text:
Israel Aerospace Industries

Israel Aerospace Industries (התעשייה האווירית לישראל), is Israel's major aerospace and aviation manufacturer, producing aerial and astronautic systems for both military and civilian usage. It has 14,000 employees as of 2021. IAI is state-owned by the government of Israel.

IAI designs, develops, produces and maintains civil aircraft, drones, fighter aircraft, missile, avionics, and space-based systems.

IAI's main focus is engineering, aviation and high-tech electronics, though it also manufactures military systems for ground and naval forces. Many of these products are centered on the core needs of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF). Other offerings are marketed to numerous foreign militaries.

History
Israel Aerospace Industries was founded in 1953 as Bedek Aviation Company under the initiative of Shimon Peres, then director general of the Ministry of Defense, in order to maintain Israel Defense Forces aircraft. The company originally had 70 employees and recruited American born aviation expert Al Schwimmer as the company's founder and first president.

First aircraft manufacturing

In 1959 Bedek began manufacturing its first aircraft, a V-tailed twinjet trainer of French design, the Fouga CM.170 Magister, locally called Tzukit (Monticola). The Tzukit became the Israeli Air Force principal trainer for 50 years. The IAI Tzukit was also used in the 1967 Six-Day War by 147 Squadron as a close support aircraft, attacking targets on the Egyptian front during the first day of the war, when Israel's more capable combat aircraft were deployed against Arab air bases and aircraft. They were then deployed against Jordanian forces, including armour, on the West Bank. The Magister proved effective at the close-support mission albeit with heavy casualties, with six being lost.

The first aircraft to be fully designed and built by IAI, the IAI Arava short take-off and landing transport aircraft, first flew in 1969 after three years of development.

The French embargo impact
In response to the French embargo, IAI began developing its own fighter aircraft, a derivative of the Mirage 5 called the IAI Nesher ("hawk"), in 1968. The Nesher entered service in 1971, in time for the Yom Kippur War. The Nesher was followed by the IAI Kfir ("lion cub"), which was developed as a result of Israel's need for adapting the Dassault Mirage III to the specific requirements of the Israeli Air Force. The Kfir entered service with the IAF in 1975, the first units being assigned to the 101st "First Fighter" Squadron. Over the following years, several other squadrons were also equipped with the new aircraft. The Kfir's first recorded combat action took place on 9 November 1977, during an Israeli air strike on a training camp at Tel Azia, in Lebanon. The only air victory claimed by a Kfir during its service with the IAF occurred on 27 June 1979 when a Kfir C.2 shot down a Syrian MiG-21.

The IAI Kfir has been exported to Colombia, Ecuador, Sri Lanka and was leased to the US Navy and the US Marine Corps from 1985 to 1989, to act as adversary aircraft in dissimilar air combat training.

Diversification

In 1969 IAI acquired North American Rockwell's Jet Commander series of business aircraft. This became the basis for the IAI Westwind line. Work on an improved Westwind – named the Astra – began in the late 1970s by stretching the fuselage and designing a new swept wing, with the first prototype flight occurring on 19 March 1984. The first production Astra flew on 20 March 1985, FAA certification came on 29 August 1985 and customer deliveries started in 1986.

In the 1960s, IAI developed the Gabriel anti-ship missile and the Elta Electronics Industries subsidiary developed an inexpensive aircraft radar which would become a successful export item. In the 1970s IAI developed the Dabur class patrol boat.

In the 1970s IAI also entered the Unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) market with the development of the IAI Scout. In 1984, IAI formed a joint venture with rival Israeli company Tadiran to market both companies' UAV's, the Tadiran Mastiff and the IAI Scout.

Developing the maintenance, repair and overhaul business
By 1980s the original Bedek maintenance business was conducting extensive overhauls on dozens of different aircraft types, working on engines as well as airframes and interiors, IAI could provide more comprehensive refurbishments than even the aircraft manufacturers themselves. The unit had 4,000 employees by the mid-1980s and overhauled a huge range of aircraft, from propeller-driven trainers to airliners; including big civil aviation programs, such as conversion of Boeing 747s to freighters.

The Lavi program

In 1980 the Government of Israel decided to use the experience IAI had accumulated to develop and manufacture a modern fighter plane to be the mainstay of the Israel Air Force. The aircraft, called the IAI Lavi, was to be a superior attack aircraft with advanced weapons systems. It had its rollout in July 1986 and successful maiden flight in December 1986.

In August 1987, after extensive government deliberations, the decision was made (by one vote) to cancel the Lavi program, due to the questioning of Israel's economic ability to support the cost of such an extensive program. This led to a serious crisis at IAI which necessitated a major reorganization of the company's structure and business strategy; the company's work force of more than 22,000 people was cut by 5,500 in 1988. However, the Lavi program was credited with developing a number of advanced technologies that IAI was able to market.

1990s onwards—export led growth
By 1989 IAI posted a profit of $11.8 million on sales of $1.28 billion. The company had four divisions—Aircraft, Aviation, Electronics, and Technologies—and 17 factories. IAI was established as a world leader in upgrading aircraft. Planes such as the Vietnam-era McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II were modernized with advanced avionics and weaponry.

In the 1990s IAI entered the space race with the AMOS communications satellites, Ofeq observation satellites and the Shavit space launcher.

In December 1997, the IAI Galaxy, a business jet with an intercontinental range developed as a joint venture Galaxy Aerospace with the Hyatt Corporation, made its first flight and entered service in 2000. In May 2001, General Dynamics' Gulfstream Aerospace bought IAI's Galaxy Aerospace Co. L.P. unit for $330 million, although IAI continues to perform most of the assembly and development of the jets which are marketed by Gulfstream.

In 2003, Israel Aircraft Industries attempted to enter the VLJ (very light jet) Market by launching the Avocet ProJet, a 6–8 seat high utilization air taxi with a list price almost half the cost of the least expensive business jet available at that time. In early 2006, ProJet development stalled after a major undisclosed US OEM pulled out of the program due to unspecified reasons.

The company was working with the Aviation Technology Group on a military trainer version of the ATG Javelin, a fighter style personal jet. The version being developed would have competed against a large field of jet trainers at a much lower cost of acquisition and maintenance. ATG halted development of the Javelin in 2008 due to a lack of funds.

In March 2004 IAI signed a $1.1 billion contract with India to install three EL/W-2090 AWACS systems on Russian-made Ilyushin Il-76 transports, which are based in part on IAI's earlier EL/M-2075 Phalcon platform which was developed in the 1990s. In the late 2000s IAI developed the follow-on EL/W-2085 system which is installed on heavily modified Gulfstream G550 aircraft and which besides serving in the IAF were also sold to Singapore and Italy.

On 6 November 2006, IAI changed its corporate name from "Israel Aircraft Industries Ltd." to "Israel Aerospace Industries Ltd."; to more accurately reflect the current scope of the firm's business activities, which includes not just aircraft, but also systems, satellites and launchers, as well as maritime and ground systems.

On 13 April 2009, the Moscow Times reported that the Russian Defense Ministry had signed an agreement with Israel Aerospace to purchase $50 million in pilotless drone aircraft. The contract reportedly includes three types of UAVs manufactured by the company.

In January 2012, IAI announced a sale of $1.1 billion of defense systems to an Asian country. The deal has been signed but the company did not name the buyer. It was reported that the sale will include IAI aircraft, missiles and intelligence technologies.

On 4 September 2012, the Gulfstream G280, a new twin-engine business jet built by IAI, received full certification from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

IAI is a member of the prestigious Trace International and Society of Corporate Compliance and Ethics (SCCE) organizations and recognized in the Transparency International April 2015 report to be in the top third of worldwide defense companies for its ethics and anti-corruption programs.

In April 2018, IAI systems were observed in a film made by the Azerbaijan Army, specifically the IAI Harop loitering munition system, resulting in criticism from the Armenian government concerning the supply of Israeli arms to the Azeri army. In 2019, IAI sells drone defense systems to governments to be placed in sensitive areas such as borders, army bases, or power plans, and provides equipment to shoot down military drones as well. It also sells to clients such as airports looking to protect against consumer drones. IAI in 2019 is Israel’s major aerospace and defense manufacturer. It released its Popstar system in September 2019, which "can detect and track drones up to 4 km away in day or night". IAI advised customers in December 2019 not to fly some Boeing 737 freighters it had converted, after IAI said it detected an "apparent irregularity" in the production process. IAI's converted 737s had come into service in 2003.

In July 2021, IAI Aviation Group has agreed to establish a passenger to freighter conversion site to convert the B737-700/800 with Atitech (Italy) in Naples.

Civilian aircraft produced
Source:

 * IAI Westwind (1965–1987) :
 * 1121 Jet Commander, Certification : November 1964, Line relocated in Israël in 1969
 * 1123 Commodore Jet, Certification : December 1971, stretched, GE‐CJ610‐9 turbojets, thrust reversers, wing-tip tanks, APU
 * 1124 Westwind I, Certification : March 1976, TFE731‐3 turbofans, updated systems and avionics
 * 1124A Westwind II, Certification : April 1980, winglets, wing refinements, additional tank, upgraded avionics
 * Gulfstream G100 (1985–2016)
 * 1125 Astra, Certification : August 1985, new wing, modified fuselage, updated systems and avionics
 * 1125 Astra SP, Certification : May 1990, digital avionics
 * G100 (Astra SPX), Certification : January 1996, improved engines, upgraded avionics
 * G150, Certification : November 2005, fuselage stretched and widened, new nose, new avionics, uprated engines
 * Gulfstream G200 (Galaxy, 1997–2011), Certification : December 1998, new fuselage, improved engines, winglets, modified wing, upgraded avionics
 * Gulfstream G280, (in production) Certification and EIS: 2011 : All new fuselage, T-Tail, Wings, engines, systems and avionics
 * Arava: medium-sized STOL transport aircraft (no longer in production)
 * IAI Avocet ProJet: very light jet (program cancelled in 2005)

Civilian air systems

 * Conversion of passenger aircraft to cargo aircraft
 * A330-300
 * B737-300
 * B737-400
 * B737-700
 * B737-800
 * B767-200
 * B767-300
 * B747-200
 * B747-400
 * B777-300
 * Flight Guard infrared countermeasures system against MANPAD anti-aircraft missiles

Military aircraft

 * 377M Anak – conversions done to several ex-Pan American World Airways Boeing 377 Stratocruiser airliners into heavy lift military cargo aircraft after the United States refused the sale of the C-130 to the Israeli Air Force.
 * Lavi – an Israeli fighter jet, abandoned when the United States refused to fund an F-16 competitor.
 * Kfir – fighter jet, developed from the Nesher.
 * Nammer – fighter jet, updated version of the Kfir.
 * Nesher – fighter jet, derivative of the French Mirage 5.
 * ELTA-ELI-3001 – AISIS – Airborne Integrated SIGINT System.
 * CAEW Conformal Airborne Early Warning Aircraft – based on the G550 and equipped with the phalcon radar.

Unmanned aerial vehicles

 * UAVs – unmanned aerial vehicles, manufactured by IAI's MALAT division:
 * Pioneer (with the USA)
 * RQ-5 Hunter (with the USA)
 * Heron family of long-endurance unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV)
 * Harpy
 * Eitan
 * I-View
 * Harop
 * Ranger
 * Scout
 * Searcher
 * Bird-Eye family of mini-UAV
 * Panther
 * Ghost

Military air systems

 * Rafael Python 5 air-to-air missile (together with Rafael Advanced Defense Systems Ltd.)
 * Upgrades to F-16 and F-15, and MiG-21 jet fighters
 * Upgrades to Sikorsky CH-53 Yas'ur in project "Yas'ur 2000"
 * Avionics upgrades for the Ka-50-2 Erdogan gunship in collaboration with Kamov
 * Phalcon air surveillance system
 * Eitam – adaptations of a Gulfstream G550 for airborne early warning and control
 * Griffin LGB – a system for converting unguided bombs into precision-guided munitions
 * SkySniper air to surface missile

Ground defense systems

 * IDF Caterpillar D9R's armor kit
 * IAI JUMPER (See also XM501 Non-Line-of-Sight Launch System)
 * Unmanned skid steer loader "Front Runner"
 * Unmanned IDF Caterpillar D9 remote-controlled bulldozer
 * AMMAD
 * TopGun (artillery)
 * Scorpius Electronic Warfare System

Ground transportation

 * Assembly of IC3 diesel multiple unit trains and double-decker railway coaches under license from Bombardier Transportation
 * Taxibot, semi-robotic towbarless pushback tractor.
 * RBY MK 1
 * RAM MK3

Unmanned ground vehicles

 * Guardium
 * Sahar – robotic engineering scout
 * Robattle
 * D9T Panda – unmanned version of the IDF Caterpillar D9T armored bulldozer

Naval systems

 * Super Dvora Mk III class patrol boat
 * Super Dvora Mk II class patrol boat
 * Dvora class fast patrol boat
 * Dabur class patrol boat

Missile systems

 * Arrow – Anti-ballistic missile system
 * Arrow 3 – Anti-ballistic missile system
 * Barak 1 – Surface-to-air missile
 * Barak 8 – Surface-to-air missile (jointly developed with DRDO of India)
 * Gabriel – Air-to-surface, surface-to-surface anti-ship missile
 * Iron Dome – mobile all-weather air-defence system
 * Jericho I - Short-range ballistic missile
 * Jericho II & III - Long-range ballistic missile
 * LAHAT – Anti-tank missile
 * LORA - Tactical ballistic missile
 * Nimrod – Air-to-surface, surface-to-surface missile
 * Skysonic - weapon system under development
 * Skysonic - weapon system under development

Space hardware

 * AMOS (satellite bus)
 * Intelsat 24
 * AMOS-2
 * AMOS-3
 * AMOS-4
 * AMOS-6
 * EROS (satellite)
 * EROS A
 * EROS B
 * Ofeq Satellite series
 * Ofek-7
 * Ofek-9
 * Ofek-10
 * RISAT-2 satellite
 * SHALOM (satellite)
 * Shavit space launcher
 * Middle East Newsline has reported that IAI will launch one or more CubeSats by the end of 2008.
 * TecSAR reconnaissance satellite, launched on 21 January 2008
 * VENμS satellite

Manufacturing plants

 * Systems, Missiles & Space Group
 * Malam – integration
 * Mabat – missiles and satellites
 * Tamam – inertial guidance and electro-optic systems
 * Military Aircraft Group
 * Lahav – aircraft upgrades
 * Mata – helicopter upgrades
 * Golan Industries – crash survival seats and other aircraft parts
 * Malat – Unmanned Aerial Vehicles
 * Elta – Radars, electronic warfare and ELINT
 * Bedek Aviation Group – MRO
 * Aircraft Division – Conversion of passenger aircraft to cargo aircraft, heavy aircraft maintenance, Fleet Maintenance
 * Engines Division – Repair and overhaul of civil and military aircraft engines (P&W, GE)
 * Components Division – Repair and overhaul of civil and military aircraft components (APU, Landing Gear, CSD etc.).
 * Commercial Aircraft Group
 * Ramta – railcars, patrol boats, armor kits for engineering vehicles etc.
 * Aerostructures
 * Shahal – landing gear and other aircraft parts
 * Technologies
 * Business Jets
 * Engineering Division – aircraft manufacturing and integration
 * Maman – IT Services. mainly implementing and maintaining ERP/SAP Package.

title: Israel Aerospace Industries


text:
Talk:Anglo-Spanish War (1585–1604)

Untitled
I was under the impression that Sir Francis Drake was executed by James I, and therefore could not have been killed in an expedition.
 * No, Francis Drake died of dysentery in the Caribbean in 1596. You may be thinking of Sir Walter Raleigh.

Are there books written about this entire war, not just the armada battle?

I don't think so. J.H. Eliot Europe Divided 1559-1598 (1968), although old-style and not covering the entire period, is still an excellent read and covers European aspects that most English language histories gloss over.
 * I believe Grenville's Revenge went down in a storm during the Azores battle, along with many Spanish vessels. And Drake and Hawkins weren't killed, but died of disease. I'll add a bit more about Ireland.--shtove 13:48, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

Land campaigns
There should be more about the Netherlands, Calais and Brittany.--shtove 22:01, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

Infobox
Considering that the outcome of the war was more favorable to Spain if not a Spanish victory, the picture of the Armada defeat atop the infobox will give a wrong impression to anyone who doesn't read the whole article. It might be better to use a pic of a Spanish victory or at least of a neutral battle. SamEV 02:00, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
 * By all means, providing such a picture can be found. Albrecht 02:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Best luck to you. :) SamEV 11:46, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Certainly the war was indecisive, but the spin put on the period after Gravelines to create the impression that England suffered the worst defeats is stupid. Comparing the Spanish Armada to the English Armada a year later and coming to the conclusion that they yielded similar results is similarly riduculous, seeing as how the Dutch and English actually managed to land a large invasion force on Portugese soil. The success of the privateering was much the same as it was before 1588 as well. The only item that marks it out as any different is the fact that two of England's leading captains died. Privateering was always risky, especially when the conducted in a region almost solely dominated by one power like the Spanish Main. Anyway, I see little point on relying on books with titles as unimaginative and narrow as this one: "The Defeat of the English Armada and the 16th-Century Spanish Naval Resurgence"

I didn't think anybody could come up with anything to argue back with. Do you know why that is? It's because the majority of people who edit the history pages of this website do not have the slightest education in the study of history. To you, the most important thing is national pride and so, as is completely self-evident, any logic or rationality is lost. I suggest you give it up because the more you persist, the more it will provoke similarly-minded people to do the same.

 * I'd not read your comments till now. I respectfully decline to give you any more of a reply than this. Good day. SamEV 07:06, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

The author of the above statements engages in name calling by referring to the points of this history article as "stupid". All too often, some people get upset if history is not portrayed in a strictly anglocentic point of view. Too much of our English language history is presented in a seletcive, spun, and even lied about manner such that the British are almost allways the victors and the good guys. But with the internet, those days are over. --Scipio-62 (talk) 14:45, 24 January 2008 (UTC)--Scipio-62 (talk) 14:44, 24 January 2008 (UTC)Scipio-62 07:06, 24 January 2008--

 * His tone was uncalled for. And yes, English history could be more objective, though I suppose this can be said about every country, perhaps. SamEV (talk) 02:19, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree. You can read many texts in which Spanish and French historians readily admit defeats such as Trafalgar or the Armada of 1588. Its very rare where I read of English language texts about British defeats such as Cartagena or the great exploits of French admiral Suffren. --Charles A 06:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Most wars of the time were actually like this one - weighing up the advantages and disadvantages gained is not easy and requires a very broad perspective. Originally the box showed the "result" as just the "Treaty of London". Then somebody put "English victory" - and so retaliation came by replacing it with "Spanish victory" - given that the Spanish won more battles and reinforced their position vis-a-vis the broader picture which included a determined attack on their colonial trade and colonies - the war with England actually favoured Spain but could hardly be said to be overwhelming and the article actually makes this quite clear. That said - it is not a straightforward thing to access and usually reality is like that - messy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.84.93.185 (talk) 05:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Edits since 17/04/07
Not happy with all of these - will revert and edit them over the weekend. Any objections?--Shtove 20:42, 18 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I removed stuff from the intro - some of it was tendentiously in favour of Spain, and the rest is treated in the article in a balanced manner.
 * Improvements needed: the background section stretches back too far, there should be brief accounts of the 1588 Armada, of the campaigns in the Netherlands, Normandy and Brittany, and of the terms of the 1604 treaty.--Shtove 21:51, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Portugal on Spanish Side
I think Portugal should be included as ally of Spain in the war box, as it happened.Câmara 14:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 05:27, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

== Who won this war?S Did England win? --?.  The great Darren shan fan   20:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

No. England did not win and did not rule the waves as many Anglocentic history books so wrongfully asserted. When king James I ascended to the English throne in 1603, he quickly realized that the war was a fruitless enterprise and thereafter signed the peace treaty of 1604 with the Spanish with terms favorable to Spain. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scipio-62 (talk • contribs) 14:41, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Somebody had the temerity to insert that the Spanish navy "some success" in defending the treasure fleets (after 1588) in the introductory section. One of the primary reasons for this war was English desire for that treasure. Now people will point to the burning of the treasure fleet at Cadiz by the Spanish themselves in 1596 as a "failure" but it was in fact a premeditated succesful defensive move - the ship were relatively slow moving galleons bullt that way for long oceanic voyages of cargoes - and not just treasure. In the ocean they were tough to take on, but in harbour they were vulnerable to faster moving vessels designed exclusively for war. The commander of the treasure fleet was no fool so he sank them where their precious cargoes could be recovered easily later. The vessels themselves were just that, expendable vessels. The Anglo-Dutch fleets goal was to sieze the treasure - it failed and the expedition ended up sapping the English war effort instead of helping it.

Another thing worth mentioning is that England could ill afford to continue the war with Spain. Up until that time, England had not developed colonies in the new world to nearly the same extent as Spain. In order to for England to develop it's new world colonies and expand her empire, she had to make peace with Spain. Which is why King James I wisely decided to make peace with Spain in 1604 rather than continue the crazed bankrupting policies of that foolish Queen Elizabeth that got England nowhere.--Charles A 23:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scipio-62 (talk • contribs)
 * Got England nowhere? You mean aside from securing Independence from The Pope and Catholic Spain? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PlentifulOnions (talk • contribs) 16:07, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Did Spain "win"?

 * No.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by PlentifulOnions (talk • contribs) 16:05, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

Surely a Spanish victory would have been to conquer England. I think it would make more sense to have the result in the infobox to just refer to the Treaty and let readers decide who "won". Or maybe say the result was inconclusive and refer to the treaty. John Smith's (talk) 20:52, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Not necessarily- this was a complex and evolving matter. It was not only about religion, but trade and colonies as well as balance of power politics. For an interesting discussion on the matter follow the external link to Wes Ulm's article. Its worth the read. I preferred it when the info box merely showed the result as "Treaty of London", this was the status quo for a long time, then somebody put English Victory (!) and of course that was replaced soon after with Spanish victory, which seems more deserved but with strong qualifications. But I think it is best returned to as it was originally. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.84.92.52 (talk) 13:26, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we should put as result : Treaty of London (terms favorable to Spain)

because many anglo-saxons believe this was a english victory (NOT!!)--EuroHistoryTeacher (talk) 18:55, 23 November 2008 (UTC)

 * I would leave it as indecisive. It's true that the terms of the treaty were generally favorable to Spain, but on the other hand, the mere fact that Spain was making peace with a Protestant king of England represented a serious concession on its part, given its foreign-policy aims at the time. Funnyhat (talk) 02:29, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

 * First let me make clear that England (not Spain) sued for peace. Since the Treaty of London article says the terms were favorable to Spain i think its deserved to portray it as such in this article, in fact the war was a Spanish victory if you count the battles and outcomes. Let's take a look at the Spanish Armada of 1588, it failed and two more armadas were ready the next year. Now lets look at the English Armada of 1589, it failed and until the next century (year 1625) no english fleets dare to venture into spanish soil (its important to note that in English Armada of 1625 received huge help from the dutch and again failed miserable, even with superior numbers lol--EuroHistoryTeacher (talk) 21:53, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, using 'lol' in an argument really shows a non biased and educated viewpoint... even more so when you're using an example from 1625, twenty years after the war ended. Spain and England both failed in their aims - though England retained Protestantism, counter to the central Spanish aim. Clearly, the Spanish lost in the short term AND in the long term - Spanish decline took it from being one of (maybe even the) most powerful countries in the world to... well, an also ran, all over by 1700! But hey, keep this as a Spanish win if you like, cheer a win from over 4 hundred years ago where the central aim wasn't even achieved! We all know Spanish history is desperately short of wins so you should take any chance you get - now THAT is worth a 'lol'
 * Well, taken into account that Spain was, for several centuries, and with "desperate shortage of wins", one of the (or the) most important power in the world THAT is an unbeatable achievement! No wins but rule for centuries! Wow! When so many are so desperate to convince the world that they beat the Spanish, or that they were not beaten by them, is a clear evidence that shows how great and important has been Spain in history.

State what you may, but it is a historical fact that Sir Walter Raleigh was executed at the request of the Spanish Ambassador to England. Raleigh was executed because he attacked a Spanish colony in Venesuela in violation of the 1604 peace treaty. I ask this, why would those "almighty powerful" English execute one of their great heroes for fear of risking another war with the Spanish? I've read accounts that King James had some "love of the Spanish", but that is just anglocentric rubbish. King James was a practical man and he knew that starting another war against the Spanish would be foolish and thats why Raleigh lost his head.--Charles A 20:40, 9 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scipio-62 (talk • contribs)

It is true that it wasnt until Oliver Cromwell that the English navy was made into a very effective fighting force, capable of beating many fleets. ALthough after he died it went down hill again.... Oh by the way EuroHistoryTeacher that "no english fleets dare to venture into spanish soil" was probably wise.... I always thought ships were suppossed to be on the sea!Willski72 (talk) 10:46, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Bigger/Smaller
Whether the English Armada was Smaller or Bigger ? Please verify it and change it in the Article accordingly. Abdul raja (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:12, 9 November 2011 (UTC).

Citation needed
There are only four citations in this entire, rather long, article. Entire paragraphs of opinion are presented with no citation or justification, in particular the 'effects' section but also others. I have also removed the uncited claim for the war being a Spanish victory. I do not think this is an opinion widely held by historians, so I have left just the specific effects of the Treaty of London. 94.193.35.68 (talk) 18:58, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Causes
"Philip and the Catholic Church considered Mary, Queen of Scots, a Catholic cousin of Elizabeth's, to be the rightful Queen of England. In 1567, Mary was imprisoned and forced to abdicate the Scottish throne in favour of her infant son, James. Thereafter she fled to England, where Elizabeth had her imprisoned. Over the next two decades, opponents of Elizabeth and James continually plotted to have Mary placed on the throne of one or both kingdoms." Removed this for a few reasons. Firstly it isn't true that Mary was forced to abdicate. Elizabeth never named a succession and Mary therefore remained heir presumptive until the moment she was executed. Secondly there is no evidence Philip would consider Mary a preferable ruler to Elizabeth. Indeed Philip protected Elizabeth from excommunication until 1568 (Spanish loan seizure) and even attempted to marry her. It is also of note that Mary was essentially French and a close tie between England and France could prove disastrous for Spain as it would produce a power block capable of directly confronting the Spanish Empire. Lack of Spanish support can be seen through the 1571 Ridolfi Plot in which Spanish support for regime change was non existent. — Preceding unsigned comment added by THKH (talk • contribs) 15:51, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Moderating concluding statements on the conflict
Both sides seem to be overstating the financial devastation of the war for England and Spain alike and likewise overstating the level to which it contributed to the decline (or ascendancy) of either. On the financial side, yes James I in England inherited a debt of roughly £400,000, and as John Guy in particular has discussed in his treatments, there were further less obvious financial obligations left-over from Elizabeth I's reign to fund the war effort, such as the sale of offices to wealthy nobles and the sales of the royal lands themselves. Although this burden was hardly helpful at the start of the Stuart period, it was hardly devastating either. Henry VII had inherited crippling debts and a war-torn England at the start of the Tudor period, devastated by the Wars of the Roses, but was able to bring the country back to solvency in good order, so there is no reason that the early Stuarts should have been handicapped by comparison. Also much of England's hardship and financial pressure in the early 1600's came about due to poor harvests and epidemics, which cannot be blamed on the war.

Likewise for Spain. Yes, Spain during the war had taxation and revenue problems with increasing dependence on the bankers from Genoa and other centres. But as Geoffrey Parker and other period historians have made clear, Spain's issues with solvency had already been severe decades before the war with England, with a failure to collect and manage revenues from regions outside Castile. Also the problem was especially exacerbated, ironically, by Spain's imperial gains, through uncontrolled inflation and currency fluctuations due to increasing imports of New World silver. And like England, Spain's position was further aggravated by poor harvests and a plague at the turn of the century, likewise factors that cannot be causally connected to the war. Yet as with England, Spain's financial position, whilst imperiled, was hardly crippling- Parker himself, in Europe in Crisis 1598–1648, makes it clear that 17th c. Spain ironically had less in the way of tax and other financial revolts compared to European peers. New World silver and other trading goods, despite the distortions to Spain's economy, continued to flow in and fund Spanish expeditions through the 17th c., even as the Dutch began to wrest away sea supremacy by mid-century. And despite the failure of reforms and general poor management by Philip III, Spain continued to find the resources to administer overseas colonies and militarily defeat enemies (for example Cadiz in 1625) in major engagements through the 1620's and after.

Same issue with overstating the balance-of-power impact on either side. England's ambitions were certainly hindered, but in no way devastated by the costs and burdens of the war when the treaty was signed in 1604. England's maritime trade, both in the North Sea and the trans-Atlantic trade, increased at a regular pace. And although the Stuarts obviously encountered financial and constitutional crises in the subsequent decades, it is contentious to lay these principally at the feet of the Anglo-Spanish War in 1604. By most even-handed measures of national performance, England continued to gain economic and geopolitical importance in the Stuart period that followed the war.

Likewise, again, for Spain. It is far too contentious to assign a causal importance to the Anglo-Spanish War of 1585-1604 in Spain's perceived decline many decades into the 17th century. It is indeed fair and accurate to state that Spain's colonial monopoly (or Spanish claims to it) could not be asserted in the 1600's, and that ships from rival countries- France as well as England and the Netherlands- would carry on an increasing share of the trans-Atlantic trade. However, claims of a decline are too easily countered by indicators of ongoing and even increasing strength that lasted well into mid-century. Whilst Spain's overall share of the trans-Atlantic trade declined, the country's overall trade and shipping still very much grew esp. under Philip IV and remained by far the most dominant of the European powers. Spain under Philip IV was also unequivocally successful in defeating England's attempt to invade Cadiz in 1625, and to capture Breda the same year despite fierce resistance by English and Dutch soldiers, then to launch a successful naval offensive to capture St. Kitts from the English and French a few years later. Spain's military and tactical management thus brought about crushing victories over all major rivals less than three decades after the Treaty of London in 1604. Note this achievement came about despite the continuing failure of Spanish financial and political reforms by both Philip III and Philip IV in the intervening decades, as well as further damage to Spain's position from corruption, general fiscal mismanagement, commercial competition and inflation. Even after defeat by France at Rocroi and Netherlands at the Downs- which occurred many decades after 1604- Spain continued to be a powerful rival to both, and as shown by Spanish victories in for example War of Jenkins Ear, also remained a constant thorn in the side of the English navy well into the following century. So even making such a strong claim as that of Spanish decline decades into the 1600's is highly debatable at best, leave alone identifying the Anglo-Spanish War of 1585-1604 as a proximate cause of such a questionable conclusion. (Notably, England's reversals in the 1620's battles were in fact a proximate cause of the English Civil War, something that did not happen in Spain.)

I therefore think it most advisable to refrain from making strongly-worded conclusions about financial impact or geopolitical balance-of-power in the aftermath of the war and the Treaty of London, as there is too little in the way of evidence or consensus for that in the case of either country. Both encountered financial hardships which nonetheless were not new, not crippling and did not precipitate severe crises which clearly had more easily identifiable proximate and underlying causes. Likewise, the geopolitical balance of power remained very much in flux for both countries after 1604, and given Spain's military and economic dominance well into the 17th c., by some measures even increasing, it is too contentious to assert importance of the 1585-1604 war in causing Spanish decline or even to assert such decline at all. Best to simply focus on the specifics and finish with a balanced statement of the challenges and the conflicts that followed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by NDelhier (talk • contribs) 06:08, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

 * Many of your claims are plausible. The problem with changing the text while keeping the original references is that it creates a false impression that your changes are supported by the cited source. If you have an alternative perspective, support it with another reliable source. Otherwise, you run a risk of misrepresentation. Lachrie (talk) 08:05, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * This article starts off with Philip worried about what was going on in England in the 1560s, just as he was undoubtedly worried about what was happening in France and the Holy Roman Empire with these new fangled heresies, and then there were the expansive Ottomans to worry about. But his main concern was always the troubles in his own territories, the Netherlands and this war was an annex to that. I think the only way to get this article into some order is to strip it down to the basics, just tell the events of this war, and drop the aftermath, otherwise somebody is soon going to explain how this war caused D-Day. Provocateur (talk) 09:43, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 8 September 2023
Boaby776765 (talk) 13:00, 8 September 2023 (UTC) Scotland was involved in this war could i include it>?
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. M.Bitton (talk) 13:42, 8 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Perhaps you should explain why you think Scotland is a Belligerent in this conflict. All armies and navies in this period (and for two centuries after) were multinational, some from conviction, others for money. Many smaller states hired out mercenaries as a means of generating income; the Swiss made it a major export industry.
 * As mentioned elsewhere on other articles where you've made a similar edit, the fact Scottish soldiers fought (on both sides) does not make Scotland (the kingdom and political entity) a Belligerent. I've suggested you read the definition; have you done so?
 * I've also tried to explain the difference between being a Belligerent (which requires a formal declaration of war), and Involvement, which can mean a variety of things. For example, France financed the Protestant cause in the 30 Years War from its outset and was thus Involved, but did not become a Belligerent until declaring war on the Emperor in 1635. A large number of US nationals served in the Royal Navy at Trafalgar; presumably you're not suggesting that makes the USA a Belligerent in the Napoleonic Wars.
 * What isn't clear? This is generating a lot of edits (here and elsewhere), so I'd like to be confident you understand the distinction, rather than simply repeating the same point. Robinvp11 (talk) 16:46, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Lede
I think Its great to add battles in The Netherlands since It was an important place in the war. Also Its important to maintain a well balance between the mentioned Spanish victories and English victories. 31.221.234.233 (talk) 19:27, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

 * I don't think that the lede should go over all kinds of battles during the war. It should at most mention a famous one or a decisive one. So I think that the Spanish Armada is the only one that should be named seperatly. The other armadas can be mentioned together.
 * As for the War in the Netherlands. It should be mentioned how it went in general terms, but there are to many battles to mention. The most significant in that time period were the Battle of Nieuwpoort, and Siege of Ostend, but I don't think that those should necessarily be mentioned in the Lede. DavidDijkgraaf (talk) 19:46, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The Spanish Armada was not a “decisive one”, or at least no more than the English Armada.
 * I agree, however, to mantain a balance. After all, the War ended in a status quo, England nor Spain won as such 31.221.234.233 (talk) 19:50, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * The Spanish Armada was not a “decisive one”, or at least no more than the English Armada.
 * I know, but it is the most famous event during the war. I think it deserves a mention in the lede. For my part with a note that it didn't end the war in favour of England. DavidDijkgraaf (talk) 19:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Its famous and important, of course. It deserves a mention. But I think the English Armada was also very relevant, enought to be also mentioned 31.221.234.233 (talk) 19:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Maybe we can reach a compromise mentioning the Spanish Armada, the English Armada, the Battle of Nieuwport and the Siege of Ostend. 31.221.234.233 (talk) 19:53, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't mind that DavidDijkgraaf (talk) 19:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * perfect, I would revert my current edit. Since its not a stable version 31.221.234.233 (talk) 19:56, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I can agree to that but no more as the lede will become a long list. Eastfarthingan (talk) 20:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I changed part of the lede by including the four main events talked here.
 * Feel free to change or improve details or grammar. 31.221.241.38 (talk) 23:52, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Anglo-Spanish War (1585–1604)


text: Category:English golfers

title: Category:English golfers


text:
Bennie Maupin

Bennie Maupin (born August 29, 1940) is an American jazz multireedist who performs on various saxophones, flute, and bass clarinet.

Maupin was born in Detroit, Michigan, United States. He is known for his participation in Herbie Hancock's Mwandishi sextet and Headhunters band, and for performing on Miles Davis's seminal fusion record, Bitches Brew. Maupin has collaborated with Horace Silver, Roy Haynes, Woody Shaw, Lee Morgan and many others. He is noted for having a harmonically-advanced, "out" improvisation style, while having a different sense of melodic direction than other "out" jazz musicians such as Eric Dolphy.

Maupin was a member of Almanac, a group with Cecil McBee (bass), Mike Nock (piano) and Eddie Marshall (drums).

As leader/co-leader

 * The Jewel in the Lotus (ECM, 1974)
 * Slow Traffic to the Right (Mercury, 1977)
 * Moonscapes (Mercury, 1978)
 * Driving While Black with Patrick Gleeson (Intuition, 1998)
 * Penumbra (Cryptogramophone, 2006)
 * Early Reflections (Cryptogramophone, 2008)
 * Symphonic Tone Poem for Brother Yusef with Adam Rudolph (Strut, 2022)

With Almanac (Maupin, Mike Nock, Cecil McBee, Eddie Marshall)
 * Almanac (Improvising Artists, 1977) – recorded in 1967

As sideman
With John Beasley
 * Positootly! (Resonance, 2009)

With Marion Brown
 * Marion Brown Quartet (ESP-Disk, 1966)
 * Juba-Lee (Fontana, 1967)
 * Afternoon of a Georgia Faun (ECM, 1970)

With George Cables
 * Shared Secrets (MuseFX, 2001)

With Mike Clark
 * Actual Proof (Platform Recordings, 2000)

With Miles Davis
 * Bitches Brew (Columbia, 1970)
 * Jack Johnson (Columbia, 1971)
 * On the Corner (Columbia, 1972)
 * Big Fun (Columbia, 1974)

With Chick Corea
 * Is (Solid State, 1969)
 * Sundance (Groove Merchant, 1972) - recorded in 1969
 * The Complete "Is" Sessions (Blue Note, 2002) - compilation

With Jack DeJohnette
 * The DeJohnette Complex (Milestone, 1969) - recorded in 1968
 * Have You Heard? (Milestone, 1970)

With Patrick Gleeson and Jim Lang
 * Jazz Criminal (Electronic Musical Industries, 2007)

With Herbie Hancock
 * Mwandishi (Warner Bros., 1971)
 * Crossings (Warner Bros., 1972)
 * Sextant (Columbia, 1973)
 * Head Hunters (Columbia, 1973)
 * Thrust (Columbia, 1974)
 * Flood (CBS/Sony, 1975)
 * Man-Child (Columbia, 1975)
 * Secrets (Columbia, 1976)
 * VSOP (Columbia, 1976)
 * Sunlight (Columbia, 1978)
 * Directstep (CBS/Sony, 1979)
 * Feets, Don't Fail Me Now (Columbia, 1979)
 * Mr. Hands (Columbia, 1980)
 * Dis Is da Drum (Mercury, 1994)

With The Headhunters
 * Survival of the Fittest (Arista, 1975)
 * Straight from the Gate (Arista, 1977)
 * Return of the Headhunters (Verve, 1998)

With Eddie Henderson
 * Realization (Capricorn, 1973)
 * Inside Out (Capricorn, 1974)
 * Sunburst (Blue Note, 1975)
 * Mahal (Capitol, 1978)

With Andrew Hill
 * One for One (Blue Note, 1975) – recorded in 1965-70

With Lee Morgan
 * Caramba! (Blue Note, 1968)
 * Live at the Lighthouse (Blue Note, 1970)
 * Taru (Blue Note, 1980) – recorded in 1968

With Darek Oleszkiewicz
 * Like a Dream (Cryptogramophone, 2004)

With the Jimmy Owens-Kenny Barron Quintet
 * You Had Better Listen (Atlantic, 1967)

With Woody Shaw
 * Blackstone Legacy (Contemporary, 1970)
 * Song of Songs (Contemporary, 1972)

With Horace Silver
 * Serenade to a Soul Sister (Blue Note, 1968)
 * You Gotta Take a Little Love (Blue Note, 1969)

With Lonnie Smith
 * Turning Point (Blue Note, 1969)

With Jarosław Śmietana
 * A Story of Polish Jazz (JSR, 2004)

With McCoy Tyner
 * Tender Moments (Blue Note, 1968)
 * Together (Milestone, 1978)

With Lenny White
 * Big City (Nemperor, 1977)

With Meat Beat Manifesto
 * Actual Sounds + Voices (Nothing, 1998)

title: Bennie Maupin


text:
Salem Prize

The Salem Prize, in memory of Raphael Salem, is awarded each year to young researchers for outstanding contributions to the field of analysis. It is awarded by the School of Mathematics at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton and was founded by the widow of Raphael Salem in his memory. The prize is considered highly prestigious and many Fields Medalists previously received it. The prize was 5000 French Francs in 1990.

Past winners
(Note: a F symbol denotes mathematicians who later earned a Fields Medal).

• 1968 Nicholas Varopoulos

• 1969 Richard Hunt

• 1970 Yves Meyer

• 1971 Charles FeffermanF

• 1972 Thomas Körner

• 1973 Evgenii Mikhailovich Nikishin

• 1974 Hugh Montgomery

• 1975 William Beckner

• 1976 Michael R. Herman

• 1977 S. V. Bockarev

• 1978 Björn E. Dahlberg

• 1979 Gilles Pisier

• 1980 Stylianos Pichorides

• 1981 Peter Jones

• 1982 Alexei B. Aleksandrov

• 1983 Jean BourgainF

• 1984 Carlos Kenig

• 1985 Thomas Wolff

• 1986 Nikolai Makarov

• 1987 Guy David and Jean Lin Journe

• 1988 Alexander Volberg and Jean-Christophe YoccozF

• 1989 no prize

• 1990 Sergei Konyagin

• 1991 Curtis T. McMullenF

• 1992 Mitsuhiro Shishikura

• 1993 Sergei Treil

• 1994 Kari Astala

• 1995 Håkan Eliasson

• 1996 Michael Lacey and Christoph Thiele

• 1997 no prize

• 1998 Trevor Wooley

• 1999 Fedor Nazarov

• 2000 Terence TaoF

• 2001 Oded Schramm and Stanislav SmirnovF

• 2002 Xavier Tolsa

• 2003 Elon LindenstraussF and Kannan Soundararajan

• 2004 no prize

• 2005 Ben J. Green

• 2006 Stefanie Petermichl and Artur AvilaF

• 2007 Akshay VenkateshF

• 2008 Bo'az Klartag and Assaf Naor

• 2009 no prize

• 2010 Nalini Anantharaman

• 2011 Zhan Dapeng and Julien Dubedat

• 2012 no prize

• 2013 Larry Guth

• 2014 Dmitry Chelkak

• 2015 no prize

• 2016 Maryna ViazovskaF

• 2017 no prize

• 2018 Alexander Logunov

• 2023 Sarah Peluse and Julian Sahasrabudhe

title: Salem Prize


text: Category:Welsh golfers

title: Category:Welsh golfers


text:
Unibroue

Unibroue is a brewery in Chambly, Quebec, Canada, that was started by Serge Racine and Quebec native André Dion. The company was purchased by Sleeman Breweries Ltd. in 2004, which was itself taken over by Sapporo in 2006.

History
Unibroue was founded by business partners André Dion and Serge Racine who had acquired 75% of La Brasserie Massawippi Inc. of Lennoxville, the initiator of the micro-brewery movement in Québec, in 1990. The two purchased the remainder of the shares at the end of 1991 when they transferred their interest in La Brasserie Massawippi Inc. to Unibroue. The original goal of the two entrepreneurs was to improve distribution for the few emerging craft breweries in Quebec. When other breweries left the project, Unibroue shifted towards brewing entirely. According to Pierre Clermont, a knowledgeable observer of Quebec beer, "since there was a moratorium on brewing licenses, Unibroue bought Massawippi to be able to brew their own beer. By purchasing the brewery, they automatically acquired the brewing license, Br-008."

By 1992, La Brasserie Massawippi Inc. became a wholly owned subsidiary of Unibroue. Afterward, it changed its corporate name to Brasserie Broubec Inc. and in July 1993 merged with Unibroue. It was bought by Canadian brewer, Sleeman Breweries Ltd., in 2004. Sleeman, in turn, was purchased in 2006 by Sapporo.

Beers
Unibroue makes a wide range of beers; although, there is a focus on Belgian-style brews, such as their Maudite ('Damned'), La Fin du Monde ('The End of the World'), and Don de Dieu ('Gift from God'). Most of Unibroue's beers are bottled "on the lees", or containing yeast sediment (or lees). This practice provides additional fermentation, also called bottle-conditioned, after bottling. The result is a beer which ages well if kept in the dark and unrefrigerated, and allows it to be shipped relatively cheaply to international markets. The yeast gives Unibroue beers a cloudy appearance and provides a characteristic element to the taste. On many of their labels, suggested serving temperatures (for example, "better at 12°–14°C") are included.

Recently, Unibroue shifted to more conventional styles with a series of lighter beer cans inspired by their original, heavier Belgian beers to renew with a younger customer base. Recent addition include la Petite Maudite, a brown ale, and Saison Libre, a saison light beer. As with its classics brews, recent additions also typically refer to Quebec's history and folk traditions.

La Fin du Monde
La Fin du Monde ( French for "The End of the World") is a Belgian-style tripel and bottle conditioned golden ale introduced in July 1994. The name is claimed to derive from the European explorers' belief that they had reached the end of the world when they arrived in the Americas.

The colour is a cloudy blonde with a golden hue. Though similar to Belgian tripels in appearance, La Fin du Monde is less bitter and more spicy (featuring coriander and orange peel), more similar to Tripel Karmeliet than standard tripels like Chimay and Westmalle. The beer contains a very high (9% ABV) alcohol content. As of 2016, this beer has earned more medals and awards, including some of the world's highest honors, than any other Canadian beer.

Don de Dieu
Don de Dieu is a wheat ale which is re-fermented in the bottle, brewed in the Belgian strong pale ale style. The beer and label were inspired by the explorer Samuel de Champlain de Brouage and his ship, the Don de Dieu ('Gift from God').

Maudite
Translated into "Damned", this is an 8% ABV Strong amber-red ale. (The label denotes the style as "Belgian Style Double Ale").

Blanche de Chambly
Blanche de Chambly is a Belgian-style witbier. The first refermented white beer brewed according to Belgian tradition in North America. 5.0% ABV.

À Tout Le Monde
Added in 2016, À Tout Le Monde is a Saison style beer. Added in 2016, at 4.5% ABV, it is the brewery's lowest alcohol beer. It was brewed at the request of guitarist Dave Mustaine of Megadeth.

Special brew-lines
Unibroue brews and bottles the Trader Joe's Vintage Ale.

Saison Libre
A 4.0% ABV light Saison beer in reference to Quebec's Quiet Revolution in the sixties.

Awards
La Fin du Monde has been the winner of many medals of excellence: 5 platinum, 6 gold, and 1 silver from the Beverage Testing Institute since its introduction in 1994. In 2004 it won the gold medal at the Los Angeles County Fair for Belgian-Style Abbey Ale.

Don de Dieu has won four gold medals from the Beverage Testing Institute since its introduction in 1998.

Grande Reserve 17 received the "World's best dark ale" award at the World Beer Awards in London, England in 2011. Also, it received a Platinum medal from the Beverage Testing Institute in 2009, 2010, and 2011.

Unibroue has won several awards in subsequent years too, at the World Beer Awards. In 2015, for example, the company's products received many accolades. La Fin du Monde was declared World's Best Belgian Style Tripel, La Résolution and Éphémère Poire (pear), La Résolution won The Americas' Best Belgian Style Strong and Éphémère Poire was named The Americas' Best Fruit Flavored Beer. The Unibroue 17 Grande Réserve was declared The Americas’ Best Vintage Dark Beer and the company won three gold medals for Terrible, Maudite, Éphémère Pomme, three silver medals for Blanche de Chambly, Trois Pistoles, Noire de Chambly, and a bronze medal for Blonde de Chambly.

At the 2016 Awards, the company won the following World's Best awards: Belgian Style Strong Dark, Unibroue Trois Pistoles and Belgian Style Tripel, Unibroue La Fin Du Monde. Conventional awards for Unibroue products included Belgian Style Strong Dark - Silver Medal, Fruit & Vegetable Flavoured Beer - Silver Medal, Belgian Style Witbier - Gold Medal.

title: Unibroue


text:
User talk:Friday13

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkTroll 22:03, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ryan Philippe
I reverted your recent edit to As the World Turns...Ryan Philippe was on One Life to Live. Mike H 21:21, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Okita Soji
In regard of your edits on the Okita Soji article

1. 00:07, 18 January 2005 Friday13 m (Correcting the category (1868 deaths>1869 deaths))

2. 00:03, 18 January 2005 Friday13 m (Correcting year of death in biography.)

While the exact date of Okita's birth is uncertain, the date of his death is NOT. The claim that he died in 1869 is RIDICULOUS! (One only has to check up a few historical references to know that.) Please don't take someone's word for it just like that.... Thank you very much. Nlf7 09:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Dominican Republic
Hello. Just wanted to ask if there is some new administrative division of Dominican Republic or edits like this: from this user  is just sneaky vandalism. Thank you. - Darwinek 10:16, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I haven't heard of any new provinces being created (there was a plan to split Santo Domingo, but that was scrapped, apparently). While that user created many articles, a lot (if not most, didn't see them all) of his edits certainly looks like vandalism. Friday13 00:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Friday13


text:
User talk:Jian213311

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkTroll 22:03, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jian213311


text:
Prince Motor Company

The Prince Motor Company (Japanese: プリンス自動車工業株式会社) was an automobile marque from Japan which eventually merged into Nissan in 1966. It began as the Tachikawa Aircraft Company, a manufacturer of various airplanes for the Japanese Army in World War II, e.g., the Ki-36, Ki-55 and Ki-74. Tachikawa Aircraft Company was dissolved after the war and the company took the name Fuji Precision Industries. It diversified into automobiles, producing an electric car, the Tama, in 1946, named for the region the company originated in, Tama, using the Ohta series PC/PD platform. The company changed its name to Prince in 1952 to honor Akihito's formal investiture as Crown Prince of the nation. In 1954 they changed their name back to Fuji Precision Industries, and in 1961 changed the name back again to Prince Motor Company. In 1966, they became part of Nissan, while the Prince organization remained in existence inside Nissan, as Nissan Prince Store in Japan until Nissan consolidated the Prince dealership network into "Nissan Blue Stage" in 1999.

Products
Prince had success building luxury automobiles. Among its most famous car lines were the Skyline and Gloria, both of which were absorbed into the Nissan range and continued after their 1966 merger; however, Prince also built the 15-passenger Homy which was eventually shared with the Nissan Caravan and the Nissan Laurel, a four-door sedan platform mate with the Skyline, on which Prince had begun development before the merger but was introduced after the merger in 1968. Prince had also begun development on a small car to compete with the Toyota Corolla and Nissan Sunny, but after the merger, the car was introduced as the Nissan Cherry using front wheel drive.

The former Nissan Gloria and the Nissan Skyline are known in the US as the Infiniti M (2003 - 2004) and the Infiniti G (2003 - 2006).

Model designation system
Up to 1961, Prince used a four-letter model code for its vehicles. The first letter stood for the engine code (A was 1500 cc, B was 1900 cc), the second letter stood for the chassis model, the third letter stood for the body type (S for sedan, T for cabover truck, V for van, P for pickup truck and so on) and the fourth letter was the order of production. A fifth letter was sometimes added, and this was the model version (S for standard, D for deluxe). A number was added to the end to delineate revisions of the same model. This number was a Roman numeral until 1956, after which it was an Arabic numeral.

From 1962, Prince switched to an alpha-numeric code, similar to what Nissan would eventually use.

History
The Prince Motor Company had two origins.

Tachikawa Aircraft Company

 * December 1946 - The electric car division of the Tachikawa Aircraft Company became independent and was activated as the Fuchu Plant of the Kosoku Kikan Kogyo Co., Ltd..
 * June 30, 1947 - The Fuchu Plant of the Kosoku Kikan Kogyo Co., Ltd. became the Tokyo Electric Car Company. (Official foundation date of the Prince Motor Company.)
 * February 1949 - Shojiro Ishibashi invested in the Tokyo Electric Car Company and became the chairman.
 * November 30, 1949 - The Tokyo Electric Car Company changed its name to Tama Electric Car Company.
 * November 1951 - The Tama Electric Car Company changed its name to Tama Motor Company.
 * November 1952 - The Tama Motor Company changed its name to Prince Motor Company.
 * April 10, 1954 - The Prince Motor Company merged with its engine supplier Fuji Precision Industries. The new company was named Fuji Precision Industries and the name Prince Motor Company disappeared in the meantime.

Nakajima Aircraft Company

 * August 16, 1945 - The Nakajima Aircraft Company changed its name to Fuji Sangyo Co., Ltd..
 * November 6, 1945 - The GHQ defined Fuji Sangyo as the Zaibatsu and decided to disband them.
 * May 1950 - Fuji Sangyo Co., Ltd. was disbanded.
 * July 1950 - Fuji Sangyo Co., Ltd. was divided into twelve companies. Of them, the Tokyo Plant (located in Suginami, Tokyo) and the Hamamatsu Plant became Fuji Precision Industries.
 * April 1951 - Shojiro Ishibashi became the chairman of Fuji Precision Industries.
 * April 10, 1954 - Fuji Precision Industries merged with its customer Prince Motor Company. The new company was named Fuji Precision Industries and the name Prince Motor Company disappeared in the meantime.

After Merger of Fuji/Prince Until Merger with Nissan

 * February 1961 - Fuji Precision Industries changed its name to Prince Motor Company. (The name "Prince Motor Company" revived.)
 * 1962 - Prince became the first Japanese car company to field a works team in a European rally, the Liège-Sofia-Liège. Neither of the two Skylines entered finished the rally, which had an 82 percent attrition rate.
 * May 1965 - Prince Motor Company announced the merger with Nissan Motor Company.
 * August 1966 - Merged into Nissan Motor Company.

List of vehicles

 * Prince Sedan (the first passenger car of Prince)
 * Prince Gloria (a luxury sedan & wagon)
 * Prince Skyline (a performance coupe/sedan)
 * Prince Skyway (a delivery van based on the Skyline)
 * Prince Miler (a pickup truck based on the Skyline)
 * Nissan Laurel (a compact luxury sedan/coupe based on the Skyline)
 * Prince Homy (a cargo van/minibus)
 * Prince Homer (a pickup truck based on the Homy)
 * Prince R380 (a race car)
 * Nissan Prince Royal (a limousine made for the Imperial Household of Japan)
 * Nissan Cherry (a small front-wheel-drive coupe and sedan)
 * Prince Clipper (a cabover truck)
 * Prince Light Coach (a large capacity passenger bus shared with the Clipper)

Concept vehicles

 * 1956 Prince BNSJ: Displayed at the 1956 Tokyo Motor Show, the BNSJ was much larger compared to other Japanese cars of the era and was the first non-production prototype (concept) displayed at the Tokyo Motor Show. It was powered by the FG4A-20 engine, but was enlarged to 1.9L. The BNSJ never entered production.
 * 1956 Prince DPSK: The DPSK was developed as part of Japan's "National Car" program of 1955, similar to the German program that resulted in the Volkswagen Beetle. The proposal called for a 4-seater with an engine of 350 cc to 500 cc, a weight of around 400 kg and a top speed of 100 km/h. The 495 kg DPSK was powered by a rear-mounted 24 hp, 601cc two-cylinder boxer engine known as the FG2D. This engine suffered from vibration and noise problems and was later replaced with a 599cc, 36 hp four-cylinder boxer engine called the FG4C and the car became the CPSK. Prince persevered with this concept until 1959 when the National Car program was cancelled, likely due to Prince becoming a more upscale quality car manufacturer.
 * 1963 Prince 1900 Sprint: Based on the Skyline 1500, the Sprint was designed by Scaglione of Italy and powered by the 1.9L GB-4 engine from the Gloria. The Sprint was shown at the 1963 Tokyo Motor Show, but did not enter production.

title: Prince Motor Company


text:
User talk:Aarondoyle

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkTroll 22:03, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Jamiedunn.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Jamiedunn.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this:.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Image legality questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 17:14, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Skype
You might note that at least one of your recent edits also introduced some extraneous text around some numerical characters. This may be due to a combination of your browser and Skype trying to identify and highlight telephone numbers. Thank you. This edit--Rumping (talk) 12:23, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Confraternity of Brothers Clubs

A tag has been placed on Confraternity of Brothers Clubs requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. JoelWhy (talk) 13:18, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Hookey (game)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Hookey (game) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. ...William 12:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

title: User talk:Aarondoyle


text:
User talk:Tresoldi/PhiloBot

WP:RFBOT
Your recent bot approvals request has been speedily approved. Please see the request page for details. — M ETS 501 (talk) 14:57, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, if you're fetching a lot of pages, it would be a good idea to use either Special:Export, a database dump, or query.php — M ETS 501 (talk) 15:02, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Notability of Robert Shelly
Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Robert Shelly, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Robert Shelly seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Robert Shelly, please affix the template to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Please note that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it did not nominate Robert Shelly itself. Feel free to leave a message on the bot operator's talk page if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot. --Android Mouse Bot 2 19:24, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Shelly
Help! please dont leave it for other people to provide the basic information for your stubs; you can more easily find this material than the overworked admins like me who are trying to judge whether to delete the article. A list of books would be a good start. DGG 21:26, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
 * sorry about where I put it. I saw you were on a project, and it's hard to keep track of everything at once. If you haven't discovered it already, there are quite a number of WP editors not particular impressed by the academic world, and who move very fast; I find it help to at least have a good impressive listing of published works. WorldCat is very convenient for this.  :) DGG 02:16, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Bots
Hello. If your bot was programmed with C# in Windows and you're ready to help me make my own bot for other wiki-projects please contact me. --Stefán Örvarr Sigmundsson 00:49, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

title: User talk:Tresoldi/PhiloBot


text:
User talk:Kiwizzarrd

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Welcome, newcomer!

Here are some useful tips to ease you into the Wikipedia experience:

 * First, take a look at the Wikipedia Tutorial, and perhaps dabble a bit in the test area.
 * When you have some free time, take a look at the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines. They can come in very handy!
 * Remember to use a neutral point of view!
 * If you need any help, feel free to post a question at the Help Desk
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Also, here are some odds and ends that I find useful from time to time:

 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Brilliant prose
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Village pump
 * Boilerplate text

Feel free to ask me anything the links and talk pages don't answer. You can most easily reach me by posting on my talk page.

You can sign your name on any page by typing 4 tildes, likes this: ~~~~.

Best of luck, and have fun!

ClockworkTroll 22:04, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

title: User talk:Kiwizzarrd


text: Category:German golfers

title: Category:German golfers


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay Kingdom

I count 20 delete, 6 keep, 4 merge & redirect, 1 "microkeep", and 1 "very weak keep". I'll now delete the article. Wile E. Heresiarch 03:06, 1 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Gay Kingdom
Current vote tally:
 * Keep = 8
 * Delete = 17
 * Delete OR merge/redirect = 2
 * Merge/redirect = 4

This page is yet another useless page involving imaginary nations much along the line of Atlantium. Very unencyclopedic and useless. Please vote delete. Arminius 22:04, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't understand the hostility of some Wikipedians against autonomous states and I certainly didn't appreciate that you speedily deleted this article twice before you even could have had time to check the validity of its existence. Sarge Baldy 22:25, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. I don't understand the determination of some Wikipedians to assert that simple verifiability is the sole criterion for inclusion. I can verify that my bedroom exists, and I can jump up and down until I'm blue in the face insisting that it's an independent micronation, but that still doesn't make Bearcat's bedroom a valid Wikipedia topic until, at minimum, at least one other nation's government recognizes my bedroom as a legitimate nation. Bearcat 04:21, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Verifiability in itself is not a valid basis for inclusion, unless the subject is in some way also unique and/or interesting to the extent that people are likely to end up researching it on Wikipedia. Your bedroom isn't (to my knowledge). This entity is.--Gene_poole 06:28, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Merge with Same-sex marriage in Australia and redirect there. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 22:46, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * MicroKeep all these micronations. As a phenomenon, they say something about something (but what?). — Bill 22:48, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Merging and redirecting is good. Do that. —No-One Jones (m) 23:18, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * KEEP. The existence of this entity is noted in multiple third party sources. It is notable and encyclopaedic.--Gene_poole 00:00, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * We're back to "I have nipples, Greg. Can you milk me?" again.  The existence of you and me is noted in multiple third-party sources, yet neither of us have articles.  At least, neither of us should have. Chris 03:20, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * True. And when you do something unique, that is likely to result in someone somewhere doing a word search for it on Wikipedia - like the group that created the subject of this article has - you can and should have.--Gene_poole 03:34, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I've done plenty of "unique" things (Ever stood in a government chamber and told the leader to "shut up"? Didn't think so.).  I don't consider "setting up a bogus micronation in search of vanity" to be unique.  I personally know too many people that have done it already, and that's just me.  Chris 01:02, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Firstly, your "unique" parliamentary experience nothing of the sort - nor is it likely to have been either a matter of public interest sufficient to have been widely reported in high-circulation media nor to have sufficiently motivated anyone at all to research it on Wikipedia. Secondly, stating that the Gay Kingdom is "bogus" and a "vanity" project is nothing more than your totally unsubstantitated POV; it proves precisely nothing - although I'm certainly interested to hear about the many people you know of who have previously founded a gay micronation by sailing to an actual island, located in an actual ocean in an actual boat, and there raising an actual flag with a group of actual likeminded people in attendance.--Gene_poole 01:15, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Its gayness, or otherwise, is irrelevant. Micronations are micronations are micronations.  Publicity stunts are vanity efforts, and this bears all the hallmarks of one - within 4 months, the settlers are gone; a little small-time media exposure.  Next you'll be suggesting that this is not due to the fact that it's an unremarkable micronation, but bdue to an international media conspiracy against micronations in general.  The whole point of a publicity stunt is to gain attention from the media.  So, whoop-de-doo, they got two articles in print one day.  That doesn't make it an established entity worthy of inclusion.  Especially when it was founded this year and has zero population. Chris 12:57, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Keep. If Government of Tibet in Exile gets an article, why not this? Shane King 00:19, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Interesting logic.Arminius 00:57, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * D Because Dalai Lama is notable enough to have his own article (and as a result, has one), whereas random Australian gay guy doesn't. Chris 03:08, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * A micronation that's only existed for four months? Delete or merge and redirect.  -Sean Curtin 00:51, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is basically an advertisement for a political website. The so-called country has no inhabitants, its so-called diplomatic missions are all political publishers and the like, and its so-called territory is all claimed by Australia. No evidence that it is even borderline encyclopedic. Andrewa 00:59, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-existent micronation.  RickK 04:22, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Does not exist. Geogre 05:19, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Also I don't think a supposed micronation in Australia should be compared to the very real government of Tibet. Especially one that started four months ago. NeoJustin 10:41 Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable micronation. Possibly a footnote in an article on gay rights in Australia, but not notable in its own right. Possibly unpopulated.  — Gwalla | Talk 05:57, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. --Improv 06:57, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Very weak keep, after some googling I think there might be enough to create an encyclopedic article. — siro  χ  o  07:24, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)
 * If this were to form a key role in a gay rights campaign, then it might be notable. As it is, it isn't any more notable than clambering up onto a Buckingham Palace balcony in a badly fitting Batman suit - i.e. possibly worth a passing mention in a relevant article, but not on it's own. Delete. Average Earthman 09:03, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: promo, vanity, trivial, stupidity. Wile E. Heresiarch 13:49, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Micronation. Let the people who care about micronations decide whether it's a real micronation whose listing deserves to remain in the article. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 00:54, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Delete, delete, delete. Ambi 00:57, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Indrian 00:58, Oct 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete or Redirect to relevant Australian gay rights article - not significant enough to be an article. Capitalistroadster 07:50, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * D Today's scores on Google for "gay kingdom":
 * #1 - the official site
 * #2 - the second link cited in the article, which doesn't really verify it (not exactly independent)
 * #3-10 - forums and blogs.  Oh, and that article which won't load.  Ever.  Next page ...
 * #11-20 - Hmm... more forums and blogs
 * #21-30 - oh, look ... blogs galore. WP debuts at 29.  At this point, we see the first unrelated references
 * #31-40 - VfD at 31, and now we hit the porn sites. A few articles which we've already seen turn up again.
 * #41-50 - the porn sites really start to kick in.
 * Normally, 1500 Google hits would be respectable, but most of them evidently aren't for this place (see for yourself). Heck, you can't even reach 50 results before you drown in the sea of blogs and porn sites.  As a guide, Google for sealand generates 268,000 results.  Try sealand -maersk and you still get 6 figures.  Going by the usual analogy of needing to clear the bar in the pole vault, this article is the guy that just nosedived straight into the mat. Chris 13:15, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Keep My goodness, such an avalanche of votes against. I don't think people can see beyond the stub for an article like this or the importance of such a statement as sailing to an island to make a society in which people are free to have a legal marriage. Very disapointed in Wikipedians right now. --ShaunMacPherson 19:55, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * They're not free to have a legal marriage, because the land is still Australian territory subject to Australian laws, which forbid same-sex marriage. Chris 03:45, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * I appreciate the sentiment of this vote, but wikipedia is not a activism database. Not every political act, even if to serve a just cause, is encyclopedic. I hope no one is confusing votes to delete this page as a vote against (or for) legalisation of gay marriage. I think many just feel a group like this is more worthy of a mention in a civil rights group's newsletter than in an encyclopedia. Arminius 21:11, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * By that logic we should immediately begin listing every other civil rights group that has an article on VfD too.--Gene_poole 22:27, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Says Mr. "Anything documented by a third party must go in." Chris 03:45, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * That's "Mr Anything documented by multiple third party sources that is unique and/or interesting enough to be the subject of a Wikipedia word search" to you.--Gene_poole 03:55, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Show me concrete evidence that someone outside the Australian bighead^W^W micronation community has searched for this on WP. Chris 04:47, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Show me concrete evidence that they haven't. --Gene_poole 05:24, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * Merge to Micronation. Suntiger 03:04, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Please don't. That page should be culled as it is. RickK 05:38, Oct 28, 2004 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Micronation, 4 months. must be millions of these out there, and this one doesn't even have a population! Nuclear man 12:02, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Millions? *snort*  A handful at most.  Interesting phenomenon, well-written article, why is everyone so delete happy?  Storage space is cheap.  Deleting an article just for being non-notable, except in extreme cases, such as pure vanity or bio articles with no notability to back them up, is pure foolishness.  Strong keep.  --L33tminion 01:41, Oct 29, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete for all the reasons everyone else has already explained. Rho 03:41, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep Dmn / [[User talk:Dmn|Դմն ]] 01:14, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's not that Wikipedians bear hostility against autonomous states: Wikipedians are hostile to web sites that use Wikipedia as part of their attempt to pretend to be autonomous or state-like. - Nunh-huh 01:19, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not much more than an advert.  —Lowellian (talk)   22:48, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)


text: Category:New Zealand golfers

title: Category:New Zealand golfers


text:
Steve Penk

Steve Penk is a British radio and television presenter. He was born in Rusholme in Manchester and attended Hazel Grove High School. At the age of 16, he started his radio career at Piccadilly Radio in 1978 (subsequently rebranded Key 103), where his breakfast show delivered record ratings, the highest in the station's history to this day.

In 1997, Penk moved on to work at Capital Radio London, presenting the mid-morning show. On his programme he regularly did his famous radio wind-ups. It was during one of these wind-up calls that Penk had the idea to call the then British Prime Minister, Tony Blair. Penk was able to get through the No. 10 switchboard and managed to get Blair on the air for a few minutes. Blair later mentioned during Prime Minister's Questions that Penk had prank-called him that morning, and at that point it became a global media story.

In 2001, Penk moved to Virgin Radio, where he replaced Chris Evans on the breakfast show and increased the audience by 300,000 listeners in the first three months. Penk then returned to Capital FM in 2002 to present a networked late show.

After a year presenting the late show on Capital Radio, networked to a number of other stations, Penk returned to Manchester's Key 103; however, he left at the end of 2006. Penk returned to the airwaves on Fox FM in Oxfordshire in March 2007 as its new breakfast show presenter. However, he announced on 15 January 2008 he would be leaving the station by March 2008 due to "internal politics".

He also presented a number of primetime TV Shows for ITV, such as TV Nightmares, The Way They Were and When Athletes Attack. Penk made guest appearances on Blankety Blank and a few series of TV's Naughtiest Blunders on ITV1.

On Thursday 4 September 2008, it was announced that Penk had bought the entire share capital in the radio station 96.2 the Revolution. Almost immediately after the purchase, Penk made major changes both to the schedule and to the playlist. The changes led to outrage from some listeners to the station and departure of some of the station's DJs. However, after changing the station's format Penk managed to quadruple the audience.

In January 2014, he sold 96.2 the Revolution. In 2015, Penk launched the Steve Penk Wind-Up Channel on DAB+ in Manchester, featuring wind-up/prank calls 24/7.

In 2016, Penk created and launched Radio Dead, a globally unique radio station that only plays artistes who are deceased. Penk closed Radio Dead, along with another internet based station that he owned, at the end of November 2019.

In 2019, he started a podcast of his BBC Radio 4 Extra series Radio Nightmares, featuring mistakes and bloopers from all types of radio broadcasting across the world.

He stood in on the 10pm Saturday night show on Greatest Hits Radio in June 2021.

Television appearances

 * TV Nightmares
 * Would I Lie To You?
 * Russian Roulette
 * Blankety Blank
 * The Way They Were: Coronation Street Special
 * TV's Naughtiest Blunders
 * This Morning

title: Steve Penk


text:
Manipur National Conference

The Manipur National Conference was a political party in the Indian state of Manipur. MNC was formed in 2002, when a split occurred in the Manipur State Congress Party. Two competing factions struggled to be recognized as the authentic MSCP. In the end the Election Commission recognized the Th. Chaoba-led group as the real MSCP. W Nipamacha Singh (former Chief Minister of Manipur) then re-christened his group as 'Manipur National Conference'.

Elections
In the 2002 state assembly elections MNC supported the Secular Progressive Front. MNC won one seat in the elections.

Merger with RJD
In 2005, MNC merged with RJD.

title: Manipur National Conference


text:
USS Murray (DD-576)

The third USS Murray (DD/DDE-576) was a Fletcher-class destroyer in the United States Navy during World War II. Murray was named for Capt. Alexander Murray and his grandson Rear Adm. Alexander Murray

Murray (DD-576) was laid down on 16 March 1942 by Consolidated Steel Corporation, Orange, Texas and launched on 16 August 1942, sponsored by Mrs. Frank T. Leighton. The ship was commissioned on 20 April 1943.

World War II
After shakedown in the Caribbean, Murray served on escort duty in the Atlantic Ocean, then sailed to join Destroyer Squadron 25 at Pearl Harbor in September 1943. Sailing with a carrier task force, Murray took part in strikes on Wake Island 5–6 October, then voyaged to the South Pacific to support the landings on Bougainville 8–9 November, splashing three enemy aircraft. Two days later, while covering US 3rd Fleet aircraft carriers in a strike against Rabaul, Murray shot down two of a force of about 150 enemy aircraft attacking her formation.

Hewing to a demanding pace of operations, Murray was on antisubmarine patrol in the Gilbert Islands from 20 November to 8 December during the occupation of Tarawa and Abemama, then for the next month guarded shipping into the newly acquired islands. In January 1944 Murray performed outstandingly in fire support missions for the capture of Kwajalein, then screened transports carrying invasion forces to Eniwetok. Two months of escort duty in the western ocean routes followed, until she joined in the bombardment of Kavieng, New Ireland, 20 March.

Joining the 7th Fleet Murray took part in the assault on Aitape, New Guinea, 23 to 28 April, downing another enemy aircraft during an aerial torpedo attack. Rejoining the 6th Fleet in June, she screened amphibious craft during the assault on Saipan, then sailed to Guam for close-in fire support and transport screening duty 20 July to 26th. After patrol and escort duties for the consolidation of the Mariana Islands until late in August, Murray returned to the continuing operations around New Guinea. She bombarded Wewak 30 August to cover British minelaying operations, and in September covered the landings on Morotai. Returning to Hollandia, she prepared for the invasion of the Philippines, sortieing in escort of the transports for Leyte. On 20–21 October, she conducted shore bombardment, moving in as close as reefs would allow to fire over the landing force into enemy installations and at the same time aiding in repelling enemy air attacks.

Departing the Philippines immediately after the landings Murray overhauled at San Francisco, California, then in January 1945 escorted a battleship division to Pearl Harbor while en route to join Task Force 58. She screened the aircraft carriers and acted as picket during the first carrier raid on Tokyo 16 February and attacks on Iwo Jima and the Ryukyu Islands 26 February to 1 March, sinking a Japanese picket ship about 200 miles off the coast of Japan on 26 February. Murray next prepared for the Okinawa operation, during which she screened battleships from submarine attack during the initial preinvasion bombardment. Hit by a Japanese bomb 27 March, she retired to Pearl Harbor for repairs.

While returning to the forward areas by way of Eniwetok, Murray was ordered 2 July to locate, board, and search Japanese hospital ship Takasago Maru, bound for Wake Island and suspected of carrying arms or supplies, contraband for a hospital ship. She located the ship the next day, but search revealed nothing in violation of international law, so the hospital ship was allowed to proceed to Wake to embark sick and wounded Japanese.

Rejoining her force, now Task Force 38, Murray guarded the fast carriers in the raids against Honshū, Hokkaidō, and Kyūshū through the last 2 months of the war. In one of the most daring raids of the war, Murray and others of her squadron penetrated Suruga Bay, Honshū, 30 July to bombard the city of Shimizu, perhaps the deepest penetration of Japanese waters by any surface craft during the war.

After World War II
One of the initial occupation force, Murray became the first ship in empire waters to bring in a Japanese submarine when the enemy undersea fleet began to surrender. On 27 August, aircraft of TF 38, patrolling off Honshū, located a submarine flying the black flag designated as the surrender signal, and Murray was ordered to intercept and take the craft into Tokyo Bay for internment. Her boarding party received the swords of JSUB I-14's officers that same day, and the submarine was escorted to the mouth of Sagami Bay. Murray was present in Tokyo Bay for the formal Japanese surrender 2 September, then 3 days later sailed for the United States. Inactivated at Philadelphia Naval Shipyard, Murray decommissioned 27 March 1946, and went into reserve at Charleston, South Carolina.

Korean War years
In June 1951, Murray began conversion to an escort destroyer, for which she had been designated DDE-576 on 2 January 1951. She recommissioned at Charleston 16 October 1951.

Early in 1952, Murray began East Coast and Caribbean training operations from her home port, Norfolk. She also served periodically as plane guard during carrier qualification of naval aviation cadets off Pensacola, Florida. In June 1953, she sailed for her first deployment to the Mediterranean, serving in the hunter killer force of the 6th Fleet. Her 1954 tour was marked by an extension to northern European ports. In 1956, Murray operated with USS Nautilus (SSN-571) and participated in a NATO convoy escort exercise in European waters. During much of 1956 she underwent yard overhaul, then in 1957 sailed round Cape of Good Hope for patrol duty in the Persian Gulf, the usual access to which was blocked by the closing of the Suez Canal the previous autumn. With the canal free later in the spring, she joined the 6th Fleet in Mediterranean operations through August.

Between March 1958 and May 1961 Murray formed part of Task Group Alfa, an experimental development group working in antisubmarine warfare. The group usually operated off the Virginia Capes, but in the summers of 1959 and 1960 participated in the annual summer NROTC midshipmen training cruises, voyaging to Canadian ports and Bermuda.

1960s
In late May 1961, Murray was one of the rescue ships stationed along the route of President John F. Kennedy's flight to Paris, then participated in that summer's midshipmen cruise. Redesignated DD-576 on 30 June 1962, Murray rejoined TG Alfa for its development operations, which were interrupted for participation in the Cuban Quarantine in October and November 1962 that forced Soviet missiles out of Cuba and averted grave international complications. At 1633 on 27 October 1962, the Murray Deck Log contains the following entry: "Sonar contact bearing 212 2,000 yards." The Murray sonar gang classified the contact as a possible submarine After several hours of "ping time" at 2050 hours the same date the Murray Deck Log contains the following additional entry:  "Submarine surfaced bearing 080, 3,900 yards. 4 hours and 17 minutes after initial contact by this ship at LAT 27-36N, LONG 65-56.5W." Thus Murray was the first U.S. Navy destroyer to gain and hold contact with the first of three Soviet submarines forced to surface during the Cuban Missile Crisis. After training off New England early in 1963, Murray returned to Caribbean patrols then came north for the midshipmen cruise.

Murray sailed 29 November 1963 for her first 6th Fleet deployment in six years, visiting French, Spanish, and Italian ports before returning to Norfolk 23 May 1964. She cleared Norfolk again 8 September for NATO Arctic operations, crossing the Arctic Circle 21 September, and visiting Amsterdam before returning to Norfolk 23 October.

Decommissioned in May 1966 at Norfolk, Murray was struck from the Navy list 1 June 1966, and sold for scrapping to Boston Metals Co., Baltimore, Maryland, in 1966.

Murray received 11 battle stars for World War II service.

title: USS Murray (DD-576)


text: Category:Japanese golfers

title: Category:Japanese golfers


text: User talk:193.136.173.40

title: User talk:193.136.173.40


text:
Leslie Burgin

Edward Leslie Burgin (13 July 1887 – 16 August 1945) was a British Liberal and later Liberal National politician in the 1930s.

Biography
Born to Edward Lambert Burgin, a solicitor, Burgin studied law at the University of London, graduating with a first-class LL.B. in 1908 and a LL.D. in 1913.

Burgin trained as a solicitor specialising in international law and served as principal and director of legal studies to the Law Society. He contested Hornsey four times and East Ham North once, without success.

In the 1929 general election Burgin was elected as Liberal Member of Parliament (MP) for Luton. Along with some other Liberal MPs he joined the Liberal Nationals in 1931 and was made a Charity Commissioner. In 1932 he was appointed Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade. He was appointed to the Privy Council in the 1937 Coronation Honours.

In 1937 Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain appointed Burgin as Minister of Transport. Two years later he was appointed as the first Minister of Supply in April 1939. As the post had not yet been established in law, he formally served as Minister without Portfolio for the first three months. His appointment was aimed to appeal to liberal minded opinion but was criticised as being inappropriate - A.J.P. Taylor described Burgin as being "another horse from Caligula's well-stocked stables" (a follow-up to contemporary remarks about the earlier appointment of Sir Thomas Inskip as Minister for Coordination of Defence). When Chamberlain was replaced by Winston Churchill, Burgin was not included in the new wartime ministry.

Burgin was referred to in the book Guilty Men (1940) by Michael Foot, Frank Owen and Peter Howard (writing under the pseudonym 'Cato'), an attack on public figures for their failure to re-arm and their appeasement of Nazi Germany.

He retired at the 1945 general election before dying in August 1945, aged 58.

title: Leslie Burgin