text:
Ilus

In Greek mythology, Ilus (Ἶλος) is the name of several mythological characters associated directly or indirectly with Troy:
 * Ilus, the son of Dardanus, and the legendary founder of Dardania.
 * Ilus, the son of Tros, and the legendary founder of Troy.
 * Ilus, son of Mermerus, and grandson of Jason and Medea. This Ilus lived at Ephyra, between Elis and Olympia. In a tale recounted in the Odyssey, he played host to Odysseus, but when Odysseus requested from Ilus poison for his arrows, he declined, from fear of divine vengeance.
 * Ilus, an ally of Turnus, the man who opposed Aeneas in Italy.

title: Ilus


text:
2004 Bahrain Grand Prix

The 2004 Bahrain Grand Prix (officially the 2004 Gulf Air Bahrain Grand Prix) was a Formula One motor race held on 4 April 2004 at the Bahrain International Circuit. It was Race 3 of 18 in the 2004 FIA Formula One World Championship. It was the first Formula One race to be held in the Kingdom of Bahrain and the Middle East. The 57-lap race was the third round of the 2004 Formula One season. The race was won by Ferrari driver Michael Schumacher. His teammate Rubens Barrichello completed a 1-2 for the team, whilst Jenson Button completed the podium for the BAR team by finishing in third position.

Friday drivers
The bottom 6 teams in the 2003 Constructors' Championship were entitled to run a third car in free practice on Friday. These drivers drove on Friday but did not compete in qualifying or the race.

Qualifying

 * Notes
 * – Nick Heidfeld, Zsolt Baumgartner and Kimi Räikkönen received a 10-place grid penalty for engine changes.

Race

 * Notes
 * – Gianmaria Bruni started the race from the pitlane.

Championship standings after the race

 * Drivers' Championship standings

 * Constructors' Championship standings

 * Note: Only the top five positions are included for both sets of standings.

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

title: 2004 Bahrain Grand Prix


text:
HMS Prince of Wales (R09)

HMS Prince of Wales (R09) is the second Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carrier of the Royal Navy. Unlike most large aircraft carriers, Prince of Wales is not fitted with catapults and arrestor wires, and is instead designed to operate STOVL aircraft; the ship is currently planned to carry up to 48 F-35B Lightning II stealth multirole fighters and Merlin helicopters for airborne early warning and anti-submarine warfare, although in surge conditions the class is capable of supporting 70+ F-35B. The design emphasises flexibility, with accommodation for 250 Royal Marines and the ability to support them with attack helicopters and troop transports up to and larger than Chinook size.

The completed Prince of Wales began sea trials in September 2019 and first arrived at her new home base of HMNB Portsmouth in November 2019. The ship was formally commissioned into the Royal Navy at a ceremony in Portsmouth on 10 December 2019. The ship's commissioning date marked the 78th anniversary of the sinking of her predecessor, a World War II era battleship which was lost in action along with HMS Repulse (1916) in 1941. She is the eighth Royal Navy ship to have the name HMS Prince of Wales. Construction of the ship began in 2011 at Rosyth Dockyard and ended with launch on 21 December 2017. She was handed over to the Royal Navy in 2019.

When on operations, Prince of Wales will form a central part of a UK Carrier Strike Group, comprising escorts and support ships, with the aim to facilitate carrier-enabled power projection.

Design and construction
Much like her sister ship Queen Elizabeth, the original 2008 design of Prince of Wales envisaged flying F-35B Lightning II Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing (STOVL) jets from a ski-jump ramp. However, in May 2010, the government published its long-awaited Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR), which stated that Prince of Wales would be converted to a Catapult Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery (CATOBAR) configuration, operating the F-35C. An 18-month study commenced into the conversion but ultimately found that it would cause severe cost implications and delays. In May 2012, the government announced it would be reversing its decision to convert Prince of Wales and that the ship would be built to its original STOVL design.

The SDSR also stipulated that the UK only required one aircraft carrier, however penalty clauses in the contract meant that cancelling Prince of Wales would be more expensive than building her. Instead, the government planned to construct Prince of Wales and then either place her into extended readiness or have her sold to an ally. Contrary to this, in 2012, the Royal Navy published its annual yearbook, titled A Global Force 2012/13, which stated that both carriers are "likely to be commissioned and may even be capable of operating together".

Prince of Wales was assembled at Rosyth from 52 blocks built by six shipyards around the UK. Construction began on 26 May 2011 with the first steel being cut at Govan shipyard by Defence Secretary Liam Fox. In September 2014, Prince of Wales reached a final assembly phase when hull blocks LB02 and LB03 were floated into 1 Dock of Rosyth dockyard, Scotland.

During the 2014 NATO Summit in Wales, Prime Minister David Cameron announced that Prince of Wales would be brought into active service, rather than sold off or mothballed. This was later confirmed in the government's 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review.

In April 2016, the ship was said to be around 80% structurally complete. On 1 September 2017 HMS Prince of Wales' most senior officer, Captain Ian Groom, confirmed that the carrier was now essential to fulfilling the Royal Navy's 'full carrier strike capability.'

Sea trials
Prince of Wales was formally named on 8 September 2017 at Rosyth dockyard by Queen Camilla (then the Duchess of Rothesay). On 21 December 2017, Prince of Wales was floated out of Rosyth drydock #1 for the first time and manoeuvred to a nearby jetty for fitting-out and further systems integration. A Merlin Mk2 helicopter landed and took off six times on her flight deck on 23 September 2019.

The Prince of Wales was due to commence sea trials in 2019 with a view to being commissioned in late 2019. As such, the ship left the fitting out basin at Rosyth for the first time on 20 September 2019; initially she remained anchored in the Firth of Forth, undertaking initial engine and system tests, and waiting for the tide to allow her to pass under the bridges crossing the firth. HMS Prince of Wales sailed under the Firth of Forth bridges on 22 September 2019 and began sea trials.

On 16 November 2019, Prince of Wales arrived at her home base of Portsmouth for the first time, berthing at Princess Royal Jetty. The ship was formally commissioned into the Royal Navy at a ceremony in Portsmouth on 10 December 2019. She is expected to be fully ready for front-line duties around the globe from 2023.

On 28 February 2020, Prince of Wales arrived in her affiliated city of Liverpool for the first time on a week-long visit.

In May 2020, Prince of Wales experienced flooding which the Royal Navy described as "minor". This was followed by more significant flooding from the fire control system in October 2020 which caused damage to her electrical cabling. She was confined to docks where she remained for almost eight months whilst repairs were made. Her long-planned deployment to the United States to undertake her first F-35B trials was cancelled. During 2020 Prince of Wales was at sea just 30 days, compared to 115 days for Queen Elizabeth. Following repair Prince of Wales departed Portsmouth Naval Base to resume sea trials on 30 April 2021. In October 2021, the Royal Navy declared the ship as fully operational.

Aircraft
The two ships of the Queen Elizabeth class are each expected to be capable of carrying forty aircraft, a maximum of 36 Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II stealth multirole fighters and four AgustaWestland Merlin helicopters. The 2010 SDSR anticipated the routine deployment of twelve F-35Bs, but a typical warload will be 24 F-35Bs and some helicopters. These could be a Maritime Force Protection package of nine anti-submarine Merlin HM2 and five Merlin Crowsnest for airborne early warning; alternatively a "littoral manoeuvre" package could potentially include a mix of Royal Navy Commando Helicopter Force Merlin HC4, AgustaWestland Wildcat AH1, RAF Boeing Chinook transports, and Army Air Corps AgustaWestland Apache AH.1 attack helicopters. In 2022, it was reported that initially five Merlins will be equipped with Crowsnest, and that three of these will normally be assigned to the "high readiness" aircraft carrier. six landing spots are planned, but the deck could be marked out for the operation of ten medium helicopters at once, allowing the lift of a company of 250 troops. The hangars are designed for CH-47 Chinook operations without blade folding and for the Bell Boeing V-22 Osprey tiltrotor, whilst the aircraft lifts can accommodate two Chinooks with unfolded blades.

Passenger/crew transfer boats
The two ships of the Queen Elizabeth class were to each carry four PTBs made by Blyth-based company Alnmaritec. Each 13.1 m long PTB carries 36 passengers and two crew to operate the vessel and is davit-launched. To enable the craft to fit into the docking area the navigation and radar masts are fitted with Linak actuators so that they can be lowered automatically from the command console. The enclosed cabin is heated and there is a set of heads forward.

Subsequently, it was reported that Prince of Wales would carry three of the new Sea-class work boats being procured for various tasks in the Royal Navy.

Weapons systems
Defensive weapons include the Phalanx Close-In Weapons System for anti-aircraft and anti-missile defence and initially Miniguns for use against fast attack craft. In 2023, the Minigun was retired from Royal Navy service and replaced by Browning .50 caliber heavy machine guns. The 30mm Automated Small Calibre Guns are fitted for but not with, and not carried as of 2021.

Replica bell from predecessor
In spring 2019, Merseyside shipbuilder Cammell Laird, who built the ship's predecessor, the King George V-class battleship HMS Prince of Wales (53), and also built sections for both the current ship and HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08), was commissioned to make a replica of the predecessor's bell for the current ship. The original, raised in 2002 and currently residing at the National Museum of the Royal Navy location at the Portsmouth Historic Dockyard, was surveyed as part of the process.

Cammell Laird were able to contact Utley Offshore in St Helens, the foundry that made the original bell still had the original pattern based on the 1908 Admiralty design. Compared to the bronze or bell metal that is used in most modern ship bells, specially sourced nickel silver was used for authenticity. The engraving was done by Shawcross in Birkenhead, while Cammell Laird shipwrights constructed the hardwood base. Cammell Laird COO Tony Graham presented the finished replica to commanding officer Captain Darren Houston during the ship's week-long visit to Liverpool in March 2020.

Name
The Queen Elizabeth-class carrier is the eighth HMS Prince of Wales, named after the title traditionally granted to the heir apparent of the British monarch. The name was announced at the same time as that of her sister ship HMS Queen Elizabeth (R08).

The decommissioning of HMS Ark Royal (R07) under the SDSR in 2010 led to an unsuccessful campaign for one of the new aircraft carriers to receive that name.

Prince of Wales was formally named on 8 September 2017 at Rosyth Dockyard on the Firth of Forth at Rosyth, Fife, Scotland by the then-Duchess of Rothesay, now Queen Camilla.

Operational history
In May 2020, Prince of Wales experienced flooding which the Royal Navy described as "minor". This was followed by more significant flooding in October 2020 which caused damage to her electrical cabling. Prince of Wales departed Portsmouth Naval Base on sea trials on 30 April 2021. In October 2021, the Royal Navy declared the ship as fully operational.

Prince of Wales participated in an international exercise off the coast of Scotland in October 2021. This involved joint operations with her sister ship HMS Queen Elizabeth.

NATO command ship
On 1 January 2022, Prince of Wales took over the role of command ship for NATO's maritime high readiness force from the French Navy. The ship was intended to spend the next twelve months supporting NATO exercises in the Arctic, Baltic and Mediterranean. Her first exercise in this role was Cold Response 22, a Norwegian-led exercise which was designed to test her crew in this role.

2022 starboard propeller shaft external coupling malfunction
On 27 August 2022 Prince of Wales departed HMNB Portsmouth to undertake training exercises with the US Navy, the Royal Canadian Navy, and United States Marine Corps, and to host the Atlantic Future Forum trade and economic conference in New York. On 29 August after suffering mechanical problems in the UK's South Coast Exercise area,  the ship proceeded to anchor in the Solent off the Isle of Wight. It was reported that an external coupling that connects the outer propeller shaft to the drive shaft from the propulsion motors had failed. Rear Admiral Steve Moorhouse, Director of Force Generation, confirmed "significant damage to the shaft and the propeller and some superficial damage to the rudder. There is no damage to the rest of the ship". She arrived in Rosyth for repairs on 12 October 2022, and was originally expected to return to Portsmouth in spring 2023 following completion of repair work. On 15 May 2023 the Secretary of State for Defence denied that she was being cannibalised and mothballed and said that she would be in full service by that autumn. The ship returned to sea for trials after completing repairs on 21 July 2023.

2023 aircraft and UAV trials
In September 2023, Prince of Wales began a series of trials with different UAV systems intended for resupply. Once in the Channel the ship’s company will conduct trials with UK-firm W Autonomous Systems to assess the feasibility of drones delivering supplies to Royal Navy vessels at sea – initially flying in up to 100kg of stores. W Autonomous WAS platform is a twin-engine light alloy twin boom aircraft capable of carrying a payload of 100kg up to 1000km. Later in the year, the carrier was expected to operate in US waters for broader trials with platforms including the MV-22B Osprey and Mojave UAV.

On 15 November a General Atomics Mojave unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) took off from and then landed back on board Prince of Wales, with the aircraft carrier situated off the east coast of the United States. This marked a point in time where the Mojave Remotely Piloted Air System (RPAS) drone is the largest uncrewed vehicle to have flown from a non-US Navy carrier. Noted for its short take-off and landing (STOL) capability, the UAV's take-off was conducted at an angle across the flight deck and did not utilise the main ramp. It is expected that the results of these trials will interest many international partners.

Affiliations

 * Liverpool
 * Bristol
 * University Royal Naval Unit Bristol
 * Worshipful Company of Engineers
 * Worshipful Company of Goldsmiths
 * Welsh Guards
 * Royal Lancers
 * No. 27 Squadron RAF
 * RNRMC and Greenwich Hospital

title: HMS Prince of Wales (R09)


text:
User:Denni/User talk:Denni/2004 April Archive

''. . Hi there. How are you today?''

MY PERSONAL SANDBOX
 Invited Guests Only  Please do not poop in the sand.

User:Dwindrim/Testaroonies!!! Weather lore

<:> ACHTUNG <:>
 '''This here's my talk page. '''I refactor at will. '''I put things where I can find them. '''If what you say is important, I keep it. If it's not, I don't. '''I read everything here. I reply to the sane. I definitely reply if you've remembered to take your meds. '''My IQ is 176 and I have read all of Voltaire in its original Norwegian. Sometimes I lie.'''

THE DARK SIDE OF WIKI
 There is no dark side of Wiki. Wiki is all dark.

ARCHIVES
2004 February Archive 2004 February - 2004 April 10 Archive

(Boldface mine)

Passive language
Dwindrim, I notice somebody is claiming that your management of this talk page "is considered vandalism". Kevin makes a claim in passive language without directing us to whose consideration he is citing. You (and I) obviously consider otherwise, so it is also accurate to say in that weak, passive voice that deleting comments from talk pages is not considered vandalism. For all that approach offers, it is accurate to say "the world is considered flat" if we don't offer mention of whose consideration we are advancing.

To the contrary of Kevin's generalized claim, users routinely manage their talk pages, though asking others not to add comments is usually an unproductive management approach. I think Alex756's talk page is the most readily available example of a managed talk page in my mind, though Angela is also a well-known user and administrator whose talk page demonstrates examples of her personal management style.

Archiving talk pages frequently is often a productive way of reducing clutter, and of course you are free to add whatever previous comments you wish from an archived page to a new page. Archiving at least lets people know you read their comments, and gets you out of a boring, stifling, constraining arm-wrestling match with people who you would most likey pay less attention than more. Talk page archives I have seen are most often noted on the relevant talk page such as [ [ User_talk:Dwindrim/archive1|Archive1 ] ]Archive1, but we would have little way of knowing without extensive research to what extent people silently create subpages. But in no case does it seem polite for another person to attempt to filibuster your talk page when you have proposed other venues for where there comments would be more welcome. I don't think you will find much voluntary compliance with an "invited guests only" policy, though, in a format where you are unable to post a strong doorman.

Kevin's approach did little to promote in my mind an interest in exploring the substance of whatever conflict he is attempting to explore by posting on your page, but his position would be stronger if he cited a policy on talk page management. Then you could add your edits to that policy page, demonstrating the lack of consensus on how talk pages should be managed. I recall seeing some ongoing discussion on the matter, but I don't recall seeing any durable concensus about it. If I were asked to vote, I would say the page history function provides adequate well-protected resources for reviewing talk-page history and that anything else is an unnecessary demand placed on charitable donors to Wikipedia. My opinion is that talk pages are primarily for public conversations between you and others, and not necessarily places for people to post comments about you. It would seem more appropriate to me that people post their opinions and views about other users on their own pages, and invite you to join the discussion taking place beyond your control than to attempt to imply policies that cannot be cited and that are the temporal product of an emerging consensus among an open group with revolving membership. Refactor 20:00, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * If you need to cite an example of an administrator removing comments from the administrators talk page, keep an eye on User_talk:Danny at this same time. Refactor 20:22, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * See User_page, Talk_page for information on purposes, standards, and conventions, regarding user talk pages and talk pages in general. Kevin Baas 20:33, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

It would seem clear to me who's wiping whose muddy feet on whose carpet. Denni 20:46, 2004 Apr 10 (UTC)

Denni deleted (active, mind you) discussion from a talk page, which is against wikipedia policy (see User_page, Talk_page). I reinserted the deleted content in its proper historical place. I am now requesting arbitration. Kevin Baas 20:52, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I see no evidence that Kevin has attempted to refactor his approach or to summarize whatever complaint it is he attempted to enter as discussion on this page. As far as I can tell, he is now interested in the narrow bureaucratic issue of how a user shall manage a talk page and hasn't made a lot of effort to explain to readers what is the original substance of the complaint. It does not present a clean set of facts that are likely to benefit the group by taking time for arbitration, nor does it suggest, merely on the value of prima facia evidence that Kevin has a strong interest in a particular encyclopedic subject. This could all change if Kevin would summarize a controversy over the content of an article, that would provide meaningul context for discussion about editorial styles and potential personality conflicts. There is a principle of law that says controversies regarding courtroom decorum are moot if they arise from an original case that has no standing in court. So it would be more productive for all concerned to help at least me understand the substance of the controversy, because I have little interest in bureaucratic squables unrelated to specific controversies, except perhaps in finding substance around which to make jokes about burueacrats.

 * Of course, while I am a bit more sympathetic to the home team on this page, Denni isn't doing much, in my opinion, to advance a reputation as a member of the fledgling association of advocates, either. An inability to cogently advocate one's own interests doesn't provide much evidence of an ability to cogently advocate for others. Carpet is replacable, but if the carpet is set afire, it threatens more than the rug. And clean carpet provides little refuge if Kevin succeeds in rallying a crowd around whatever undisclosed issue is at the heart of this exchange. And pulling the carpet out from under somebody's feet won't get them out of the party, it will just leave an unwelcome guest writhing angrily on the floor.

 * And I am not doing much to investigate the background of this dispute, so there is plenty of high-ground available for anyone who wants to move there. And unless I decide to act otherwise, I have no reputation or even a tracable edit history, so you might as well ignore me and get what you can from my freely offered advice. Might I suggest a tall glass of milk or a few chelated calcium tablets would help balance the inflamed personal chemistry apparently driving all concerned .... Refactor 21:16, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Refactor
I appreciate your comments and suggestions, and have done two things: archive the discussion prior to this point, and submit my resignation to the Association of Advocates. The only history germane to other than user talk here is that Mr. Bass attempted to post yet another article on material which has already been heavily debated on VfD, and in which discussion he exhibited an appalling lack of self-control. My suggestion on VfD was that, in my words, he was "attempting to hose us again." I regret the use of such language, and will carry some learning from this experience. This led to some rancorous discussion on our talk pages, at which point I suggested, since it was leading nowhere, we ought just drop it. Mr. Bass was not so inclined, and when I reorganized (but did not alter the text of) my talk page, he undertook systematic reversion of it. I regret I did not get to my own defense sooner - I prefer to handle things on my own where I can, and moreover, was not sure where to take this discussion, given that User:Refactor is a blank page. Wiki is still bigger than my head... Denni 21:53, 2004 Apr 10 (UTC)

 * I appreciate your attempt at apology for your personal attack, but please try again. I think you can do better than that. This time, do not make skewed allegations, and secondly, stay on topic.  One sentence should be sufficient.  (BTW, I don't know what to make of the fact that User:Refactor (& User talk:Refactor is a blank page, either.) Kevin Baas 22:22, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * How considerate of you to accept an apology addressed to Wiki for my POV analysis of yet another...hmmm... I make no apology whatsoever to you, sir. I have seen your foul mouth in action on others' talk pages, and the one sentence which comes to mind as a response to your request would merely hurtle me into your own linguistic depths. As I have suggested before, since we have no common point of agreement, let us cease discussion entirely except where such discussion may take place within an article's talk page. Since I have nothing to say to you here, and you have nothing I have any interest in hearing, I will assume that any further posts here are intended exclusively for the purpose of trolling, and will treat them accordingly. Have a pleasant day. Denni 22:40, 2004 Apr 10 (UTC)

 * Well, I hope I was some help. Wiki is a bit bigger than my head too, but I still have the benefit of far more links in my neural structure than Wikipedia has in its database. And that is not even counting the chemical linkages only recently discovered in the glial cells - the other 90 percent of the brain. They rely heavily on ATP and calcium, so when the going gets tough, the tough go get milk, or do something to help their mitochondria convert ADP into ATP. I'm not a big advocate of apologies. I think they diminish understanding of interests that got lost in some poor communications. I think they often serve as an alternative to actually trying another approach. But that is just me. In the last post here, Kevin was still trying to control your behavior rather than changing his own approach in hopes of getting a different reaction from you. Refactor's user page is blank in hopes that each of you would prefer to work it out on your own, but I hope having a fan cheering for you each to find a way to work it out can at least result in some original plays instead of repetition of the same routines. Best of luck to both of ya. And as for trolling, some 1970 years ago today, one Hebrew king supposedly woke from the dead and went back to teaching his friends how to troll for the souls of men, so it's not neccessarily a bad thing.Refactor 07:52, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Look, I have no intention of being hostile, and I have not, as far as I can see, been hostile or uncivil. I do not feel that I have been treated with the same respect.

 * In regards to apology, I would like to clear something up that has apparently been misconstrued: I never accepted any apology, nor did Dwindrim give one. It seems that he does not feel that there is anything wrong with his actions or behavior.  Perhaps we function under a different system of mores.  In this case, I think it would be beneficial to the future understanding of both parties to reconcile these differences through other sources.  Respecting this, I have posted an entry on Requests_for_comment. Kevin Baas 08:10, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Why are you resigning from AMA?
Denni, I am wondering why you think that advocates cannot get into disputes or that the fact that you are in a dispute means you cannot help anyone else with their disputes? Advocates are human and do not have to be people who do not take stands or cannot disagree with the behaviours of others. If you are involved in a dispute yourself you may not want to take on helping another at the same time, but being involved in a dispute may give you more insight into the dispute resolution process that you realize. It is that knowledge and experience that may be the most important thing you can offer to others in your work as an advocate. BTW have you thought about presenting the issues above to a mediator for review? Kevin Baas seems stuck on the idea of going straight to arbitration. Is he afraid of mediation? — ©   Alex756   16:38, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * It is that I let my ego get in the way. I was all prepared for a lovely flame war with Mr. Baas, and went so far as to light the kindling before realizing what it would do to the work I have done with Wiki. I am concerned that in the heat of helping someone else, I would allow myself to be less than neutral. I would, of course, hope that not to be the case, and am asking if there is any precedent for this situation. Thanks kindly. Denni 19:16, 2004 Apr 11 (UTC)

Yes, Denni, I am all for mediation. I had went to arbitration simply because I did not know the proper process. Thanks. Kevin Baas 22:33, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Your first questions: (a) mediation: I don't understand the question. (b) I seek:
 * 1) A formal apology from you, for your personal attacks on vfd-electrodynamics and our user talk pages, as well as your uncivility and generally rude behavior.
 * 2) Gaurauntee that you will refrain from this in the future, with other users as well as me.
 * 3) Gaurauntee that you will use the talk pages appropriately, and respect other people's freedom of speech and right to equal representation.
 * 4) Respecting this, a formal apology for burying my comments in the upper section of the talk page, which is historically misleading and contradicts:
 * 5) the purposes of refactoring a page as stated by the guidelines and policies, and
 * 6) the general guidleine of talk pages proceeding vertically, as stated by the guidelines and policies.
 * 7) A general acknowledgement, given the above, of your violation of the principle of the wikipedian community in regards to treating members of the community with respect and decency, and
 * 8) A gaurauntee that you will refrain from such behavior in the future.

 * (William M. Connolley 08:35, 2004 Apr 14 (UTC)) Don't give KB anything until he learns how to spell guarantee :-) And promises to stop telling you what to do with your own talk page.

 * I'll be happy to give Kev the time of day (it's 12h45 now), but that's about it. For all this high-sounding talk of respect and decency, ol' Kev must have forgotten the remarks either he or someone else named Kevin Baas made when someone actually asked for sources for his, um, uh, you know. I do believe the phrase "and you can put (these) where the sun doesn't shine", or something functionally equivalent, was employed. The talk pages are gone with the article which was deleted, or I'd be happy to copy the comments here for further discussion. I do, however, like the idea of talk pages proceeding vertically. I tried a horizontal arrangement once; it was a supreme pain. Denni 19:28, 2004 Apr 14 (UTC)

 * Please stay on topic, Denni. And regarding proceeding vertically, your joke is funny.  What makes it funny?  It is funny because it shows how dysfunctional that interpretation of the phrase "proceeding vertically" is with regard to talk pages.  Kevin Baas 20:02, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * My page, I choose the topics. Your page, you choose the topics. I choose to talk about how it is some people who claim to have high IQs demonstrate the social quotient of australopithecus africanus when it comes to their interactions with other people, and I apologize to Lucy for placing her in such company. And what the heck is this with attempting to explain to me why my own joke is funny? Are you serious? Did you really think I made this joke by accident? Are you for real? Denni 20:48, 2004 Apr 14 (UTC)

 * Regarding topics, it's not about pages, it's about conversations and communication. If you can't stay focused on a topic in a discussion, it becomes more difficult to communicate information besides emotion.  Also, the issues that are brought up fail to be addressed - another hindrance of communication.  This is what I meant by staying on topic - I was concerned about communication being compromised. Kevin Baas 16:57, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I could just run a spell-check if I wish. But I'm not going to waste my time.  I trust that people are concerened with what I say rather than such trivial matters.  I'm not telling anyone what to do with "their" talk page.  I am telling them what the wikipedia policies and guidelines tell them not to do, and what a decent respect for other human beings entails.  I have every right to do this, and although I disagree with how William has misconstrued things here, I will defend his right to say what he has said with my life. Kevin Baas 16:41, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Your second questions:

(a)I seek a clearer understand of the degree of sanctity and propriety of a person's voice.

(b)Your wishes are solely your own jurisdiction, regardless of what others people may think of you for having them. i acknowledge your wishes. I reserve the right to think poorly of you for not only having but stating such counter-productive wishes. I also reserve the right to communicate freely with whomever I so choose, respecting, ofcourse, their person, and treating them with decency, with the intention of exchanging information for mutual benefit. Kevin Baas 01:16, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

IYD
Whatsoever they may be

Admin Nomination
Hello, I would appreciate your help by earning your vote as an admin. I have been here about 5 months now and have been nominated. I have made many contributions and have improved on my editing and behavior. I take this seriously, that is why I have gotten into it with Anthony so much. You can look at my user page yourself and see my contribtions. I would appreciate a vote in the yes column if you agree. Again, thanks for your time and help. ChrisDJackson 02:34, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

AMA co-ordinator election is now on
You may now vote for user:Ed_Poor or user:Alex756 in the first ever AMA co-ordinator election. Follow the instructions on AMA Coordinator Election Procedure for more details.

AMA members who wish to abstain from voting must also e-mail wikipedia_ama_voting@yahoo.co.uk with notice of that intent.

To clarify anything before voting, ask user_talk:Zanimum or user_talk:Jwrosenzweig on their talk pages.

AMA members have until April 30, at 11:00:00 EST to vote. -- user:zanimum
 * Your vote has been counted. Jwrosenzweig 15:51, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I have posted a Requests for mediation. You should go to the page and fill in your part. Kevin Baas 01:48, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Request for mediation
Hello. You agreed to mediation at Requests for mediation. Do you have any prefernece as to mediator? There is a list of current mediators at Mediation Committee. I'm sorry for any delay in responding to your request. Regards -- sannse (talk) 15:24, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC) (mediation committee)

 * If Angela would be willing, I would be very pleased to have her handle this. If she cannot, then I have no other specific preference. Thanks. Denni 18:18, 2004 Apr 18 (UTC)

 * Thanks for the reply Denni. I will just confirm Kevin's choice is for both of his current requests and will get back to you shortly -- sannse (talk) 18:55, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * It seems there is general agreement on Angela as a possible mediator. I will talk to her and hopefully she will contact you shortly.  -- sannse (talk) 20:36, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I've been assigned as the mediator between you and Kevin. Do you have any preference as to how the mediation takes place? I would prefer it be done by email, but you also have the option of using a page on Wikipedia, a page on meta:, the mediation boards or the #mediation.wikipedia IRC channel. The request for mediation has been moved to Requests for mediation/Archive 6. Before the mediation starts, please can you let me know that you agree to abide by the conditions laid out in Confidentiality during mediation. Thanks. Angela. 01:08, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply on my talk page. I have sent you an email regarding your aims for the mediation. Angela. 18:43, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)

Korova Milk Bar and other copyright violations
Hi. In regards to your posting of Korova Milk Bar on Copyright problems, you did right to add a copyvio notice and list the violation. Do not just remove copyright text from the article. It must be deleted to avoid leaving it in page history. If you want to recreate teh article before it is deleted, follow the directions and allow copyright violations to be deleted. For Korova Milk Bar, you would have recreated a new article at Korova Milk Bar/Temp until the violation is deleted. (It has now been deleted and you can recreate directly at: Korova Milk Bar - Tεx τ urε 15:18, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

WikiTrans access
Likely an old question, but I would like to be able to seamlessly link content from Wikipedia to Wikibooks/ Wiktionary/ Wikever. Is there a simple technique, or do I have to http code them. Also, are there easy links to the other Wiki pages, and if so, where are they located? Thanks, anyone. Denni 03:54, 2004 Apr 15 (UTC)

 * I can't find a page explaining these, though there was a tip of the day related to interwiki links. Wikibooks and Wiktionary can be linked to via shortcuts like page title and page title . There isn't a shortcut for wikisource yet. Angela. 07:40, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)

 * How about Wikiquotes?कुक्कुरोवाच

 * No, there doesn't seem to be one for Wikiquote yet either. Angela. 13:57, Apr 16, 2004 (UTC)

Clinical depression: copyright issues
Denni, you have added some material which seems to be from the Canadian Mental Health Association into clinical depression: has this material been licenced to Wikipedia under the GFDL by the Canadian Mental Health Association? If not, we can't use it: we cannot, for example, use material given to Wikipedia for Wikipedia use alone; only full GFDL grant from the copyright owner or public domain are acceptable. See Copyright for the full details on this. Regards, The Anome 22:49, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)


text:
GRIMMS

GRIMMS were an English pop rock, comedy, and poetry group, originally formed as a merger of The Scaffold with two members of the Bonzo Dog Doo-Dah Band and the Liverpool Scene for two concerts in 1971 at the suggestion of John Gorman.

The band's name is an acronym, formed from the initial letters of each original member's surname:
 * Gorman, John (The Scaffold) – vocals
 * Roberts, Andy (Liverpool Scene and The Scaffold) – vocals, guitar
 * Innes, Neil (Bonzo Dog Band) – vocals, keyboards, guitar
 * McGear, Mike (The Scaffold) – vocals, percussion
 * McGough, Roger (The Scaffold) – vocals, spoken poetry
 * Stanshall, Vivian (Bonzo Dog Band) – vocals, percussion, brass instruments.

History
During the late 1960s, The Scaffold and The Bonzo Dog Band had each already achieved a respectable measure of success independently of each other in the UK, through their regular appearances on television and radio and their respective chart successes in 1968 with 'Lily The Pink' and 'The Urban Spaceman'.

By 1970, while The Scaffold still remained active, The Bonzo Dog Band were technically no longer a going concern. Some members of the Bonzos would however briefly reform in 1971 to record Let's Make Up and Be Friendly to fulfill their recording contract, and as a result Neil Innes and Vivian Stanshall assembled a band to tour the UK during 1971 and 72. This group, billed variously as 'Freaks' or 'Bonzo Dog Freaks' occasionally featured Andy Roberts, who was also a close long-time associate of The Scaffold. During this period, Innes and Stanshall also guested on The Scaffold's 'Do The Albert' single and some of their more obscure musical ventures such as the theme song to the 1972 movie 'Burke And Hare'. A more formal grouping of the talents involved seemingly became inevitable.

Neil Innes said about the eventual formation of GRIMMS: "I don't know what attracted the Scaffold to the Bonzos; we were incredibly anarchic, which was probably something shared by the Scaffold as well. Hence GRIMMS, this leap in the dark."

For GRIMMS' initial performances, the six founder members were augmented by various friends and guest musicians - at the second appearance, for example, Keith Moon played drums (Moon had also played with 'Freaks', most notably on their BBC Radio One session in March 1971). However, once GRIMMS was more formally organised by 1972, regular personnel were quickly added, including:
 * Adrian Henri (Liverpool Scene) – spoken vocals/poetry
 * Brian Patten – spoken vocals/poetry
 * Michael Giles (King Crimson) – drums
 * Dave Richards (Plainsong) – bass, vocals
 * John Megginson – bass, keyboards.

These eleven musicians, poets and performers formed the "real" initial version of GRIMMS, despite the acronym which only included the names of six of them. Others who appeared live and on record with the band throughout its existence included (amongst many others):
 * George Bruno 'Zoot' Money – (Zoot Money's Big Roll Band and Dantalian's Chariot) – keyboards, vocals, acoustic guitar
 * Peter "Ollie" Halsall (Timebox and Patto) – guitars, vocals
 * Gerry Conway (Cat Stevens band and Steeleye Span) – drums
 * Jon Hiseman (Colosseum) – drums
 * John Halsey (Timebox and Patto) – drums
 * Timmy Donald (incorrectly credited as Timmy Donnell on recordings) – drums
 * Mike Kellie – drums
 * Gasper Lawal – drums, percussion, chorus vocals
 * Shamsi Sarumi – drums, percussion, chorus vocals
 * Kate Robbins – backing vocals

All the band members were paid the same wage on the road, and members who weren't performing in a show would sit with the audience.

Roberts, Richards and Stanshall do not appear on the band's first Island Records LP, Grimms, which was a live recording compiled from a run of UK shows in 1972. Roberts and Richards were committed to touring with the band Plainsong in 1972 and so missed the performances during which the first album was recorded. The notoriously mercurial Stanshall, meanwhile, had essentially already left the group before the LP was recorded, but although he consequently never appeared on any of the band's albums, the line-up remained flexible enough to allow him to occasionally return for guest spots at concerts afterwards. Henri, Giles and Money all left after the live album was released in early 1973, to be replaced by Halsall and Conway.

During this busy period McGough, McGear, Gorman and Roberts also remained a going concern on their own terms as The Scaffold, releasing the album Fresh Liver, also on Island Records. Ostensibly a Scaffold album, the lines between the two bands became increasingly blurred as Innes, Halsall, Megginson, Money and Conway all made significant musical contributions to the LP. Innes himself recorded and released his own solo debut How Sweet To Be An Idiot in the same year backed by Roberts, Halsall, Richards and Conway. McGough and Patten, meanwhile, also continued their ongoing parallel careers as published poets. As for GRIMMS itself, although the band's line-up was in a constant state of flux, it nevertheless retained a core membership of about 10 players right through to the end of 1973.

GRIMMS' own second LP of 1973, the studio album Rockin' Duck, received generally favourable press, but shortly after its release tensions among the band's leaders reached breaking point, preventing the group from capitalising on the good reviews. During the tour behind the album in late 1973, a violent outburst from Patten towards McGear on the band's tour bus in Manchester led to McGear leaving the group. During this tour Neil Innes was absent for certain dates and John Hiseman also sat in on drums to cover for the outgoing Conway, and the absence of Innes and presence of Hiseman can be heard on a BBC Radio 1 In Concert broadcast from this period. By the end of the year Halsall had also left GRIMMS (and would soon go on to join Hiseman's new group Tempest).

During 1974, GRIMMS suspended operations entirely when The Scaffold, at McGear's instigation, reunited for a major tour in support of surprise hit single "Liverpool Lou", and most of the remaining GRIMMS – with the notable exception of Patten – accompanied them. The Scaffold then elected to record another, final album, Sold Out, and those commitments stymied any GRIMMS activity until the following year.

GRIMMS eventually reconvened early in 1975 to tour and to film a television special entitled GRIMMS on Women shown as part of the BBC series The Camera and the Song. Gorman, Innes, McGough, Roberts, Richards and Megginson were rejoined in this endeavour by Patten and a returning Zoot Money, and new arrival 'Admiral' John Halsey (formerly of Patto and currently of Innes' backing band Fatso, and later to reunite with Innes and Ollie Halsall in The Rutles) entered the scene. Halsey had a highly developed sense of comedic timing honed during his days in Patto which brought much to GRIMMS' live performances of the period. It was also around this time that GRIMMS released a book of poetry, lyrics, prose and art based loosely around their exploits on tour entitled 'Clowns on the Road'.

By the time it came to record their third and what turned out to be final album Sleepers in 1976, Halsey was unavailable and Patten and Money had both left again (although Money later contributed vocals to one track). Drummer Timmy Donald (whose name was misspelled as Donnell in the original LP credits) had joined them for the album sessions, which left the final version of GRIMMS with 'only' seven members (Gorman, Roberts, Innes, McGough, Megginson, Richards and Donald). The band set out to make the album a more overtly musical affair than before and felt they had succeeded by the end of recording, but once the album was released, GRIMMS finally fizzled out as the members went their separate ways and somehow never regrouped again. Although Sleepers proved to be the band's swansong, in the liner notes of the expanded CD reissue of the album the key members are reported as considering it their best and most cohesive recorded statement.

Singles
 UK releases
 * "Backbreaker" / "The Masked Poet" (DJM DJS 393) July 1975
 * "The Womble Bashers of Walthamstow" / "The Worst Is Yet To Come" / "Wiggle Waggle" (DJM DJS 679) June 1976
 * "The Womble Bashers" / "Womble Bashers Wock" (Virgin VS 154) June 1976 by The Bashers

Albums
 UK releases
 * Grimms (Island HELP 11) [LP] February 1973
 * Rockin' Duck (Island ILPS 9248) [LP] October 1973
 * Sleepers (DJM DJLPS 470) [LP] May 1976
 * Grimms / Rockin' Duck (Edsel EDCD 370) [CD] 1993 [Reissue of both 1973 albums on one disc, with two tracks from the first album omitted]
 * Sleepers (Hux HUX 079) [CD] July 2006 [Reissue of the 1976 album, with eleven additional tracks]

 US release
 * Rockin' Duck (Antilles AN 7012) [LP] March 1976

Discography notes

 * On the Island label releases, Grimms included Mike McGear.
 * On the DJM label releases, Grimms did not include Mike McGear.
 * The single, "The Womble Bashers" / "Womble Bashers Wock," is by The Bashers, including members of GRIMMS and Mike McGear.
 * See also The Scaffold Discography.
 * See also Mike McGear Discography.

title: GRIMMS


text:
Talk:Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax

Older
Mr. impossible, I think your additions are pretty POV. I'm inclined to revert, but there's probably stuff that can be salvaged. I'd note, also, that you need to describe his anti-semitic behavior, or whatever, towards Hore-Belisha, not just refer to it glancingly. Also, it's pretty questionable to refer to Anthony "who cares what Germany does in its own backyard" Eden as an "anti-appeaser." And Halifax's comments about Hitler were generally in the context of being in meetings in Germany with Hitler or Göring, or whoever. I don't see as "things diplomats say to be polite" can be taken to represent what someone actually thinks. Halifax was certainly less rosy about appeasement than Chamberlain - recall that Halifax led the cabinet revolt after the Bad Godesberg meeting, and also pressed Chamberlain towards a more assertive policy after Prague. Halifax also had pretty much nothing to do with Oswald Mosley (who was a Labour politician before going fascist, first of all). And he did a good job both as Viceroy of India and as wartime ambassador to the United States. john 20:11, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Dear John,

Call me Jo, because it's my name. I pretty much agree with you. I'm still sort of new around here and whatever the tone actually is I don't think I've quite got it. I was updating the list of UK ambassadors, stumbled across this page and was appalled by its stubbiness since Halifax is pretty important in WW2 politics. I didn't have enough info to hand to do a full rewrite so I did a vague and biased one in order to encourage someone to do a better job - which nearly worked (!). In any case, I hate dry articles. So certainly my amendments were more opinion than fact but I sort of question some of your changes - though tentatively.

I did indeed sketch over the anti-semitism because I've just written Leslie Hore-Belisha as well, which I hope you won't also take exception to - it's factually far sounder. I had that in mind so more detail here ("inappropriate to have a Jew in charge of publicity") might be a good idea.

 * It was much better - I think there were some bits that were kind of POV, and I think you're exaggerating the power of "fascist sympathizers" among the Tories. Certainly Halifax was not a fascist sympathizer.  And I'd add that you can find Winston Churchill saying almost exactly the same things about Hitler that Halifax did.  That doesn't make either of them fascist or nazi sympathizers. john 23:33, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

I'd prefer to think of Antony "I hate Nasser" Eden as an anti-appeaser because that's (I believe) why he resigned from the cabinet in 1938 and why Churchill appointed him Foreign Secretary and also had something to do with Eden suceeding Churchill as PM. They were a political faction. Semi-coincidentally he resigned about the time that Hore-Belisha's request to mobilise was slapped down as it was becoming more and more clear that Chamberlain could not be persuaded by any means to adopt an aggressive posture. Not by any UK politician anyway.

 * Eden was an opportunist, pure and simple. When he actually was Foreign Secretary, he was as much of an appeaser as anybody else.  He had personal issues with Chamberlain, and thought he was incompetent, but didn't disagree with his basic attitude to foreign affairs.  It was only after his resignation that he got all anti-appeasement.

On Halifax's comments about Hitler, these were not just in the public arena but also in his private diary. I'm not saying (and indeed did not say, because it would be completely untrue) that Halifax was a Nazi or even in his own terms a nazi-sympathiser. I'm simply saying that in common with many right-wing politicians in 30's Britain he admired Hitler's transformation of Germany from basketcase to industrial strongman of Europe. I mentioned Mosley to emphasise this movement; probably a bridge too far. Incidentally the one thing that Churchill and Mosley had in common was their propensity to switch parties. The latter was a Conservative first (as the youngest MP in the house) for several years only later switching to Labour. If you're a national socialist I suppose you get schizophrenic about stuff like that.

 * Yes, a lot of conservative politicians said things like that about Hitler (including Churchill, as I noted above). But I think it's unfair to say it in such an out of context way.  As it was written, it did suggest that Halifax was a Nazi-sympathizer, and possibly a fascist.  I don't think that's really fair. And also I don't think it's right to connect this with appeasement - Churchill was anti-appeasement, and said many of the same things about Hitler that Halifax did.  And Halifax probably said nicer things about Hitler than Chamberlain ever did, but Chamberlain was much more avid about appeasement than his foreign secretary.  You're right about Mosley, of course (although they both shared on admiration of Mussolini, as well...).  He married Curzon's daughter, and switched to Labour in the 20s sometime. john 23:33, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

On the subject of who was the bigger appeaser - Chamberlain or Halifax - I simply don't know enough to comment except to say that I don't think there's a lot of credit to be had here. Certainly if you think he was a good viceroy/ambassador you could back that up. I'm sure he was - although Churchill surely did most of the talking to Roosevelt...actually the more I think about it (and I'm okay on anglo-american relations) the more I think of Halifax as a rather sidelined figure but perhaps we could talk about that.

 * I agree there's not much credit to either Chamberlain or Halifax on appeasement, although I think Chamberlain was almost certainly a much more deeply stupid and naive appeaser than Halifax. But that says more to how bad Chamberlain was than to anything good about Halifax. As to his role as ambassador, I'll look in my copy of Roosevelt and Hopkins, which talks about Halifax's arrival in Washington, but my understanding is that Churchill considered the position to be pretty tremendously important - remember that in the beginning of 1941, he was still trying to get the US to come into the war.  Of course he was also trying to get rid of Halifax, and Churchill did do a lot of personal diplomacy with Roosevelt, but I think it's hard to say that the position of ambassador to Britain's most important ally (and he also remained a member of the very tiny war cabinet, too) is some sort of kicked upstairs sinecure.  As to his role in Washington, from my memory the Americans were at first highly unenthusiastic about him, because they thought of him as, well, a big appeaser, but that later they warmed to him. john 23:33, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Anyway that's my analysis. I think we both might have been a bit sweeping but I'm sure we can knock a good article of all this so that's nice and it's my first chance to have a big ramble (can you tell I'm enjoying myself) about a wiki article so that's nice too.

A fresh nugget (I won't do an update until we've come to a gentlemen's agreement -oh rats, that needs an addition as well - on the content) is that Halifax features in the novel (and the film) of The Remains of the Day by Kazuo Ishiguro. But I promise that's not where I'm getting my information from.

Sorry to have gone on so tediously.

--Mr impossible 23:01, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

We can probably work out a good article. Certainly stuff like casual anti-semitism and comments admiring Hitler can be worked in, but I think it's important to contextualize them, and to try to avoid tying them to support for appeasement, which I think had a lot more to do with an understandable desire to avoid war, and all that, than it did with any admiration of Hitler's government or sympathy for his persecution of Jews. I might work off Britannica's version to get a more substantial article, at some point. john 23:33, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Finally got round to a properly researched update - though if you're good on international relations 1938-9, that section might need some tweaking. Is there any chance you could put one of those menu things in to break it up a bit? It's now got a bit unwieldy. Also I've removed Goschen from this page because a quick look at Wilmington's biography and a copy of the DK 20th century day by day shows that he was Halifax's successor. I'd recommend that Goschen's article by either rewritten - preferably not by me - or marked for deletion because there's nothing in it but inaccurate information. I won't edit the Viceroy list myself because I know you don't like your lists tangled with and I heard a rumour you were stressed enough as it is.

--Mr impossible 15:36, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

I assume you mean Willingdon? I will just change the Goschen article to say he was governor of Madras from 1924 to 1929, and change the Viceroy article (although you could've done it yourself). At any rate, much good work with this expansion, although it presently seems a bit 1911-ish in its Olympian judgments - it might need a bit of NPOVing, but I think it's okay. I'll add something on 1938 to 1939 when I get the chance. john 20:27, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

Article Title
Before he was made Lord Irwin, I've generally seen him referenced as "E.F.L. Wood." As such, wasn't the previous location (with the full name) more appropriate? john k 01:17, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Yes, I think so. However, I'm generally in favor of doing these kinds of moves, if only to simplify linking. Mackensen 01:19, 23 Sep 2004 (UTC)

FIRST Earl of H.?
Is it possible that TWO 1st Earls with the same name did exist in history: (1) E.F.L. Wood and (2) "Charles Montagu, 1st Earl of Halifax, KG, PC, FRS (16 April 1661–19 May 1715)", an English poet and statesman? And if so, how? --ECeDee 15:02, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

 * Actually it's even more complicated than that. Have a look at Earl of Halifax! These titles are in the gift of the monarch and they revert to the crown if there aren't the correct heirs about (as in Montagu's case) so over long periods of time they can be given out again. And again. --Mr impossible 12:32, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: German Alliance Pact documents
I don´t want to mess around with this piece because most of it reads very well, but this section seems grammatically wonky:

"In August 2008, under the freedom of information act the MI5 released documents revealing amateur diplomat James Lonsdale-Bryans attempts to foster a allegiance between Britain and Germany, and implicated Halifax as James Lonsdale-Bryans strongest proponent in Parliament."

Should this be:

"In August 2008, under the Freedom of Information Act the MI5 released documents revealing the attempts of James Lonsdale-Bryans to seek a peace treaty between Britain and Germany, and implicated Halifax as James Lonsdale-Bryans' strongest proponent in Parliament."

???

I'd like a response, because I don´t wish to intervene in a subject that i don´t know anything about (maybe that´s a bit deviant in wikipedia ...) Compromiso (talk) 00:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)

 * I added this section sorry for my bad grammar, this entire section of the article was removed by Mleimon and the only explanation was he/she was adding balance to the article, given it is a documented fact with references the manner in which this was done was completely abhorrent I will add the section again and with the grammatical improvements suggested. RohypnolFTW (talk) 01:16, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Most significant event
The mosat significant political event, the death sentences of martyrs Bhagat Singh, Sukhdev, and Rajguru has not even been bloody mentioned!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.170.35 (talk) 07:51, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Cripple?
"was born with a withered left arm with no hand, a disability that in no way affected his riding, hunting or shooting"? I'd think it would affect anyone, even if they found a way to overcome that (and how?). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aurast (talk • contribs) 01:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

 * He had an artificial hand with a spring-operated thumb.Paulturtle (talk) 18:08, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Appeasement, etc.
Some of the strongest condemnation of Lord Halifax isn't mentioned. I added the Guilty Men link. Another thing to consider might be the Auxiliary Units/Michael Foot stuff. The somewhat sloppy text on the gateway page to the Dad's Revolutionary Army episode of BBC radio programme Document claims, "the early Home Guard believed that Foreign Secretary, Lord Halifax was leading the call to give in ⌈to Germany in the Second World War⌉. Michael Foot, who then backed a guerrilla war, had plans for Halifax if he did. The 93 year-old former Labour leader told this programme: 'I'd have killed him' ". Open4D (talk) 17:07, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

 * You can also hear a minute of an interview with Foot here on You Tube. Open4D (talk) 17:07, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Guilty men isn't a serious historical source, it's a rabid screed by the Marxist wing of the Labour Party. Should we also include "The Left Was Never Right": The 'answer' to 'Guilty Men'? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.184.72.43 (talk) 23:01, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

 * It's a bit of a push to say Foot was on the Marxist wing of the Labour Party. More than a push frankly, just plain daft. Or perhaps you meant the Liberal Owen or the Tory Howard were on the Marxist wing of the Labour Party? DuncanHill (talk) 23:07, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

For the Sake of England
Whereas Dominion and Afrika Reich are well-known novels, I cannot find any reference on Amazon to this novel or it's author who has been set up as a redlink. Can someone assist? 217.155.193.120 (talk) 23:51, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

"Destroy" Czechoslovakia?
Is the following sentence, from roughly halfway through the article, correct? "The eventual Munich settlement, though humiliating to many in the British government, while hugely popular around the world, was short of Hitler's desires (and of Chamberlain's proposed concessions) and increased Hitler's determination to return to destroy Czechoslovakia in the spring." Hitler's determination to destroy Czechoslovakia? That can't be right, surely? Hitler wanted to *claim* Czechoslovakia, not destroy it. --Stickie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.29.230.9 (talk) 17:19, 6 February 2013 (UTC)

Well yes and no. Czechoslovakia was an artificial construct barely 20 years old. Hitler didn't want to physically destroy the country ala Carthage. He wanted to destroy the concept: Take parts for himself and give Poland and Slovakia the rest. 90.184.72.43 (talk) 22:57, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

last appeaser
The article states "In January 1941 Halifax was sent to Washington, D.C., on the death in office there of Ambassador Marquess of Lothian; he was the last man linked with appeasement to leave the Cabinet, as Chamberlain, Hoare and Simon had already departed."

A couple of quibbles with this. Firstly, Chamberlain didn't depart; he died. Secondly, while Simon was not a member of the War Cabinet, he held the position of Lord Chancellor throughout Churchill's ministry, which was generally a cabinet-level office. Saying he'd "left the Cabinet" seems rather strong - he'd rejoin it as soon as a normal sized cabinet was re-established after the war in Europe ended. Finally, I'm not sure you can say that either Sir Kingsley Wood, a close associate of Chamberlain, or especially Anthony Eden, who had been the primary executor of appeasement throughout his first tenure as Foreign Secretary, can be considered to not be "linked" with appeasement. john k (talk) 04:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

 * Simon was not restored to the Cabinet when the war ended. I'll retire back to pedants' corner now.Paulturtle (talk) 17:42, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

In popular culture
Was it Winston Churchill or Jennie Jerome who was elected President in 1936? Paul Magnussen (talk) 16:43, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

Neutrality questioned
This article whitewashes Lord Halifax. It doesn't even mention the May 1940 War Cabinet Crisis. It was my understanding the reason Churchill became PM was that, unlike Halifax, he did not want to sue for peace. Shemp Howard, Jr. (talk) 22:00, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

 * Incorrect. He declined to become PM (and this was right at the start of May 1940, just as Hitler was attacking the West), although almost everyone wanted him to, as he felt that Churchill would have been running the war leaving him as a puppet, much as Lloyd George had wanted Asquith to be in Dec 1916. The official reason given was that as a peer he could not realistically be PM. At that stage a long war still seemed to be in the offing.

 * The suing for peace stuff came a week or two later after the catastrophic French defeat at Sedan. Halifax favoured approaching Italy to see if acceptable terms were on offer, as it would give a chance to extract the BEF from France and in his view better terms might be obtained with France still in the war than after her defeat. Churchill - who appears to been deluding himself about the likelihood of France fighting on and about the imminence of US entry - in drumming up the support of the Labour ministers, asserted that peace would mean "surrender" and handing over the Royal Navy, a view which has passed so deep into popular mythology that most historians just skate quickly over the matter as it is almost impossible to have a rational discussion about it. It is simply impossible to say what armistice terms might have been on offer.Paulturtle (talk) 04:32, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 30 March 2015

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: To be moved to Edward Frederick Lindley Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax. No firm consensus or case based on reliable sources has emerged for the proposed name, but there does seem to be some sense that his name is often spelled out in full in sources, rather than initialised. The proposer said below that the spelled out title is acceptable, so going with that. Note: move requires admin assistance, which I will request. — Amakuru (talk) 12:34, 7 May 2015 (UTC)

E. F. L. Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax → Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax – WP:NCPEER. His entry in the ODNB confirms he was known by his first name of Edward. The article seems to have been placed here in 2005 on the grounds that he was more commonly referred to by his initials (like F. E. Smith), but no source for this is given - and he certainly would not have been so known after his ennoblement, so using the initials in combination with the peerage title is anachronistic. Opera hat (talk) 00:43, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

 * Oppose: other sources suggest he was referred to by his initials see: UK War Cabinet, a site which seems to be connected to the National Archives (here), IMDB (here), and this image held by the Library of Congress (here). Other sources tend to spell out his name in full as 'Edward Frederick Lindley' rather than just as Edward such as Cracroft's Peerage (here) and Halifax College, York, which is named after him (here). Ebonelm (talk) 11:56, 30 March 2015 (UTC)
 * That UK War Cabinet site clearly uses Wikipedia as a source and IMDB is not reliable. Even if Halifax was known to the public as EFL Wood, this would no longer have been the case after he was created Lord Irwin in 1925, succeeded to the viscountcy of Halifax in 1934 and was raised to an earldom in 1944. The only people who would have used his Christian names after 1925 would have been close friends and family, and they called him Edward. The current title is a form of his name that would never have been used by anyone. Any printed encyclopaedia would have its article at "Halifax, Edward Frederick Lindley Wood, 1st Earl of" and if you'd prefer this article to be at Edward Frederick Lindley Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax I wouldn't object. Opera hat (talk) 10:36, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 18 May 2016

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) Omni Flames   let's talk about it  08:17, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Edward Frederick Lindley Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax → Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax – He went by the name Edward, and we don't usually keep people articles with all forenames. Google hits on "edward wood lord halifax": 373,000; on "edward frederick lindley wood lord Halifax: 48,600. He also appears in Oxford Dictionary of National Biography as "Edward Wood". HandsomeFella (talk) 16:08, 18 May 2016 (UTC) --Relisted. — Amakuru (talk) 07:56, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

 * Normally I'd agree with you, but in Lord Halifax's case there may be something to be said for his three first names. Before he was elevated to the peerage as Baron Irwin, he was often referred to in official contexts as E.F.L. Wood (although Hansard went by Hon Edward Wood or Major E. Wood). In modern academic sources E.F.L. Wood isn't unusual either. Atchom (talk) 01:39, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
 * We have a similar case: Edward Bulwer-Lytton, who was created Baron Lytton in 1866, "after he had done the bulk of his writing and political activity" (quote move discussion on Talk:Edward Bulwer-Lytton. "E. F. L. Wood" – with spaced initials per WP:SPACEINITS – is an alternative target for the move, if that can be agreed upon. It actually has 410,000 google hits. HandsomeFella (talk) 11:01, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

 * Rename to either Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax or E. F. L. Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax, but whatever, get rid of the God-awful current title. It was never used. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:22, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
 * As I proposed a move to Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax in March, I suppose I'd better support it now. I oppose E. F. L. Wood: are people really suggesting that he is better known by the name under which he served as a minor government minister in the 1920s, rather than as Lord Irwin, the Viceroy of India, or Lord Halifax, the Foreign Secretary and wartime Ambassador to the USA? And I strongly oppose a move back to E. F. L. Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax: at least the full name and title was and is used by other encyclopaedias, biographical dictionaries, peerage reference works and the like, but the combination of initials and title is a nonsense hybrid never seen outside Wikipedia. Opera hat (talk) 23:41, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Recent edit-warring
I see the article's introduction, which I scribbled a few months back (it probably needs a brief summary of his India policies as well) has attracted the attentions of an anonymous editor with only a few edits to his name, possibly the same tedious troll who keeps resurfacing in British political history articles of this era (sorry if I'm jumping to wrong conclusions).

Just so as we are clear here, I'm not aware of any historian who seriously disputes the version of events given in the introduction, namely that Halifax, as is shown in documents from the time, was unwilling to be a figurehead PM with Churchill running the war (this was when the German attack on the West had just started but before it became clear that France was about to go down to catastrophic defeat). I don't know of anybody, not even Boris Johnson (I checked) who claims that Churchill "refused to serve under him", even if he may or may not have kept tactically silent at one meeting. This wasn't 1916 when everyone was at each other's throats and threatening to resign. Feel free to post a correction if I'm wrong.Paulturtle (talk) 05:34, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Austria annexed Germany
More Austrians (by percentage) voted to merge with Germany than Germans voted to merge with Austria. More than 99% of both countries supported the merger but te Austrian vote was higher by a fraction of a percent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.144.97.133 (talk) 23:07, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

German alliance with Britain
Hitler stated often that he was a supporter of Britain and its empire, evensuggesting a military alliance o prevent Stalin overtaking Europe. When the British Luegenpresse repeatedly claimed that Hitler was Britain's enemy, Hitler wrote a letter to Lord Rothermere that stated he had given between four and five thousand speeches, and in none of them had he said or written anything against Britain or its interests. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.144.97.133 (talk) 23:11, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax. 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/20050106213938/http://www.indhistory.com/lord-irwin.html to http://www.indhistory.com/lord-irwin.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) 09:04, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax. 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/20131621142700/http://www.chch.ox.ac.uk/cathedral/memorials/WW2/francis-wood to http://www.chch.ox.ac.uk/cathedral/memorials/WW2/francis-wood

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) 03:27, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Baron Irwin
Where did the "Irwin" title come from? Is it a place (I can't find anywhere called Irwin in the UK: our list at Irwin only lists places in the US and Australia)? Or a surname from somewhere in his ancestry perhaps? Proteus (Talk) 13:48, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Good question! According to Birkenhead "Edward relinquished his seat in the House of Commons and was created Baron Irwin of Kirby Underdale, the parish in the East Riding of Yorkshire in which Garrowby lies. There was a connection here between the name Irwin and Temple Newsam, for an Ingram had been raised to the peerage after the Restoration and assumed the Scottish title of Lord Irvine." Garrowby Hall was the ancestral seat of the Woods, Temple Newsam was left by Emily Meynell-Ingram to her nephew, Edward Wood. The Ingrams used the English Irwin spelling rather than the Scottish Irvine, despite Irvine being the "official" form used in the title. So he used it as a nod to the family whose stately home he had inherited. DuncanHill (talk) 18:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you - that's very interesting! Proteus (Talk) 10:44, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Edward Wood, 1st Earl of Halifax


text:
Scum (film)

Scum is a 1979 British prison drama film directed by Alan Clarke and starring Ray Winstone, Mick Ford, Julian Firth and John Blundell. The film portrays the brutality of life inside a British borstal. The script was originally filmed as a television play for the BBC's Play for Today series in 1977. However, due to the violence depicted, it was withdrawn from broadcast. Two years later, director Alan Clarke and scriptwriter Roy Minton remade it as a film, first shown on Channel 4 in 1983. By this time the borstal system had been reformed. The original TV version was eventually allowed to be aired eight years later in 1991.

The film tells the story of a young offender named Carlin as he arrives at the institution and his rise through violence and self-protection to the top of the inmates' pecking order, purely as a tool to survive. Beyond Carlin's individual storyline, the film also serves as an indictment of the borstal system's flaws, with no attempt at rehabilitation. The warders and convicts alike are brutalised by the system. The film's controversy arose over its graphic depiction of racism, extreme violence, rape, suicide, many fights and very strong language.

Plot
Three young men arrive at a borstal by prison van: Carlin, who has taken the blame for his brother's theft of scrap metal; Angel for stealing a car and Davis for escaping from an open institution. Each is allocated a room; Angel and Davis get private rooms while Carlin is sent to a dormitory.

Carlin, having been transferred for assaulting a warden, wants to keep a low profile. He meets and befriends Archer, an eccentric and intellectual inmate serving two years for workplace fraud who is intent upon peacefully inconveniencing the staff as much as possible. Archer tells Carlin how his reputation is already known: Banks, the current "Daddy" (the inmate who controls the wing), is seeking Carlin for a fight to maintain his dominance over the wing. Banks' status appears to have been achieved by petty bullying and intimidation with the aid of his henchmen Richards and Eckersley and the passive assent of the staff.

Carlin struggles to settle into the dormitory and, after witnessing the timid and vulnerable Davis victimised and attacked by Banks, is himself viciously beaten and headbutted by Banks in an unprovoked attack. Realising there is no hope of being allowed to serve his sentence in peace, Carlin exacts revenge and establishes dominance. Walking through the association (rec) room he picks up two snooker balls and puts them in a sock. Using this improvised cosh on Richards, Carlin orders Eckersley to desist from informing, then goes to find Banks. Surprising him in a washroom he gives Banks a severe beating and then tells him who the "Daddy" of the wing now is: one who will 'kill him' if Banks ever interferes with his or his friends' wellbeing. This ambush required cooperation and information from other inmates, showing how Carlin has soon won both respect and amity.

Several days later, Carlin is challenged by an adjacent wing's Daddy whom he viciously beats but allows to continue to manage his wing under Carlin's overall control. Things improve for the inmates under Carlin, with victimisation of younger, weaker prisoners prevented, along with racially-motivated violence. He keeps to the same seat at table in the dining hall, to where information and requests are directed, and with his associates such as Archer and Meakin - a contrast to Banks and his bullies. Carlin's status is recognised by the warders: he requests and gets a single cell in return for agreeing to be a responsible "natural leader" to the housemaster Mr. Goodyear.

Meanwhile, Meakin's friend Toyne, learns through a letter from his in-laws that his wife has died. He becomes severely depressed, his despair being noticed by the warders who scold him for "moping". Toyne slashes the arteries in his arms. He is transferred to an adult prison where, Meakin later learns, he died after a second suicide attempt. Davis, meanwhile, is framed for theft by Eckersley and placed on report. Carlin advises him to be careful to avoid Eckersley and his cronies but while working alone in a greenhouse, Davis is gang-raped by three youths who had requested a break after seeing him there. Their supervising warder Sands sees what happens but reacts with a grin and then ignores the dishevelled state of the semi-undressed trio as they return. That night a distraught Davis kills himself with a razor blade. While bleeding to death, he presses the button in his cell for help, but is ignored by warder Greaves.

Davis's suicide is the last straw for the Borstal inmates. In the dining hall, having collected their food, the inmates sit silently, refusing to eat. Carlin initiates a full-scale riot in the dinner hall. Carlin, Archer and Meakin are later shown being dragged, bleeding and unconscious, into solitary confinement after having been beaten by the wardens. The Borstal's Governor later informs them the damage to the dinner hall will be repaid through lost earnings. The Governor then declares a minute's silent prayer for Davis and Toyne.

Deviations from original BBC production
The film differs from the original BBC production in many respects. The film contains strong language and is much more violent and graphic than the milder BBC version. Ray Winstone, John Blundell, Phil Daniels, John Judd, Ray Burdis and Patrick Murray all reprise their respective roles as Carlin, Banks, Richards, Sands, Eckersley and Dougan from the BBC version, while all other roles are recast. David Threlfall had been intended to reprise his role as Archer from the BBC version, but he was working with the Royal Shakespeare Company at the time and was subsequently replaced by Mick Ford. The story was also changed. The BBC version features a homosexual relationship between Carlin and another inmate, which was dropped from the film. Minton later said that this was a pity as it would have expanded Carlin's character and made him vulnerable in an area where he could not afford to be vulnerable.

The television play version of the film also features less graphic rape and suicide scenes. An additional scene shows Davis trying to talk to Carlin about the incident. Carlin dismisses him when he is reluctant to talk in front of Carlin's 'missus' (partner). In the remake, the relationship between Carlin and his 'missus' does not feature. Instead, during the mess, Davis looks up at Carlin from the dining table as if about to confide in him, but Carlin unwittingly chooses that moment to get up and leave.

Also in the television play, it is made clear at the end of the film that Banks is in hospital – resulting from the beating administered by Carlin when ousting him as the "daddy"; in the theatrical version he is present at the end moment of silence.

Release
The film had its UK premiere at the Prince Charles Cinema in London. It opened on 20 September 1979 at the Prince Charles Cinema and finished fifth at the London box office with a gross of £18,074 in its first week.

2017 re-release
In 2017, Kino Lorber re-released the film in selected theatres for a limited time. In the United States, the film grossed $5,405.

Critical reception
In a High Court case against Channel 4 for showing the film, British morality campaigner Mary Whitehouse initially won her private prosecution, but the decision was later reversed on appeal. The Independent Broadcasting Authority had approved on its transmission. However, the film was well-received by critics, and today enjoys a reputation of a classic cult movie.

Philip Thomas of Empire said of the film, "Scum's brutality makes it a genuinely harrowing film. The bleak, snow-dusted locations, the featureless interiors of the institution, the perfect casting and magnificent acting of the indifferent and brutal staff make borstal appear to be what can only be described as a living hell."

On review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film holds an approval rating of 89% based on reviews from 9 critics. Metacritic gives the film a score of 78 out of 100, based on reviews by 11 critics, indicating "generally favorable reviews".

Legacy
In 2010, a Canadian film heavily based on Scum, titled Dog Pound, was released.

Home media
The film was first released on VHS video in the UK in 1983, where it was immediately caught up in the UK video nasty controversy of the early 1980s.

It was later released on DVD in the UK by Odyssey and Prism Leisure. It was the digitally remastered uncut version but in fullscreen, with only a trailer and an interview as bonus features. In the US an Alan Clarke boxset was issued that included several films, among them both the BBC original and cinema version of the film plus audio commentaries. Prism Leisure released a limited edition 2 disc set in the UK on 13 June 2005. Disc One featured the BBC version with an audio commentary and two interviews. Disc Two instead featured the theatrical remake with an audio commentary, several interviews and featurettes and two trailers. It was digitally remastered from a widescreen print. This special edition DVD was sold in amaray slipcase packaging and also in a limited edition tin case. A Region 0 DVD boxset featuring both the theatrical version and the 1977 BBC-banned television version on separate discs followed in the US, released by Blue Underground. In 2015, Australian company Shock Entertainment released Scum on DVD and Blu-ray as part of their Cinema Cult line.

title: Scum (film)


text:
Theodor Brorsen

Theodor Johan Christian Ambders Brorsen (29 July 1819 – 31 March 1895) was a Danish astronomer. He is best known for his discovery of five comets, including the lost periodic comet, 5D/Brorsen, and the periodic comet 23P/Brorsen-Metcalf.

Life
Theodor Johan Christian Ambders Brorsen was born in Nordborg on the island Als, (South Jutland), as son of the captain Christian August Brorsen (1793-1840) and Annette Margrethe Gerhardine Schumacher (1788-1855). He got his three middle names after the maternal grandfather of his mother, the Nordborg counsel Johan Christian Ambders (1710-1795). After the amicable divorce of his parents in 1822, Brorsen grew up at his mother's. Her good financial circumstances allowed him to attend the school of the Moravians in Christiansfeld (1826-1829) and then, from 1830 to 1839, the Latin school in Flensburg. By request of his mother, Brorsen studied law in Kiel (1839), Berlin (1840), Heidelberg (1841), and again in Kiel (1842), until he decided to follow his inclinations and studied astronomy in Kiel in 1844.

Brorsen worked at the astronomical observatory of Kiel in 1846, and at the Altona Observatory in 1847. He rejected a job offer from the astronomical observatory "Rundetaarn" (Round tower) in Copenhagen. Instead, he accepted a job at the private observatory of baron John Parish (1774-1858, an Englishman, also known as Freiherr von Senftenberg) in Žamberk (at the time called Senftenberg) in the present-day Czech Republic. When the post of the director of the astronomical observatory of Altona became vacant in 1854, Brorsen applied to it, but was not chosen. After the death of baron Parish in 1858, his heirs had the observatory of Senftenberg dismantled and the astronomical instruments were sold, although Brorsen offered to continue his work for free. Nevertheless. Brorsen remained in Senftenberg for another 12 years, and continued his observations with his own instruments.

In 1870, he returned to his home town of Nordborg in South Jutland, which had become Prussian since the Second War of Schleswig in 1864, and subsequently was German from 1871 up to the plebiscite of 1920. In 1874, Brorsen moved into the house Løjtertoft 11, where he lived until his death. His unmarried half sister, Amalie Petrine Brorsen (1832-1911), kept the house for him. In his years in Nordborg, however, Brorsen hardly occupied himself with astronomy any more. His main interests were meteorology (also observations of the Northern Lights), as well as botany, especially orchid breeding.

Personally, Brorsen was an introverted character with relationship anxieties. He twice broke off an engagement in the last moment (first one to Louise Lassen from Sønderborg, then another one to Miss Bernkopf from Žamberk) and hence remained unmarried. Besides, there are testimonies that Brorsen developed self-willed habits in the last 25 years of his life spent in Nordborg. He did not take much care for his clothing, he let his hair grow long, and when his boots pressed his feet, he cut holes into his boots in the tight places. He used to take a daily bath in the Oldenor, a lake in Nordborg; in winter, he hoed a hole into the ice for that purpose. Brorsen died at 75 years of age, and was buried on 5 April 1895 in the cemetery of Nordborg where his grave is still preserved today.

Discoveries

 * Brorsen discovered five comets: 1846 III, 1846 VII, 1847 V, 1851 III and 1851 IV.  Two of them were named after Brorsen as they are periodic comets.  The comet 1846 III is called Brorsen and the comet 1847 V is named Brorsen-Metcalf (because Joel Hastings Metcalf was its rediscoverer in 1919).

 * The comet 5D/Brorsen (with a period of 5.46 years) was last seen in 1879. In all, five of its rotations around the Sun were observed.  It belonged to the Jupiter comet family, whose comets can be short-lived- it may not exist today.

 * The comet 23P/Brorsen-Metcalf (with a period of 69.06 years) was observed in 1847, 1919 and 1989. It belongs to the Halley comet family and is to be expected for 2059 again.

 * In 1850, Brorsen (re-)discovered an emission nebula in the constellation Orion: NGC 2024, also known as Flame Nebula. It had already been observed, however, by William Herschel in 1786, as we know today.
 * Brorsen might have discovered a sixth comet on 16 March 1854; this discovery could not be confirmed by other astronomers, though.
 * In 1854, Brorsen published the first thorough investigations of the so-called gegenschein (counter shine) of the Zodiacal light. He was also able to explain that phenomenon correctly. Besides, Brorsen was the first to discover that the Zodiacal light can embrace the complete sky, because, under favorable conditions, a feeble light bridge connecting the Zodiacal light and the counter glow can be observed.
 * In 1856, Brorsen discovered a globular cluster in the constellation Serpens, which was later catalogued as NGC 6539.
 * Further, Brorsen investigated the occultations and proper motions of stars. In the field of theoretical astronomy, Brorsen calculated the perihelia of comet and planet orbits.

Honors

 * For each of his first three comet discoveries, Brorsen was awarded a golden comet medal by the Danish king Christian VIII. The medal that he got in 1846 can be seen today in the museum at Sønderborg castle, see here.
 * Brorsen was appointed a corresponding member of the nature historic society in Žamberk in 1850.
 * Today, in Nordborg, a street, Th. Brorsens vej, is named after Brorsen.
 * The asteroid 3979, which was discovered by A. Mrkos in Klet on 8 November 1983 was named "Brorsen" on proposal of J. Tichá (MPC 27734 – 1996 August 28).

Literature

 * Sven Houmøller, Otto Kryck: Familien Brorsen fra Nordborg. Copenhagen 1949, p. 25-28 (listing the previous literature).
 * Hertha Raben Petersen: Theodor Brorsen. Astronom. Nordborg 1986. ISBN 87-88558-05-3

title: Theodor Brorsen