text:
Ali Meshkini

Ali Akbar Feiz Aleni (2 December 1921 – 30 July 2007 ), better known as Ali Meshkini (علی مشکینی), was an Iranian cleric and politician.

Life
Meshkini was an Iranian Azerbaijani born in a village near Meshkin Shahr and the Sabalan mountain. He was born as Āli, but preferred the pronunciation Ali during his career. He succeeded Ayatollah Montazeri as chairman of the Iranian Assembly of Experts after the latter was ousted. The Assembly of Experts selects the Supreme Leader of Iran and supervises his activities.

Meshkini chaired the commission that drafted the amendment of 1989 to the 1979 constitution of Iran. Within the commission, he also chaired one of its four committees, the one tasked with drafting amendments that would strengthen the judiciary. As such, he was an influential force in changing the leadership of the judiciary from a triumvirate, the Supreme Judicial Council, to an individual in 1989.

He was the author of many books on Islamic jurisprudence and general issues of Islam. Mohammadi Reyshahri, Iran's minister of intelligence from 1984 to 1989, was Meshkini's son-in-law.

Meshkini was the chair of the Society of Seminary Teachers of Qom and also served as Friday prayer leader in Qom. Despite his old age and poor health, he became a candidate for re-election in 2006 Assembly of Experts elections.

Death
Meshkini died on 30 July 2007 at 16:30 local time, at Tehran Hospital, of respiratory and kidney failure.

Quotes and political views
Meshkini was known for his unyielding support of the likes of Ahmadinejad and the hardline politicians of Iran. He regarded the Iranian reformist movement "as a complete waste of time" and on several occasions called for the resignation of the likes of Mohammad Khatami.

After the election of Ahmadinejad, Meshkini spoke at a Friday prayer in Ardebil saying: "As the Supreme Leader of The Assembly of Experts of the Islamic Republic of Iran, it gives me great pleasure to announce that Dr. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is our new President. From this moment onwards, we will follow his words (religiously). Our people in Azerbaijan will follow him alongside the Persians in the same spirit of brotherhood that we have kept for decades ... as Shia's".

After the Israel-Lebanon conflict, Meshkini has been quoted to say that "victory of the Lebanese Hizbollah over the Zionist regime was a divine phenomenon."

Referring to US occupation of Iraq, Meshkini said: "A bully has embarked on a military expedition and has attacked another bully in the midst of Islamic countries ... Look at what they have done and what they are doing under the pretext of freedom ... The mask of deception has been lifted from the face of Bush and Blair. It has become clear that they are both blood-sucking Hitlers."

title: Ali Meshkini


text:
Frank Russell, 2nd Earl Russell

John Francis Stanley Russell, 2nd Earl Russell, known as Frank Russell (12 August 1865 – 3 March 1931), was a British nobleman, barrister and politician, the elder brother of the philosopher Bertrand Russell, and the grandson of John Russell, 1st Earl Russell, who was twice prime minister of Britain. The elder son of Viscount and Viscountess Amberley, Russell became well-known for his marital woes, and was convicted of bigamy before the House of Lords in 1901, the last peer to be convicted of an offence in a trial by the Lords before that privilege of peerage was abolished in 1948.

Russell was raised by his paternal grandparents after his unconventional parents both died young. He was discontented living with his grandparents, but enjoyed four happy years at Winchester College. His academic education came to a sudden end when he was sent down from Balliol College, Oxford, probably because authorities there had suspicions concerning the nature of his relationship with the future poet Lionel Johnson, and he always bitterly resented his treatment by Oxford. After spending time in the United States, he married the first of his three wives, Mabel Edith Scott, in 1890. The two quickly separated, and the next several years saw acrimonious litigation in the courts, but the restrictive English laws of the time meant there was no divorce. Russell was elected to the London County Council in 1895, and served there until 1904. In 1899, he accompanied the woman who would become his second wife, Mollie Somerville, to Nevada, where each obtained a divorce, and they married, then returned to Britain to live as husband and wife. Russell was the first celebrity to get a Nevada divorce, but it was not recognised by English law, and in June 1901, he was arrested for bigamy. He pleaded guilty before the House of Lords, and served three months in Holloway, afterwards marrying Mollie according to English law. He gained a free pardon for the offence in 1911.

Beginning in 1902 Russell campaigned for divorce law reform, using his hereditary seat as a peer in the House of Lords to advocate this, but had little success. He was also a campaigner for motorists' rights, often taking briefs to defend them after being called to the bar in 1905, and at one time had the registration number plate A 1. His second marriage ended after he fell in love with the novelist Elizabeth von Arnim in 1914, and he married von Arnim in 1916. The couple soon separated, though they did not divorce, and Elizabeth caricatured him in her novel Vera, to his anger. Frank Russell aided his brother Bertrand when he was imprisoned for anti-war activities in 1918. Increasingly aligned with the Labour Party, Russell was given junior office in the second MacDonald government in 1929, but his ministerial career was cut short by his death in 1931. Despite his achievements, Frank Russell is obscure compared to his brother and grandfather, and his marital difficulties led to his being dubbed the "Wicked Earl".

Early life
John Francis Stanley Russell was born on 12 August 1865 at Alderley Park in Cheshire. He was the first child of John Russell, Viscount Amberley, the eldest son of John Russell, 1st Earl Russell. The earl twice served as prime minister of Britain, and earlier in his career, had been an architect of the Reform Act 1832. In 1864, Amberley married Katherine Louisa Stanley, younger daughter of Edward Stanley, 2nd Baron Stanley of Alderley, uniting two prominent Whig families. Alderley Park was the seat of the Stanley family.

Unconventional for their time, the Amberleys believed in birth control, feminism, political reforms then considered radical (including votes for women and the working classes) and free love, and lived according to their ideals. For example, feeling it unfair that Douglas Spalding, the tutor of their son Frank, should remain celibate, the viscountess invited Spalding to share her bed, with the approval of her husband. The Amberleys had two children after Frank, Rachel (born 1868) and Bertrand (born 1872). The family lived at Rodborough house (near Stroud), which belonged to the viscount's father, and then at Ravenscroft Hall, near Trellech, where Frank was allowed to do much as he pleased, including roaming the countryside. His parents had lost religious faith and Frank was not called upon to attend church. By age eight, he had read, for pleasure, the complete works of Sir Walter Scott, and began a lifelong love of science and engineering by attending the Royal Society's lectures for children.

In December 1873, the family journeyed to Italy; during the return the following May, Frank came down with diphtheria. He was nursed by his mother, and recovered, but in June both she and Rachel fell ill with the disease. The viscountess died on 28 June and her daughter five days later, dealing the viscount a blow from which he never really recovered. He died on 9 January 1876 from pneumonia. The viscount's will nominated T. J. Sanderson, a friend from his university days, and Spalding as co-guardians of Frank and Bertrand. The earl and his wife, Frances Russell, Countess Russell (often referred to as Lady John Russell) might have accepted Sanderson, even though he was (like Spalding) an atheist, but Spalding was of a lower social class and was not acceptable, especially once they had the opportunity to read the Amberleys' surviving papers and learnt the nature of his relationship with the viscountess. The Earl Russell and Lady John brought suit in the Court of Chancery, and Sanderson and Spalding chose not to fight the suit. Frank and Bertrand were placed in the custody of their paternal grandparents, with two of the Russells' adult children, Rollo and Agatha, also co-guardians.

This took Frank from what he later called the "free air of Ravenscroft" where he could wander as he wished, to his grandparents' home at Pembroke House, where he was closely supervised and confined to the grounds. He found the atmosphere stifling – no subject considered vulgar could be mentioned, and he was required to go to church and have religious education. The earl was by then past 80, two decades older than his wife, and spent many of his waking hours reading: the house was dominated by Lady John, who employed a strict moral code in raising the boys. Frank was not allowed much time alone with Bertrand, as he was believed a bad influence on his younger brother, and Frank Russell wrote of Bertrand, "Till he went to Cambridge he was an unendurable little prig." Annabel Huth Jackson, a friend of both boys, deemed Pembroke House, "an unsuitable place... for children to be brought up in." George Bernard Shaw, a half-century later, wrote to Frank of his incredulity that the boy had not murdered his Uncle Rollo and burned the place down.

Education
Frank was sent to Cheam as a boarder in 1876. He was happier at school than he had been at Pembroke Lodge. In his memoirs he remembered his indignation at being addressed by his father's courtesy title, Viscount Amberley, which was now his as heir apparent to the earldom. He was still at Cheam when in 1878, his grandfather died, making Frank the 2nd Earl Russell.

Frank then attended Winchester College, from 1879 to 1883. Winchester became his spiritual home, and he expressed his reverence for the school in his autobiography. George Santayana, who would be a long-time friend of Frank Russell, described Winchester as "the only place he loved and the only place he was loved". Frank briefly became pious while at Winchester, going so far as to be confirmed by the Bishop of Winchester in November 1880. The orphaned earl was taken under the wing of his housemaster, the Revd George Richardson, and his wife Sarah. It was Sarah Richardson that Santayana was thinking of in making his statement; she later defended Frank Russell as his marital problems filled the daily papers, and he was devastated by her death in 1909. At Winchester, Frank spent four of his happiest years and acquired many of the friends he would have in adult life. From about the time Frank began at Winchester, Frank and Bertrand began to spend time with their maternal grandmother, Henrietta Stanley, Baroness Stanley of Alderley, whom they came to like greatly as far less priggish than Lady John. Frank came to find Lady Stanley's London residence at 40Dover Street a refuge from Pembroke House.

It was at Winchester that he befriended the future poet and critic Lionel Johnson, whom he would describe as "the greatest influence of my life at Winchester". They were friends in Russell's final term at Winchester, and Johnson visited Pembroke House, but the friendship did not truly blossom until Russell went up to Balliol College, Oxford, in 1883. The pair wrote long, earnest letters to each other in which they explored spiritual matters and questions of sin and morality. In 1919 Russell anonymously published Johnson's side of the correspondence as Some Winchester Letters of Lionel Johnson.

At Balliol, Russell read classics. The scholar of classical Greek literature Benjamin Jowett was then Master of Balliol and also Vice-Chancellor of Oxford. Russell found the university stimulating, welcoming the "untrammelled and unfettered discussions on everything in heaven and earth". He wrote to Johnson at Winchester, and after the correspondence was forbidden by Johnson's father, routed his letters through fellow undergraduate Charles Sayle. Russell joined university clubs and other groups, and made satisfactory academic progress through much of his first two years, but his Oxford career was dramatically cut short when in May 1885, as Russell related it in his memoirs, he was sent down by Jowett for supposedly writing a "scandalous" letter to another male undergraduate. Russell denied the charges but was refused a formal inquiry. Incensed at having been falsely accused, he lost his temper with Jowett, telling him he was no gentleman, and left the college. Even after a year, Jowett refused Russell re-admission to Balliol, and refused the necessary recommendation to allow Russell to enter a Cambridge college.

The veracity of Russell's account of his sending-down is open to question; Santayana deemed it a fabrication, based on what Russell had privately told him, but at the core of it was the nature of Russell's relationship with Johnson. In April 1885, Johnson, who had recently turned 18 but appeared younger, stayed overnight in Russell's rooms after missing the last train to London, and, according to Santayana, the authorities had seen the two together and declared Johnson too young to be Russell's "natural friend". Nevertheless, Santayana wrote that the relations between Russell and Johnson had not been "in the least erotic or even playful". In July 1885, two months after Russell was sent down, Johnson's father enquired of Jowett whether Russell was a suitable companion for Lionel, and was told he was not, and that further acquaintance between the two should be forbidden. Russell and Jowett reconciled to some extent, and the master was present at the earl's first wedding in 1890. Russell, though, missed Jowett's funeral in 1893, alleging rheumatism, and remained bitter about the end of his Oxford career for the rest of his life. Santayana stated that any "unnatural desires" on Russell's part did not last, given that he turned out "a perfectly normal pronounced polygamous male".

Early adulthood
After his sending-down from Oxford, Russell took a year's leasehold on a small house in the village of Hampton, to which his guardians (he was not yet 21 years old, the age of majority at the time) reluctantly consented on condition a tutor of their choice live with him. Although the monotony of life in the London suburbs was varied by guests such as Oscar Wilde, Russell was resentful at how he had been treated at Oxford and in October 1885, took ship for the United States. He was generally impressed with America, but disliked New York City. On his trip, he first met Santayana, then an undergraduate at Harvard College; he was the first Englishman Santayana had ever met. Russell also met Walt Whitman on his trip across America and back, and visited the president, Grover Cleveland at the White House.

Russell attained his majority in August 1886, and came into his inheritance, allowing him to live on a grander scale. He was not idle, involving himself with an electrical contracting company, a field he had experimented in since his boyhood. This was the first of many commercial enterprises in which he would participate. Like Russell's commercial career as a whole, it had mixed success, ceasing to trade within three years. An expensive lifestyle and fees from the many court actions he was involved in would lead him to describe himself as bankrupt by 1921, and when Frank died ten years later, Bertrand said he had inherited a title from his brother but little else.

First marriage
Although Russell was not wealthy by the standards of British nobility, what he did have, including his title, was enough to make him the target of parents seeking suitable matches for their daughters. Among these were Maria Selina (Lina) Elizabeth, Lady Scott, who sought a suitable match for her daughter, Mabel Edith Scott, and called on Russell in 1889. Santayana recalled that Russell was at first more interested in Selina Scott, a divorcée, than her daughter and theorised that the fact that Russell's mother died when he was a child allowed Lady Scott to overwhelm Russell and persuade him that the way to perpetuate their friendship was for him to marry her daughter.

Frank and Mabel Russell married on 6 February 1890. Three months later, the two separated, Mabel alleging physical and mental cruelty. Santayana later wrote, "Russell as a husband, Russell in the domestic sphere, was simply impossible: excessively virtuous and incredibly tyrannical. He didn't allow her enough money or enough liberty. He was punctilious and unforgiving about hours, about truth-telling, about debts. He objected to her friends, her clothes, and borrowed jewels. Moreover, in their intimate relations he was exacting and annoying. She soon hated and feared him."

Late in 1890, Mabel sued unsuccessfully to judicially separate from him, accusing him in the process of "immoral behaviour" with another university friend, Herbert Roberts, head mathematics tutor at Bath College. The allegations of the trial filled the newspapers. and a jury found in Frank Russell's favour. At the time, the only valid ground for divorce was adultery, although a woman alleging it would also have to show some other offence, such as desertion. With the approval of their families, Frank and Mabel Russell continued to live apart, a tacitly agreed relationship that meant Mabel was unlikely to be able to show desertion. Although there were fitful efforts at reconciliation thereafter, the parties remained apart. In 1892, Russell opened his own firm of electrical engineers, Russell & Co. He began to be seen more in the House of Lords, in September 1893 being one of forty peers who supported the unsuccessful Irish Home Rule bill. Despite the lull in the Russell matrimonial litigation, detectives were active for both sides, hoping to find evidence of adultery which would allow their employer advantage in the courts. By 1894, Frank Russell, as he told his brother Bertrand, was three years into an affair with Mary Morris, a clerk at his electrical works.

Having failed to convince the jury, Mabel subsequently attempted to obtain a separation by indirect means, suing for restitution of conjugal rights in 1894. Under the Matrimonial Causes Act 1884, failure to comply with an order of restitution of conjugal rights served to establish desertion, which gave the other spouse the right to an immediate decree of judicial separation, and, if coupled with the husband's adultery, allowed the wife to obtain a divorce. Such an action also allowed a petitioning wife to seek an allowance. In general, at the time in England, divorces were available only when the petitioning spouse had not offended against the marriage and the other spouse had. The earl countersued on the ground that her accusations since 1891 amounted to legal cruelty. A jury found for Frank Russell in both cases in 1895, but Mabel appealed and the verdict was overturned in the Court of Appeal. The case went all the way to the House of Lords, and the Law Lords affirmed the appeals court decision. This denied them both satisfaction, binding the definition of legal cruelty to physical violence and making Russell v. Russell a case of legal significance for the next seventy years, until divorce law reform eliminated cruelty as a statutory ground for divorce. Another trial took place in 1897 after Lady Scott published accusations against Russell; she was convicted of criminal libel and sentenced to eight months in prison, but Russell was hissed at by the crowds surrounding the Old Bailey after the sentencing, and called the "Wicked Earl".

The Local Government Act 1894 created district and parish councils. In December of that year Russell successfully stood for Cookham Parish Council, and was made chairman, and ex officio a guardian of the poor. He worked to change outdated practices in the workhouse, and to see that roads and rights of way were maintained. In February 1895, he was elected to London County Council (LCC) for Newington West as a Progressive. He aligned himself with the left, joining the Reform Club in 1894, a bastion of Liberalism. He stood unsuccessfully for Hammersmith at the next election, in March 1898, but was made an alderman, continuing him on the LCC, where he remained through 1904.

Nevada divorce

Russell became infatuated with Marion (known as Mollie) Somerville, who was at that time married to George Somerville, with whom Russell had become friendly during the campaign in Hammersmith. The twice-married daughter of a master shoemaker from Ireland, Mollie Somerville had three children and was secretary of the Hammersmith Women's Liberal Association. She campaigned for Russell; the two became close and were seen together at several events. When she fell ill early in 1899, Russell let her use one of his residences, and the two went away together, travelling via France to America. Russell planned to use laxer American divorce laws to end his marriage to Mabel Russell.

Russell and Mollie Somerville journeyed to Chicago, but learned that local laws had recently been tightened, and required a year's residence, with other restrictive provisions. North Dakota and Arizona Territory were also considered, and in the latter case visited, but also required living there a year. Nevada, with only a six-month requirement, was more practical. They settled in Glenbrook, on Lake Tahoe, for the winter of 1899–1900. On 14 April 1900 both Russell and Somerville were granted divorces. Their marriage ceremony in Reno before Judge Benjamin Franklin Curler took place on 15 April. They honeymooned on the way to America's East Coast, including at Denver's Brown Palace Hotel, where Russell told a reporter that a charge of bigamy would never stick. The couple returned to Britain the following month.

Russell knew such a divorce was invalid under English law, which refused to recognise foreign divorces obtained by British subjects; his intent was to allow Mabel Russell to obtain a divorce on the grounds of bigamy following adultery, which would also free him to marry again: he deposited £5,000 that would go to her upon a divorce to ensure her cooperation.

Beginning when Russell wired news of his Nevada marriage to appear as a notice in The Times, there was considerable press interest on both sides of the Atlantic in what had occurred. Both Mabel Russell and George Somerville filed for divorce, and each gained them uncontested, subject to the usual waiting period before the decrees became absolute. Russell, on his return, took his seat on the LCC as if nothing had occurred. There was, initially, no other official reaction, society accepted them as a married couple, and Mollie appeared on the 1901 census as "Mollie Russell".

Trial before the Lords
Russell was arrested on a charge of bigamy as he stepped from a train at Waterloo Station on 17 June 1901. Why an action was brought for this rarely prosecuted crime is uncertain. Russell believed that he was prosecuted when, as he related, another nobleman who had acted similarly but was a favourite at Court was not, because he was "an unbeliever and a radical". The Russell family always believed that the earl was prosecuted at the behest of the new king, Edward VII, who had a chequered past and several mistresses while on the throne, to boost his own reputation for morality.

Russell was bailed, and following a hearing at Bow Street Magistrates' Court on 22 June, he was indicted for bigamy by a grand jury and committed for trial. Until the privilege was abolished in 1948, peers and peeresses indicted for treason or felony were tried before the House of Lords, a majority vote deciding the matter. Russell could not have waived trial there had he wanted to, and the verdict of the House of Lords could not be appealed. Such trials were rare: Russell's trial was the first since that of Lord Cardigan, who was acquitted on a charge of duelling in 1841, the previous trial having been in 1776, and only one trial, resulting in the acquittal of Lord de Clifford for manslaughter in 1935, followed before the abolition.

Russell's trial before the House of Lords took place in the Royal Gallery of the Houses of Parliament on 18 July 1901, with some two hundred peers present, including Lord Salisbury, the prime minister. The lords spiritual who were among Russell's judges were William Maclagan, the Archbishop of York and Randall Davidson, the Bishop of Winchester (later Archbishop of Canterbury). Lord Halsbury, the lord chancellor, presided under the king's commission as lord high steward. Also present were Mollie Russell, Judge Curler, and the English clergyman who had performed Russell's first marriage. The assembled peers and judges in their robes were deemed "most picturesque" by The New York Times, which described a "magnificent blaze of color" from the robes of the assembled peers and judges. All the Lords of Appeal were present to advise the peers on any legal questions that arose, as were eleven other judges. This required the suspension of the courts over which they would have presided that day, and some newspapers questioned the cost of the spectacle, which included the expense of bringing over Curler from Nevada and housing him for two months.

When Russell's trial began on 18 July, he was called upon to plead guilty or not guilty, but his counsel interposed, and argued that because the wedding had taken place in America, Russell had not violated the bigamy statute. Lord Halsbury dismissed the point without even requiring the prosecution to respond. Russell then pleaded guilty, and made a statement defending his conduct and stating that no one had been injured thereby, and the lords retired to consider their verdict. The House of Lords had the power to disqualify Russell from sitting there in future unless pardoned, but it did not. On the recommendation of Lord Halsbury, Russell was sentenced to three months at Holloway Prison. He wrote in his memoirs that the privilege of peers cost him dearly, as he probably would have been sentenced to a token day in prison at the Old Bailey had he been a commoner. Instead, a great sum of money and considerable effort had been expended to provide him with a trial before the Lords, "and it was necessary that the sentence should bear some relation to the fuss made about it." In anticipation of his arrival, a room for favoured prisoners, previously occupied by the journalist W. T. Stead and by some of the Jameson raiders, had been prepared for him, where he could have his own food and wine.

Russell spent part of his time in prison peppering the home secretary, Charles Ritchie, with petitions for his early release (which he did not gain) and for better conditions and more privileges (which, mostly, he received). He read through the works of Shakespeare, twice, and wrote his first book, Lay Sermons, treating religious and ethical questions from his perspective as an agnostic. His friend, Santayana, was unimpressed with the book, describing it as "the only regrettable consequence" of Russell's incarceration. He was released on 17 October 1901, eleven days before his divorce by Mabel Russell became absolute (George Somerville's divorce of Mollie had become absolute on 24 June). Frank Russell married Mollie according to English law on 31 October 1901.

Frank Russell persisted in his view that he had done nothing wrong. In 1911 he approached the prime minister, H. H. Asquith, asking for a free pardon, and when asked why he deserved it, told Asquith, "Well, the official reason is that I have been a good citizen, for ten years since the offence, and that my conduct is free from any reproach; but if you ask me for the real reason I should say because the conviction was a piece of hypocritical tosh." A free pardon was duly issued by the home secretary, Winston Churchill.

Second marriage

Released from prison, Russell attempted to use his place in the House of Lords to reform the law of divorce. In 1902 he introduced legislation to allow divorce based on cruelty, lunacy, three years separation, or one year if both parties consented. Their lordships, led by Lord Halsbury, immediately voted down the bill, rather than (as was usual with bills that were not to be passed) postponing consideration of it. Russell tried again in 1903, with an identical outcome. Attempts in 1905 and 1908 were treated more gently by the Lords, which postponed consideration rather than rejecting them outright. Russell wrote of his proposals in his second book, Divorce (1912), and a royal commission that year recommended reforms, which were in fact slow in coming: it was not until after the First World War that divorce came within reach of those not wealthy, by allowing petitions to be heard at local assizes rather than in London, and no-fault divorce was not enacted until 1969.

Both because he had become interested in law and because he was in need of income, in 1899 Russell was admitted to Gray's Inn as a student for the Bar. His studies were interrupted by his time in Nevada and in Holloway, but no action was taken against him for his conviction of felony. He was called to the Bar in 1905, and practised for about five years.

Russell was an early motorist and an active member of the RAC (then the Automobile Club of Great Britain and Northern Ireland). He was an outspoken defender of motorists' rights. He is famed for having the registration A 1. This is frequently reported as being the first number plate issued in Britain, but was most likely not – it was, however, the first registration issued by the London County Council (LCC), in 1903. Russell was still a member of the LCC, and awarded the registration to himself. The number plate made him a target for the police, and after five speeding tickets and threats to suspend his licence from magistrates, he sold car and plate in 1906. He continued working for motorists' rights as a barrister, taking large numbers of briefs for motoring offences.

The marriage with Mollie was generally a success in its early years; according to Russell's biographer, Ruth Derham, she "genuinely loved him, understood that he must be master in his own house... her outside interests provided them both with a degree of independence." High among these was women's suffrage: both spouses spoke at public meetings in favour of votes for women, and Mollie challenged Asquith to provide more than just a "vague promise" of the vote. Russell disapproved of militant suffragists such as Emmeline and Christabel Pankhurst, but conceded that their tactics were effective.

Third marriage; First World War years
In 1909 Russell met the woman who would become his third wife, the novelist Elizabeth von Arnim ( Mary Annette Beauchamp), widow of Count Henning August von Arnim-Schlagenthin, by whom she had five children. The widowed von Arnim had an affair with H. G. Wells, and ended her relationship with Wells after learning that he had another lover. At the same time, Frank and Mollie Russell had quarrelled and were growing apart, and he and Elizabeth von Arnim moved in the same literary circles. They fell in love in a visit he paid her, without Mollie, over the New Year of 1914. Mollie Russell petitioned for restoration of conjugal rights but once convinced Frank would not return, accepted an allowance for life, which Bertrand continued to pay after Frank's death in 1931, permitting her to live a life of leisure. In exchange, she sued for divorce on the grounds of desertion and adultery, and the suit was not contested.

Frank and Elizabeth Russell married on 11 February 1916. The marriage failed quickly and acrimoniously, and she fled for America after only six months of marriage, Frank's temper being a major factor. Like each of Frank Russell's marriages, there were no children born of it. It has been suggested that the earl was addicted to cocaine, though Derham found this to be unlikely and contended that the addiction which helped destroy the marriage was Frank's love of gambling at bridge. Two weeks before his death in 1931 Frank Russell wrote to Santayana that he had received two great shocks in his life, when Jowett sent him down from Oxford, and "when Elizabeth left me I went completely dead and have never come alive again." An attempted reconciliation failed in 1919. They never divorced. Von Arnim famously caricatured Russell in her 1921 novel Vera, a depiction that greatly angered him, and when Elizabeth heard of her husband's death in 1931 she said she was "never happier in her life".

Russell had continued to take liberal stances in the House of Lords, strongly supporting the Parliament Act 1911, which diminished its powers, and in December 1912 joined the Fabian Society, the first peer to do so. Nevertheless, he did not align himself with the fledgling Labour Party, and in January 1913, decried the "dangerous immunity" of trade unions. Russell supported British involvement in the First World War once it started, but sympathised with his brother Bertrand's anti-war views. Both opposed conscription, and Frank was one of only two peers to speak in opposition in the Lords when Asquith brought in conscription in 1916.

Bertrand's anti-war activities were considerable, despite Frank urging caution on him; he was successfully prosecuted under the Defence of the Realm Act, banned from areas of the country, sacked from his position as lecturer at Trinity College, Cambridge, and denied a passport to go to America to take up a position at Harvard. By late 1917, though, Bertrand had become disillusioned with his cause and Frank met with General George Cockerill of the War Office, resulting in agreement within the government on 17 January 1918 that the banning order should be lifted. The same day, though, Bertrand published an article, "The German Peace Offer" in The Tribunal, causing the government to rescind the agreement, and in February he was prosecuted and sentenced to six months in prison, a sentence he began in May after an appeal failed. He was allowed, though, to serve his sentence at Brixton Prison, with greater privileges than the magistrate would have given him. In a 1959 BBC interview Bertrand attributed this to Frank's influence over the home secretary, Sir George Cave, though Bertrand's biographer, Ray Monk, believed that Bertrand was confusing the efforts to get him these privileges with Frank's later efforts to secure a remission, which bore fruit when Bertrand was released six weeks early. While Bertrand was in prison, Frank visited him, and with Bertrand limited to one outgoing letter per week, received lengthy letters from his brother containing messages to be given to other people.

Labour politician and death (1921–1931)
Elizabeth's publication of Vera led to threats from Russell's solicitor, but only served to increase interest in the book. Bertrand and Santayana considered the depiction cruel but Santayana admitted it was accurate in detail. The earl carried a copy of it around with him, and attempted to refute individual passages from it to those willing to listen. Russell's more substantial response was to write his memoirs, My Life and Adventures, published in 1923, in which Elizabeth is never mentioned. The book was well received; most reviewers deemed it entertaining.

From the early 1920s Russell was more commonly seen in the House of Lords. He fully embraced the Labour Party when it took office for the first time under Ramsay MacDonald in 1924. He was given no office in that short-lived government, possibly because of his past marital problems. By the time Labour was in government again, in 1929, Russell had proved his worth to the Labour Party both in debate – there were then very few Labour peers – and through service in committee and on royal commissions. Russell hoped to be Lord President of the Council or Leader of the House of Lords, but these posts went to Lord Parmoor. Russell was made Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Transport, Herbert Morrison, a post for which his considerable experience with automobiles qualified him.

Russell's main accomplishment in the Transport position was steering the Road Traffic Act 1930 through the House of Lords. This abolished the 20 mph speed limit that had been in place for motor cars since 1893, but also required compulsory insurance and set a minimum driving age, as well as legislating against dangerous driving. Having served on the Royal Commission on Lunacy, Russell introduced what became the Mental Treatment Act 1930, allowing voluntary admission to psychiatric facilities and permitting a local authority to establish mental health outpatient clinics.

Russell was promoted to Under-Secretary of State for India under William Wedgwood Benn. He began his tenure by stating that Indian independence was "at this moment impossible", something which although quickly retracted, Nehru concluded was the true attitude of the British government. He worked hard to overcome the gaffe, and was a delegate to the First Round Table Conference (1930–1931). As one of Labour's few representatives in the Lords, he was often called upon to steer legislation having nothing to do with his portfolio. In February 1931, he took a holiday on the Riviera, where he suffered from influenza. Still recovering from this, he died at his hotel in Marseilles on 3 March 1931, the day before he was supposed to depart for home. He was cremated there, and his ashes were scattered in the gardens of his former home, Telegraph House.

The prime minister, MacDonald, stated, "He was one of the most charming men I have ever met and behind his charm of manner was a really very great intelligence. He was a most valuable colleague both in making preparations for the round-table conference and in helping us to study and master the problems involved, and then in making the conference a success." Benn regretted Russell's death "not only because it deprives the India office of a distinguished political figure but because of the personal loss of a brilliant, kindly friend".

Assessment
Russell stated of himself: "I have always been a fighter from the time when I fought first my Uncle Rollo, then Benjamin Jowett, and then for six awful years Mabel Edith. It is my misfortune and not my fault that practically the whole of my life has been chronicled in detail in the daily Press. Few people can abhor and resent publicity in what has to do with the private life more than I do, and the result, of course, is to give the public a curiously distorted view of one's character and tastes."

Annabel Jackson remembered Russell as a child as Bertrand's "beautiful and gifted elder brother". Santayana wrote that while Lionel Johnson could be judged by his poems, "poor Russell had only his ruins to display and to be judged by most unjustly, ruins of passions that had hounded him through life like a series of nightmares, and had made the gossips call him 'The Wicked Earl'." To Derham, Russell "was not a evil man. Neither by modern standards was he 'wicked'. Throughout his life, his strong identification with his youthful self, misunderstood, persecuted, and wronged, led him to seek reforms that benefited many an underdog, but also made him 'suspect the satisfied', 'distrust the majority', impatient with acquaintance and unsuccessful in love." Ann Holmes, in her chapter on the Russell divorce cases, stated that in late Victorian England, "marital fidelity was not as important as the appearance of a stable marriage and happy home; scandal was more shameful than adultery. It was a rule painfully learned by the second Earl Russell and his wife... Russell was a martyr in that he chose to defend himself publicly when he could have addressed his marital problems in private. At the very least, he could have agreed to negotiate a monetary settlement... He and his family paid a high price for his stubborn refusal to relent."

The divorce suits between Frank and Mabel Russell had historic significance. Jack Harpster in his article on Russell's Nevada divorce, noted, "John Francis Stanley Russell's personal problems found expression in political activism, specifically in his effort to change England's outdated divorce statutes. Although he saw no progress during his lifetime..." Gail Savage, in her journal article on Russell's divorce law advocacy, stated, "Frank Russell's vulnerability to the charms of a pretty widow and her pretty daughter had devastating consequences for his personal life. But the trajectory of Frank Russell's personal misfortunes and the impetus of his personality intersected a larger-scale social and cultural dynamic that involved a refiguring of the ways in which we understand gender relations and marriage." The House of Lords' decision in Russell v. Russell remained a leading case in divorce law for decades, establishing several legal precedents. The first celebrity to get a Nevada divorce, Russell's efforts there first drew attention to that state as a place where one could get an easier divorce than at home, though the divorce of Laura and William E. Corey (1906) and the establishment of an office in Nevada (1907) and subsequent promotion of the state by the New York lawyer, William H. Schnitzer, were greater factors in making Nevada a centre for divorces.

Peter Bartrip concluded his biographical sketch of Russell, "It is hard to warm to Frank but easier to excuse, or at least explain, his character in terms of genetic inheritance, peculiar upbringing and the childhood tragedies that cost him most of his immediate family. The adult who emerged was a mass of contradiction: the socialist aristocrat who was proud of his status yet contemptuous of social convention; the agnostic who wrote sermons; the protector of the oppressed who tyrannized servants; the champion of women's rights who bullied his wives; the opponent of bad driving who briefly made a career of defending bad drivers. In the end he will be remembered less for his achievements and more for his marital history, scandals and association with those family members, notably his grandfather, brother and third wife, whose achievements far outshone his own."

Publications

 * Lay Sermons (1902)
 * Divorce (1912)
 * Some Winchester Letters of Lionel Johnson (1919)
 * My Life and Adventures (1923)

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

title: Frank Russell, 2nd Earl Russell


text:
Talk:Optimus Prime (Transformers)

Previously redirected to: Talk:Optimus Prime

title: Talk:Optimus Prime (Transformers)


text:
Talk:List of monastic houses in Scotland

Non christian?
So far all the abbeys listed here are christian, but Scotland does have the Samye Ling tibetan buddhist monastery in Langholm in the borders, which is fairly famous and of decent size and standing. I can't see much reason not to list it here. Does anyone object? -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 15:08, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

I see no problem - there is nothing say that the page is intended to, or should relate exclusively to christian establishments.

In the England Abbeys list I have included a Buddhist meditation centre which was formerly a Priory - so this would merely be an extension of available relevant data.

--JohnArmagh 20:35, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

 * Super. John, do you intend to undertake a programme of writing articles for all these myriad institutions (heck, even listing them is a major effort)?  I have some photos of the abbeys at Dryburgh, Melrose, and Jedburgh which I could upload, and I could be persuaded to take one of Inchmahome, but writing the corresponding articles is rather low on my to-do list, as writing Cambuskenneth Abbey mostly exhausted my patience. -- Finlay McWalter |  Talk 21:27, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

White Castle / Nunraw / Sancta Maria Abbey
The current version of the List is very impressive! I would like some advice on how to separate the content of White Castle, East Lothian. White Castle was and is a hill fort. Sancta Maria Abbey is a Cistercian monastery. Nunraw Abbey is a Cistercian guesthouse and conference centre, not far from Sancta Maria. I have been there and know some of the people there. I would like to keep the White Castle article as an article on the hillfort, and I have enough material to do it. I would also like to have two separate articles on the two buildings. Sancta Maria is a modern building. Nunraw Abbey is a historic house. Can someone help, please? Renata (talk) 19:53, 1 July 2008 (UTC)

Orkney
i) why is the Brough of Deerness not included ? ii) what's about Golgotha monastery (Transalpine Redemptorists) on Papa Stronsay ?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.54.143.39 (talk) 19:10, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Geographical subdivisions
What is the basis for the current list of geographical subdivisions? Some appear to relate to traditional counties and others to modern council areas. For instance, Lanarkshire is listed, as well as City of Glasgow and South Lanarkshire, both of which overlap extensively with Lanarkshire. Aberdeenshire is linked to Aberdeenshire (traditional), but others link to modern council areas like Perth and Kinross, Argyll and Bute. Also, Highland, Fife, etc are no longer 'regions', as the Regions of Scotland were abolished in 1996. Would anyone object if I rearranged under purely modern council areas? Thanks, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 15:46, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

 * This is a tough call. Unlike Ireland, where the traditional counties have been retained, Scotland, like England (in some respects moreso) has undergone continual change in adminstrative districts - and there is nothing to suggest that administrative tinkering will not continue in the future - meaning that each administrative change requires a reorganisation of the list if it is to be based on current boundaries.  I tried to adhere to a scheme which required least reorganising but retained some relationship to both historical and contemporary divisions and tended to settle on the layout of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Scotland_Administrative_Map_2009.png.  Even so I am not entirely satisfied with it. JohnArmagh (talk) 10:40, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Layout and scope
I've been watching the development of this article since before it's name change from Religious houses of Scotland which I had changed it to. John Armagh has put in a power of work in developing the separate UK articles and I doff my hat to him. I've also been working on an article in my own name-space—although not fo a bit—which I intended to replace the original one. PLease see User:Billreid/Religious houses. I wouldn't mind some comments on a comparison of the current layout with the one in my name-space. The important thing is getting the information out there and I think both formats do that but the system I was developing lists the houses under Order and the existing one is listed under local authotity area. The local authority information is also captured in the version I was developing. However, a purely monastic house article is only half the story and the other religious houses, namely, Hospitals, Cathedrals and Collegiate churches could be drawn together under the one article giving the researcher a single point of call. As I said, both versions attempt to do the same thing and if there's a concensus for the status quo then I'll leave the info in my name-space in case there is any info of value that can be used. --Bill Reid | (talk) 18:35, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

 * I've more-or-less completed the task of incorporating the details from Cowan & Easson.  I deliberately settled on monastic establishment and excluding hospitals and secular colleges etc. partly because of the sheer number of them (as is the case in England) - I felt they would swamp the monastic houses, and additionally I found that if the list contains too many references that wikipedia can't handle it - which is why I had to divide the England list into counties and exclude the references from the List of monastic houses in England list which transcludes them.   However that certainly does not mean that there is no case for a list of non-monastic religious houses for each of Scotland, England and Wales - however my personal interest does not extend to non-monastic establishments. Now that I have attended to England, Wales, Scotland and the Isle of Man, my next endeavour is to address the lists pertaining to Ireland.   JohnArmagh (talk) 10:53, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

 * I've taken a look at Bill's list - and I think it is a valuable addition. Whilst most works on the subject use the division into monastic orders I was anxious to present a list which was geography-based.   I was considering producing supplementary lists in monastic order order, but this was going to be a big task - and we each have only one lifetime.  There certainly is no encyclopaedic conflict in having various presentations of the lists, so as to satisfy the reader's requirements.  I for one would enjoy seeing Bill's lists become part of the available compendium on this subject. JohnArmagh (talk) 11:03, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of monastic houses in Scotland. 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/20071011142109/http://www.monymusk.com/index.asp?subsec=6 to http://www.monymusk.com/index.asp?subsec=6
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061114222643/http://www.nunraw.org.uk/ to http://www.nunraw.org.uk/
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20120630205619/http://arts.st-andrews.ac.uk/~cmas/site.php?id=125608 to http://arts.st-andrews.ac.uk/~cmas/site.php?id=125608
 * Added tag to http://monasticmatrix.usc.edu/monasticon/index.php?function=detail&id=1081

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) 14:18, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on List of monastic houses in Scotland. 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/20081216140202/http://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk/scotland/ayrshire/featured-sites/crossraguel-abbey.html to http://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk/scotland/ayrshire/featured-sites/crossraguel-abbey.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304053959/http://www.scotlandsplaces.gov.uk/search_item/index.php?service=RCAHMS&id=55042 to http://www.scotlandsplaces.gov.uk/search_item/index.php?service=RCAHMS&id=55042
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120511045033/http://www.papastronsay.com/index.html to http://www.papastronsay.com/index.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) 21:13, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Painstaking italic fixes reverted
I recently fixed "c." per MOS:CIRCA while fixing nine "missing end tag" errors in which italics were present at some point in a line of text but never closed. My edit was reverted citing a local consensus that apparently ignores MOS guidance in these "List of monastic houses..." articles regarding italics, circa, dashes, date ranges, and more. I have no interest in an edit war, so if the editor who reverted me could please fix the missing end tag errors, that would be helpful. – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:14, 10 October 2020 (UTC)


text:
User:LHOON

I was born in Mechelen, Belgium and got my PhD from the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. Now researcher and lecturer at the Erasmus Hogeschool Brussel and the Vrije Universiteit Brussel.

Fields of interest:
 * electric vehicles
 * standardization
 * railroads
 * tramways
 * industrial archaeology
 * phrenology
 * alchemy

title: User:LHOON


text:
Nicholas Daniel

Nicholas Daniel (born 9 January 1962) is a British oboist and conductor. In 2003 he was appointed Artistic Director of the Leicester International Music Festival.

Education
He was educated at Salisbury Cathedral School and the Purcell School.

Awards
Daniel won the BBC Young Musician of the Year Competition in 1980 and was awarded the 2011 Queen's Medal for Music., cited as having made “an outstanding contribution to the musical life of the nation”. In 2016 his recording of concertos by Vaughan Williams and MacMillan was awarded the BBC Music Magazine Premiere Award.

He was appointed Officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) in the 2020 Birthday Honours for services to music.

Teaching posts
Daniel was Professor of Oboe at the Guildhall School of Music and Drama for ten years, then in 1997 became Professor of Oboe and Conducting at the Indiana University School of Music. He then was invited to be Prince Consort Professor of Oboe at the Royal College of Music in London. In 2004, he was named Professor of Oboe at the Musikhochschule in Trossingen, Germany.

Performing ensembles
Nicholas Daniel is a founding member of the Haffner Wind Ensemble and Britten Sinfonia, and formed a duo with pianist Julius Drake in 1981.

As Principal Oboe of Britten Sinfonia, Daniel has frequently appeared as a member of the orchestra and also as a soloist/director. In 2009 Britten Sinfonia released its first own label recording, which features Nicholas Daniel in John Tavener's Songs of the Sky.

In September 2021 Daniel was appointed as Artistic Director and Principal Conductor for the Orion Orchestra.

Commissions
Daniel has commissioned and premiered many new works for the oboe, to increase its status as a solo instrument. Such works include:
 * The Kingdom of Dreams by John Woolrich (1989)
 * Double Concerto by Simon Bainbridge (1990)
 * An Interrupted Endless Melody by Harrison Birtwistle (1991)
 * First Grace of Light by Peter Maxwell Davies (1991)
 * Helios by Thea Musgrave (1994)
 * Oboe Concerto by John Woolrich (1996)
 * Oboe Quintet by John Woolrich (1998)
 * Oboe Concerto by Nigel Osborne (1998)
 * Three Capriccios for solo oboe by John Woolrich (2001)
 * Two's Company by Thea Musgrave (2005)
 * The Fabric of Dreams by Michael Zev Gordon (2006)
 * Kaleidoscopes by John Tavener (2006)
 * Sorella by Rory Boyle (2007).
 * Oboe Concerto by James MacMillan (2010).

Recordings
Daniel has recorded many albums, both solo work and chamber music, such as:
 * Alwyn oboe concerto
 * Alwyn Chamber works
 * Alwyn Chamber works vol 2
 * Alwyn Orchestral works
 * Arnold Orchestral works: Fantasia Conifer
 * Berkeley oboe concerto
 * Bliss Chamber works
 * Finzi Orchestral works: Eclogue
 * Finzi, Howells, Patterson works for oboe & piano
 * Horovitz oboe concerto
 * Elena Langer Landscape With Three People
 * Martinu Sinfonia Concertante
 * Moeran Fantasy Quartet
 * Mozart Sinfonia Concertante in E flat
 * Mozart Wind Concertos
 * Mozart Chamber works
 * Thea Musgrave Helios; Memento Vitae
 * Strauss Sinfonia no 2; oboe concerto
 * Woolrich The Ghost in the Machine
 * French Chamber Music for Woodwinds
 * French Oboe Sonatas
 * Five Italian Oboe Concertos
 * Oboe Alone
 * Oboe Sonatas with Julius Drake
 * Vaughan Williams and MacMillan oboe concertos

title: Nicholas Daniel


text:
Limacina

Limacina is a genus of swimming predatory sea snails commonly known as sea butterflies in the family Limacinidae. This genus contains some of the world's most abundant gastropod species.

Etymological meaning of the generic name Limacina is "snail-like".

As pelagic marine gastropods, Limacina swim by flapping their parapodia, inspiring the common name sea butterflies.

Sea butterflies are part of the clade Thecosomata. Sea angels, similar to Limacina, are in the order Gymnosomata. Both of these orders are still referred to as "pteropods". Sea butterflies of the order Thecosomata have a shell, while sea angels in the order Gymnosomata do not.

Shell description
The shells of Limacina are well developed, sinistrally coiled, turret-like, and include an operculum. Shell size and thickness vary within the genus. At high latitudes, the diameter of the shell does not exceed 15 mm. At lower latitudes, the diameter varies from 1 to 3 mm.

Description of the soft parts
Two large winglike parapodia, derived from foot tissue, propel these invertebrates through the water column to overcome negative buoyancy due to the animal's shell. As diel vertical migrators, Limacina inhabit deeper waters during the day and travel to the surface at night to feed.

Life habits
Feeding habits of Limacina are characterized by actively feeding on planktonic organisms such as bacteria, small crustaceans, gastropod larvae, dinoflagellates and diatoms. These prey items become entangled in a mucosal web (up to 5 cm wide) excreted by the animal that is, in turn, eaten along with the prey items. This net also provides positive buoyancy. Ciliated posterior footlobes and lateral footlobes move food collected by the mucosal web into the mouth.

Large aggregations of Limacina migrating to the surface of the water attract predators such as Clione (family Clionidae, suborder Gymnosomata), baleen whales, various species of salmonids, herring, and seabirds.

Species
Species within the genus Limacina include:
 * † Limacina atypica (Laws, 1944)
 * (recent) Limacina bulimoides (d'Orbigny, 1836) - Bulimoid pteropod. Distribution: Red Sea, Pacific. Length: 1.2 mm.
 * † Limacina erasmiana Janssen, 2010
 * † Limacina dilatata (Koenen, 1892)
 * † Limacina ferax (Laws, 1944)
 * † Limacina gormani (Curry, 1982)
 * † Limacina guersi Janssen, 2010
 * (recent) Limacina helicina (Phipps, 1774) - Helicid pteropod. Type species.
 * (recent) Limacina lesueurii (d'Orbigny, 1836) - Distribution: North America, Western Atlantic.
 * † Limacina limata (Marwick, 1926)
 * † Limacina pygmaea (Lamarck, 1805)
 * (recent) Limacina rangii (d'Orbigny, 1834)
 * (recent) Limacina retroversa (Fleming, 1823) - Retrovert pteropod. Distribution: North America, Western Atlantic, Arctic Ocean.
 * † Limacina sculptilis (Maxwell, 1992)
 * † Limacina taylori (Curry, 1965)
 * (recent) Limacina trochiformis (d'Orbigny, 1836) - Trochiform pteropod. Distribution: North America, Western Atlantic, Red Sea, Pacific. Length: 1 mm.
 * † Limacina valvatina (Reuss, 1867)
 * † Limacina? vegrandis Cahuzac & Janssen, 2010
 * Species brought into synonymy:
 * (recent) Limacina antarctica Woodward, 1854: synonym of Limacina rangii f. antarctica Woodward, 1854: synonym of Limacina rangii (d'Orbigny, 1834)
 * Limacina balea Møller, 1841: synonym of Limacina retroversa (Fleming, 1823)
 * Limacina contorta Sykes, 1905: synonym of Limacina trochiformis (d'Orbigny, 1834)
 * Limacina crossei Pelseneer, 1888: synonym of Limacina lesueurii (d'Orbigny, 1835)
 * Limacina cucullata Gould, 1852: synonym of Limacina rangii f. antarctica Woodward, 1854: synonym of Limacina rangii (d'Orbigny, 1834)
 * Limacina helicialis Lamarck, 1819: synonym of Limacina helicina (Phipps, 1774)
 * (recent) Limacina helicoides Jeffreys, 1877 - synonym of Thielea helicoides (Jeffreys, 1877)
 * (recent) Limacina inflata (d'Orbigny, 1836) - Planorbid pteropod. Distribution: circumglobal, Red Sea, Pacific. Length: 1 mm. Description: the shell is flatly twisted, resembling the shell of the cephalopod Nautilus. - synonym: Heliconoides inflata (d'Orbigny, 1836)
 * Limacina naticoides Souleyet, 1852: synonym of Limacina trochiformis (d'Orbigny, 1834)
 * Limacina pacifica Dall, 1871: synonym of Limacina helicina pacifica Dall, 1871
 * Limacina scaphoidea Gould, 1852: synonym of Heliconoides inflatus (d'Orbigny, 1834)

title: Limacina


text:
Talk:Nancy Reagan

Intro Paragraph
The second intro paragraph should really be rewritten. The purpose of the introduction is to give a general outline of the person's life without coloring it in either way while erring on the side of positivity. The entire second paragraph seems to exist only to talk about criticisms over mundane details such as her choice to change the White House china and talk to an astrologer. I have no problem with this information in the article, my only issue is why are such inconsequential details in the intro? Just to make her sound controversial? MrDestructo (talk) 17:19, 9 July 2010 (UTC)

 * WP:LEAD does not support your model of what the purpose of an introduction is. Instead, it says: "The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article. It should define the topic, establish context, explain why the subject is interesting or notable, and summarize the most important points—including any notable controversies."  That's what this lead, including the second paragraph, does.  Wasted Time R (talk) 11:21, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Allow me to counter your WP:LEAD with WP:WEIGHT. Please explain how her choice of White House china or consulting a psychic are considered notable events in her life, as is described in the sentence you quoted.  Obama's intro does not mention Ayers, Limbaugh's intro does not mention drug addiction, Niccolò Paganini's intro doesn't mention his pact with the devil.  I can't find anyone's intro paragraph that sounds as petty as this one.  I'm not arguing against criticisms in the intro, I'm arguing against including minuscule events from the subject's life and labeling them as "notable."  MrDestructo (talk) 13:02, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

 * Public perception is often the major part of being First Lady (since the role itself has few actual significant duties) and the china and astrologer episodes were a big part of her public image; neither was at all "minuscule". The astrologer episode also illustrated the behind-the-scenes influence she had within the White House. Both are quite relevant to a summary description of her time as First Lady. Also note that this is a Featured Article, meaning it has been reviewed closely by many other editors, who agreed that this material belongs in the lead. As for your comparisons, Obama and Paganini both have/had careers of immense accomplishments and their leads will be quite different. Limbaugh is an interesting case, in that he has significant accomplishments as a broadcaster but his political influence is largely a function of perception. I think reasonable arguments could be made either way about including his drug addiction in that article's lead. Wasted Time R (talk) 16:29, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

The astrology thing is pretty obscure in that it was a minor story and, while it is pretty well documented, it simply was a minor story at the time. Additionally the sentence "She had a strong influence on her husband and played a role in a few of his personnel and diplomatic decisions." is rather obscure. Several Presidents dating at least to FDR have had that criticism levied, usually, by partisan opponents. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.39.177.68 (talk) 18:46, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

 * The astrology thing was not a minor story, it got a lot of media attention at the time and has been written about ever since. Check out this list of Google Books hits that mention it.  The sentence about her role is a summary of what is discussed in the "Influence in the White House" section in the article body.  Yes, some other First Ladies have faced similar commentary, but in this case it wasn't partisan-based but more based on ideas about gender roles.  The source used for some of that text, Lisa Burns' First Ladies and the Fourth Estate: Press Framing of Presidential Wives, is a good place to read more about this topic.    Wasted Time R (talk) 10:28, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

I am not a Wikipedia expert so please excuse any errors in my approach to giving feedback. I notice that the page for Ronald Reagan opens up with him being President of the United States, and then discuss with him having been a Hollywood actor, union leader and governor of California. However, Nancy Reagan’s page opens up with her being an actress, second wife of Ronald Reagan, and only then mentions that she was the first lady of the United States. Seems inconsistent; should mention her role as First Lady first. Can anyone make the updates to make the intros consistent? I did not make any changes to the pages (I don’t know how). Thanks much! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:7000:4400:171f:7c0e:a292:ebf7:fa18 (talk) 14:17, 9 May 2021 (UTC)

Where is the date of the photo?
The photo chosen is a professional portrait intended to portray Mrs Reagan an a favorable light (which, from a certain perspective, makes it non-NPOV). Don't you think the date of the photo should therefore be shown, as it is with virtually every other Wikipedia portrait? 67.170.64.149 (talk) 18:15, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

 * Official photos are the norm for the top image in WP articles on government officials, and yes they tend to be professionally done and make the subject look good. But you have a point about the date; it's now shown.  Wasted Time R (talk) 00:57, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

The Kennedy connection
"Kennedy" is mentioned ten times - isn't that too much in an overview article about Mrs Reagan? Points to be made by comparing the two First Ladies or the two administrations could perhaps be grouped into a single section? I think it would help keeping focus on the article's main person in an otherwise very good text. --84.209.23.211 (talk) 22:30, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

 * The references to Jackie Kennedy are clustered in two First Lady sections, "Fashion" and "Elegance and formality", which seems reasonable to me. The references in a later section are to the Kennedy family as a whole and do not seem duplicative.  I have reduced one unnecessary 'Kennedy' usage in an image caption, however.  Wasted Time R (talk) 12:02, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

 * Thank you. --84.209.23.211 (talk) 18:16, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

"In office"?
How can First Lady be considered an office? I realize that by now all the First Ladies' articles are likewise formatted, and that this poor woman was showcased more than most and deserves some honors. (Even more so for Jackie O. who endured even worse, rest in peace.) But it's not official, ergo not an office. It doesn't seem encyclopaedic or proper. I have no doubt that being First Lady is a demanding cross to bear, but it seems to me that we should use some words other than "In office." — Preceding unsigned comment added by CousinJohn (talk • contribs) 04:56, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with you. It caught my attention the other day, but I let it be as I thought it may be an "Americanism" that I am unfamiliar with. But it does sound very strange to me. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 05:24, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * This is a complaint that's been made a number of times against various First Lady articles. The solution is a change to the infobox template involved to show an alternate legend of "In role" rather than "In office".  I've made a request for this at Template talk:Infobox officeholder; we'll see if anything happens.  The archives there contain previous commentary on this issue.  Wasted Time R (talk) 10:33, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Update – the infobox template has now been enhanced to cover this case, and the infobox here now says "In role". Wasted Time R (talk) 02:05, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Good read

 * I just read this article and consider it a "Good read". I do think that the "External links" section can be examined (there are eight) with consideration of ELPOINTS #3, links to avoid, and EL official, with a goal of minimizing the number of links.
 * "Further reading" and "External links" are somewhat connected but we generally separate them for various reasons including cohesion. I would think C-Span a reliable source so if content is deemed important it could be incorporated into the article. The same with the New York Times ("Nancy Reagan collected news and commentary") and it seems "First Ladies of California" would be better suited as "Further reading" if important.
 * We have started to evolve towards the section becoming a dumping ground for editor's favorites so need to trim when we can and keep an eye out for link farming. Otr500 (talk) 10:06, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

United Nations role
I find the following line to be misleading "In 1988, she became the first first lady invited to address the United Nations General Assembly, where she spoke on international drug interdiction and trafficking laws."

It gives the impression that Nancy is the first first lady to interact with the United Nations in an official capacity, which is untue. Eleanor Roosevelt was appointed as the US delegate to the United Nations General Assembly 33 years earlier and made significant contributions. While Eleanor was not in the role of first lady at the time (by 8 months), a change is needed to clarify the point.

Perhaps referring to Nancy as "the first (acting) first lady..." or "the first first lady (currently in the role)..." would be sufficient emphasis to show that she was not trailblazing a connection between the role of the first lady and the UN like the current statement implies. DinoGarret (talk) 20:51, 7 March 2021 (UTC)

Good call. I updated it to the first suggestion. I like the separation of "first first lady" which already sounds awkward. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DinoGarret (talk • contribs) 22:49, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

The claim of Nancy Reagan guest-starring on Dynasty appears to be fictional
I have done some archiving, and, unlike her well-documented appearance on Different Strokes, there is no record of a guest appearance on any Dynasty episode.2601:447:4080:10:F00D:331C:4B77:A09F (talk) 00:20, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
 * In contemporary reporting, I also only found the Diff'rent Strokes appearance. Interestingly, many of those mention that Gerald Ford made a cameo on Dynasty. I found a current source that repeats the Nancy/Dynasty claim. But I suspect that article picked up the claim from this article, just like a number of Google Books hits (they're all ebooks, likely WP rehashes). The linked main article on the campaign makes no mention of it. I've removed Dynasty. Schazjmd   (talk)  00:34, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ramirezk6.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 04:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

FA sweeps
Article does not seem to be well-researched or comprehensive. There's too much reliance on news stories as opposed to scholarly sources or retrospectives such as the Benze biography. See the further reading section (t · c)  buidhe  22:46, 12 May 2022 (UTC)

"Throat goat"??
Is this really appropriate for inclusion in an encyclopedia? Oktayey (talk) 17:33, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Why not? We're just reporting what she was actually called, based on her, er, strengths. We're not prissy about stuff like this. --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  17:58, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @JackofOz Alright, I guess. Mentioning this kind of thing just seemed so incredibly profane for an article about a First Lady. Oktayey (talk) 21:16, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * That's almost sort of the point. What people do behind closed doors is their business, that's one thing. But when someone gets a reputation, and even a nickname, for a certain sexual activity with multiple partners, that's already newsworthy in itself, but if they later go on to become First Lady (!!!), that's a juxtaposition that's too delicious to just be ignored in the interest of propriety. But it seems you're not averse to mentioning what she did, just the term "Throat Goat". Is that it? --  Jack of Oz   [pleasantries]  00:14, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * @JackofOz Well, I wasn't shocked specifically by the nickname. In hindsight, I agree my initial reaction wasn't very reasonable—doubting that it should be included because it was too profane for an article on a First Lady. Oktayey (talk) 18:52, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Categories
I made Category:Nancy Reagan a subcat of Category:Reagan Era, which made Category:Conservatism in the United States redundant. I've made some mistakes with categories before, so if this doesn't seem like a legit change, feel free to undo it. - Special-T (talk) 00:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Nancy Reagan


text:
User:Miriel~enwiki

I am active in the german and the alemannic wikipedia whenever my time allows me to do so. Hopefully I´ll also find some time for contributions to the english site.

title: User:Miriel~enwiki