Born Isabella Baumfree in 1797, Sojourner Truth settled in the Battle Creek area in the 1840s. She travelled through the Midwest and New England speaking against slavery and for women's rights. She lived in the area until her death in 1883. Her connection to the state of Michigan was honored by the state American Revolution Bicentennial Commission in 1976 which urged the Michigan Legislature to name a highway in her honor. Public Act 93 of 1976 named all of M-66 in Calhoun County, including the segment that runs concurrently with I-194, as the Sojourner Truth Memorial Highway. The highway was dedicated to her on May 21, 1976.

The Cereal City Development Corporation (CCDC) asked the Legislature to amend the memorial designation in 1993. They felt that I-194/M-66 was better known to locals as The Penetrator, and they wished to restore emphasis to Truth. They asked for the "Sojourner Truth Downtown Parkway" name to be applied to "M-66 between Interstate 94 and Hamblin". The Legislature passed Public Act 208 of 1993 to affect the change, restoring "the link between Sojourner Truth and the City of Battle Creek, which was once the center of abolitionist sentiment in the state."

title: M-66 (Michigan highway)


text:
Talk:American literature

Sci-fi section?
I'd like to suggest a greater section for science-fiction literature. Its one of the major American contributions to popular literature and deserves more than a couple sentences. Why not mention SF authors along with others in the piece?

I agree. Arthur C Clarke, Ray Bradbury and perhaps even Orson Scott Card merit a line here. Moabalan

NPOV?
I guess this is just an aside, but is the fact that Walt Whitman "manages not to sound like a crass egotist" really NPOV? That's how he always came off to me, to tell the truth. Also, although I guess the "literary value" could be disputed, but I'm surprised not to see Stephen King listed among more recent American writers. I've never personally read any of his books, but they've been undeniably popular. Of course, as the previous writer(s) says, discussing current literature in this light is dangerous. :) Seems like I should be able to think of more writers if I put my mind to it, too.

 * This whole article is a mess. I got as far as Washington Irving sounding "comfortably European" and realized it was very much POV. Claining Poe is the first "American" fiction author is certainly not an opinion that is beyond dispute. -- Decumanus 20:38, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I didn't really think it was that bad, although the claim about Poe bothered me, too. (I'd forgotten by the time I got to the Whitman thing.) The article roughly parallels works of American fiction I read in high school. Maybe my teacher wasn't very NPOV. :)

Non-fiction?
Does literature encompass non-fiction? Certainly one of the great early contributions to American writing would be Thomas Paine's Common Sense, which was found in an enormous percentage of households of the day. (This is often cited as evidence that the early U.S. had an amazingly high rate of literacy before compulsory education.)

Native American Literature
This page should have a complete review of Native American Literature.

Birth/ death dates of authors
I've added a few in an unsystematic way, but it would be very useful to add more. This would help see authors that may be out of place. For instance, it may not be useful to put Cather (b. 1843) and Stegner (b. 1909) in the same sentence concerning the early decades of the 20th century.ch (talk) 21:51, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Lede revised to relfect contents of the article
I revised the lede to reflect the contents of the article. I removed the Dickstein reference, which says that American literature is in English, but there is no obvious reason to give it special weight. Here it is for future reference:. I reluctantly left the Herlihy-Mera reference. It was introduced recently to support the claim that American literature is predominantly in English, but it is actually an attack on that position!

I would be happy to supply examples of American literature texts and surveys that include these traditions. For instance, Ch 22 "American literature in languages other than English," in Companion to American Literature ch (talk) 06:13, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

Exploring America Through Literature
Statement of the Purpose (200 Words Max.) 39.61.180.11 (talk) 10:31, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

Steven King - not even mentioned?
Someone with over 400M books sold and multiple movies could at least be mentioned somehow in the article. However Im unsure how Cambr5 (talk) 22:55, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:American literature


text:
Wikipedia talk:Nooks and corners of Wikipedia that should be frequented

Isn't the standard expression "nooks and crannies?" —Herbee 20:30, 2004 Mar 1 (UTC)

 * Nooks and crannies gets 15 times more Google hits, but both seem to be widely used. Angela. 17:07, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

Does anyone mind if I change the order of the sections. I think we ought to get more people frequenting cleanup and peer review, rather than drawing so much attention to VfD, which already gets 20,000 views a month! Angela. 17:07, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

 * That's a good idea, please do so. -- Arvindn 16:27, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Is this page itself not frequented? No edits for 9 days, it has such old info. -- Paddu 13:27, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I nominate Pages needing attention. It lists many shameful articles (confusing, possibly incorrect, etc) that IMHO are worse than stubs, but sit unrectified for months because they're a little esoteric and people who could fix them never see them. --Smack 05:41, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I've added the section, but it might need some examples if anyone wants to keep that up to date. Angela. 21:36, Apr 5, 2004 (UTC)

Just tidied page titles a bit hope that's ok --(talk to)BozMo 14:05, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

Delete this page?
I update this page with administrator nominations, but I get the distinct feeling that I'm wasting my time. It's only been edited 27 times by three editors in the last month; ten of those edits were by me and one of those editors is me. One of the three pages listed as being on cleanup is no longer on cleanup. The featured article candidate is now just a featured article, and the featured picture candidate will follow suit in a couple days. The item on VFD has been deleted. None of the rest of the links are unique to this page.

If you regularly read this page, please say so. Otherwise, I'm going to mothball it. I'll wait a week for objections, then orphan it; wait a week again, then VFD it. --Ben Brockert < 05:01, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * I don't think it should be deleted; there need to be pages for the wikipedia community like this -- just look how the PCUSA page has improved to to its listing here. Perhaps this page could list some wikipedia tasks that are especially needed for which there are presently few voluenteers. Writing articles is great, but doing boring cleanup like moving little stubs to the wiktionary or translation is important too.Zantastik 10:36, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * I read it actually... It's kind of redundant, considering the same links are available on Community Portal. Personally, I like it because it has all the sections I visit. Phils 12:13, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Keep. I discovered this page when I found my name linked to it when I was a RFA candidate and since then I've tried to keep that section up to date.  I think this is just a page that needs a little more publicity, that's all.  PedanticallySpeaking 17:53, Dec 29, 2004 (UTC)

 * Keep. Ozzyslovechild 22:08, 29 Dec 2004 (UTC)

 * Keep. It has the sections I visit frequently. Community portal has too much material crammed into a one page. jni 17:25, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

We seem to have a consensus to keep the page. With the various reorganizations that various maintance pages have undergone recently, keeping this page up to date, always a bit of a dull task, has become quite a bit more difficult. The creation of the Commons has made finding information on images and the users responsible for them a longer task. Cleanup no longer exists as it used to, and Pages Needing Attention has been broken down into category pages. Keeping the RFA section up to date has always been a problem. Does anyone have any suggestions for reorganizing the page? - RedWordSmith 22:17, Jan 20, 2005 (UTC)

WP:RFA Headline Candidates
Quite outdated. How nice if it could be automatically updated to show the current candidates for quick reference while visiting WP:NAC. º0º hydnjo talk 17:40, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

WP:RFA Candidates
Updated on 6 June 2005 hydnjo talk 00:22, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

WP:VFD Updates
Thank you AllyUnion for putting this on VFD Bot's to do list. Until then I'll update manually.

I'm thinking that if this page were to be up to date it would be used more frequently for a quick look around (or is it just me). hydnjo talk 02:53, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * VFD Bot reported for duty today. hydnjo talk 11:58, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Proposed merge
Because this page is so poorly updated, other than by the VFD Bot, I'm proposing to merge it with Goings-on, where things like collaborations and new featured articles/pictures are maintained, because that page is kept more current. --Michael Snow 20:45, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

 * OK with me. WP:VFD is being updated daily by VFD Bot (Thanks to AllyUnion) but WP:RFA candidates is being kept current (sort of) manually. A WP:FAC link would also be helpful. And of course Goings-on should be easy to find by a newbie (and oldie); say, on the Community Portal front page. hydnjo talk 21:11, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)


text:
CBC Radio

CBC Radio is the English-language radio operations of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. The CBC operates a number of radio networks serving different audiences and programming niches, all of which (regardless of language) are outlined below.

English
CBC Radio operates three English language networks.

The inconsistency of branding between the word "One" and the numerals "2" and "3" was a deliberate design choice on CBC's part and is not an error, though from 1997 to 2007, CBC Music was known as "CBC Radio Two".
 * CBC Radio One - Primarily news and information, Radio One broadcasts to most communities across Canada. Until 1997, it was known as "CBC Radio".
 * CBC Music - Broadcasts an adult music format with a variety of genres, with the classical genre generally restricted to midday hours. From 2007 to 2018, it was known as "CBC Radio 2".
 * CBC Radio 3 - Broadcasts a youth-oriented indie rock format through the CBC's online radio platform. Some content from Radio 3 was also broadcast as weekend programming on Radio Two until March 2007.

From 1944 to 1962 the CBC's English service operated two radio networks, the main Trans-Canada Network and the Dominion Network. In 1962 the Dominion Network was disbanded and the Trans-Canada Network became known as CBC Radio and in 1997, CBC Radio One. In some cases CBC announcers will still say "CBC Radio" in reference to programs that air only on Radio One.

CBC Music originated in 1960 as the CBC FM network. It was rebranded as CBC Stereo in 1975, and then CBC Radio Two in 1997 before becoming CBC Music in 2018.

In August 2009, CBC Radio launched a mobile app, initially for iOS, featuring streams of the three services, and other web-exclusive stations. In February 2012, the CBC launched a new, similar streaming platform and app known as CBC Music. In October 2019, CBC Music was succeeded by CBC Listen, a new platform that encompasses CBC Radio and CBC Music content, as well as CBC-produced podcasts.

French
The CBC (better known in French as la Société Radio-Canada, or colloquially simply Radio-Canada) also operates three French language radio networks, two of which have a similar programming focus as the corporation's English-language radio networks.

Structurally, the French-language radio operations are managed as part of the CBC's overall French-language services division and therefore have limited ties to the English-language radio networks, which are structured similarly (i.e., there is no overall "CBC Radio" division responsible for both English and French radio).

 * Ici Radio-Canada Première - News and information.
 * Ici Musique - Music, arts and culture.
 * Ici Musique Classique - Classical music service broadcasting online and through HD Radio in Ottawa and Montreal.

CBC North
In the Northwest Territories, Yukon, Nunavut, and northern Quebec, CBC North airs a modified Radio One schedule to accommodate programming in Indigenous languages.

Podcasts
CBC Radio has 14 original podcasts. Two of the podcasts, Someone Knows Something and Missing & Murdered, are ranked among the top shows on the iTunes and Stitcher charts. In addition, select podcasts are often now broadcast on its terrestrial radio network as supplement material, typically during the summer programming months of July and August to fill time such as on The Current when regular programming is reduced during the summer period.

Someone Knows Something
"Someone Knows Something," hosted by filmmaker David Ridgen, first aired in 2016. The show, which investigates cold cases in Canada and the United States, finished its fourth season in March 2018. In season three, Ridgen worked with a Mississippi man, Thomas Moore, to solve the 1964 kidnapping and murder of Moore's brother, Charles, and his friend, Henry Dee. As a result of information uncovered by the podcast, James Ford Seale, a former member of the KKK, was convicted of the killings in 2007 and received three life sentences for his crimes against Moore and Dee. Season four returned to Canada as Ridgen sought answers in the 1996 unsolved murder case of Wayne Greavette, an Ontario man killed by a bomb that was disguised as a Christmas gift and sent to his home. Season four ended in March 2018 and had the fewest episodes of the series.

Missing & Murdered
Investigative journalist Connie Walker hosts "Missing & Murdered," a podcast that looks into deaths and disappearances of indigenous women in Canada. The show's first season, "Missing & Murdered: Who Killed Alberta Williams," covered the unsolved homicide of Alberta Williams who went missing from Prince Rupert, British Columbia, after a night out with friends. Her body was discovered days later along Highway 16, which has since become known as "the Highway of Tears." Following the show, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police announced the case was once again active. The second season, released in March 2018, helped a family find out what happened to their teenage sister, Cleo Semaganis Nicotine, after she was sent to the United States from Saskatchewan during the "Sixties Scoop." The stories featured on this podcast are part of a broader effort by Walker, who is Cree, and CBC News to raise awareness about the more than 250 unsolved disappearances and homicides of indigenous women and girls across Canada. In 2017, the RCMP announced an initiative to stop violence against indigenous women and girls, citing studies were done in 2014 that found they are among the most likely populations to be victims of violent crime.

Other services
The CBC operates Radio Canada International (RCI), an online service. RCI ended its shortwave radio broadcast in June 2012.

In some remote Canadian tourist areas, such as national or provincial parks, the CBC also operates a series of transmitters that broadcast weather alerts from Environment Canada's Weatheradio Canada service.

The CBC formerly operated Galaxie, a digital television radio service that provides 45 channels of music programming to digital cable subscribers in both English and French. This service is now operated by Stingray Digital, who since relaunched the service as Stingray Music. The CBC also celebrates the generation of leaders, builders, and change-makers of Canada under the age of 40 through the CBC Future 40 People Choice Award.

CBC Radio in the news
In 2012, CBC Radio lost some of its funding as a result of large cuts in Canadian government spending. This has resulted in a reduction of the number of concerts being recorded, the closing of recording studios, and the laying off of technicians, as well as the introduction of four minutes per hour of advertising on the Radio 2 and Espace Musique stations. The CBC's requirement to air advertising on the stations expired on August 31, 2016, and was fully discontinued the following day on September 1.

title: CBC Radio


text:
Talk:Pansexuality

America is a whole continent
Stop using the word 'americans' to refer to people living in the United States. If it is a part where Wikipedia explain about new and evolved languages conceptions, it should be known that for Latinamerica this is oppresive -much more than the term bisexuality instead of pansexuality-. Thank you. Marisol from Argentina, where pansexuality is very common and I could add a lot of information as I speak English but I now I feel put aside. 176.206.38.94 (talk) 21:54, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

 * It's two continents. People normally say "North American" or "South American" when they mean people from these whole continents. Central America and Latin America can also refer to specific groups of countries in the Americas. The official demonym for people from the USA is "American". I can see why not everybody likes that but that's not something Wikipedia has any power to change. DanielRigal (talk) 22:08, 16 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Lol what would you refer to them as otherwise? What a silly thing to get upset about. Jlambrecht265 (talk) 00:22, 12 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Exactly. Some people use USians, but that is not used by everyone. Historyday01 (talk) 18:03, 12 August 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 May 2023
Current page states: [Pansexuality may be considered a sexual orientation in its own right or a branch of bisexuality] = X

Proposed changes: [Pansexuality is a sexual orientation in its own right. Claims that Pansexuality is the same as, or a branch of Bisexuality, are a common form of Panphobia (fear based hatespeech or violence towards Pansexuals), and directly harmful to Pansexual people.] = Y

Change X to Y SereneNecrosis (talk) 12:56, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Red information icon with gradient background.svg Not done: Callme mirela 🍁 13:38, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 * (I see that Callmemirela beat me to it but I'll add my response anyway as it might help to explain why this change will not be made.) You have not given any reliable sources to support this claim and instead argue with divisive and unsupported claims of panphobia. Furthermore, what you suggest does not even seem to be correct. Pansexuals are most frequently included under the wider bisexual umbrella, a fact well referenced in the article. This is not erasure. Pansexuality is still its own distinct thing. We wouldn't have an article about it if it wasn't. The article correctly notes that not all pansexuals like being included under the wider bisexual umbrella and that this is debated. It is right there in the introduction. In short, the article does a good job of stating the situation and would not be improved by the suggested change. DanielRigal (talk) 13:50, 7 May 2023 (UTC)

Possible Opportunity for Omnisexuality Article
I have noticed that Omnisexuality is a section in the article on pansexuality. While I have no problems with this, I feel as if omnisexuality could be given a separate article. After all, the sexuality dates back from 1959, over 60 years, so it has a long enough history to be qualified for a whole separate article. However, the sexuality is not well-known outside of a [relatively] small community, so it may not be considered major enough for an article. AtomicMango80 (talk) 13:31, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

 * This has been discussed various times on here, but as of yet, there haven't been enough reliable sources (also see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here) to make its its own article. What Talk:Pansexuality/FAQ states is relevant here:
 * "Q: Why does the History of the term section say that omnisexuality is a synonym for pansexuality?"
 * "A: Because reliable sources say it is. See."
 * As far as I'm aware, omnisexual is a synonym of pansexual. Historyday01 (talk) 14:30, 28 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Ah, ok. Makes more sense. Well, the two sexualities are different, but they are similar. Sorry; I didn't know of the fact it has been discussed several times here. AtomicMango80 (talk) 15:22, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Gender and Technoculture 320-03
— Assignment last updated by Momlife5 (talk) 15:52, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Pansexuality


text:
Talk:List of proposed amendments to the Constitution of the United States

Amending process
This section should be deleted or moved, as it doesn't really list anything. Alternatively, the name for the article should be changed to something more appropriate. Any suggestions? Kdpssps (talk) 23:23, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It's background. And why change the name? Outback the koala (talk) 06:10, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Change it to a title that doesn't make this section seem out of place. Kdpssps (talk) 22:00, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * What if we changed the section on the amending process to "Background" or something like that instead? Other suggestions? Outback the koala (talk) 22:44, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Agree with the above. I also believe it would be useful to edit the statement so that it does not suggest that the two methods outlined by Article V do not limit the amendment process to those two alone.

Separating from main article
Why was this moved from the main article? It seems kind of paltry as a stand alone article. - SimonP 20:39, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)
 * My reasoning to make it a stand-alone article included: 1)It's small today because it's a very incomplete list. There are dozens of amendments proposed every year.  The main article is already over the recommended size limit. If we ever get this list more complete, it will be very large. 2) None of the "proposals" in the current list have advanced past the point of political rhetoric.  They came across as a distraction to the main article.  Moving them to a stand-alone seemed a better alternative than deleting. Rossami 21:46, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Your probably right. The large advantage of the previous location was that it was close to the information on the successful and failed amendments of the past, information which is not easy to access from the current article. - SimonP 21:57, Mar 1, 2004 (UTC)

Move from Proposed amendments to the United States constitution
I moved this page from Proposed amendments to the United States constitution to Proposed amendments to the United States Constitution. This makes it consistent with the other pages relating to the U.S. Constitution, which all capitalize the c in Constitution. — Mateo SA | talk 05:55, Dec 23, 2004

Move from Proposed amendments to the United States Constitution
I moved this page again, from Proposed amendments to the United States constitution to Proposals for amendments to the United States Constitution. The term "proposed amendments" is often used to refer to proposals that have been passed by Congress and proposed to the states. "Proposals" is a better term for ideas not passed by Congress. Mateo SA | talk 04:26, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

Proof?
Does anyone have proof that Steny Hoyer was the one to propose the most recent repeal to the twenty-second amendment?

updated a small bit of information from the page Twenty-second Amendment to the United States Constitution along with the citing, on January 4, 2013, Rep. José Serrano attempted the most recent proposal to appeal the 22nd amendment 66.189.173.57 (talk) 16:58, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Bricker Amendment
For some time I have been working on revisions to the Bricker Amendment article. I finally posted it and have a PR at Peer review/Bricker Amendment/archive1. I'd welcome comments. I know all those references may seem extravagant, but I'm hoping to get it as an FA and those voters want lots of footnotes. PedanticallySpeaking 16:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Christian Amendment
The 'proposed mid-twentieth century' blurb here is contradicted by the content of the Christian amendment article--though I'm guessing the article's right, I don't know, and so will leave it to others to correct. Wilhelm Ritter 04:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Marriage between man and a woman.
Why isn't the so called constitutional amendment against gay marriage included. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.111.215.111 (talk • contribs)
 * Personally, I haven't seen an actual legislative proposal on that topic. If you've got a source, add it.  Rossami (talk) 22:28, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Wrong definition of "proposed"?
Generally speaking, in the context of Constitutional amendments, a proposed amendment is one that has cleared the first phase for amendment, followed by ratification. For example, Article V says: "The Congress, whenever two thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose Amendments to this Constitution, or, on the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments..." While proposal is also a term used for introducing legislation in Congress, I feel that to mix the two meanings of proposal together makes the term ambiguous. Thus, I would restrict "proposed/proposal" to the Constitutional sense of the term (amendments approved by Congress or a Constitutional Convention) and then use a term such as "introduce" to refer to potential amendments introduced in a house of Congress that do not pass both houses. Thoughts? –Pakman044 23:18, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I came to this article thinking it was going to list every amendment of the said constitution ever proposed. It is still an interesting article and I got the information I wanted, but shouldn't the name be more like "List of proposed, but not yet accepted, amendments to the United States Constitution"- though it is a (bit) lengthy.  -76.188.26.92 (talk) 06:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Needs to be changed its not congress decision of what to do Art V says shall call a convention. They dont get to decide what to do. 75.106.109.239 (talk) 01:28, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Madison's 17 amendments.
According to A more perfect union: the creation of the U.S. constitution "Madison was able to shepherd through 17 amendments in the early months of the Congress, a list that was later trimmed to 12 in the Senate." The 12 are: but what are the 5 that were trimmed? -- Jeandré, 2008-11-25t10:01z
 * 1. Article the First/Congressional Apportionment Amendment
 * 2. 27th
 * 3-12. Bill of rights

constitutiona convention of 2008?
http://www.newswithviews.com/Levant/nancy116.htm http://thebulletin.us/articles/2008/12/16/news/nation/doc494744dc48e97242563036.txt —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.192.100 (talk) 14:17, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

why no mention in wiki —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.163.192.100 (talk) 14:14, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps because it's complete bunk and that comes nowhere close to being a reliable source.
 * -IkonicDeath —Preceding undated comment was added at 01:00, 30 January 2009 (UTC).

Proposed Page Merge
These two articles are extremely similar and the information they contain could easily be fused together. Having both articles is counterproductive. I propose that the Unsuccessful attempts to amend the U.S. Constitution be merged into this page. Said page will then become a redirect to this page.Outback the koala (talk) 08:11, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

 * Support since I am the nominator for the merge. Outback the koala (talk) 08:15, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Support Chadlupkes (talk) 02:32, 16 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Support The article, as is, is more flimsy than tissue paper. Seeyardee (talk) 19:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

War of 1812
I have deleted the references, including pictures, to the War of 1812. The article on Titles of Nobility Amendment clearly shows that the amendment continued to be voted on by those state legislatures that had not done so prior to the beginning of the War of 1812. When the war started on June 18, 1812 there were 18 states (Louisiana joined on April 30, 1812) and it was necessary to obtain 14 votes to approve the amendment at that time. The amendment simply failed to obtain the necessary number of votes at the time and there is no evidence that the War of 1812 influenced the voting. Dwalrus (talk) 13:39, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see a mention of it all on the TONA page, so it's best if we exclude that from the article for now. Outback the koala (talk) 01:11, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

New heading
I suggest that a separate heading be established for the 2 amendments that were proposed by Congress but have expired: the Equal Rights Amendment and DC Voting Rights Amendment. Dynzmoar (talk) 11:26, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

 * I agree that this would make sense. We should include a background regarding the debate surrounding the proposed amendments but expired amendments. Outback the koala (talk) 22:35, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

 * I was wondering why the ERA wasn't listed here.... PurpleChez (talk) 18:59, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

quit removing bill of federalism
prof larry sabato has his own article (2007)and randy barnett cannot.why?.bill of federalism is getting revalent in todays us political system as the federal govt is overreaching its limits manchurian candidate 05:59, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Scope of article
I think we need to limit the scope of this article to those amendments that were actually proposed by Congress or a state, and remove the ones made by individuals. Those can be covered elsewhere. As of now, it's a bit difficult to tell what was an actual proposed amendment, and what was made by an individual for whatever purposes. - BilCat (talk) 07:20, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

the bill of federalism is a imp proposed amendment just like the bill of rights.we dont need seperate articles.status quo should be maintained.if any non public representative offers groundbraking amendments it should be added as there are exceptions always. 203.153.44.130 (talk) 19:03, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

National Debt Relief Amendment
This link, while from a think-tank and therefore not a reliable source for Wikipedia in and of itself, was the first I had read of any sort of a National Debt Relief Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Probably will bear watching, and may become notable if/as it is covered by other media over the coming months. N2e (talk) 19:15, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Massive changes
The order was massively changed and I don't see why the proposed order is better. Additionally several proposed amendments were removed because they weren't proposed in congress, but that is within the scope of this list. Outback the koala (talk) 04:40, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Mixing two amendments that actually passed Congress in with a random list of amendments introduced by Congressmen is a disservice to the reader. As to what qualifies an amendment as "proposed", introduction by a Congressman is a bright line measure that can be cited with RS. Including other "suggested proposed amendments" from the general public would result in a very long list as the thousands of ideas for amending the Constitution have been discussed. If a suggestion can't even get the support of one Congressman to introduce it in Congress, is it really notable? Rillian (talk) 13:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Amendments included here should have received significant coverage in the media and is therefore notable enough to have sources, even if not introduced into the congress directly. As long as they are cited why not include them??
 * additionally, why do you want to put them in reverse order? Since we are still discussing I have undone your revision until the issue is resolved here. Why would the original order not be better to the reader. My main thought is that it goes in the order that a constitutional amendment makes and is therefore easier to follow when reading. But, I am open to hearing your prospective. Outback the koala (talk) 20:35, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Suggestions of possible amendments (even suggestions with lots of media coverage) are not "proposed amendments" (as the title of this article states). As defined within the article itself, Article V allows for two methods of "proposing an amendment": by Congress or by a national convention. Perhaps a new article titled "Things people have suggested be changed in the U.S. Constitution" could be created to hold the other items. Rillian (talk) 14:22, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

 * I agree with separating out the amendments that were not officially proposed throguh the amendment process into another article. - BilCat (talk) 14:59, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

 * OK thats fair, I can agree that, we can remove 'suggested' amendments. But I don't agree with the order - I am reverting again to the original order. Outback the koala (talk) 00:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

 * User:Rilian, please discuss here. I do not agree with your proposed change to reverse the order of the sections, I have made this clear above. Maybe we can compromise somehow. Please stop reverting the status quo without discussion. Outback the koala (talk) 03:34, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Failed amendments
If an amendment fails, like the Equal Rights Amendment, does the entire process have to start over? If Congress were to pass the amendment again, do the states that already ratified it have to re-ratify? StarDust787 (talk) 23:40, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Concerning a statement in the article " This is the only one of the original twelve amendments in the Bill of Rights never to have been ratified by the states." One night assume from this statement that 11 of the 12 were ratified at the time in 1789. Maybe a link to the 27th amendment or a clarification would be helpful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.251.126.26 (talk) 02:10, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Recentivism
Does anyone else think the section on the 21st century is too long relative to the 19th and 20th centuries? It covers just 10 years, yet the section contains 13 examples. The previous two centuries cite only 10 examples.--Work permit (talk) 02:22, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I do as well.Naraht (talk) 15:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Roe v. Wade decision Text
Currently reads 'controversial Roe v. Wade decision'

should read 'Roe v. Wade decision' as controversial expresses an opinion. The ruling by the Supreme Court validates lower court rulings. The decision is not itself controversial, it is definitive to the law. Individual response to the decision might view it as controversial, but the legal decision is not.

108.91.140.62 (talk) 00:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)alan

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on List of proposed amendments to the United States Constitution. 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/20080509141821/http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly54.asp to http://www.c-span.org/questions/weekly54.asp

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:08, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

Ratified amendments
Does the article need a full list and description of the 27 ratified amendments? There's already a list article here describing them. This article is a list of proposed amendments, while including descriptions of the 6 unratified amendments is definitely appropriate; the 27 ratified amendments are no longer proposed amendments and kind of off topic. All that would be necessary is to mention that there have been 27 amendments, a link to the list of amendments, and a brief mention of the history of amendments touching on topics such as the Bill of Rights and the Reconstruction amendments. Any thoughts? Libertybison (talk) 23:55, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I think the larger question here (and it's not a new one) is, what's the purpose and scope of this list article? Is it to list every Constitutional amendment proposed by member of Congress? Is it to list every significant proposal that came close to passing or was adopted by Congress? Should the 33 proposed amendments (and I wouldn't differentiate between the 27 ratified proposals & the 6 unratified proposals) that Congress has sent to the states for ratification be included, or not? Also, for me at least, the subject of this list article's title is also part of this larger question. T's an issue that's been discussed on a couple of prior occasions. Personally, and in light of your comments above, I'd suggest we consider moving this page to something like List of proposals to amend the United States Constitution. The introduction could touch on the amendment process and link to the list of amendments article before pointing out that what follows is an incomplete list of proposals to amend the Constitution that have been introduced, but did not pass or are pending before Congress. Thanks for bringing this up; I've been thinking on-and-off for a while about how this page might be refined & improved. Drdpw (talk) 01:38, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * You raise several good points, and the name change you propose may be a good thing. Although, if the article is going to mention historical proposals like the Blaine and Bricker Amendments that didn't get the go-ahead by Congress, which are no longer advocated for now, then it should also mention the unratified amendments that were rejected by the states. Libertybison (talk) 01:39, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks; regarding the 2 amendments that passed Congress but ("timed-out") failed to be ratified by the states, I don't think they need to be covered specifically in the body of such an article as they, along with the other 31 that were sent to the states for ratification would be addressed in the introduction, and are covered, like the still pending and ratified amendments, in the other list article. Let's let this sit for several days, and hopefully others will comment. Be of good cheer. Drdpw (talk) 02:00, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

Major edit message
Over time, there have been several conversations concerning what to include/not-include in this article. So, after contemplating those conversations, I have been bold and removed the section listing the 33 amendments approved by Congress and sent to the states for ratification. Those approved amendments are listed at List of amendments to the United States Constitution, thus listing them here also is redundant. I have also added a hat note to the top of the article for clarity and ease of navigation: Additionally, I updated the external links section (a few were dated). Cheers. Drdpw (talk) 20:43, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of proposed amendments to the United States Constitution. 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/20120121023827/http://blogs.burlingtonfreepress.com/politics/2011/12/08/sen-bernie-sanders-i-vt-offers-constitutional-amendment-on-corporate-citizenship/ to http://blogs.burlingtonfreepress.com/politics/2011/12/08/sen-bernie-sanders-i-vt-offers-constitutional-amendment-on-corporate-citizenship/

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) 19:03, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Non notable proposals
There are a large number of "proposed" amendments in the 21st century, many of which don't pass wp:notable since their only citations are to the resolution itself or a press release. I've deleted them. As it stood, the list seemed to smack of Recentism. The alternative would be to list every house or senate resolution introduced that proposed a constitutional amendment. Checking government records, that would mean 66 entries JUST for the the 2017-2018 session of congress. Lets discuss if you disagree.Work permit (talk) 02:25, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

I've cited the proposals with wp:rs establishing (some) notability for every article where I could find them, and deleting proposals where I couldn't Work permit (talk) 02:11, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Every Vote Counts Amendment
It seems to have never been taken up by committee, much less less voted out of committee. I could find no coverage of it in the press. In the house it was sponsored by 9 representatives. Lets discuss what makes this notable. If we covered every proposal by every member of congress, we would have 100 per year. Work permit (talk) 20:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

Liberty Amendement
I can find no independent coverage establishing notability of this constitutional proposal. The most prominent reference is a website for a group advocating for it. Work permit (talk) 00:24, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

No pages link to Proposed "Liberty" Amendment to the United States Constitution except this one. This proposal has not achieved any wp:notability. Work permit (talk) 02:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * My suggestion to you would be to start an afd about the article. It seems to warrant deletion. Drdpw (talk) 03:24, 5 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I added a notability tag. Let’s see what happens. Work permit (talk) 12:46, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Issues regarding the AMENDING PROCESS section
on 2/19, TySoltaur edited this article's "Amending process" section – here, and stated in the summary, "→Amending process: 3/4 is currently 39 states, not 38." Then, after I reverted the edit, the editor restored the reverted edit. Now, TySoltaur has called my effort a few days later to fine-tune the section's text and add reliable sources to it vandalism – here and subsequently here. So, my 1st question is, How many states must ratify a constitutional amendment before it becomes part of the Constitution? My second question is, is there any unnecesary any repetition of detail or any omission of detail in the "Amending process" section? Thanks in advance for your input. Cheers. Drdpw (talk) 08:21, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Answer to Question 1: 38 states are required to amend the US Constitution. Here's the math - Exactly 75% of 50 states, is 37.5 states. Since you can't have half a state & 37 isn't enough, you go with 38. GoodDay (talk) 15:16, 23 February 2019 (UTC)
 * The answer 38 is also supported by this reliable and authoritative source: https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution
 * Indeed 38 states is what was required to ratify the 23rd through 27th amendments. GoodDay (talk) 01:00, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Answer to Question 2: The version of the 'Amending process' section should be restored to its status quo. GoodDay (talk) 15:29, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

 * Agree, the correct number is 38, and the amending process be restored to its previous version. I suggest referencing the number 38, https://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution is fine with me.  I would suggest a minor gramatical change in the status quo but that can occur after consensus is reached.-- Work permit (talk) 03:05, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the feedback y'all. When the correct number of ratifications of state legislatures is restored, these 2 references could be used at key points in the section, as they expressly state the process, and the numbers required at the various stages of the process for advancement: the NARA's "Constitutional Amendment Process" page noted above by Work Permit, and Constitution Day: Proposed Amendments, which is already used once in the section. As far as the status quo text, I see a few words bearing uppercase letters that shouldn't, and a redundant sentence——that could be cut (the ensuing bullet-points state the same thing). Cheers. Drdpw (talk) 06:36, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Update
I have: changed uppercase letters to lowercase where necessary, as per MOS:CAPS; restored correct number of state legislatures that must ratify an amendment for it to become operative - 38; expanded placement of references; and tweaked wording in a few places. Drdpw (talk) 22:38, 28 February 2019 (UTC)


text:
User:Secretlondon/Photos to take

The following articles need photos:

to add: Parks? all stations in zone 1?

Brent

 * Neasden Temple by CGP
 * Wembley Stadium (time machine needed - or a photo of a building site?)

Camden

 * 2 Willow Road, Hampstead
 * Lawn Road Flats (Isokon building), Hampstead
 * High Point 1, Hampstead
 * University College London
 * Birkbeck College
 * British Library
 * Euston Tower

City

 * Gray's Inn
 * City of London's 'ring of steel' - done by ChrisO
 * Bank of England - done by ChrisO
 * Inner Temple - done by ChrisO
 * Lincoln's Inn
 * Lincoln's Inn Fields
 * London Stock Exchange
 * NatWest Tower
 * London Wall - done by ChrisO - Image:London wall statue.jpg
 * Lloyd's of London
 * Middle Temple - done by ChrisO
 * Museum of London
 * St Clement Danes - done by ChrisO
 * St. Ethelburga's Bishopsgate
 * St Mary-le-Bow - done by ChrisO
 * St Mary-le-Strand - done by ChrisO

Croydon

 * East Croydon station
 * West Croydon station
 * Tramlink
 * Croydon Clocktower
 * Whitgift Centre
 * Surrey Street market
 * Purley Way
 * Croydon Airport
 * Addington Palace
 * Fairfield Halls

Greenwich

 * Eltham Palace
 * Queen's House - done by ChrisO - Image:Queens house greenwich.jpg
 * Royal Greenwich Observatory - done by ChrisO - Image:Royal observatory greenwich.jpg

Kensington and Chelsea

 * Trellick Tower - North Kensington
 * Royal Albert Hall - exterior and detail of frieze
 * Science Museum (London)
 * Imperial College, London
 * Royal College of Music
 * Royal College of Art
 * Albert Memorial

Lambeth

 * MI6 building, Vauxhall
 * Royal Festival Hall (and rest of the South Bank) - done by ChrisO
 * Brixton Market
 * Brixton Academy
 * Lambeth Town Hall
 * Shell Tower - done by ChrisO
 * The Oval

Lewisham

 * Laban Dance Centre, Deptford
 * Lewisham centre
 * New Cross
 * Horniman Museum

Richmond

 * Eel Pie Island

Southwark

 * Alexander Fleming House - elephant and castle
 * Prisoner of war huts, Peckham Rye
 * OXO Tower - done by ChrisO - Image:Oxo tower london.jpg
 * Peckham in general - library, pulse, peckham rye with the shops
 * East Dulwich - Dulwich Library, Dulwich Plough, the concrete house
 * Dulwich Picture Gallery
 * remnent of the Great North Wood in Dulwich

Tower Hamlets

 * Balfron Tower - poplar, nr blackwall tunnel, carradale house next door -- Keithlard 21:09, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Robin Hood Gardens Estate Poplar (if still extant)
 * Keeling House, Bethnal Green
 * HSBC Tower, London

Wandsworth

 * Battersea Power Station

Westminster

 * 10 Downing Street - to be done by ChrisO
 * Banqueting House at Whitehall - done by ChrisO - Image:Banqueting house london.jpg
 * Cenotaph - done by ChrisO - Image:Cenotaph.jpg
 * Clarence House
 * Covent Garden
 * The Economist building, Piccadilly
 * Horse Guards - done by ChrisO - Image:Horse guards london.jpg
 * Kensington Palace
 * London Palladium
 * Madame Tussauds
 * St. James's Palace - done by ChrisO - Image:St james palace.jpg
 * Trafalgar Square - done by ChrisO but not yet uploaded
 * The Old Bailey - done by ChrisO
 * Royal Courts of Justice - done by ChrisO
 * Temple Church - exterior done by ChrisO, still need interior
 * Westminster Abbey already done by ChrisO
 * London School of Economics and Political Science
 * Apsley House
 * Centrepoint
 * Charing Cross - of what exactly? it's a district
 * It's also a monument in the forecourt of Charing Cross station (actually a Victorian replica of the medieval original) -- ChrisO 22:12, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC). Thanks - will do. Secretlondon 22:14, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

 * Foyles
 * Lord's cricket ground
 * Millbank Tower
 * National Gallery, London
 * National Portrait Gallery

Architecture

 * Institute of Education building
 * Finsbury Health Centre
 * Peckham Health Centre
 * Kensal House, Ladbrooke Grove
 * Swiss Cottage Leisure Centre

Stations

 * Aldgate East tube station
 * Bond Street tube station
 * Borough tube station
 * Charing Cross tube station
 * Covent Garden tube station
 * Euston station
 * Euston Square tube station
 * Fenchurch Street station
 * Goodge Street tube station
 * Great Portland Street tube station
 * Kings Cross railway station
 * Leicester Square tube station
 * Russell Square tube station
 * Victoria Station (London)
 * Warren Street tube station
 * Vauxhall station

 * Brixton tube station
 * Clapham North tube station
 * Clapham South tube station
 * Kennington tube station

Places

 * London Transport Museum (c garden)
 * Royal Opera House (c garden) - done by ChrisO
 * Leicester Square
 * British Library
 * Carnaby Street

Universities

 * King's College London
 * Royal Academy of Music
 * School of Oriental and African Studies
 * Goldsmiths College
 * Senate House

 * Hyde Park
 * Soho
 * Speakers Corner
 * Kensington Gardens - peter pan statue

Disused tube stations

 * York Road tube station - on York rd nr Kings Cross
 * South Kentish Town tube station - Kentish Town rd

Also: Fruit and Veg needed

title: User:Secretlondon/Photos to take


text:
William of Champeaux

Guillaume de Champeaux (c. 1070 – 18 January 1121 in Châlons-en-Champagne), known in English as William of Champeaux and Latinised to  Gulielmus de Campellis, was a French philosopher and theologian.

Biography
William was born at Champeaux near Melun. After studying under Anselm of Laon and Roscellinus, he taught in the school of the cathedral of Notre-Dame, of which he was made canon in 1103. Among his pupils was Peter Abelard, whom he had a disagreement with because Abelard challenged some of his ideas, and because William thought Abelard was too arrogant. Abelard calls him the "supreme master" of dialectic after he replaced his master as the new teacher. In 1108 he resigned his positions as archdeacon of Paris and master of Notre Dame, and retreated to the shrine of St Victor, outside the city walls of Paris, where, under his influence, there formed what would become the abbey of St Victor.

He was a friend of Bernard of Clairvaux, having helped Bernard recuperate from ill-health; later he motivated Bernard to write some of his important works including the Apologia, which was dedicated to William.

William left St Victor in 1113 when he became bishop of Châlons-en-Champagne, at which time he took part in the dispute concerning investitures as a supporter of Pope Callixtus II, whom he represented at the conference of Mousson. In 1114, he issued the Grande charte champenoise (Great Champagne Chart) which defined the agricultural and viticultural possessions of the Abbey of Saint-Pierre-aux-Monts, thus giving rise to the modern-day Champagne wine region. After relinquishing his Benedictine Abbacy, he moved to a Cistercian monastery in Rheims, where he also composed a number of spiritual books, such as his Vita Prima, which were widely read in monastic circles.

His surviving works are a fragment on the Eucharist, inserted by Jean Mabillon in his edition of the works of St Bernard, and the Moralia A brevi ala and De Origine Animae. In the last of these he maintains that children who die unbaptized must be lost, the pure soul being defiled by the grossness of the body, and declares that God's will is not to be questioned. He upholds the theory of Creationism (i.e., that a soul is specially created for each human being). Ravaisson-Mollien has discovered a number of fragments by him, among which the most important is the De Essentia Dei et de Substantia Dei; a Liber Sententiarum, consisting of discussions on ethics and scriptural interpretation, is also ascribed to Champeaux.

He is considered the founder of an early version of moderate realism, a philosophy which held that universals exist in particular things as common substances individuated by accidents and in the mind as concepts.

title: William of Champeaux


text:
STS-51-G

STS-51-G was the 18th flight of NASA's Space Shuttle program, and the fifth flight of Space Shuttle Discovery. The seven-day mission launched from Kennedy Space Center, Florida, on June 17, 1985, and landed at Edwards Air Force Base, California, on June 24, 1985. Sultan bin Salman Al Saud from Saudi Arabia was on board as a payload specialist; Al Saud became the first Arab, the first Muslim, and the first member of a royal family to fly into space. It was also the first Space Shuttle mission which flew without at least one astronaut from the pre-Shuttle era among its crew.

Mission summary
Discovery lifted off from Launch Complex 39A, Kennedy Space Center (KSC), at 7:33 a.m. EDT on June 17, 1985. The mission's crew members included Daniel C. Brandenstein, commander; John O. Creighton, pilot; Shannon W. Lucid, Steven R. Nagel, and John M. Fabian, mission specialists; and Patrick Baudry, from France, and Prince Sultan Sultan bin Salman Al Saud, from Saudi Arabia, both payload specialists.

STS-51-G carried three communications satellites as its primary cargo. These were Arabsat-1B (Arab Satellite Communications Organization); Morelos-1 (Mexico); and Telstar-303 (AT&T Corporation); all three were Hughes-built satellites. All three successfully utilized Payload Assist Module (PAM-D) booster stages to achieve geostationary transfer orbits (GTO) after being deployed from Discovery.

Also carried was the SPARTAN-1 (Shuttle Pointed Autonomous Research Tool for AstroNomy) a deployable/retrievable carrier module, designed to be deployed from the orbiter and fly free in space before being retrieved. SPARTAN-1 included 140 kg of astronomy experiments. It was deployed and operated successfully, independent of the orbiter, before being retrieved. Discovery furthermore carried an experimental materials-processing furnace, two French biomedical experiments (French Echocardiograph Experiment (FEE) and French Postural Experiment (FPE)), and six Getaway Special (GAS) experiments, which were all successfully performed, although the GO34 Getaway Special shut down prematurely. This mission was also the first flight test of the OEX advanced autopilot which gave the orbiter capabilities above and beyond those of the baseline system.

The mission's final payload element was a High Precision Tracking Experiment (HPTE) for the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) (nicknamed "Star Wars"); the HPTE failed to deploy properly during its first try on the mission's 37th orbit, because the orbiter was not at the correct attitude. It was successfully deployed on orbit 64.

Discovery landed at Edwards Air Force Base at 9:11:52 a.m. EDT on June 24, 1985, after a mission duration of 7 days, 1 hour, 38 minutes, and 52 seconds.

Mission Insignia
The STS-51-G insignia illustrates the advances in aviation technology in the United States within a relatively short span of the twentieth century with Discovery flying over the Wright Flyer. A gold-and-orange-flame eagle forms the base of the insigna. The surnames of the crewmembers for the Discovery's mission appear near the center edge of the circular design, with the French and Saudi crewmembers added below, with a respective flag icon along their name. Although Baudry was the first French citizen to fly with a Space Shuttle mission into space, he was only the second Frenchman to go to space, following Jean-Loup Chrétien's earlier missions with Soyuz capsule, Soyuz T-6.

Wake-up calls
NASA began a tradition of playing music to astronauts during Project Gemini, and first used music to wake up a flight crew during Apollo 15. Each track is specially chosen, often by the astronauts' families, and usually has a special meaning to an individual member of the crew, or is applicable to their daily activities.

title: STS-51-G


text:
List of U.S. states by date of admission to the Union

A state of the United States is one of the 50 constituent entities that shares its sovereignty with the federal government. Americans are citizens of both the federal republic and of the state in which they reside, due to the shared sovereignty between each state and the federal government. Kentucky, Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and Virginia use the term commonwealth rather than state in their full official names.

States are the primary subdivisions of the United States. They possess all powers not granted to the federal government, nor prohibited to them by the Constitution of the United States. In general, state governments have the power to regulate issues of local concern, such as regulating intrastate commerce, running elections, creating local governments, public school policy, and non-federal road construction and maintenance. Each state has its own constitution grounded in republican principles, and government consisting of executive, legislative, and judicial branches.

All states and their residents are represented in the federal Congress, a bicameral legislature consisting of the Senate and the House of Representatives. Each state is represented by two senators, and at least one representative, while the size of a state's House delegation depends on its total population, as determined by the most recent constitutionally mandated decennial census. Additionally, each state is entitled to select a number of electors to vote in the Electoral College, the body that elects the President of the United States and Vice President of the United States, equal to the total of representatives and senators in Congress from that state.

Article IV, Section 3, Clause 1 of the Constitution grants to Congress the authority to admit new states into the Union. Since the establishment of the United States in 1776, the number of states has expanded from the original 13 to 50. Each new state has been admitted on an equal footing with the existing states.

List of U.S. states
The following table is a list of all 50 states and their respective dates of statehood. The first 13 became states in July 1776 upon agreeing to the United States Declaration of Independence, and each joined the first Union of states between 1777 and 1781, upon ratifying the Articles of Confederation, its first constitution. (A separate table is included below showing AoC ratification dates.) These states are presented in the order in which each ratified the 1787 Constitution and joined the others in the new (and current) federal government. The date of admission listed for each subsequent state is the official date set by Act of Congress.

Articles of Confederation ratification dates
The Second Continental Congress approved the Articles of Confederation for ratification by the individual states on November 15, 1777. The Articles of Confederation came into force on March 1, 1781, after being ratified by all 13 states. On March 4, 1789, the general government under the Articles was replaced with the federal government under the present Constitution.


text:
NUnit

NUnit is an open-source unit testing framework for the .NET Framework and Mono. It serves the same purpose as JUnit does in the Java world, and is one of many programs in the xUnit family.

Features

 * Tests can be run from a console runner, within Visual Studio through a Test Adapter, or through 3rd party runners.
 * Tests can be run in parallel.
 * Strong support for data driven tests.
 * Supports multiple platforms including .NET Core, Xamarin Mobile, Compact Framework and Silverlight.
 * Every test case can be added to one or more categories, to allow for selective running.

NUnit provides a console runner (nunit3-console.exe), which is used for batch execution of tests. The console runner works through the NUnit Test Engine, which provides it with the ability to load, explore and execute tests. When tests are to be run in a separate process, the engine makes use of the nunit-agent program to run them.

The NUnitLite runner may be used in situations where a simpler runner is more suitable. It allows developers to create self-executing tests.

Assertions
NUnit provides a rich set of assertions as static methods of the  class. If an assertion fails, the method call does not return and an error is reported. If a test contains multiple assertions, any that follow the one that failed will not be executed. For this reason, it's usually best to try for one assertion per test.

Nunit 3.x is supporting multiple assertions.

Classical
Before NUnit 2.4, a separate method of the  class was used for each different assertion. It continues to be supported in NUnit, since many people prefer it.

Each assert method may be called without a message, with a simple text message or with a message and arguments. In the last case the message is formatted using the provided text and arguments.

Constraint based
Beginning with NUnit 2.4, a new Constraint-based model was introduced. This approach uses a single method of the  class for all assertions, passing a   object that specifies the test to be performed. This constraint-based model is now used internally by NUnit for all assertions. The methods of the classic approach have been re-implemented on top of this new model.

Example
Example of an NUnit test fixture:

The NUnit framework discovers the method  automatically by reflection.

Extensions
FireBenchmarks is an addin able to record execution time of unit tests and generate XML, CSV, XHTML performances reports with charts and history tracking. Its main purpose is to enable a developer or a team that work with an agile methodology to integrate performance metrics and analysis into the unit testing environment, to easily control and monitor the evolution of a software system in terms of algorithmic complexity and system resources load.

NUnit.Forms is an expansion to the core NUnit framework and is also open source. It specifically looks at expanding NUnit to be able to handle testing user interface elements in Windows Forms. As of January 2013, Nunit.Forms is in Alpha release, and no versions have been released since May 2006.

NUnit.ASP is a discontinued expansion to the core NUnit framework and is also open source. It specifically looks at expanding NUnit to be able to handle testing user interface elements in ASP.Net.

title: NUnit


text:
STS-51-I

STS-51-I was the 20th mission of NASA's Space Shuttle program and the sixth flight of Space Shuttle Discovery. During the mission, Discovery deployed three communications satellites into orbit. The mission launched from Kennedy Space Center, Florida, on August 27, 1985, and landed at Edwards Air Force Base, California, on September 3, 1985.

Spacewalks

 *  Fisher and van Hoften  – EVA 1
 * EVA 1 Start: August 31, 1985
 * EVA 1 End: August 31, 1985
 * Duration: 7 hours, 20 minutes

 *  Fisher and van Hoften  – EVA 2
 * EVA 2 Start: September 1, 1985
 * EVA 2 End: September 1, 1985
 * Duration: 4 hours, 26 minutes

Mission summary
Discovery launched at 6:58 a.m. EDT on August 27, 1985. Two earlier launch attempts, one on August 24 and another on August 25, were scrubbed – the first because of poor weather, and the second because the backup orbiter computer failed and had to be replaced. The successful launch on August 27, 1985, took place just as an approaching storm front reached the launch pad area.

The five-man STS-51-I crew included Joe H. Engle, commander; Richard O. Covey, pilot; and James D. A. van Hoften, John M. Lounge, and William F. Fisher, mission specialists. Their primary mission was to deploy three commercial communications satellites and retrieve and repair the Syncom IV-3 (Leasat-3) satellite, which had been deployed during the STS-51-D mission in April 1985, but had malfunctioned. In addition, a mid-deck materials processing experiment, the Physical Vapor Transport Organic Solid Experiment (PVTOS), was flown aboard Discovery.

The three communications satellites were Aussat-1, a multi-purpose spacecraft owned by Australia; ASC-1, owned and operated by the American Satellite Corporation (ASC); and Syncom IV-4 (Leasat-4), leased to the Department of Defense (DoD) by its builder, Hughes Space and Communications. Both Aussat-1 and ASC-1 were deployed on the day of the launch, August 27, 1985. Syncom IV-4 (Leasat-4) was deployed two days later. All three achieved their planned geosynchronous orbits and became operational.

On the fifth day of the mission, astronauts Fisher and van Hoften began repair efforts on the malfunctioning Syncom IV-3, following a successful rendezvous maneuver by Discovery. The effort was slowed by a problem with the Remote Manipulator System (Canadarm) elbow joint. After a second EVA by Fisher and van Hoften, the satellite's control lever was repaired, permitting commands from the ground to activate the spacecraft's systems and eventually send it into its proper geosynchronous orbit. The two EVAs lasted a total of 11 hours and 46 minutes.

Discovery landed on Runway 23 at Edwards Air Force Base at 6:16 a.m. PDT on September 3, 1985. The flight lasted a total of 7 days, 2 hours, 18 minutes and 42 seconds, during which the shuttle completed 112 orbits of the Earth.

Mission insignia
The insignia depicts an American bald eagle, trailing red and white stripes, and pushing a boundary layer forward. The 19 stars, along with the eagle, are references to the 20th shuttle mission (with the eagle representing the orbiter and thus being the 20th "star"). Lining the patch are the surnames of the crew members.

Wake-up calls
NASA began a tradition of playing music to astronauts during the Project Gemini, and first used music to wake up a flight crew during Apollo 15. Each track is specially chosen, often by the astronauts' families, and usually has a special meaning to an individual member of the crew, or is applicable to their daily activities.

title: STS-51-I


text:
STS-51-J

STS-51-J was NASA's 21st Space Shuttle mission and the first flight of Space Shuttle Atlantis. It launched from Kennedy Space Center, Florida, on October 3, 1985, carrying a payload for the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), and landed at Edwards Air Force Base, California, on October 7, 1985.

Crew notes
All five astronauts on the secret mission were active-duty military officers. Before William A. Pailes was assigned to the STS-51-J flight, Mike Mullane was rumored to have been assigned as mission specialist 3 on his second trip to space.

Mission summary
STS-51-J launched on October 3, 1985, at 15:15:30 UTC (11:15:30 a.m. EDT), from Launch Pad 39A at the Kennedy Space Center. The launch was delayed by 22 minutes and 30 seconds due to a problem with a main engine liquid hydrogen prevalve close remote power controller; the controller was showing a faulty "on" indication.

The mission was the second shuttle flight totally dedicated to deploying a United States Department of Defense payload, after STS-51-C. Its cargo was classified, but it was reported that two (USA-11 and USA-12) DSCS-III (Defense Satellite Communications System) satellites were launched into geostationary orbits by an Inertial Upper Stage (IUS). The DSCS satellites used X-band frequencies (8/7 GHz). Each DSCS-III satellite had a design life of ten years, although several of the DSCS satellites have far exceeded their design life expectancy.

The mission was deemed successful. After a flight lasting 4 days, 1 hour, 44 minutes and 38 seconds, Atlantis landed on Runway 23 at Edwards Air Force Base at 17:00:08 UTC (13:00:08 EDT) on October 7, 1985. During STS-51-J, mission commander Bobko became the first astronaut to fly on three different shuttle orbiters, and the only astronaut to fly on the maiden voyages of two different orbiters.

Mission insignia
The 51-J mission insignia, designed by Atlantis's first crew, pays tribute to the Statue of Liberty and the ideas it symbolizes, but also as not to emphasize the "classified" nature of the mission like the first one did. The historical gateway figure bears additional significance for astronauts Karol J. Bobko, mission commander; and Ronald J. Grabe, pilot, both New York City natives.

title: STS-51-J


text:
M-78 (Michigan highway)

M-78 is a state trunkline highway in the US state of Michigan. The western terminus is the intersection with M-66 north of Battle Creek in Pennfield Township. The roadway runs 10.744 mi through rural farmland and the community of Bellevue as it approaches its eastern terminus at an interchange with Interstate 69 (I-69) near Olivet. The highway is used by between 3,100 and 5,300 vehicles on a daily basis.

When the state highway system was signed in 1919, M-78 followed a similar routing. At Bellevue, it turned northeast to terminate at Charlotte. In the 1920s, the highway was extended southerly to the Indiana state line near Sturgis and northeasterly into the Lansing area. In the 1930s, M-78 was extended further on its northern and eastern end to Flint. The highway was converted into a freeway in sections starting in the 1960s. During that decade, the southern extension from the 1920s was removed from M-78 and added to other state highways, and in the 1970s, the northeastern extensions, now mostly freeways, were removed from M-78 as well. Two special routes were created as a result of the various reroutings in the Lansing area, both of which are no longer part of the state highway system.

Route description
M-78 begins at an intersection with M-66 in Pennfield Township, north of Battle Creek in Calhoun County. The trunkline passes through rural farm lands as it runs due east and northeast. It briefly crosses the southeast corner of Barry County as it enters Eaton County. There M-78 follows Battle Creek Highway past some small ponds and into the town of Bellevue. The trunkline becomes Capitol Avenue in town and turns south onto Main Street in the middle of the central business district. M-78 crosses a branch line of the Canadian National Railway before leaving town. Main Street turns easterly and becomes Butterfield Highway. M-78 crosses the Battle Creek River before terminating at I-69's exit 48 in Bellevue Township.

M-78 is maintained by the Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) like other state highways in Michigan. As a part of these maintenance responsibilities, the department tracks the volume of traffic that uses the roadways under its jurisdiction. These volumes are expressed using a metric called annual average daily traffic, which is a statistical calculation of the average daily number of vehicles on a segment of roadway. MDOT's surveys in 2010 showed that the highest traffic levels along M-78 were the 5,256 vehicles daily on Capitol Avenue in Bellevue; the lowest counts were the 3,176 vehicles per day in Calhoun County. No part of M-78 has been listed on the National Highway System, a network of roads important to the country's economy, defense, and mobility.

History
When the original state highway system was designated c. July 1, 1919, M-78 ran along a route similar that of today. It started north of Battle Creek at a junction with then M-79 and cut through the corner of Barry County to Bellevue, but it turned northeasterly to end at Charlotte at a junction with M-29. By 1927, M-78 was extended southward, replacing M-79 to the Indiana state line, connecting with State Road 9 (SR 9) south of Sturgis. At the same time, a northerly addition extended the highway concurrently along US Highway 27 (US 27) to Dewitt and then solo to a junction with M-47 near Pittsburg. The section north of Lansing was changed in 1929. The section from Dewitt Pittsburg was redesignated M-104, and M-78 was extended through East Lansing to Haslett. By 1936, the highway was extended all the way into Flint to end at M-21. Around the same time, a second routing through downtown Lansing for US 27/M-78 was designated along Capitol Avenue; the former route along Main, Kalamazoo and Larch streets and Grand Avenue was given the Truck M-78 designation.

In the latter half of 1941 or the beginning of 1942, a section of the concurrent M-78/M-86 was rerouted west of Colon in St. Joseph County. In 1950, the bridge across the Grand River on Main Street was completed; after completion, the mainline M-78  was routed over the bridge and up Larch Street, replacing Truck M-78 in the process. The former car-only route on Capitol Avenue was removed from the state highway system. By the middle of 1960, the first section of freeway along M-78 was opened in the Lennon area. The next year, the freeway had been extended as far southwest as Durand from the end at Lennon. By the start of 1962, M-78 was a freeway from Perry at the junction with M-47 all the way to Swartz Creek near Flint.

On December 12, 1962, the I-96 freeway was completed around the south and west sides of Lansing, and a year later, the I-496 freeway was completed north into downtown from I-96. M-78 was rerouted from the I-96/US 27 interchange southwest of Lansing east along I-96 and then north on I-496. From there, M-78 followed the one-way pairing of Homer and Howard streets from the northern end of the freeway up to the one-way couplet of Saginaw Street and Grand River Avenue, returning to its previous routing. The former route through downtown along US 27 was redesignated Business M-78 (Bus. M-78) at the same time.

M-66 was extended southerly from Assyria through Battle Creek to the Indiana state line replacing sections of M-78 in 1965. The US 127 freeway was completed from Mason north to Lansing in 1966, adding the US 127 designation along the I-496/M-78 freeway. The next year, M-78's freeway was extended eastward to I-75/US 10/US 23 in Flint. The US 127/M-78 freeway was extended north of I-496 in 1969, and a discontinuous section of M-78 freeway east of Flint was completed around the same time frame. In 1970, the I-496 freeway was completed and the Bus. M-78 designation was removed through Lansing. In 1972, the highway was rerouted to run east of Bellevue to Olivet instead of northeast to Charlotte. The next year, all of M-78 northeast of Olivet was removed when I-69 between Charlotte and I-96 southwest of Lansing was completed; this truncation produced the modern routing of M-78 in the state.

Truck route
Truck M-78 was a former truck route through the city of Lansing. It started at the corner of Capitol Avenue and Main Street and ran along Main Street to Grand Avenue. There, it turned north on Grand Avenue to Kalamazoo Street and turned east on Kalamazoo over the Grand River. At Larch Street, Truck M-78 continued north to rejoin the mainline at the corner of Larch and Saginaw streets.

By the middle of 1936, the US 27/M-78 routing through Lansing was split into two. The mainline was restricted to cars only and moved to run along Capitol Avenue. The former routing was restricted to trucks only and designed as a truck route. In 1950, the bridge for Main Street over the Grand River was completed and mainline US 27 was rerouted to use it to connect to Larch Street. From there north, US 27/M-78 followed Larch Street supplanting the truck route, which was decommissioned at that time.

Business route
Business M-78 (Bus. M-78) was a business loop through the city of Lansing. It ran from an interchange between US 27/M-78 and I-96 on the southwest side of Lansing along US 27 (Lansing Road) into downtown. From there, it ran east on Main Street and north on Larch Street. At Saginaw Street, Bus. M-78 turned east to reconnect to M-78.

The business loop was created in 1963 when M-78 was rerouted along the newly completed sections of the I-96 and I-496 freeways in the Lansing area. The designation was decommissioned in 1970 when I-496 was completed through downtown Lansing.

title: M-78 (Michigan highway)


text:
STS-61-A

STS-61-A (also known as Spacelab D-1) was the 22nd mission of NASA's Space Shuttle program. It was a scientific Spacelab mission, funded and directed by West Germany – hence the non-NASA designation of D-1 (for Deutschland-1). STS-61-A was the ninth and last successful flight of Space Shuttle Challenger before the disaster. STS-61-A holds the current record for the largest crew—eight people—aboard any single spacecraft for the entire period from launch to landing.

The mission carried the NASA/European Space Agency (ESA) Spacelab module into orbit with 76 scientific experiments on board, and was declared a success. Payload operations were controlled from the German Space Operations Center in Oberpfaffenhofen, West Germany, instead of from the regular NASA control center. This was the first spaceflight to include multiple crewmembers from any single country other than the United States or Soviet Union.

Mission summary

Space Shuttle Challenger lifted off from Launch Complex 39A at Kennedy Space Center, Florida, at 12:00 p.m. EST on October 30, 1985. This was the first Space Shuttle mission largely financed and operated by another nation, West Germany. It was also the only Shuttle flight to launch with a crew of eight. The crew members included Henry W. Hartsfield Jr., commander; Steven R. Nagel, pilot; Bonnie J. Dunbar, James F. Buchli and Guion S. Bluford, mission specialists; and Ernst Messerschmid and Reinhard Furrer of West Germany, along with first Dutch astronaut Wubbo J. Ockels of the European Space Agency (ESA), all payload specialists.

The primary task of STS-61-A was to conduct a series of experiments, almost all related to functions in microgravity, in Spacelab D-1, the third flight of a Spacelab orbital laboratory module. Two other mission assignments were to deploy the Global Low Orbiting Message Relay Satellite (GLOMR) out of a Getaway Special (GAS) canister in the cargo bay, and to operate five materials processing experiments, which were mounted in the orbiter's payload bay on a separate device called the German Unique Support Structure. The experiments included investigations into fluid physics, with experiments in capillarity, Marangoni convection, diffusion phenomena, and critical points; solidification experiments; single crystal growth; composites; biological studies, including cell functions, developmental processes, and the ability of plants to perceive gravity; medical experiments, including the gravitational perceptions of humans, and their adaptation processes in space; and speed-time interaction studies of people working in space.

One equipment item of unusual interest was the Vestibular Sled, an ESA contribution consisting of a seat for a test subject that could be moved backward and forward with precisely controlled accelerations and stops, along rails fixed to the floor of the Spacelab aisle. By taking detailed measurements on a human strapped into the seat, scientists gained data on the functional organization of the human vestibular and orientation systems, and the vestibular adaptation processes under microgravity. The acceleration experiments by the sled riders were combined with thermal stimulations of the inner ear and optokinetic stimulations of the eye.

NASA operated the Space Shuttle, and was responsible for overall safety and control functions throughout the flight. West Germany was responsible for the scientific research carried out during the seven-day mission. To fulfill this function, German scientific controllers on the ground worked closely with the personnel in orbit, operating out of the German Space Operations Center at Oberpfaffenhofen, near Munich, West Germany. The orbiting crew was divided into two teams, working in shifts to ensure laboratory work was performed 24 hours a day. Communications were optimal throughout the mission and the ground and orbital crews were able to interact regularly. The overall system of one control center controlling spacecraft operations and a second controlling experiment functions worked smoothly in practice.

The GLOMR satellite was successfully deployed during the mission, and the five experiments mounted on the separate structure behind the Spacelab module obtained useful data. Challenger landed, for what was to be the last time, on Runway 17 at Edwards Air Force Base on November 6, 1985. The wheels stopped rolling at 12:45 p.m. EST, after a mission duration of 7 days, 0 hour, 44 minutes, and 51 seconds.

STS-61-A marked the last successful mission of Space Shuttle Challenger, which would be destroyed with all hands on board during the launch of the STS-51-L mission on January 28, 1986.

Records
STS-61-A with its crew of 8 set a record as the highest number of people in space on a single spacecraft. The first seven-person Shuttle mission had been STS-41-G in October 1984.

STS-61-A was not the first Space Shuttle flight of an ESA astronaut or a West German citizen, as Ulf Merbold, who also served as the backup on this mission, had previously flown on the STS-9 mission in 1983, but Wubbo Ockels became the first Dutch citizen in space.

Guion S. Bluford at the time was already the first African-American in space, having previously flown on STS-8. With STS-61-A he became the first African-American to fly in space twice. He would later go on to fly on STS-39 in 1991 and on STS-53 in 1992. Bluford was a member of the U.S. astronaut class of 1978.

Mission insignia
The insignia was chosen by the eight members of the STS-61A/D1 Spacelab mission to represent the record-sized Space Shuttle crew. Crewmembers surnames surround the colorful patch scene depicting Challenger carrying a long science module and an international crew from Europe and the United States, and as the module is primarily part of the German contribution to the mission, the German flag and the mission suffix D-1 are prominently depicted. As to further distinguish Ockels, being the first Dutch citizen to fly into space, gets attributed an ESA logo to his name, instead of the more traditional addition of the respective non-US members being attributed with their respective nation's flags, as the patch already was that elaborately showing such.

title: STS-61-A