text:
Yellow Sun (nuclear weapon)

Yellow Sun was the first British operational high-yield strategic nuclear weapon warhead. The name refers only to the outer casing; the warhead (or physics package) was known as "Green Grass" in Yellow Sun Mk.1 and "Red Snow" (a US design) in Yellow Sun Mk.2.

Yellow Sun was designed to contain a variety of warheads. The initial plan was that it would carry an alarm-clock-type warhead known as "Green Bamboo", and then replace it with a true thermonuclear warhead known as "Green Granite". After signing a weapon technology agreement with the US, both concepts were dropped. Green Granite would be replaced by Red Snow at an earlier service date. This meant the interim Green Bamboo was less important and it was replaced by the less powerful and simpler "Green Grass".

A unique feature of the Yellow Sun casing was its completely flat nose. This provided two benefits, one was that the drag allowed the bomb to fall behind the bomber a safe distance before detonation, and the other was that it did not generate the complex pattern of shock waves that a classically curved nose created, which made it difficult to measure altitude barometrically.

Mark 1 with Green Grass began to enter service in 1959, replacing the massive Blue Danube over the next year. Mark 2 with Red Snow began to replace it in 1961. Beginning in 1966, Yellow Sun was replaced by the WE.177, based on another US design.

Design
The casing was around 21 ft long, and 48 in in diameter. The Mark 1 version with the Green Grass warhead weighed 7250 lb. The Mk.2 version with the lighter 1700 lb Red Snow warhead had ballast added to maintain overall weight, ballistic and aerodynamic properties, and avoid further lengthy and expensive testing, and changes to the electrical power generating and airburst fuze.

Unlike contemporary United States bombs of similar destructive power, Yellow Sun did not deploy a parachute to retard its fall. Instead, it had a completely flat nose which induced drag, thereby slowing the fall of the weapon sufficiently to permit the bomber to escape the danger zone. Additionally, the blunt nose ensured that Yellow Sun did not encounter the transonic/supersonic shock waves which had caused many difficulties with barometric fuzing gates which had plagued an earlier weapon, Blue Danube.

Electrical power was supplied by duplicated ram-air turbines located behind the twin air intakes in the flat nose. The earlier Blue Danube design had relied on lead–acid batteries which had proven to be both unreliable and to require time-consuming pre-flight warming.

Green Bamboo
Yellow Sun Stage 1 and Stage 2 were the original designations. Stage 1 was intended as an interim design to carry a one megaton Green Bamboo warhead of the "layer-cake" type thought similar to the Soviet Sloika and the US Alarm Clock concepts. These hybrid designs are not now regarded as truly thermonuclear, but were then thought to be a stepping-stone on the route to a fusion bomb. Stage 2 was to follow when a true thermonuclear warhead based on the Green Granite design became available.

To produce the required yield, the implosion of the fissile core had to be extremely uniform. This required a complex 72-point explosive system, and led to a very large weapon overall. The resulting 45 in diameter of Green Bamboo determined the 48 in diameter of both Yellow Sun and the Blue Steel missile.

The launch of Sputnik 1 coincided with ongoing negotiations between the US and UK about nuclear technology, and the sudden shock of an apparent Soviet superiority swept aside lingering US concerns about the UK after the Suez Crisis. These negotiations would lead to the US–UK Mutual Defence Agreement in 1958. With access to US designs, the original plan to use Green Granite for Stage 2 was abandoned as a new thermonuclear warhead would be available before Granite would be. This meant the need for a powerful interim design to fill this time period was also considerably less important. The decision was made to cancel Green Bamboo and replace it with a simpler concept.

Green Grass
After Green Bamboo was abandoned a decision was made to use the Interim Megaton Weapon known as Green Grass in the Yellow Sun casing and designate it as Yellow Sun Mk.1 until better warheads were available for a Mk.2.

Green Grass was of similar layout to Green Bamboo, although it was not thermonuclear, being a very large unboosted pure fission warhead that was based in part on the core of the Orange Herald device tested at Grapple, with some of the implosion and firing features of Green Bamboo. The modulated neutron initiator was Blue Stone.

Twelve Green Grass warheads were fitted in the much larger, older casings derived from Blue Danube and known as "Violet Club". These twelve warheads were later transferred to the Yellow Sun Mk.1 casings and supplemented by further warheads totalling 37.

Green Grass yield was originally stated to the Royal Air Force (RAF) as 500 kilotons of TNT equivalent (2.1 PJ), but the designers' estimate was later revised downwards to 400 kt of TNT. The Green Grass warhead was never tested. It used a dangerously large quantity of fissile material – thought to be in excess of 70 kg, and considerably more than an uncompressed critical mass. It was kept subcritical by being fashioned into a thin-walled spherical shell. To guard against the accidental crushing of the core into a critical condition, the shell was filled with 133,000 steel ball-bearings, weighing 450 kg. In a conflict, these would have had to be removed before flight. The RAF thought it unsafe (see ).

Red Snow
Red Snow was the US W28 warhead used in the US Mk-28 nuclear bomb. This was anglicised to adapt it to British engineering practices, and manufactured in Britain using British fissile materials. For further information see the "Deployment" section below.

Deployment
Deployment started in 1959–60. The RAF Service designations were Bomb, Aircraft HE 7000 lb HC Mk.1 or Bomb, Aircraft HE 7000 lb HC Mk.2. Yellow Sun Mk.1 was intended as an "emergency" weapon, and had not been engineered for reliable long-term stockpiling. It was always envisaged that a Mk.2 version would be available later fitted with a true thermonuclear warhead derived from the Granite type tested at Grapple, or an American type made available after the 1958 US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement. It was carried only by RAF V bombers.

In September 1958 a decision was made to abandon the Granite type warheads intended for Yellow Sun Mk.2 (and Blue Steel, and Blue Streak MRBM) and instead adopt the US W-28 warhead used in the US Mark 28 nuclear bomb. This was anglicised to adapt it to British engineering practices, and manufactured in Britain using British fissile materials and known as Red Snow. Red Snow was more powerful, lighter and smaller than Green Grass. It was always envisaged that the Yellow Sun bomb casing would be adapted for successor warheads to minimise unessential development time and cost. Yellow Sun Mk. 2 entered service in 1961, and remained the primary air-dropped strategic weapon until replaced with WE.177B in 1966.

Although the first British designed thermonuclear weapon to be deployed, Yellow Sun was not the first to be deployed with the RAF. US Mk-28 and Mk-43 thermonuclear bombs and others had been supplied to the RAF for use in V bombers prior to the deployment of Yellow Sun. Some bombers of the V-force only ever used American weapons supplied under dual-key arrangements.

Existing individuals
An authentic shell is on display at the Air Force Museum in Cosford, England.

title: Yellow Sun (nuclear weapon)


text:
Hebrew Academy

Hebrew Academy may refer to:

Organisations

 * The Academy of the Hebrew Language, Hebrew language regulator
 * Hebrew Academy for Special Children, non-profit organization

Canada

 * Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Montreal, Quebec
 * Tanenbaum Community Hebrew Academy of Toronto, high school in Toronto, Ontario
 * Vancouver Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Vancouver, British Columbia

United States

 * American Hebrew Academy, Jewish preparatory school in Greensboro, North Carolina
 * Epstein Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Olivette, Missouri
 * Greenfield Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Atlanta, Georgia
 * Hebrew Academy of Cleveland, Jewish day school in Cleveland, Ohio
 * Hebrew Academy of Long Beach, Jewish day school in Long Beach, New York
 * Hebrew Academy of Nassau County, Jewish high school in Nassau County, New York
 * Hebrew Academy of San Francisco, also known as Lisa Kampner Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in San Francisco, California
 * Hebrew Academy of the Five Towns and Rockaway, Jewish day school in Lawrence, New York
 * Hebrew Academy of Tidewater, elementary school in Virginia Beach, Virginia
 * Hebrew Language Academy Charter School, charter school in Brooklyn, New York
 * Hyman Brand Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Overland Park, Kansas
 * Jack M. Barrack Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvania
 * Joseph Kushner Hebrew Academy, yeshiva day school in Livingston, New Jersey
 * Phoenix Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Phoenix, Arizona
 * Politz Hebrew Academy, Jewish school in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
 * Rabbi Alexander S. Gross Hebrew Academy, Jewish high school in Miami, Florida
 * Seattle Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Seattle, Washington
 * Margolin Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Memphis, Tennessee
 * Melvin J. Berman Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Rockville, Maryland
 * North Shore Hebrew Academy, yeshiva in Great Neck, New York
 * Tucson Hebrew Academy, Jewish day school in Tucson, Arizona

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

title: Hebrew Academy


text:
Archives station

Archives station is a Washington Metro station in Washington, D.C., on the Green and Yellow Lines.

The station is located in Northwest Washington at 7th Street between Pennsylvania and Indiana Avenues, and it is very close to Gallery Place station, so close that the lights of one station can be seen down the tunnel from the other. It takes its name from the nearby National Archives. Its subtitle is derived from the U.S. Navy Memorial and the Penn Quarter neighborhood in which the station is located. It is a popular stop for tourists, with easy access to the northern side of the National Mall.

History
Service began on April 30, 1983. Its opening coincided with the completion of 3.3 mi of rail south of Gallery Place to L'Enfant Plaza and across a bridge over the Potomac River to the Pentagon station.

The station was originally named Archives. In 1989, the WMATA Board of Directors voted to rename the station to Archives–Navy Mem'l to recognize the nearby U.S. Navy Memorial. In 2004, it was renamed Archives–Navy Mem'l–Penn Quarter, in recognition of the nearby Penn Quarter neighborhood. "Navy Mem'l" and "Penn Quarter" were moved to a new subtitle, leaving "Archives" as the main name, on November 3, 2011, to go into effect on June 18, 2012 upon the publication of an updated system map. New signage was installed accordingly in 2005, following the 2004 renaming, and in late-spring 2012, following the late-2011 second renaming.

There is a provision for a future second mezzanine at the south end of the station, with a knock-out panel visible on the station's south wall.

From March 26, 2020, until June 28, 2020, this station was closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Between January 15 to January 21, 2021, this station was closed because of security concerns due to the 2020 Inauguration.

From October 12, 2021, to October 14, 2021, Blue Line Trains temporarily served this station due to a Blue Line Train derailment near the Pentagon Station.

Station layout
The station has an island platform accessed from the corner of Indiana Avenue and Seventh Street, NW.

Notable places nearby

 * Department of Justice
 * Embassy of Canada, Washington, D.C.
 * Federal Trade Commission
 * Ford's Theatre
 * Grand Army of the Republic Memorial
 * J. Edgar Hoover Building (headquarters of the FBI)
 * Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg Center (home of the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies)
 * National Archives
 * National Gallery of Art
 * National Mall
 * National Museum of Natural History
 * Temperance Fountain

In popular culture
In 2004, the station was referenced in the Disney film National Treasure. The station entrance was also featured in the 2007 film Breach.

title: Archives station


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ZSB

This page is an archive of the discussion surrounding the proposed deletion of the page entitled ZSB.

This page is kept as an historic record.

The result of the debate was to delete the article.

Useless deadend orphan non-NPOV. --Ben Brockert 22:58, May 18, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Trivial POV. --Starx 23:49, 18 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. IT'S STUPID.  Just stupid.  Really pointless and unworthy of our fine encyclopædia.  blankfaze 00:22, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * What's with these Gamefaqs message board posters? Delete with prejudice. -- Cyrius|&#9998 02:08, May 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * And to think they're concerned about being "met with insults." Looks to me like they've set themselves up big time for those so inclined!  Agree with ALL reasons stated. - Lucky 6.9 05:26, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete with alacrity. --Stormie 06:51, May 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking Stormie learned a new word today :) -- Cyrius|&#9998 07:30, May 19, 2004 (UTC)
 * Idiocy, delete with extreme prejudice. DO'Neil 11:01, 19 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Yawn. MWOT. Andrewa 02:06, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue or the deletion should be placed on other relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ZSB


text:
Red Snow

Red Snow was a British thermonuclear weapon, based on the US W28 (then called Mark 28) design used in the B28 thermonuclear bomb and AGM-28 Hound Dog missile. The US W28 had yields of 70, and while Red Snow yields are still classified, declassified British documents indicate the existence of "kiloton Red Snow" and "megaton Red Snow" variants of the weapon, suggesting similar yield options, while other sources have suggested a yield of approximately 1 MtTNT.

Development
The Red Snow warhead was developed after a September 1958 decision to adopt the US warhead for British use, following the 1958 US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement. It entered service in 1961, remaining in use until 1972, when it was replaced by the WE.177 bomb. Production numbers are classified, but it is believed that fewer than 150 weapons were produced.

Red Snow was used as both a free-fall bomb and as the warhead of the Blue Steel missile. In the gravity bomb role, it was fitted into the casing of the Yellow Sun weapon, even though the Red Snow warhead was considerably smaller than that of the original Yellow Sun bomb.

The Red Snow physics package was later reduced in size, weight and yield, and fitted with a smaller more modern primary, intended as a Red Beard replacement. Known as Una, this was later reduced in diameter and renamed Ulysses as the physics package intended for the UK warhead on the Skybolt project.

Design
Red Snow used the primary stage Peter, an anglicised version of the US Python device used in the W28. The Peter device contained 2.25 kg of plutonium and 1.4 kg of uranium. The kiloton Red Snow contained 1.6 kg of plutonium, 11 kg of uranium, 0.6 kg of lithium deuteride and 2.49 to 2.54 g of tritium, while in megaton Red Snow all the values stayed the same except the lithium deuteride amount which increased to 16 kg.

The device was fitted inside weapon cases from the older Yellow Sun weapons. This may have been to simplify crew retraining, simplify integration of the new weapon to existing platforms, or to hide the radical reduction in weapon size.

title: Red Snow


text: Template:R from US postal abbreviation

title: Template:R from US postal abbreviation


text:
List of language regulators

This is a list of bodies that consider themselves to be authorities on standard languages, often called language academies. Language academies are motivated by, or closely associated with, linguistic purism and prestige, and typically publish prescriptive dictionaries, which purport to officiate and prescribe the meaning of words and pronunciations. A language regulator may also have a more descriptive approach, however, while maintaining and promoting (but not imposing) a standard spelling. Many language academies are private institutions, although some are governmental bodies in different states, or enjoy some form of government-sanctioned status in one or more countries. There may also be multiple language academies attempting to regulate and codify the same language, sometimes based in different countries and sometimes influenced by political factors.

Many world languages have one or more language academies or official language bodies. However, the degree of control that the academies exert over these languages does not render the latter controlled natural languages in the sense that the various kinds of "simple English" (e.g. Basic English, Simplified Technical English) or George Orwell's fictional Newspeak are. They instead remain natural languages to a considerable extent and are thus not formal languages such as Attempto Controlled English. They have a degree of standardization that allows them to function as standard languages (e.g. standard French). The English language has never had a formal regulator anywhere, outside of private productions such as the Oxford English Dictionary.

Constructed languages
Apart from the Akademio de Esperanto, most constructed languages (also called conlangs) have no true linguistic regulators or language academies.

Esperanto
Esperanto and Ido have been constructed (or planned) by a person or small group, before being adopted and further developed by communities of users through natural language evolution.

Bodies such as the Akademio de Esperanto look at questions of usage in the light of the original goals and principles of the language.

Interlingua
Interlingua has no regulating body, as its vocabulary, grammar, and orthography are viewed as a product of ongoing social forces. In theory, Interlingua therefore evolves independent from any human regulator. Interlingua's vocabulary is verified and recorded by dynamically applying certain general principles to an existing set of natural languages and their etymologies. The International Auxiliary Language Association ceased to exist in 1954, and according to the secretary of Union Mundial de Interlingua "Interlingua doesn't need its Academy".

Other bodies
These bodies do not attempt to regulate any language in a prescriptive manner and are primarily concerned with aiding and advising the government on policies regarding language usage.
 * 🇭🇰 Hong Kong: Official Language Division Civil Service Bureau Government of Hong Kong – concerned with matters concerning government language policy
 * Macau: Departamento dos Assuntos Linguísticos of the Public Administration and Civil Service Bureau of the Government of Macau –concerned with matters concerning government language policy

title: List of language regulators


text:
Red Beard (nuclear weapon)

Red Beard was the first British tactical nuclear weapon. It was carried by Royal Air Force (RAF) English Electric Canberra medium bombers and the V bomber force and by Supermarine Scimitars, de Havilland Sea Vixens, and  Blackburn Buccaneers of the Royal Navy's (RN) Fleet Air Arm (FAA). Developed to Operational Requirement OR.1127, it was introduced in 1961, entered service in 1962. It was replaced by the WE.177 in the early 1970s and was withdrawn from service in 1971.

Design
Red Beard was an unboosted fission weapon that used a composite core (mixed core in British terminology of the time). The composite core used both weapons-grade plutonium and weapons-grade uranium-235, and was intended to minimise the risk of pre-detonation that was a feature of all-plutonium designs of that period with yields larger than 10 kilotons (kt). An added benefit of the composite core was a more economical use of fissile material. The design was tested twice during the Operation Buffalo series of nuclear trials at Maralinga in Australia – first (codenamed Buffalo R1/One Tree) on 27 September 1956: a 15 kt explosion, after which the resulting mushroom cloud rose to a height of 11430 m, and again (codenamed Buffalo R4/Breakaway) on 21 October 1956. Although the design concept of Red Beard was similar to that of the Blue Danube warhead, an innovative means of implosion meant that its overall size could be significantly reduced.

Its measurements were 3.66 m in length, 71 cm in diameter, and a weight of approximately 1750 lb. Two versions were produced: the Mk.1, with a yield of 15 kilotons, and the Mk.2, with a yield of 25 kilotons. The Mk.2 was available in two variants, the No.1 used by high-altitude bombers, and the No.2 variant that was intended for low-level delivery by the toss bombing method, and its 'over-the-shoulder' variant referred to as the Low Altitude Bombing System (LABS).

Red Beard's Royal Air Force and Royal Navy service designations were:
 * Bomb, Aircraft, HE 2,000 lb MC Mk.1 No.1
 * Bomb, Aircraft, HE 2,000 lb MC Mk.1 No.2
 * Bomb, Aircraft, HE 2,000 lb MC Mk.2 No.1
 * Bomb, Aircraft, HE 2,000 lb MC Mk.2 No.2

Weighing in at approximately 794 kg, Red Beard was considerably lighter than the 2000 lb official service designation, which was based on the original technical requirement.

Another significant improvement over Blue Danube was the electrical system for the bomb firing mechanism and the radar altimeter fuse. Blue Danube had used 6 volt lead–acid batteries that were unreliable, and had to be installed at the last minute before takeoff. There were also potential risks associated with 'stray' electrical discharges to the firing mechanisms which might have led to accidental detonation. Red Beard used twin ram-air turbines located in the nose, from which there could be no stray discharges before bomb release. The air inlet can be seen in the extreme nose. They exhausted through 'blow-out' patches in the nose sides. Until bomb release, the weapon drew electrical power from the aircraft for heating and pre-heating of the radar fuzes.

Like Blue Danube, the body diameter at 71 cm was greater than was desirable relative to the overall length of 3.66 m. To compensate for this stubbiness, and quickly stabilise the bomb after release, Red Beard was equipped with flip-out tail fins that were activated pneumatically, triggered by a lanyard attached to the aircraft.

As with Blue Danube, the fuzing arrangements were composed of twin radar fuzes that were activated by a barometric 'gate' after release. The barometric gate ensured that the radar fuzes only transmitted in the last few seconds of free-fall, to a computed burst height, and this technique minimised the possibility of radar countermeasures disabling the radar fuzes. There were back-up contact and graze fuzes to ensure bomb destruction in the event of a misfire.

None of the variants allowed in-flight arming of the fissile core. The core was inserted before take-off, in a process referred to as 'last minute loading'. For carrier-borne aircraft, landing with the armed weapon was forbidden, and the aircraft would instead be diverted to a shore airbase. Although the Royal Navy required its Sea Vixen aircraft to be type-approved for Red Beard carriage as insurance against delays in the development of the Blackburn Buccaneer, the Sea Vixen never deployed in the nuclear strike role. Early models were subject to severe environmental limitations, especially when loaded into Royal Navy Scimitars on exposed aircraft carrier decks in Northern waters. The Mk.2 variants were better engineered to withstand extreme conditions, and other than the yield difference, this was the main area of difference.

When the bomb was delivered by low-level toss bombing, the aircraft was almost always at a lower altitude than the burst height; so in effect, the bomb was not really 'dropped', but was released and 'flew' upwards in a ballistic trajectory, to detonate when it reached the required altitude.

Service in United Kingdom and Singapore
Royal Air Force stocks of Red Beard for the Canberra and V-bomber forces totalled 110. Of these, forty-eight were deployed in Cyprus to meet the UK's commitments to Central Treaty Organization (CENTO), forty-eight were deployed in Singapore at RAF Tengah to meet commitments to Southeast Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO), and the remainder were located in the United Kingdom. Royal Navy stocks are believed, from archived declassified documents, to total thirty-five weapons, to be shared between five aircraft carriers, and shore-based supply and overhaul infrastructure. The carriers were thought (from similar sources) to each have an air-conditioned storage capacity for five Red Beard weapons.

Before the Red Beard codename was issued in 1952, it was frequently referred to in official documents as the 'Javelin Bomb', because it was originally conceived as a weapon for the 'thin-wing Javelin bomber', a projected derivative of the (thick wing) Gloster Javelin all-weather fighter. The designation 'target marker bomb' was a euphemism used to disguise the nature of the bomb, so that its dimensions and weights etc. could be circulated to aircraft and aircraft equipment designers, without compromising security.

It was replaced by the WE.177 in the early 1970s.

John Dolphin
Whilst Chief Engineer at the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment (AWRE), Aldermaston, John Dolphin worked on the Red Beard trigger mechanism. Subsequently, in July 1959, Dolphin requested an ex-gratia financial award for his work on the weapon; but was turned down. His claim was that although it was not his job to do so, he invented the 'Rotary Hot Line' device that eventually became the trigger for the Red Beard bomb (and which was used in all subsequent thermonuclear bombs). He further stated that his invention brought to an end the deadlock in meeting the specification for the Red Beard, and that he had to overcome "serious opposition" against the senior scientists whose job did include the brief for its invention. His claim was refused on the grounds that as a 'Chief Engineer', it was within the scope of his duties.

Surviving examples
At the Air Force Museum in Cosford, England, one is displayed on a trolley in front of a bomber. A training version is on display at the Explosion Museum of Naval Firepower.

title: Red Beard (nuclear weapon)


text:
Mount Vernon Square station

Mount Vernon Square station is a Washington Metro station in Washington, D.C., on the Green and Yellow Lines. It is the northeastern terminus of the Yellow Line.

Location
Mount Vernon Square station is located at the border of the neighborhoods of Downtown and Shaw in the northwestern quadrant of Washington. Its namesake, Mount Vernon Square, is located two blocks to the south at the convergence of New York Avenue and Massachusetts Avenues and 7th, 9th, and K Streets. The station's subtitle is derived from the station's location along 7th Street NW and its proximity to the Walter E. Washington Convention Center. However, the station is only one of five Metro stations underneath 7th Street NW.

Transit-oriented development
Like many other Metro stations in the Washington Metropolitan Area, Mount Vernon Square station has spurred development in its proximity. Most prominent is the Washington Convention Center, although a number of smaller residential and commercial projects have been completed within the surrounding blocks. To the southeast of the station is the Mount Vernon Triangle, a business improvement district (BID) seeing rapid mixed-use growth. To the southwest of the station is the mixed-use CityCenterDC development project, which is home to luxury condominiums and luxury retail franchises such as Louis Vuitton, Moncler, Gucci, Hugo Boss, Tesla, Del Frisco's Double Eagle Steak House, Fig & Olive and other upscale dining and shopping destinations.

History
Service began on May 11, 1991. The station mezzanine was renovated in 2003 to coincide with the opening of the Walter E. Washington Convention Center. The renovation included additional faregates and a new street entrance.

In 2003, two redundant elevators near the entrance with escalators were opened and the station is the first station to get redundant elevators.

On January 7, 2007, the fifth car of a six-car train derailed in the tunnel at the interlocking south of the station, sending twenty people to the hospital for minor injuries and significantly damaging a rail car. Service resumed the next day at 5 AM.

Since May 25, 2019, Yellow Line trains no longer terminated at this station during rush hours and extended to Greenbelt at all times.

From March 26, 2020 until June 28, 2020, this station was closed due to the 2020 coronavirus pandemic.

From October 12, 2021 to October 14, 2021 Blue Line Trains temporarily served this station due to a derailment near the Arlington Cemetery Station.

Since May 7, 2023, the northeastern terminus of the Yellow Line was truncated from Greenbelt to this station, following its reopening after a nearly eight-month-long major rehabilitation project on its bridge over the Potomac River and its tunnel leading into L'Enfant Plaza.

Name changes
Originally to be named "Federal City College", the station was named Mount Vernon Square–UDC at the time of its 1991 opening, reflecting the establishment of the University of the District of Columbia. The station was renamed Mt Vernon Sq/7th Street–Convention Center in 2001; the "7th Street" helped distinguish that the stop served the new Walter E. Washington Convention Center as opposed to the old Washington Convention Center at 9th Street NW. On November 3, 2011, the station was again renamed, taking "Mount Vernon Square" as the main name, with "7th Street–Convention Center" as a subtitle.

Station layout
The station) has a single island platform accessed from the southwest corner of Seventh and M Streets, NW. There is a pocket track just beyond the station going north, which is currently used to turn Yellow Line trains for service back to Huntington. It is also one of only two underground terminus stations in the Washington Metro, the other being Glenmont.

title: Mount Vernon Square station


text:
Richard Yates

Richard Yates may refer to:

People

 * Richard Yates (actor) (1706–1796), English comic actor
 * Richard Yates (antiquary) (1769–1834), English cleric
 * Richard Yates (politician, born 1815) (1815–1873), 13th governor of Illinois (1861–1865), U.S. Senator from Illinois (1865–1871), U.S. Congressman from Illinois (1851–1855), member of Illinois House of Representatives (1842–1845, 1848–1849)
 * Richard Yates Jr. (1860–1936), his son, 22nd governor of Illinois (1901–1905), U.S. Congressman from Illinois (1919–1933)
 * Dick Yates (1921–1976), Welsh footballer
 * Richard Yates (novelist) (1926–1992), American novelist and short-story writer
 * Richard Yates (athlete) (born 1986), English athlete

Novels

 * Richard Yates (novel), 2010 novel by Tao Lin

title: Richard Yates


text:
High church

The term high church refers to beliefs and practices of Christian ecclesiology, liturgy, and theology that emphasize "ritual, priestly authority, [and] sacraments". Although used in connection with various Christian traditions, the term originated in and has been principally associated with the Anglican tradition, where it describes churches using a number of ritual practices associated in the popular mind with Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy. The opposite tradition is low church. Contemporary media discussing Anglican churches often prefer the terms evangelical to low church and Anglo-Catholic to high church, even though their meanings do not exactly correspond. Other contemporary denominations that contain high church wings include some Lutheran, Presbyterian, and Methodist churches.

Variations
Because of its history, the term high church also refers to aspects of Anglicanism quite distinct from the Oxford Movement or Anglo-Catholicism. There remain parishes that are high church and yet adhere closely to the quintessentially Anglican usages and liturgical practices of the Book of Common Prayer.

High church Anglicanism tends to be closer than low church to Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox teachings and spirituality; its hallmarks are relatively elaborate music, altarpieces, and clergy vestments and an emphasis on sacraments. It is intrinsically traditional.

High church nonetheless includes many bishops, other clergy and adherents sympathetic to mainstream modern consensus across reformed Christianity that, according to official Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox Christian teachings, are anathema (see the ordination of women and to varying degrees abortion).

The term high church has also been applied to elements of Protestant churches within which individual congregations or ministers display a division in their liturgical practices, for example, high church Presbyterianism and high church Methodism, and within Lutheranism there is a historic high church and low church distinction comparable with Anglicanism (see Neo-Lutheranism and Pietism).

Evolution of the term
High church is a back-formation from "high churchman", a label used in the 17th and early 18th centuries to describe opponents of religious toleration, with "high" meaning "extreme". As the Puritans began demanding that the English Church abandon some of its traditional liturgical emphases, episcopal structures, parish ornaments and the like, the high church position also came to be distinguished increasingly from that of the Latitudinarians, also known as those promoting a broad church, who sought to minimise the differences between Anglicanism and Reformed Christianity, and to make the church as inclusive as possible by opening its doors as widely as possible to admit other Christian viewpoints.

Over time several of the leading lights of the Oxford Movement became Roman Catholics, following the path of John Henry Newman, one of the fathers of the Oxford Movement and, for a time, a high churchman himself. A lifelong High Churchman, the Reverend Edward Bouverie Pusey remained the spiritual father of the Oxford Movement who remained a priest in the Church of England. To a lesser extent, looking back from the 19th century, the term high church also came to be associated with the beliefs of the Caroline divines and with the pietistic emphases of the period, practised by the Little Gidding community, such as fasting and lengthy preparations before receiving the Eucharist.

Before 1833
During the reign of King James I, there were attempts to diminish the growth of party feeling within the Church of England, and indeed to reconcile to the Church moderate Puritans who did not already conform to the Established Church or who had left the Church in recent years. The project to create the Authorized Version of the Bible was one such attempt at reconciliation. The continued use of the King James version of the Bible, by Anglicans and other Protestants alike in the English-speaking world, is a reflection of the success of this endeavour at cooperation.

During the reign of King Charles I, however, as divisions between Puritan and Catholic elements within the Church of England became more bitter, and Protestant Nonconformity outside the Church grew stronger in numbers and more vociferous, the High Church position became associated with the leadership of the High Church Archbishop of Canterbury, William Laud, (see Laudianism), and government policy to curtail the growth of Protestant Dissent in England and the other possessions of the Crown. See, for example, the attempt to reimpose episcopacy on the Church of Scotland, a policy that was 'successful' until the reign of William and Mary, when the office of bishop was discontinued except among the small minority of Scots who belonged to the Scottish Episcopal Church.

In the wake of the disestablishment of Anglicanism and the persecution of Anglican beliefs and practices under the Commonwealth, the return of the Anglican party to power in the Cavalier Parliament saw a strong revival of the High Church position in the English body politic. Victorious after a generation of struggle, the Anglican gentry felt the need to re-entrench the re-Anglicanised Church of England as one of the most important elements of the Restoration Settlement through a renewed and strengthened alliance between Throne and Altar, or Church and State. Reverence for martyrdom of the Stuart king Charles I as an upholder of his Coronation Oath to protect the Church of England became a hallmark of High Church orthodoxy. At the same time, the Stuart dynasty was expected to maintain its adherence to Anglicanism. This became an important issue for the High Church party and it was to disturb the Restoration Settlement under Charles II's brother, King James II, a convert to Roman Catholicism, and lead to setbacks for the High Church party. These events culminated in the Glorious Revolution and the exclusion of the Catholic Stuarts from the British throne. The subsequent split over office-holders' oaths of allegiance to the Crown and the Royal Succession, which led to the exclusion of the Non-Juror bishops who refused to recognise the 1688 de facto abdication of the King, and the accession of King William III and Queen Mary II, and did much to damage the unity of High Church party.

Later events surrounding the attempts of the Jacobites, the adherents of the excluded dynasts, to regain the English and Scottish thrones, led to a sharpening of anti-Catholic rhetoric in Britain and a distancing of the High Church party from the more ritualistic aspects of Caroline High churchmanship, which were often associated with the schismatic Non-Jurors. Thomas Hancorne, a Welsh clergyman prominent in jacobite circles, gave the County of Swansea's assize sermon on 18 April 1710 (The right way to honour and happiness), during which he complained of the "rapid growth of deist, freethinking and anti-trinitarian views." The targets of Hancorne's wrath were "irreligion, profaneness and immorality", as well as the "curious, inquisitive sceptics" and the "sin-sick tottering nation". Later, he engaged in a campaign to reassert tithe rights. Eventually, under Queen Anne, the High Church party saw its fortunes revive with those of the Tory party, with which it was then strongly associated.

However, under the early Hanoverians, both the High Church and Tory parties were once again out of favour. This led to an increasing marginalisation of High Church and Tory viewpoints, as much of the 18th century was given over to the rule of the Whig party and the aristocratic families who were in large measure pragmatic latitudinarians in churchmanship. This was also the Age of Reason, which marked a period of great spiritual somnolence and stultification in the Church of England.

Thus, by the end of the 18th century and the beginning of the 19th, those liturgical practices prevalent even in High Church circles were not of the same tenor as those later found under the Catholic revival of the 19th century. High Church clergy and laity were often termed high and dry, in reference to their traditional high attitude with regard to political position of the Church in England, and dry faith, which was accompanied by an austere but decorous mode of worship, as reflective of their idea of an orderly and dignified churchmanship against the rantings of the low churchmen that their Cavalier ancestors had defeated. Over time, their High Church position had become ossified among a remnant of bookish churchmen and country squires. An example of an early 19th-century churchman of this tradition is Sir Robert Inglis MP.

From 1833
Only with the success of the Oxford Movement and its increasing emphases on ritualistic revival from the mid-19th century onward, did the term High Church begin to mean something approaching the later term Anglo-Catholic. Even then, it was only employed coterminously in contrast to the Low churchmanship of the Evangelical and Pietist position. This sought, once again, to lessen the separation of Anglicans (the Established Church) from the majority of Protestant Nonconformists, who by this time included the Wesleyans and other Methodists as well as adherents of older Protestant denominations known by the group term Old Dissent. In contrast to earlier alliances with the Tories, Anglo-Catholicism became increasingly associated with socialism, the Labour Party and greater decision-making liberty for the church's convocations.

From the mid-19th century onward, the term High Church generally became associated with a more avowedly Anglo-Catholic liturgical or even triumphalist position within the English Church, while the remaining Latitudinarians were referred to as being Broad Church and the re-emergent evangelical party was dubbed Low Church. However, high church can still refer to Anglicans who hold a high view of the sacraments, church tradition and the threefold ministry but do not specifically consider themselves Anglo-Catholics.

Notable institutions

 * Keble College, Oxford
 * Pusey House, Oxford
 * St Stephen's House, Oxford
 * Nashotah House

title: High church


text: Wikipedia:Trophy box

title: Wikipedia:Trophy box


text:
Legislative Assembly of Manitoba

The Legislative Assembly of Manitoba (Assemblée législative du Manitoba) is the deliberative assembly of the Manitoba Legislature in the Canadian province of Manitoba. Fifty-seven members are elected to this assembly at provincial general elections, all in single-member constituencies with first-past-the-post voting. Bills passed by the Legislative Assembly are given royal assent by the lieutenant governor of Manitoba in the name of the King of Canada. The Manitoba Legislative Building is located in central Winnipeg.

The premier of Manitoba is Wab Kinew, and the speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Manitoba is Tom Lindsey. Both are members of the New Democratic Party.

Historically, the Legislature of Manitoba had another chamber, the Legislative Council of Manitoba, but this was abolished in 1876, just six years after the province was formed.

The 42nd Legislature was dissolved on September 5, 2023, and a general election was called for October 3. The 43rd Legislature opened on November 9.

Current members

 * Members in bold are in the Cabinet of Manitoba
 * Party leaders are italicized
 * † Speaker of the Assembly

Seating plan
<!--Needs updating{| style="font-size:87%"
 * bgcolor="#9999FF" border="1" | Driedger
 * }
 * bgcolor="#9999FF" border="1" | Driedger
 * }

The seating arrangement is viewable at the official website.

title: Legislative Assembly of Manitoba


text:
EDO

Edo or EDO may refer to:

Culture

 * Edo language, a language spoken in Nigeria
 * Edo people, the inhabitants of the province, creators of the Benin Empire
 * Edo period, in Japanese history

Places

 * Edo, the historical name for Tokyo, Japan
 * Edo River, a river in Japan
 * Edo State, a state in Nigeria
 * Edo (Wolaita), town in Wolayita Zone of Ethiopia
 * Edo, the historical name for Benin City, Nigeria

People

 * Edo (given name)
 * Edo (surname)

Technology

 * Edo Aircraft Corporation, a defunct American aircraft float designer
 * EDO Corporation, an American technology company
 * Extended data out DRAM, a type of computer memory
 * Extended Duration Orbiter, a NASA program

Other uses

 * 9782 Edo, a main-belt asteroid
 * Balıkesir Koca Seyit Airport, IATA code EDO
 * Economic development organization
 * Ejaculatory duct obstruction
 * Environmental Defender's Office NSW
 * Environmental Defenders Office (Qld) Inc.
 * European Drought Observatory, of the European Commission
 * HFC EDO, a football club based in Haarlem, Netherlands
 * Edo, a fictional race in Star Trek; see "Justice" (Star Trek: The Next Generation)
 * Equal division of the octave, a system of equal temperament tuning in music

title: EDO


text:
Federal Center SW station

Federal Center SW station is a Washington Metro station in an area known as the Southwest Federal Center in Washington, D.C., United States. The island-platformed station was opened on July 1, 1977, and is operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) and is located on the Orange, Silver, and Blue Lines. The station is located at 3rd and D Streets.

History
In preliminary maps, this was named Voice of America station, after the government-owned radio service located a block away. In September 1971, Department of Health, Education and Welfare secretary Eliot Richardson suggested the current name, noting that "The Voice of America is by far the smallest agency in the Southwest area". The station opened on July 1, 1977. Its opening coincided with the completion of 11.8 mi of rail between National Airport and RFK Stadium and the opening of the Arlington Cemetery, Capitol South, Crystal City, Eastern Market, Farragut West, Federal Triangle, Foggy Bottom–GWU, L'Enfant Plaza, McPherson Square, National Airport, Pentagon, Pentagon City, Potomac Avenue, Rosslyn, Smithsonian, and Stadium–Armory stations. Orange Line service to the station began upon the line's opening on November 20, 1978. Silver Line service at Federal Center SW began on July 26, 2014.

From March 26, 2020 until June 28, 2020, this station was closed due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Between January 15 to January 21, 2021, this station was closed because of security concerns due to the Inauguration of Joe Biden.

Notable places nearby

 * Museum of the Bible
 * National Air and Space Museum
 * National Museum of the American Indian
 * United States Botanic Garden
 * Several federal government buildings, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Department of Health and Human Services, NASA, United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, Voice of America radio and television studios, and the Ford House Office Building.

title: Federal Center SW station


text:
Green Grow the Lilacs

Green Grow the Lilacs is a folk song of Irish origin that was popular in the United States during the mid-19th century.

The song title is the source of a folk etymology for the word gringo that states that the Mexicans misheard U.S. troops singing "green grow" during the Mexican–American War.

The song appears in the 1931 stage play of the same name by Lynn Riggs, which is the basis of the 1943 musical Oklahoma!

Recordings

 * 1941 Tony Kraber – included in the 78rpm album The Old Chisholm Trail – Songs Of The American Southwest.
 * 1957 Gordon MacRae – included in his album Cowboy's Lament.
 * 1959 Bing Crosby and Rosemary Clooney – included in the album How the West Was Won.
 * 1959 Harry Belafonte Recorded in 1958 and released in 1959 on the RCA LP "Love Is a Gentle Thing" LSP1927
 * 1963 Chad Mitchell Trio
 * 1965 Johnny Cash
 * 1966 Tex Ritter
 * 1969 Soupy Sales - released as the B-side for his single "Muck-Arty Park"
 * 1976 The Blue Sky Boys (Bill And Earl Bolick)

Versions
There are many different versions of the lyrics.

title: Green Grow the Lilacs


text:
User talk:S. Holbourn

MY SANDBOX. WELCOME:

title: User talk:S. Holbourn


text:
Talk:Future of the Royal Navy

POV
In this too POV??

"Unlikely as it sounds, a situation such as occurred in the Falklands War could happen again. How would the government respond? Basing the question on the here and now, the conclusion seems to be that it is doubtful that the Royal Navy will be able to cope, even with the (hopefully) capable systems in which the British Government has invested so much faith. Technology is a good thing, but it doesn't help when men in small boats can cause so much destruction."

 * Yes, I believe some parts of the 'Analysis' blurs the line in regard to POV, and in some places crosses it. Clue 07:39, 6 May 2005 (UTC)

I am curious why this content is here rather than in the main article on the Royal Navy? This is great detail about the current state but I would not normally expect to find it here. I personally would expect to find it in the main article. Rossami 23:16, 18 May 2004 (UTC) Proposal:
 * 1) Merge back into the main article on the Royal Navy
 * 2) * which may require moving some current content out to a History of the Royal Navy
 * 3) Move current page to a more logical article name such as:
 * 4) Royal Navy (force structure)
 * 5) other?

Also, there is a large section under the 'Ananlysis' heading which is opinion or maybe even speculation. It needs to be more encylopedic - facts, not thinking on paper. akaDruid 13:49, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Some of the stuff on PFI doesn't really fit with an encyclopedia.--Payo 10:06, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

While there are parts of this article that might benefit from clean-up, much of the article is encyclopaedic. I'm therefore replacing the -unencyclopedic- with -cleanup-. Ian Cairns 10:03, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Point of View
But... since the end of the Cold War, successive Chancellors have imposed the 'peace dividend'. With no recognisable threat, the defence budget has been constantly raided to provide additional funds in other areas. This has led to continuing cuts to the strength of the fleet, particularly with regard to escorts - in 1990, the destroyer and frigate force numbered 43; by 2000, it had dropped to 32. In addition to this is the continued reduction in the nuclear submarine force, which will drop to 10 boats. At present, with the current global situation, these numbers are only just sufficient. Should something like the 2003 Iraq War happen again, the fleet would be stretched. And yet, it seems likely that the numbers of new units will only replace what is already in service, thanks to the government's decision to base its strategy on systems that are adaptable to many situations; it has decided that it does not need large armed forces, despite the continuing evidence of the War on Terror and the fallout of Iraq.

Added to this is the continuing use of the Private Finance Initiative, that uses private money to pay for public works. At present, three warships in the service of the Royal Navy are owned, not by the Admiralty, but by the shipbuilder that constructed them. They are chartered by the Admiralty for five years, after which the navy can purchase them, extend the charter or return them. As it seems unlikely that such major assets would be returned, it means that the taxpayer is not only paying for the five year charter, but also for the eventual cost of purchasing the ships; in effect, they are paying for them twice. While this may be an acceptable arrangement for assets such as the new strategic lift ro-ro ships (which can be used as ordinary merchant transports when not needed by the military), the same cannot be said for actual warships.

At present, the government's procurement policy involves 2 CVF and their air groups, 8 Type 45 destroyers, 5 Astute class submarines and perhaps as many as 17 FSCs. Assuming 8 Type 45s are built, this will provide a major fleet of 25 escorts, 2 carriers and 10 SSNs, with a sizeable amphibious force and significant (though not numerous) other assets. Will this be enough? Even now, the fleet is stretched and the government continues to talk of further decommissionings, not to mention the number of projects that are behind schedule - Albion and Bulwark will both enter service late; the first Type 45 has only just started construction and will be late, as will the Astute class, while there are still wranglings over the size of CVF; it has also recently been discovered that the F-35 is severely overweight, which will probably lead to a slip in its in-service date. This, coupled with the early withdrawal of the Sea Harrier, will leave no capable fleet air defence aircraft in the Fleet Air Arm for five years or more. The rationale for this is that the UK 'no longer fights the sort of wars where ships need defending from enemy warplanes far out to sea; if necessary, we can rely on coalition forces to provide the outer air defences for surface ships' (Armed Forces Minister, Adam Ingram, 28/02/02). But, who can say what the global situation will be once HMS Queen Elizabeth enters service? Who knows what will happen in the next five years? Unlikely as it sounds, a situation such as occurred in the Falklands War could happen again. How would the government respond? Basing the question on the here and now, the conclusion seems to be that it is doubtful that the Royal Navy will be able to cope, even with the (hopefully) capable systems in which the British Government has invested so much faith. Technology is a good thing, but it doesn't help when men in small boats can cause so much destruction.

When I wrote this, just after Delivering Security in a Changing World was announced, I felt very strongly that it needed to be said publically, and I still do. However, I am aware that an encyclopedia isn't the proper forum to do so, which is why I've moved the above text into the discussion page. Hammersfan 05/10/05, 15.30

Agree
I completely agree with the above comments. The early withdrawl of the Sea Harrier has been exposed for the cost cutting sham it was during the recent crisis in North Korea in October, 2006.

In particular, I take issue with this part of the article:

"Therefore, over the course of 1990s and the 2000s, the navy has begun a series of projects to enhance and rebuild its fleet, with a view to bringing its capabilities into the 21st century and allow it to turn from a North Atlantic, anti-submarine force into a true blue water navy."

How can the Navy or the authour of this article use the words "enhance" and "rebuild" while keeping a straight face is beyond me. How exactly is cutting the surface fleet to the bone compatible with the words "enhance" and (especially) "rebuild"?

That particular part of the article needs rewriting ASAP as it simply does not bear out reality. Simply regurgitating government spin is not a good way of writing an unbiased and well written article!

If this does not happen soon, I will do it myself! And will continue to change it if it is reset back to its previous (incorrect) form! --Pudduh 21:53, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

The comments above are all just agenda driven rubbish and the article is now both wrong and biased to the negative. For example " the comment about the type 42s being replaced by half the number of type 45s" last I checked there were 8 type 42s and there are 8 type 45s planned (6 ordered). You accuse the original author of speculation and comment but then are guilty of it yourselves by speculating that the last two type 45s will not be ordered when there is no real evidence that they will (tabloid newspapers are not reliable sources of information as they are themselves politically biased) Lets wait until they are cancelled before we bleat on about it otherwise we just look stupid. To be blunt the article has been turned from a interesting if maybe over positive article into what is effectively a load of labour bashing waffle!!! -- Kieran Locke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.165.225.23 (talk) 15:58, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

In addition, this comment "many of these have been cut or cancelled" any examples of these many cancelled and cut programs? Or is the editor again over exaggerating in order to further his or hers agenda.

In fairness, I think the reference to 8 Type 42s in service is after some earlier reductions in numbers from 12 ships. So 6 Type 45s would indeed only replace (numerically) half of the T42 strength as at the time of the SDR. There has been a steady reduction in the size of the RN since SDR, and this trend is continuing. This seems to me a matter of fact. On the other hand, describing this as a bad (or for that matter a good) thing strays into POV, I think. --Vvmodel (talk) 19:55, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

yes but this was a trend long before SDR to. People have short memories and don’t seem to remember the large defence cuts of the 1990s and before that. This article indicates that everything was all fine and dandy until the current administration came in. anybody who’s studied modern British military history knows that that is not true. I am not suggesting for a second that everything’s great at the moment there are problems and issues to be addressed but there has always been problems and issues and there always will be. The two editors who have changed this page seem biased and naive. Perhaps this article should be about the navy’s plans rather than what it is at the moment. I am sorry I really don’t like this article I don’t think its encyclopaedic but I will now shut up- Regards kieran Locke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.165.225.23 (talk) 15:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Update: No response
As there has been no response to either my or Hammersfan's arguments, I have decided to go nuclear and change the article to better reflect the reality faced by an ever crippled and impotent Royal Navy. The current reaction to the North Korean crisis and the fact that we can barely offer one frigate due to fleet and budget cutbacks only add to the avalanche of evidence that whoever wrote this wikipedia article does not have any perception of reality.

I shall endeavour to maintain this legitimate edit if it is returned to it's original and incorrect form. --Pudduh 16:26, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I find this sort of article "dangerous" as rather than an encyclopaedic analysis of assets and capabilities it can quickly degenerate into conjecture and personal opinion. I would advise editors to tread carefully here. Emoscopes Talk 16:38, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

 * Granted, I only wished to edit that specific part of the article as it was politically biased from the outset and bore no relation to reality. It is better to have a balanced article that recognises that the Navy is evolving and bringing in new ships and other assets, but that it has to do this within the constraints of a shrinking budget and cuts in the surface fleet. The notion that the Royal Navy is expanding is frankly absurd and living in the clouds. --Pudduh 14:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Im afraid as I said earlier all you have done is change the article to suit your own particular opinion which is no more close to reality as you put it as the original article. You say the navy is impotent and incapable because it couldn’t send a single frigate to a fictitious blockade of north Korea (again coming from the tabloids), but conveniently fail to mention the evacuation of British nationals from Lebanon by the royal navy just last summer and the 12 ship task force sent on the vela deployment to sierra Leone this year. --- Kieran Locke —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.165.225.23 (talk) 18:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Initial "the" in pagename
The naming conventions would seem to indicate that this article should be at Royal Navy in the 21st Century. Unless there are any objections, I'd propose to move it there. Alai 20:46, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

Admiralty and main article
In discussing the changes there seems to be no mention of the privatisation of what tends here to be called "the Armiralty". I've added mention to the Royal Maritime Auxiliary Service page which seemed well out of date.

Also, since this page can be a useful expansion on the topic, why isn't it linked on the Royal Navy section about this with a see main? ..dave souza, talk 08:18, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup
I have just finished a major cleanup of this article.
 * General quality "no decision has yet been decided"
 * Removed major redundancy, i.e. the use of six or seven words when two will do.
 * Removed dreadful POV
 * Removed unsourced statements/pure speculation: "Also, it is possible that a mixture of all three types could be procured, in a "family" of warship classes, but no decision regarding these projects has been announced. It is thought that there will be a minimum of 12 7,000 tonne + frigates and 5 3,000 tonne smaller variants, but no decision has yet been decided. " and "It is thought that if the government funds a higher budget for the Royal Navy ( because of mounting pressure by the media and the public ). Then other ships may be built, maybe even a third batch of type 45 destroyers,"
 * Removed entire analysis section - not only did it simply repeat what was said elsewhere but it had terrible POV and speculation, "However today, there are still difficult decisions to be taken, some have already been made, and indeed for the better." and "should re-assert the Royal Navy's position as a true Blue water navy and see it retain its position as the second most powerful naval force in the world for the forseeable future."
 * Removed some description of what was the case 20 or 30 yrs ago. This article's title suggests a forward looking description. I've also removed some triviality, e.g. HMS Clyde being the first ship built at VT's new facility. That's maybe worthy of mention at the Clyde article, not on every single page where it's mentioned. Mark83 14:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair dinkum on the POV, looks much better now. --Pudduh 13:03, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

prince of wales used as a helicopter carrier
im sorry but isnt that just tabloid speculation. considering one paper said its canceled and another has said its beinging sold to india. you should be talking about future royal naval force structure based on current government and royal naval policy. if we included every piece of media speculation we would end up with a conflicting load of garbage. lets be fair their track record on getting things right and accurate leaves something to be desired. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.35.132.151 (talk) 10:17, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:2006 CVF STOVL.jpg
Image:2006 CVF STOVL.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 21:51, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * This image is on wikipedia under the fair use guidelines. Under these guidelines the image cannot be reasonably used in this article. As such it has been removed from this article. Do not re-add it here without discussion. Thanks. Woodym555 22:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Type 45 #
You should update again, there are only 6 Type 45 destroyers planned with 7-8 being scrapped for money on FCS development. Watch after the elections as it might drop even further. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.111.43.195 (talk) 05:56, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

In-accurate
"Eight boats were the official target until 2008, now the MOD officially plans to acquire 7 Astute class submarines: it remains to be seen if this target will be maintained and reached despite the continuously shrinking budget."

"despite the continuously shrinking budget."

Clearly very wrong when the defence budget is larger and larger every year. Defence spending rises every year, it doesnt shrink. The problem is defence equiptment becomes more expensive and the defence budget doesnt rise enough to counter defence costs. The article should read "despite a lack of defence spending." or "despite budget constraints." Recon.Army (talk) 15:34, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Queen Elizabeth Class
The illustration for the new Elizabeth class carriers does not match the illustration that can be seen at HMS Queen Elizabeth, which shows a carrier with a skew-aligned runway as opposed to the axially-aligned runway shown on this article. Which of these two is the actual layout of the carrier? siafu (talk) 17:23, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Scottish Independence
i would like to point out, you have not added the repercussions to the Royal Navy if Scotland succeeds in voting for independence in 2014. As Scottish tax payers have contributed at least 9% (it's actually 10% in reality) towards military funding then a independent Scotland would be entitled to at least 9% of the military/naval hardware of the British armed forces excluding nuclear assests as Scotland is not interested in nuclear weapons or energy, which will result in the removal of the deep naval facility in faslane which will have massive implications for the "British/English" submarine fleet and the UK/English goverment in the removal of the facility from Scotland, a facility the people of Scotland never wanted on their territory, the remainder of the UK will have to pay the costs of removing the nuclear facilities from Scottish soil, the cost for ignoring the people of Scotland  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.244.9 (talk) 15:43, 26 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, under WP:SPECULATION, such commentary would be premature. In advance of the vote however, once WP:Reliable Sources comment on the issue, sourced material may be added - and you can do this yourself. Buckshot06 (talk) 01:09, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Reference for change in F-35 Variant and cancellation of CATOBAR facility on QE Class Carrier
According to an article dated 10 May 2012 the Defence Secretary Philip Hammond announced that the Royal Navy will order the STOVL 'B' variant in preference to the carrier capable 'C' variant. His reasoning is that to convert the Queen Elizabeth class carrier to 'Cat and Trap' configuration would delay service implementation and double the cost of the carriers. He stated that the carriers will now be completed in the STOVL configuration with a ski-jump which will permit continuous carrier availability throughout the life of the ship

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/News-and-Events/Latest-News/2012/May/10/120509-F35B — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djandersonza (talk • contribs) 16:58, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/News-and-Events/Latest-News/2012/May/10/120509-F35B — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djandersonza (talk • contribs) 16:54, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

 * Sortof added already. The QE ships will not be angled-decked.Phd8511 (talk) 17:40, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Needs an update
On crowsnet.Phd8511 (talk) 21:50, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Who wrote this
"A possible replacement for Sea King ASaC7 in the Airborne Early Warning role are the spare FAA Merlins that will not be upgraded to HM2 standard. The spare Merlins could be upgraded to carry the same equipment and Cerberus radar suite as the Sea King ASaC7. However, the limitations of using a helicopter in this role are well documented - endurance is limited, service ceiling is low and vibrations from the rotors may cause distortion. Therefore, two other concepts have also been put forward: a MASC version of the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft and the acquisition of the American E-2 Hawkeye embarked AEW aircraft. The V-22 was seen an attractive option for the original STOVL configuration of CVF, combined the VTOL aspects of a helicopter with the endurance of a fixed wing aircraft. The E-2 is already in service with the French and US Navies. It has advantages over the V-22 again in terms of endurance and ceiling; because its cabin is pressurised, it can operate at greater altitude than the Merlin, extending the range of its radar. However, the E-2 is not compatible with the ski-jump system envisaged for the CVF and would require a reversal back to the CATOBAR system which the US continues to lobby for. The decision on what aircraft will be chosen will be left until the 2015 Strategic defence review"

Without any source? The future AEW Project is Crowsnet.Phd8511 (talk) 19:08, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Royal Marines
24 Commando Engineer Regiment will be removed from the ORBAT not before April 2013. 131 Independent Commando Field Squadron Royal Engineers will instead be under 32 Engineer Regiment, Royal Engineers (Army) and be re-named as 131 Commando Field Squadron Royal Engineers. The Royal Marines 3 Commando Brigade will no longer have 1st Battalion, The Rifles under its operational control. This battalion will move to 160th Brigade under the Army 2020 plan. Phd8511 (talk) 21:41, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

Boat 7 not HMS Ajax
unless you are not reading

https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/Major-projects-report-2014-appendices-and-project-summary-sheets.pdf page 20

http://www.baesystems.com/en-uk/article/hms-ambush-officially-welcomed-into-the-royal-navy

http://www.baesystems.com/en/product/astute-class-submarines-enhanced

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/search/?q=%22astute%22+%22boat+7%22 Phd8511 (talk) 15:22, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Naming dispute
Please see Talk:HMS Ajax (S125). Thank you - the WOLF  child  19:43, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Please get your facts right.Phd8511 (talk) 11:30, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Feel free to join the discussion. Just please try and do so with some civility and maturity. You don't need to be so angry all the time. - the WOLF  child  11:43, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You need to open your mind.Phd8511 (talk) 07:16, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * And you need to grow up. - the WOLF  child  07:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

It is Boat 7 not Ajax
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/third-astute-submarine-formally-handed-over-to-the-royal-navy

http://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2016/march/18/160318-hms-artful

THERE IS NO NAMING DISPUTE.Phd8511 (talk) 10:33, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Why is it that you think screaming in all capital letters is somehow going to make a difference? Again, you need to calm down. And how many different pages are going to post comments about this on? Stop forum shopping, it's not allowed. The discussion on this issue has already been started on the proper page; Talk:HMS Ajax (S125), so go back there and try to discuss this in a calm, mature and rational manner. If you can gain consensus to change the content you want changed, so be it. If not, then you need to drop this and find something more productive to do. As I said before, this name issue will sort itself out sooner or later, so relax. - the WOLF  child  13:45, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

WHAT IS THE USE
of listing active Royal Navy Ships?Phd8511 (talk) 07:15, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

 * It's a completely relevant article to add. (See MOS:SEEALSO) The "see also" section here is not strictly limited to other "future of..." articles. Now, why is it you are always so hostile? Why do you even bother with Wikipedia if it makes you so angry all the time? - the WOLF  child  07:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

I had enough
learn what are facts and information! Consensus be gone.Phd8511 (talk) 07:48, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should learn Policies and guidelines. WP:CONSENSUS is kind of important. So is WP:CIVIL. - the WOLF  child  08:03, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

What about ships to be decommissioned
Nice to have large sections of ships to be built and commissioned but what about ships to be decommissioned?

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/525150/Navy_FOI2016_04694____HMS_Gleaner_to_be_withdrawn_in_2018.pdf

Cantab1985 (talk) 07:49, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

HMS Dreadnought
Should it be in the table?

JessPavarocks (talk) 08:58, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Future of the Royal Navy. 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/20101222022127/http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_191634.pdf to http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/documents/digitalasset/dg_191634.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 13:21, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

V-22 is not fixed wing
and this section is rumours. Removed until definite.

Although nothing has been officially stated, the Royal Navy may have declared interest in the potential procurement of the V-22 Osprey tiltrotor aircraft, for operation in a number of different roles. At the 2016 Farnborough Airshow, Bell Helicopter stated that although there was no specific requirement from the 2015 SDSR, the company was "keeping the Royal Navy informed". The V-22 has been procured as a COD aircraft for the US Navy, with one of its major requirements for the role being the capability of transporting a whole F-35 engine, something that the US Marine Corps also does with its V-22s, and this has been suggested as being attractive for the UK, in addition to other potential requirements (aerial refueling, special forces operations, heavy lift capability).

JessPavarocks (talk) 14:05, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

 * Military Aircraft: Procurement:Written question - HL6058 see http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-question/Lords/2017-03-14/HL6058 speculation. JessPavarocks (talk) 08:42, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Royal Marines
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/royal-marines-to-be-restructured-in-line-with-growing-royal-navy

Will update

JessPavarocks (talk) 01:44, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

But what is the need to be met?
As a non naval person, interested in public procurement, what I look for in vain here is an assessment of what the navy is for = the prediction of future strategic threat or threats which we need to design our navy to meet. Maybe there is no such thing - in which case we need a section saying so. For without it, this article is merely a list of bits and bobs which might be enough, might be too much, might be the wrong thing altogether - how would we know? Unraed (talk) 10:56, 7 July 2017 (UTC)unraed

Hyphens
Apologies if this has been discussed before, but I just wanted to check on the use of hyphens when referring to the name of a class of ships. For example, is it Astute-class or Astute class? Xtrememachineuk (talk) 05:42, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Future of the Royal Navy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/%40dg/%40en/documents/digitalasset/dg_191634.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110811224119/http://www.mbda-systems.com/mediagallery/files/CAMM-family_background.pdf to http://www.mbda-systems.com/mediagallery/files/CAMM-family_background.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:53, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

Speculative order excessive part
At the 2016 Farnborough Airshow, Bell Helicopter stated that although there was no specific requirement from the 2015 SDSR, the company was "keeping the Royal Navy informed". The V-22 has been procured as a COD aircraft for the US Navy, with one of its major requirements for the role being the capability of transporting a whole F-35 engine, something that the US Marine Corps also may be doing, and this has been suggested as being attractive for the UK.

BlueD954 (talk) 07:47, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Article title improvement
I have just come across this article, and I notice there are equivalent articles for other nations' navies with similar titles.

I wonder, could we improve the title of this article? Currently, it does not reflect the uncertainty involved in writing about the future. This article can only be about the 'planned future' rather than the currently unknown 'actual future'. JohnmgKing (talk) 11:07, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 18 January 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Withdrawn. JohnmgKing (talk) 11:55, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

Future of the Royal Navy → Planned future of the Royal Navy – The current title, whilst in line with similar pages on Wikipedia, is not really accurate. It isn't overly precise to clarify that we are talking about the planned future, and we do not have special insight into the actual future. JohnmgKing (talk) 12:18, 18 January 2023 (UTC) The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose - no, we don't have special insight, but the article, as is with current title or the propsed one can and will only do the same thing; post content based on reliable sources. The future can change at any time, and any plans along with it, so there is no need for the title to get needlessly wordy. We should retain the current title per wp:precise. - w o lf  17:37, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

AUKUS Submarines
I've added the new AUKUS submarines to be built in Barrow-in-furness. However, I've had to use some unorthodox editing techniques to make the edit look presentable (e.g. have to manually space out data in the editing area in order to produce space). If any of you could fix my edit and make it look better, that would be appreciated. Cheers Luke848 (talk) 05:22, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Future of the Royal Navy


text:
Capitol South station

Capitol South station is a Washington Metro station in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington, D.C., United States. The island-platformed station was opened on July 1, 1977, and is operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). The station currently provides service for the Blue, Orange, and Silver Lines.

History
The station opened on July 1, 1977. Its opening coincided with the completion of 11.8 mi of rail between National Airport and RFK Stadium and the opening of the Arlington Cemetery, Crystal City, Eastern Market, Farragut West, Federal Center SW, Federal Triangle, Foggy Bottom–GWU, L'Enfant Plaza, McPherson Square, National Airport, Pentagon, Pentagon City, Potomac Avenue, Rosslyn, Smithsonian and Stadium–Armory stations. Orange Line service to the station began upon the line's opening on November 20, 1978.

The station was painted white sometime in the 2000s.

Silver Line service at Capitol South began on July 26, 2014.

Between January 15 to January 21, 2021, this station was closed because of security concerns due to the Inauguration of Joe Biden.

Location
Capitol South is located in the south-central section of the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington, D.C. It is surrounded by a wealth of government offices and buildings. Most importantly, it stands as the closest station to the Capitol Building which holds the Senate and House of Representatives. All three buildings of the Library of Congress are within a quarter-of-a-mile radius of Capitol South as are the Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee headquarters. The Folger Shakespeare Library, the world's largest collection of printed Shakespearean works is a five-minute walk west from the station.

Station layout
There is only one entrance to the station located on the southwestern corner at the intersection of 1st Street SE and C Street SE. A row of three escalators and a staircase brings passengers to the station's mezzanine level, where they may buy tickets from vending machines and pass through the faregates. Once passengers pass through these faregates, a pair of escalators brings passengers onto the platform. There are two elevators for handicapped passengers, one from street level to the mezzanine on the northwestern corner at the intersection of 1st Street SE and D Street SE and another between the mezzanine and platform.

Capitol South station utilises an island platform layout with two tracks, D1 and D2. Eastbound trains to New Carrollton or Downtown Largo use track D1 whilst westbound trains to Vienna, Franconia–Springfield, or Ashburn use track D2.

Notable places nearby

 * United States Capitol
 * Cannon House Office Building
 * Longworth House Office Building
 * Rayburn House Office Building
 * United States Botanic Garden
 * Democratic National Committee
 * Republican National Committee

title: Capitol South station


text:
Eastern Market station

Eastern Market station is a Washington Metro station in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington, D.C., United States. The island platformed station was opened on July 1, 1977, and is operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). The station currently provides service for the Blue, Orange, and Silver Lines. The station is located in Southeast D.C. at Pennsylvania Avenue and 7th Street. It is named after the nearby Eastern Market, a historic public marketplace.

History
Originally, the station was to be named Marine Barracks, after the Washington Marine Barracks located a few blocks south of the station on 8th Street. However, after lobbying from the Capitol Hill Restoration Society, the name was changed to Eastern Market. The station opened on July 1, 1977. Its opening coincided with the completion of 11.8 mi of rail between National Airport and RFK Stadium and the opening of an entire section of line, which included 16 stations in total, between the Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and Stadium–Armory stations. Orange Line service to the station began upon the line's opening on November 20, 1978. Silver Line service at Eastern Market began on July 26, 2014.

title: Eastern Market station


text:
Talk:Corporate governance

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Corporate governance. 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 tag to http://ws1.ad.economics.harvard.edu/faculty/shleifer/files/SurveyCorpGov.pdf
 * Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160515141435/http%3A//www.wbcsd.org/Pages/EDocument/EDocumentDetails.aspx?ID%3D80%26NoSearchContextKey%3Dtrue to http://www.wbcsd.org/Pages/EDocument/EDocumentDetails.aspx?ID=80&NoSearchContextKey=true
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20140625080626/http://www.wbcsd.org/Pages/EDocument/EDocumentDetails.aspx?ID=15610&NoSearchContextKey=true to http://www.wbcsd.org/Pages/EDocument/EDocumentDetails.aspx?ID=15610&NoSearchContextKey=true
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20121223014659/http://fmg.lse.ac.uk/publications/searchdetail.php?pubid=1&wsid=1&wpdid=1308 to http://fmg.lse.ac.uk/publications/searchdetail.php?pubid=1&wsid=1&wpdid=1308
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.thecorporatelibrary.com/power/contents.html

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 08:46, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Corporate governance. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://arquivo.pt/wayback/20160517010633/http://xceo.net/about_us/crawford_dissertation.cfm to http://xceo.net/about_us/crawford_dissertation.cfm

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 10:22, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Corporate governance. 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/20110928135443/http://www.sebi.gov.in/commreport/corpgov.pdf to http://www.sebi.gov.in/commreport/corpgov.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070615105810/http://www.akingump.com/docs/publication/795.pdf to http://www.akingump.com/docs/publication/795.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081111151350/http://www.credit-suisse.com/research/en/ to http://www.credit-suisse.com/research/en/

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) 05:15, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Corporate governance


text:
Potomac Avenue station

Potomac Avenue station is an island-platformed Washington Metro station in the Capitol Hill neighborhood of Washington, D.C., United States. The station was opened on July 1, 1977, and is operated by the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA). The station currently provides service for the Blue, Orange, and Silver Lines. The station serves a dense residential area of Southeast Washington around Potomac Avenue and is located at 14th and G Streets.

History
The station's opening coincided with the completion of 11.8 mi of rail between National Airport and RFK Stadium and the opening of the Arlington Cemetery, Capitol South, Crystal City, Eastern Market, Farragut West, Federal Center SW, Federal Triangle, Foggy Bottom–GWU, L'Enfant Plaza, McPherson Square, National Airport, Pentagon, Pentagon City, Rosslyn, Smithsonian, and Stadium–Armory stations. Orange Line service to the station began upon the line's opening on November 20, 1978. Silver Line service at Potomac Avenue began on July 26, 2014.

On February 1, 2023, 64-year-old transit worker Robert Cunningham was killed and three others were injured in an incident involving a gunman. The attacker started an altercation on a bus, followed a passenger off and shot him in the legs, then went down to the station and shot another person in the before he confronted a woman. A transit worker tried to protect the woman and was shot. The attacker, Isaiah Trotman, was taken into custody and hospitalized. According to police records and his lawyer, Trotman has a criminal history and struggles with mental illness. Trotman was enrolled in a behavioral program but had not been seen for over a week prior to the shooting. He had been charged with several drug-related crimes in Pennsylvania in April 2022 and was awaiting sentencing after a plea deal.

Notable places nearby

 * Congressional Cemetery, 3 blocks northeast on Potomac Avenue

title: Potomac Avenue station


text:
Sorell, Tasmania

Sorell is a town in Tasmania, Australia, north-east of Hobart. It is located on the Tasman Highway at the junction with the Arthur Highway. Sorell is one of Tasmania's oldest towns, being first settled in 1808 as a small farming community and becoming an official township in 1821. At the, Sorell had a population of 1,546, and at the 2011 census, a population of 2,476. and at the 2016 census, a population of 2,907.

Pre-contact
The Mumirimina People of the Oyster Bay Tribe traditionally lived in the Sorell area.

Post-contact
Sorrel was first explored by Europeans by a party from Risdon Cove in 1803. This first exploration was done by Lieutenant Governor Collins, who originally named the area Pitt Water after the current Chancellor of the Exchequer. Sorell was later renamed after Lieutenant Governor William Sorell by Governor Lachlan Macquarie on a tour. Fertile land was discovered, and it was first settled in 1808, but remained an isolated farming community until 1821 when the town was established. Th Sorell Post Office opened on 1 June 1832. Historically, it was a granary for the colony, and became known as the "granary of Australia." It was known as a major town on the route from Hobart to Port Arthur on the Tasman Peninsula. It was the centre of an agricultural area and an important market town. It is now a dormitory town of Hobart, as well as the seat of the Sorell Council, which was established in 1862.

Telegraph service was introduced in 1876, a railway in 1892, a water supply in 1916, and electricity in 1930. In 1872 the Sorell Causeway was opened across Pitt Water, considerably shortening the route to Hobart, which otherwise relied on ferries or a route through Richmond.

Infrastructure
Sorell is served by Sorell School, the oldest continually operating public school in Australia, opened in 1821. It is a co-educational primary and secondary school, serving years K-12. Sorell is served by a Libraries Tasmania library, a Service Tasmania office, and Australia Post Office.

Sorell Plaza shopping centre, built in the mid 2000s, provides a supermarket and other major retail outlets. It was purchased by SCA Property Group, a subsidiary of Woolworths, in 2019. Gateway Shopping Center includes a competing supermarket and small retail.

Sorell falls within the Anglican Parish of South East Tasmania, based at St George's Church, and the Parish of Richmond, with services at St Thomas's Church. Historically, it was also served by the Presbyterian Scots Church, designed by James Blackburn, which is now a private residence.

Sorell has a number of historic buildings, including the Sorell Barracks, constructed to house soldiers during the Black War. These and other historic buildings - including the railway house, the old Sorell Library (now an antiques centre), and the Gordon Highlander Hotel, form a heritage walk. The area also has a local historical society as well as a Freemasons Lodge (Lodge Pembroke).

title: Sorell, Tasmania


text:
Sexton

Sexton may refer to:

Places

 * Sexton, Arkansas, United States, a former community
 * Sexton, Indiana, United States, an unincorporated community
 * Sexton, Iowa, United States, a former town
 * Sexton Glacier, a glacier in Montana, United States
 * Sexton's Burrows, peninsula at the harbour of Watermouth Bay on the North Devon coast, England, United Kingdom

People

 * Sexton (surname), people with the surname Sexton
 * Sexton Hardcastle, nickname for Adam Copeland, a pro wrestler

Arts, entertainment, and media

 * Sexton Blake (band), American band from Portland, Oregon
 * Sexton Blake, a character who appeared in numerous penny dreadfuls

Schools

 * CBS Sexton Street, Christian Brothers Secondary School in Limerick, Ireland
 * JW Sexton High School, Lansing, Michigan, United States

Other uses

 * Sexton (artillery), a self-propelled artillery vehicle of World War II
 * Sexton (office), a church or synagogue officer charged with the maintenance of the church buildings and/or the surrounding graveyard; and ringing of the church bells
 * The Sexton Irish Whiskey, a product of Proximo Spirits
 * Sexton beetle, alternative name for the burying beetle

title: Sexton


text:
Talk:Sexton

Move

 * Support Why is Sexton the re-direct here as opposed to the other way around?? Georgia guy 01:22, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Done. — Nightst a  llion  (?) 07:20, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Maritime Navigation Device

 * Support I see no mention of a sexton, the navigation device used in shipping, on this page or indeed on Wikipedia.
 * I suppose you mean sextant. --gråb whåt you cån (talk) 22:34, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Sexton