text:
Talk:Justifiable homicide

Contradictory lede
1.) A homicide can only be justified if there is sufficient evidence to prove that it was reasonable to believe that the offending party posed an imminent threat to the life or well-being of another, in self-defense. 2.) To rule a justifiable homicide, one must objectively prove to a trier of fact, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the victim intended to commit violence. The first sentence states the standard as a reasonable belief of a threat to well-being. The second sentence states the standard as an intent in fact to commit violence. 73.235.245.1 (talk) 10:44, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Stand-your-ground law
Stand-your-ground Law deserves a mention here and in what states it is already law. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 178.190.206.63 (talk) 11:45, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Sweden
I'm not convinced the Sweden section is notable enough to be included here. It provides no details other than that one police officer in Sweden got convicted of homicide at one point, and it's not really even relevant to the article, as it provides no specifics about Swedish law regarding justifiable homicide. I move it gets pulled. Jjcooper0811 (talk) 07:35, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

In the article it is not stated to what country it refers. Laws and jurisprudence vary from country to country.

It's also one very long paragraph.

"The circumstances under which homicide is justified are usually considered to be that the victim was clearly likely to kill an innocent if the defendant did not kill them."

Changing this, I don't see how the victim of the potential killer has to be innocent of anything for the killing of the potential killer to be justified, and if this is relevant, innocent of what? --Teeks 18:27, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * I think that statement might be trying to clarify that, for example, a robber is not justified in shooting a police officer that points a gun at them. Regardless of what it's trying to say, it's too unclear. --67.165.6.76 (talk) 03:45, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Material removed for clarification
"A homicide performed out of vengeance, or retribution for action in the past would generally not be considered justifiable, although in some cases such a crime is classed as being justifiable due to the impossibility of finding a jury who would convict under the case's circumstances."
 * So the law in the U.S. is that a DA or trial judge may decide that a homicide is justifiable without having to wait for a jury to be convened?
 * Just passing through... It's more of a procedural thing. A prosecutor can always choose to just not prosecute or the police can choose to not arrest. What happens heavily depends on the area. In Florida for example, authorities will generally give wide lattitude if the person who got shot was comitting a violent crime at the time because they know that local juries wont generally care if a rapist or robber was shot while attacking or fleeing. But it might be a very different story in say, Chicago where attitudes differ (both in government and in juries). Beerslurpy 11:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the point is tho, it's not a justifiable homicide. It's an unjustifiable homicide which is not prosecuted because DA's aren't enforcing the law and/or because they know the jury will ignore the law and not convict Nil Einne 02:15, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

"In cases of self-defense, the defendant should generally obey a duty to retreat if it is possible to do so (except from one's home or place of business), or it is not justifiable (in the states of Florida and Louisiana, there is no duty to retreat)."
 * I think this is ambiguous. Does the "it" mean that the use of force is not justifiable, or that, in the event that a death is caused, what would otherwise have been a justifiable use of force does not make the homicide justifiable?
 * Me again... The original statement is very much in error. "Duty to retreat" is a minority viewpoint in the US. Although few states have statutes that explicitly state there is no duty, most states have arrived at this result through common law. I'm currently working on a survey of law in this field. Also, whether death occurs or not is irrelevant. Deadly force is deadly force regardless of whether or not it succeeds. Ironically, you are thus more likely to get in trouble for intentionally wounding someone with a gun than killing them, since the intentional wounding implies that they werent doing something that would justify the use of deadly force. Beerslurpy 11:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

"Justifiable homicides are always initially assumed to be criminal until the evidence warrants a change, as justifiable homicide is one of the most common defenses for homicides both justified and criminal."
 * If the homicides were justifiable, they would actually not be criminal at all. What evidence would change this interpretation? And how can justifiable homicide be a defence to homicides "both justified and criminal"?
 * There are other redundancies and circumlocutions which I have not bothered to remove, but the whole section should be revised by someone with real understanding of the law. David91 08:58, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I'd love to, but there are dozens of pages on this subject and I am busy with law school. I am generally accumulating material on stand your ground laws at the moment, so I'll try and contribute more this semester when things are slow.Beerslurpy 11:25, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikified Links
I'm not sure if this is because of my computer, but why are all the Wikified links on this page red instead of the usual blue (purple if visited)? All the other pages on Wikipedia have links that are blue/purple except for this one as far as I can tell. Pouchkidium 07:29, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm getting the same here. Don't know what's wrong. Bigmike1020 03:51, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Abortion issue
''Some argue that termination of pregnancy is homicide of the fetus. Abortion is variously justified using a doctrine of necessity to safeguard the health of the mother or, more generally, utilitarianism.''

Ignoring for the moment the "some argue" weasel words: Since this is a legal article, perhaps we should note that in most jurisdictions in which abortion is legal, a fetus is not recognized as a legally distinct person and thus cannot be murdered in the legal sense. In the US the Unborn Victims of Violence Act seems to have changed this (though I'm not sure that this has been tested in court, as I believe Roe v. Wade explicitly said that a fetus is not a person). Still, I'm betting that this is the case in most jurisdictions where abortion is legal. --Jfruh (talk) 21:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I believe the statement is useless there as well, I vote delete it. 68.102.2.241 (talk) 06:31, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

 * I almost added a section on the UVoVA, and then I thought to myself, "Wowbagger, you'd better check the talk page first, because this is probably a controversial idea you have." Glad I checked.  Here's what I was planning to add (under Common excusing conditions).  My additions are in italics:

 * 6. The doctrine of necessity allows, for example, a surgeon to separate conjoined twins, killing the weaker twin to save the other.
 * 7. In the United States, the 2005 Unborn Victims of Violence Act defined human fetuses as "unborn children" for the first time, recognizing all fetuses as equal holders of general human rights and formally defining feticide as murder (under USC §1111). However, the law retained explicit exceptions which prohibit the prosecution "of any person for conduct relating to an abortion," "of any person for any medical treatment," or "of any woman with respect to her unborn child," thereby preserving abortion rights in the United States under a justifiable homicide framework.
 * 8. Several countries, such as the Netherlands, Belgium, Switzerland, Japan, and the US states of Oregon and Washington allow both active and passive euthanasia by law, if justified.

 * Is there any objection to my adding the above section? Does anyone feel this constitutes OR?  Or that it uses biased language?  Or that its sources are unreliable?  Or that it needs rewriting?  I would be happy to talk through such points with anyone who raises them, because I do think this would be a valuable addition for the article.  If, OTOH, there is general approval of this proposal, I'll add on my next pass through WP, probably in a couple of weeks, maybe more, maybe (if I'm lucky) in the next few days.  Grazie! --BCSWowbagger (talk) 16:17, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * I had the luck to have an internet connection and time late at night here, so I'm going to go ahead and add the item while I have the chance. However, because there has been neither consensus nor the time needed for a consensus to develop, I am still very open to discussing the item with anyone who wants to.

 * Oh, and I should have noted this last time: Jfruh, the SCOTUS in Roe v. Wade held that the personhood status of the fetus was sufficiently ambiguous to make killing it legitimate. Indeed, the majority held specifically that, were Congress ever to clearly define the fetus as a human person within the sense of the Fourteenth Amendment, the plaintiff's case would collapse and fetuses would be awarded the right to life.  However, Planned Parenthood v. Casey superseded Roe and made the right to an abortion exist independently of legislative recognition or non-recognition of any rights which may or may not belong to the life destroyed -- the right of recognizance of fetal rights, from then on, belonged solely to the (choose preferred term: mother/pregnant woman).  And that's more or less where we stand today.  At least, that's how I recall it.  I've read both decisions in full, but I am not a lawyer.  Grazie! --BCSWowbagger (talk) 00:04, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

undeclared war
"Thus, if there is no formal declaration of war or the casus belli is not legitimate, all those who engage in the fighting and kill combatants could theoretically be prosecuted"

As many people who were anti-Vietnam believe the the war was unjust. According to this statement the war was in fact murder. But with that it raises the question of, because of the draft, were the soldiers that "murdered" in the war actually murdering or were they under duress(forced to usually by threat)However, there is no doubt that no prosecutor could win a case that large against the US Government. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.192.49.38 (talk) 02:31, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

References Missing
This article has no references at all. It's almost original research. I'm surprised it's not tagged yet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.127.16.34 (talk) 05:39, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree, and I have tagged it as unreferenced and possible original research.--Aervanath (talk) 01:47, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd bet that it's the text of a hard-copy encyclopedia article which could perhaps be recognized by someone. I'm surprised it hasn't been yet. GeorgeTSLC (talk) 19:42, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

www.leginfo.ca.gov might be a good reference for the informal citations to California Penal Code 196: http://leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=187-199 --199.80.152.201 (talk) 23:24, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

self defense and justifiable homicide
The self defense law touching justifiable homicide, as explained to me in handgun permit class in the state of Tennessee, is actually very similar to the 1995 standardized deadly force policy for federal law enforcement in that use of lethal force is justified only if necessary in response to an imminent threat of death or grevious bodily harm to oneself or another person. Civilian self defense also requires meeting the test that "a reasonable person" would believe that the situation, based on what the defender knew, justified fear of death or bodily harm if the defender did not act then and there. There is no judicial finding of "justifiable homicide": homicide charges are not filed, a grand jury returns no bill, a petit jury acquits, a judge sets aside a jury verdict of guilty, or an appellate court overturns a conviction, any of these if the evidence supports a justification of self-defense. Justifiable homicide is not treated lightly, and although a few obvious cases of killing of a felon during commission of a felony are adjudicated by police report, most are actually adjudicated much higher in the justice system, by coroner, medical examiner, district attorney, grand jury, petit jury, trial judge or appellate court. An escalating mutual combat in which the "defender" was a willing participant and which ends in death, or a killing motivated by anger or hatred rather than fear of death or mayhem, is not likely to be adjudicated as a justifiable homicide. This article needs the input of defense lawyers, prosecutors, trial judges, appellate court judges and criminologists with knowledge of the subject. Naaman Brown (talk) 02:20, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Bureaucratic expertise is not relevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.52.186.148 (talk) 19:39, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Why not? GeorgeTSLC (talk) 19:44, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

California penal Code 197.4
It may be noteworthy that in California "Homicide is justifiable ... when necessarily committed in attempting [to lawfully suppress] any riot, or in lawfully keeping and preserving the peace." --199.80.152.201 (talk) 23:22, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Why is abortion not mentioned?
Homidide is defined as a human killing another human. If a human kills a human fetus, that they are clearly still killing a human. There is practically no sifference between a human inside of a womb and one outside the womb ecpect for the fact that beings inside the womb are less devolped humans, but then new born babys are far from being fully devoloped and that doesn't mean they're not human - the fact that they are an organism with human tisue is sufficient. Robo37 (talk) 14:53, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Two questions
1.)

In the "United States" section,

"In the states of Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana,[1] New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, West Virginia, Washington, Wyoming and other Castle Doctrine states, there is no duty to retreat in certain situations (depending on the state, this may apply to one's home, business, or vehicle, or to any public place where a person is lawfully present)."

My question is about the "or to any public place where a person is lawfully present)" component of the castle doctrine. I'm just a second year law student, but my understanding of the difference between "stand your ground" statutes and common law and statutory manifestations of the castle doctrine is that in states that adhere to the castle doctrine but not "stand your ground" laws, the duty to retreat does not exist in certain, specifically enumerated places or classes of places. To my yet-immature legal mind this means that if the castle doctrine includes the proposition that the defendant has no duty to retreat from an attacker when he is in "any public place where [the defendant] is lawfully present," then there is no difference between the castle doctrine and "stand your ground" statutes.

Since the defendant has the right to be in any public space subject to certain restrictions (e.g. hours), does the generalized version of the castle doctrine explained in the article imply that the defendant has no duty to retreat from an attacker when she and the attacker are separated by a large space such as a city park? Is the duty to retreat essentially rolled back to places in which one has no legal right to be? I have not read all of the states' statutes cited in the article, but for this to be true would surprise me.

2.)

A minor quibble with the grammar in the "United States" section:

"A non-criminal homicide, usually committed in self-defense or in defense of another, may be called in some cases in the United States."

To reverse the voice of this sentence for my sake, does one "call a non-criminal homicide" at some stage in criminal procedure? Does the verb "call" have some specific or anachronistic legal meaning?

Hellhounds88 (talk) 23:16, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

UK
A recent change in UK laws now enables spouses to use a partial defence based on "prolonged domestic violence", even in cases where there was no immediate danger involved (e.g. a wife killing her sleeping husband).

This groundbreaking change in Western law should be reflected in the article, but due to an apparent near-complete media blackout on the issue, sources are hard to come by. Many news articles mention this change in passing, but so far I've had no luck finding a source specifically discussing it. Any help finding sources would be highly appreciated. Here is one source just to prove that I'm not making this up or anything. --84.44.229.83 (talk) 13:53, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Justifiable homicide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120403131201/http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/45/3/45-3-103.htm to http://data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/45/3/45-3-103.htm

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

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 01:41, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Justifiable homicide. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060218065028/http://www.crisa.org.za/section_49.pdf to http://www.crisa.org.za/section_49.pdf

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:33, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

"Antivaxxers?"
I have noticed that somebody has added "Antivaxxers" to the list of conditions of a "Justifiable Homicide", I believe this is incorrect and facetious. 2600:1700:8A00:8910:18DB:C7D8:1396:F25C (talk) 07:18, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Persons engaging in an unjust war could theoretically be prosecuted
I am doubtful that this is correct as a matter of international law. If a soldier is part of a lawful chain of command, wears distinctive insignia, bears arms openly, and fights according to the rules and customs of war, then he is a lawful combatant and entitled to protection as a prisoner of war if captured. If I'm not mistaken, this is a cornerstone of humanitarian international law going back to Grotius, who based this Enlightenment view of war on the assumption that it is always possible that yours will turn out to be the side in the wrong in a war, and you must treat POWs as if there is at least a theoretical possibility that their side will turn out to be in the right. --Kent G. Budge (talk) 18:16, 6 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I think you are correct. The passage is unsourced anyway; it should be removed.JMM12345 (talk) 05:10, 16 November 2021 (UTC)JMM12345

title: Talk:Justifiable homicide


text:
Never Apologise Never Explain

Never Apologise Never Explain is the eighth full-length album by the rock band Therapy?, and the second to be released on Spitfire Records. It was released on 27 September 2004. The album was recorded in June 2004 at Parkgate Studios, Hastings.

"Never Apologise Never Explain" marked a return to the claustrophobic sound of the band's early releases. It failed to chart in the Top 200 of the UK Albums Chart. The album was not released in North America.

The album was released on CD only. A limited edition CD-ROM of the album contains two live videos ("Teethgrinder" & "Who Knows") from the Scopophobia DVD.

Polish label Metal Mind Productions re-released the album on 2 November 2009. The album was remastered using 24-Bit technology, limited to 1000 copies, on a gold disk digipak CD.

Track listing
All songs written by Therapy?

Personnel

 * Therapy?
 * Andy Cairns – vocals, guitar
 * Neil Cooper – drums
 * Michael McKeegan – bass
 * Technical
 * Pete Bartlett – producer, mixer
 * Simon Wakeling – engineer
 * Giles Hall – mixer
 * Chris Potter and John Davis – mastering
 * Iona Bateman – photography
 * Simon Leigh – photography
 * Curt Evans – design

Singles

 * "Polar Bear"/"Rock You Monkeys" was a double A-side download only single released on 13 June 2005 with a live version of "Die Laughing" from the Alive Festival in Belgium, 31 July 2004.
 * "Rise Up (Make Yourself Well) was released as a radio only single in 2004.
 * "Die Like a Motherfucker" was released as a radio only single in 2005.
 * "Long Distance" was released as a radio only single in Belgium in 2005.
 * "Perish the Thought" was released as a radio only single in Belgium in 2005.

Promo videos

 * "Rise Up (Make Yourself Well)"
 * "Rock You Monkeys": directed by Andre Thyret

Origins of the phrase
The originator of this commonly used phrase, often attributed to members of the House of Windsor (British Royalty), Duke of Wellington, Benjamin Disraeli and others, is said to be John Arbuthnot Fisher, a notable British Admiral of the Victorian and Edwardian era. ("Boldness has genius, power and magic in it ... Never contradict. Never explain. Never apologise"). And even earlier, King Charles I of England is quoted in The Oxford Dictionary of Quotations as writing "Never make a defence or apology before you be accused", in a letter to Lord Wentworth as long ago as 1636.

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

title: Never Apologise Never Explain


text:
Talk:MathML

WebEQ
Don't know if it's suitable for inclusion, but there is a Java piece of software called WebEQ which renders MathML in a browser and has a WYSIWYG editor that can write the MathML for you.

Mediawiki extension with MathML support
I know it is not about the article but can help who need it (like me): I've made a extension to mediawiki. Here is the link: ASCIIMathML4Wiki  SSPecter ☎ ♠  01:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC).

MathML support in Chrome as of 2013-01-12
an overview of browser support of MathML: http://caniuse.com/mathml — Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.123.208.11  (talk • contribs)  30 April 2012 14:38

Removal of Browser Support section
I propose removing the “Browser support” section entirely. The parts of it that are likely to be interesting are better placed in the History section. It contains a large number of abandoned browsers, and even among those browsers that are still active, the information may be misleading or incorrect. This is particularly true of the introductory text in that section, which is currently a hot mess.

One bit is worth rescuing; the final paragraph of text (“The quality of rendering of MathML in a browser depends…”) could (and likely should) be moved into the section “Presentation and semantics”. Otherwise, it seems to me the article would be more timeless and less cluttered by the removal of this section.

Feedback on this proposal is welcome! EricAMeyer (talk) 20:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

 * In the absence of feedback pro or con, I’ve gone ahead and done this just now. EricAMeyer (talk) 18:29, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:MathML


text:
VidFIRE

VidFIRE (an abbreviation of "video field interpolation restoration effect") is a technology intended to restore the video-like motion of footage originally shot with television cameras that have been converted to formats with telerecording as their basis. The word is both a noun and a verb; in a sense, it is the opposite of filmizing, which makes video look like film.

Background
Film recorded for the purposes of United Kingdom television production is usually recorded at 25 frames per second; there is an unrecorded temporal gap between each frame and the next. In contrast, video pictures are recorded as a stream of video fields. Each field can be loosely seen as half a frame, but each field is also a discrete image separated from the previous field by 1/50 second. This difference in the rate of change of the image is one of the factors contributing to the "video look", familiar to viewers as the more immediate, "live" feel seen in many soap operas and sports programmes.

When videotape technology was first created in the 1950s, tapes were extremely costly; but their reusability meant that the cost of a single tape could be spread across several productions, with each successive production erasing and then reusing the tape from a previous one, with the result that relatively few programmes produced on videotape in the 1950s and 1960s still exist in their original format.

The expense of videotape and the various mutually incompatible television standards around the world made it impractical at the time for programme makers to sell their productions to foreign broadcasters in their original video form. Film, however, was considered a universal medium, and most broadcasters had the facility to broadcast from it. Before the development of practical video tape, programme makers such as the BBC developed the technology to record programmes—either live or for prerecording—from specially adapted monitors with a film camera. The resulting film recordings are called telerecordings in the UK and kinescopes in the United States and Australia.

Programmes often were copied in this way for rebroadcast or overseas sale before the original videotapes were reused. Most live- and videotape-originated television from this era exists today only as film recordings. However, the film recording system "locks" two video fields, previously separated by 1/50 second, into a single film frame. When the film is played back, the original video-like motion is lost.

Restoring the video look
VidFIRE was developed by Peter Finklestone to address the motion differences caused by the telerecording process. It uses motion estimation software to create an intermediate image, which exists temporally between two film frames. For example, if all frames of a twenty-five-minute film recording were processed, the result would be double the amount of frames and a new running length of fifty minutes. Playback at this stage (at 25 frame/s) gives smooth movement at half speed, due to the presence of interpolated images.

The programme is then further processed by interlacing adjacent frames, which halves the running time back to the original twenty-five minutes. The final result is video with fifty fields per second, alternate fields being sourced from the original film frame or the new interpolated image respectively. This has the effect of restoring the "video look" to the production.

Limitations
Depending on the quality of the film stock and how carefully the film was stored and handled in the years since it was first recorded, film recordings can be very grainy, dirty and scratched. The appearance of these film artefacts on the processed programme would break the illusion that the viewer is watching a videotape recording. Therefore, to maintain the VidFIRE effect it is imperative the image be as clean and stable as possible. The best available copy of the film-recorded programme should be used, preferably the original camera negative. Before processing, the film should be cleaned, digitally noise-reduced, and repaired.

A further, self-imposed limitation is that VidFIRE is used only to process material that originally was produced using video cameras. There is no technical reason why film-originated material cannot be processed, but it is not considered to be "in the spirit" of restoration. It is also possible that the difference in lighting and picture balance on film may mean the final processed images look subjectively "wrong".

Commercial use for Doctor Who episodes
The Doctor Who Restoration Team routinely VidFIREs 1960s episodes of Doctor Who when preparing them for release on DVD. The process has also been applied to a number of other programmes, including two previously lost episodes of the BBC sitcom Dad's Army, which were rediscovered in 2001. The episodes, "Operation Kilt" and "The Battle of Godfrey's Cottage," were VidFIREd in preparation for their broadcast as part of a "Dad's Army evening" on BBC Two. The remainder of series one and two of Dad's Army was later processed and released on DVD. Episodes of Sykes and Public Eye have also been treated for DVD.

A few 1960s Doctor Who episodes, all starring William Hartnell, did not undergo the VidFIRE process: Part One of The Crusade - "The Lion", and parts 1-4 of The Time Meddler were not processed because it was deemed that the damage to the films rendered the video effect unconvincing. (In the case of The Time Meddler the damage was confined to part 4 "Checkmate" but the remaining episodes were left untreated also to match on DVD.). All were finally given the process in 2022 for the Season Two Blu-ray boxset.

An easter egg included on the DVD release of The Tomb of the Cybermen featured a brief clip from that serial with VidFIRE processing applied. This was an experiment by the Doctor Who Restoration Team to see how well VidFIRE would survive the MPEG-2 encoding process. The experiment demonstrated that the VidFIRE illusion was not diminished by MPEG encoding and so the next relevant DVD release, The Aztecs, was VidFIREd in its entirety. The Tomb of The Cybermen has since been re-issued on DVD in entirely VidFIREd form as part of the Revisitations 3 box set.

A slightly revised version of the process, with an improved motion-estimation engine, was first used on the BBC's 2005 DVD release of Quatermass and the Pit (as part of The Quatermass Collection) and then on all subsequent relevant Doctor Who DVD releases.

The 1970s Doctor Who serials to have undergone the VidFIRE process are: Doctor Who and the Silurians, The Ambassadors of Death (episodes 2–7; episode 1 remains on original 2-inch tape), Inferno, Terror of the Autons, The Mind of Evil, The Claws of Axos (only Episodes 2 and 3), The Daemons (only episodes 1-3 and 5), Planet of the Daleks (only episode 3) and Invasion of the Dinosaurs (only episode 1).

Beyond this, the technique (although critically applauded) has seen relatively little exposure, perhaps because of a belief within the broadcasting industry that public interest in the kind of archive television that would benefit from VidFIRE is insufficient to justify the cost of processing.

title: VidFIRE


text:
User:Yasuakinaito

My name is Yasuaki Naito. I am a doctoral student at the University of Tokyo. I am majoring in chemistry, and I study living budding yeast cells using time and space-resolved Raman spectroscopy.

title: User:Yasuakinaito


text:
Mornington Peninsula Freeway

The Mornington Peninsula Freeway is a freeway in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, that provides a link from south-eastern suburban Melbourne to the Mornington Peninsula. Whilst the entire freeway from Dingley Village to Rosebud is declared by VicRoads as the Mornington Peninsula Freeway, the section between EastLink in Carrum Downs and Moorooduc Highway in Moorooduc is locally and commonly known as Peninsula Link. The entire freeway corridor bears the designation M11.

Route
The Mornington Peninsula Freeway begins at the Dingley Bypass in Dingley Village and travels southbound towards Chelsea Heights and the EastLink/Frankston Freeway interchange in Carrum Downs, running roughly parallel to the existing Boundary Road/Wells Road corridor. From here, it continues in a south-easterly direction changing its local name to Peninsula Link. Peninsula Link runs for 25 kilometres, bypassing Central Frankston to the east until it meets Moorooduc Highway, at which points the local name reverts to Mornington Peninsula Freeway. The freeway then continues southwest until Boneo Road, in Rosebud. This section of the freeway passes through vineyards, stud farms and gardens along the Mornington Peninsula. The final section of the road between Jetty Road and Boneo Road is a two lane, single carriageway road. Despite this, this section is still classed as a Freeway by VicRoads and carries the M11 designation.

On the urban section of Mornington Peninsula Freeway (between Dingley Village and Carrum Downs), the standard travel time in both directions is 10 minutes: 2 minutes between Dingley Bypass and Lower Dandenong Road, 3 minutes between Lower Dandenong Road and Springvale Road, and 5 minutes between Springvale Road and the EastLink / Frankston Freeway. The usual peak period travel time is between 13 and 24 minutes; however, in times of extreme congestion or traffic incidents, the travel time can well exceed 30 minutes.

Northern section (Springvale Road–Frankston Freeway)
The original northern section (prior to the 2021 northern extension) was built originally as an extension of Frankston Freeway, a short but wide 2 km length curve opening to the Eel Race Drain in 1976. This was followed by a 13 km section further north to Springvale Road in Chelsea Heights, opening on 18 March 1980 alongside Wells Road, subsuming portions of it and ultimately replacing it as a through route. A plan to complete the rest of the freeway northwards from Springvale Road was cancelled by a change of Government in 1982, electing to duplicate Wells Road through Aspendale and Boundary Road through Braeside instead.

Mornington Peninsula Freeway's northern section was first signed Metropolitan Route 11 when the Eel Race Drain to Frankston Freeway stage opened in 1976, and was completely re-routed from Wells Road when the last replacement stage of Frankston Freeway opened in 1980. Despite the fact most Victorian Freeways converted to the alphanumeric system by 1998, this section retained the Metropolitan Route 11 designation. Finally in 2013, with the opening of Peninsula Link, this section was reassigned M11 (although a number of Metropolitan Route 11 shields remain visible to this day).

Southern section
Plans for the southern section as "Mornington Peninsula By-pass Road" had been made as far back as 1966, between Nepean Highway in Dromana and Eastbourne Road at Rosebud. It was built in small successive sections, starting at Nepean Highway at Dromana in late 1971 eventually to Jetty Road at Rosebud South in 1975. Another single-carriageway section between Dromana and the Nepean Highway at Mount Martha opened in 1984, later duplicated in 1989. The last extension between Mount Martha and Moorooduc South linking to Moorooduc Highway was opened in 1993 and finally duplicated in 1994.

Mornington Peninsula Freeway's southern section was initially designated Freeway Route 87, this was removed in 1987. In 1989, Metropolitan Route 11 extended to the southern section via Frankston Freeway and Moorooduc Highway, when upgrades to Moorooduc Road and the duplication of the Dromana-Mount Martha section were completed, and re-routed from Moorooduc Road when the last extension to Tuerong opened in 1994. Similar to the Northern section, Metropolitan Route 11 was retained until 2013 when it was replaced by M11.

Peninsula Link (Frankston Bypass)
The 'Frankston Bypass', connecting the northern and southern sections, has been proposed numerous times over the years, appearing in the 1969 Melbourne Transportation Plan. The Mornington Peninsula Freeway was progressively opened at each end by the 1980s, with the Frankston Freeway also opened running south from Seaford into Frankston itself. The contract for the construction of the EastLink Tollway north from Seaford was signed in 2004, with construction starting the following year. EastLink opened in 2008.

In early 2006, operator of EastLink, ConnectEast, offered to build the bypass by June 2009, but was rejected by the state government. The government would be required to contribute $100 million to the project, which would also have been funded through a 1c-2c increase in tolls. ConnectEast also wanted the EastLink concession period extended from 39 to 49 years. A leaked report sent by VicRoads to the City of Frankston in 2006 and obtained by the State Opposition in 2008 showed the cost of building the Frankston bypass was $240 million.

In October 2006, $6.5 million was allocated by the Bracks Government towards extra ramps at the Frankston end of EastLink to cater for a future bypass. Recommended by the Southern and Eastern Integrated Transport Authority (SEITA), the Transport Minister said that "no decision has been made about the requirement for a bypass of Frankston". For the 2006 State Election Liberal opposition leader Ted Baillieu promised $250 million to build a 22 kilometre long road toll free. Peter Batchelor responded that the costing did not add up, with smaller projects costing more.

Also in October 2006, then Transport Minister Peter Batchelor announced that an Environment Effects Statement would be carried out by SEITA for the bypass, and $20 million would be spent on changes to the Cranbourne-Frankston Road and Moorooduc Road intersection. Work on the EES started in March 2007 at a cost of $5 million.

The construction of EastLink and its interchange with the northern section led to speculation of possible congestion on the Frankston Freeway, especially at the southern terminus at McMahons Road on the Moorooduc Highway. This possible congestion was expected to be alleviated by the construction of a Frankston Bypass to fill a missing section of the Mornington Peninsula Freeway. VicRoads however did not anticipate such congestion on the Frankston Freeway would actually occur. Federal MP Bruce Billson however, believed otherwise, and raised the issue in parliament and the local press. The Victorian Transport Minister Peter Batchelor stated that simply because the freeway's projected path appeared on a map (referring to the route shown in the Melway street directory), that it did not mean that the road was intended to, or would ever actually be built. City of Frankston councillors however, along with Mr. Billson, pushed for the bypass to be built.

On 28 October 2007, the Federal Liberal Party pledged a maximum of $150 million towards constructing the road toll-free if elected, to be matched by Victorian Government. They were defeated at the election. In April 2008, the Southern and Eastern Integrated Transport Authority (SEITA) decided that the preferred option for a Frankston Bypass was a high standard, continuous, duplicated road in the existing road reserve from Carrum Downs to Mount Martha. A group of Moorooduc residents claimed they were not consulted in the first phase of the project, and the figures had been skewed to show public support for the selected preferred option. The report said:

"Traffic on the Moorooduc Highway through Frankston is expected to increase from 45,000 vehicles per day to around 60,000 vehicles per day in 2031....it would take 75 minutes to travel between the southern end of Eastlink and the Mornington Peninsula Freeway at Mount Martha during peak periods in 2031. A high standard, continuous, duplicated road from the southern end of Eastlink to the Mornington Peninsula Freeway at Mount Martha would reduce travel time in 2031 to around 20 minutes. These projected traffic conditions would arise, even with planned upgrades to roads such as the widening of Western Port Highway. 84% of people who provided feedback during Phase 1 supported a bypass."

The Frankston Bypass would be a 25 km freeway standard road with two lanes in each direction with a speed limit of 100 km/h. A full grade separated junction would be provided with EastLink and the Frankston Freeway, along with full grade-separated diamond interchanges at Dandenong-Frankston Road, Cranbourne-Frankston Road, Golf Links Road, Frankston-Flinders Road, Bungower Road and Old Moorooduc Road / Mornington Peninsula Freeway. Interchanges at Skye Road and Mornington-Tyabb Road will have half-diamond grade-separated interchanges with northbound entry and southbound exit ramps. The cost was estimated between $500 million to $750 million.

In September 2008, ConnectEast held talks with Roads Minister Tim Pallas, but the State Government refused to discuss the issue with the media, or promise to build it without tolls. On 16 October 2008 State Premier John Brumby announced the bypass would be built. Costing $700 million and now 27 kilometres long, work would start by the end of 2009. The State Government expected the project would be paid for in partnership with the Federal Government, and confirmed that it would be toll-free.

Throughout 2008 and early 2009, the State Government examined a number of Public Private Partnership (PPP) models for the delivery of the project, selecting the Partnerships Victoria 'Availability' model, where the private sector company designs, builds, finances and operates the project for an agreed period of time, with the State Government making regular payments to the company based on performance against a set of key performance indicators, which avoided any charges being imposed on road users. The PPP was managed by the Linking Melbourne Authority (formerly SEITA) and delivered by private sector partner Southern Way, with the State Government providing quarterly payments for delivery under an availability model, with no charges to motorists. An invitation for Expressions of Interest was issued in March 2009 followed by a Request for Proposals, with two bidders short listed by November 2009. Final bids were received a month later, with the Southern Way consortium (made up of construction companies Abigroup and Bilfinger Berger, along with financier Royal Bank of Scotland) being awarded the contract to design, build and operate the freeway on 20 January 2010.

The contract with Southern Way to design, construct and finance the freeway was signed in January 2010, with a total project delivery cost for the two parties being $759 million: made up of Southern Way's construction costs, along with the Linking Melbourne Authority's land acquisition, project management, environmental effects statement and Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act costs. Construction commenced in February 2010, with completion expected in early 2013, with Southern Way to operate and maintain the freeway for the next 25 years. The Victorian Parliament enacted legislation, the Road Management Amendment (Peninsula Link) Act 2012, in November 2012 to confer rights on the private operator to manage and maintain the road. These payments are adjusted on an availability basis, with reductions being made when each half-hour of unavailability, weighted according to the nature and severity of the unavailability. Failure to meet key performance indicators for emergency contact points, incident response, compliance with operational plans, maintenance inspections and works, reporting and environmental management will also results in the government deductions being applied to the service payments.

Peninsula Link opened on 18 January 2013 and completed the missing section of the Mornington Peninsula Freeway, running from the EastLink interchange at Seaford, Melbourne, running along the eastern fringe of Frankston. It runs via Baxter and Moorooduc almost parallel to the existing arterial Moorooduc Highway.

When Peninsula Link was opened, the route numbers were slightly altered. The Frankston Freeway (which previously carried Metropolitan Route 11 along with the sections of the Mornington Peninsula Freeway and Moorooduc Highway) now carries the M3 route from the EastLink interchange, while the whole of Mornington Peninsula Freeway, including the Peninsula Link, is designated M11.

Peninsula Link Trail
A walking and cycling path - The Peninsula Link Trail - was constructed alongside the freeway. Stretching from the Patterson River in Patterson Lakes to the Moorooduc Highway in Mount Eliza, it is concrete paved and easy to navigate. An interactive map of the Peninsula Link Trail and other walking and cycling paths in Melbourne is available here.

In 2019, Mornington Peninsula Shire launched an initiative with the aim of extending the trail from Mount Eliza to Mornington.

Northern extension (Mordialloc Freeway)
A reservation for a northern extension of the Mornington Peninsula Freeway between Springvale Road in Aspendale Gardens and the Dingley Bypass in Dingley Village has been in place for many years. The reservation is bordered by residential housing and industrial estates to the west, and Braeside Park to the east.

In October 2014 a feasibility study found that a freeway standard road was not required. However, an arterial road, called the Mordialloc Bypass, in the freeway reservation was considered to be the optimal solution. If in the future any freeway was to be considered, it would have been most likely the Dingley Arterial would be upgraded to freeway standard. The 2014 State Budget included $10.6 million over 4 years to undertake detailed planning and project development. The arterial road would have probably consisted of a divided road, at-grade traffic-light controlled intersections, a speed limit of 80 km/h and bike/pedestrian paths.

On 2 May 2017, the state government announced that it had allocated $300 million in the State budget to completing the Mordialloc Bypass as an arterial road, with an overpass to be constructed at the Springvale Road intersection. On 9 April 2018, the state Labor government announced an extra $75 million in funding and that the road would instead be built as a freeway with four lanes and grade separations along the entire length. The freeway was named Mordialloc Freeway during construction. In October 2018, the state government produced plans for the freeway, with a public consultation period.

The state government claimed that the freeway would "improve travel times and ease congestion in Melbourne's south east" and provide "safer, more reliable journeys". The government promises the freeway will save 10 minutes off journeys during evening peak hour between the Springvale Road and the Dingley Bypass with the freeway carrying 80,000 cars daily by 2031. The freeway is set to remove up to 13,000 trucks from the nearby local and arterial roads each day. It will also improve access to Monash, Melbourne's largest employment area outside of the CBD, and to the Moorabbin Airport area. The Dingley Bypass will also have an extra 7900 cars daily due to the freeway in 2031. Noise walls are also expected along the new freeway to reduce vehicle noise near residential areas as well as a shared user path along the entire freeway.

CPB/Seymour Whyte Joint Venture and McConnell Dowell/Decmil Joint Venture submitted tenders to build the freeway. The McConnell Dowell/Decmil Joint Venture was announced as the preferred contractor in 2019. Construction started in October 2019 and the freeway was opened as an extension of the Mornington Peninsula Freeway on 21 November 2021.

The extension involved the construction of 6 new bridges, 4 new grade-separated interchanges as well as a new full diamond interchange with Thames Promenade on the previous northern section. The extension also included the construction on a new shared walking and cycling path. The extension was built with entry and exit ramps on major roads including Springvale, Governor, Lower Dandenong and Centre Dandenong Roads. The extension intersects Dingley Bypass with traffic lights. A new shared walking and cycling path was also built along the extension.

Timeline of construction

 * 1971 – Southern section, 1.5 mi from Nepean Highway to McCulloch Street, Dromana, opened December 1971.
 * 1972 – Southern section, extended 1 mi for a total of 2.5 mi south-west from Nepean Highway at Dromana, opened December 1972.
 * 1973 – Southern section, extended 2.5 mi to Jetty Road at Rosebud South, for a total of 5 mi from Nepean Highway at Dromana, including completion of Burrell Road (today Latrobe Parade) overpass, opened December 1973.
 * 1975 – Southern section completed between Rosebud South and Dromana, elimination of last at-grade intersection with the $7 million Kangerong Avenue overpass in Dromana, opened July 1975.
 * 1976 – Northern section, 2 km section from Frankston Freeway to Eel Race Drain, opened November 1976, at a cost of $1.1 million.
 * 1980 – Northern section, extended 6.7 km from Eel Race Drain to Springvale Road, opened by Minister for Transport the Hon Robert Maclellan MLA, on 18 March 1980, at a cost of $14 million.
 * 1984 – Southern section, initial 5 km two-lane single carriageway between Dromana and Nepean Highway at Mount Martha, opened by Federal Minister for Transport the Hon. Peter Morris MHR on 8 June 1984, including dual-carriageway interchange over Nepean Highway at Dromana.
 * 1989 – Southern section, Dromana to Mount Martha duplicate carriageway, opened 16 May 1989, at a cost of $5 million.
 * 1993 – Southern section, initial 6 km dual-lane single carriageway from Mount Martha to Moorooduc Road in Tuerong, opened in June 1993, at a cost of $5 million.
 * 1994 – Southern section, Mount Martha to Tuerong duplicate carriageway, opened in May 1994, at a cost of $2.5 million.
 * 2013 – Peninsula Link, 25 km connecting the Northern and Southern sections, opened on 18 January 2013, at a cost of $759 million.
 * 2021 – Northern extension (Mordialloc Freeway), extended 9 km from Springvale Road in Aspendale Gardens to Dingley Bypass in Dingley Village, completed on 21 November 2021, at a cost of $523 million.

In early 2017 digital real-time travel time signage was installed to assist motorists travelling on the Mornington Peninsula Freeway.

In September 2018 flexible safety barriers were installed between Jetty Road and Boneo Road along the freeway. Barriers were also installed along the centre of the road which were completed in December 2018. In 2018 noise walls on the freeway have also been campaigned for in Safety Beach, Dromana, McCrae and Rosebud.

1969 Melbourne Transportation Plan
The freeway was originally designated in the 1969 Melbourne Transportation Plan as the F6 Freeway corridor.

Proposed extensions
Extensions of the Mornington Peninsula Freeway have been developed for the southern end to support growing traffic demand. Traffic demand is expected to increase by nearly 10 per cent along the Mornington Peninsula Freeway between 2021 and 2031.

Southern extension (Rosebud to Blairgowrie)
In July 2018 the Mornington Peninsula council conducted a Southern Peninsula Arterial Corridor Investigation with plans to extend the freeway south to Blairgowrie through the Tootgarook Wetlands. A public acquisition overlay exists from the end of the Mornington Peninsula Freeway to Melbourne Road which has reserved the land for a freeway extension. A full freeway would cost $500 million with additional bridges over the wetlands costing $3 billion in total. The freeway extension would terminate at Melbourne Road at the intersection of Canterbury Jetty Road in Blairgowrie after bypassing Rye, Tootgarook and Capel Sound. Currently where the southern section reaches Jetty Road in Rosebud, freeway conditions end, with a two-lane, single carriageway link from Jetty Road to Boneo Road. From Jetty Road the freeway was meant to adopt full freeway standards with overpasses over Jetty Road and Boneo Road, but this section has remained incomplete for over a decade. In July 2018 the Rye Internal Bypass was another project proposed to reduce traffic congestion in the area in the medium term at a cost of $5 million.

The Baillieu government committed $200,000 to a congestion study for the southern peninsula which was completed in 2012.

title: Mornington Peninsula Freeway


text:
Bitstream Cyberbit

Bitstream Cyberbit is a commercial serif Unicode font designed by Bitstream Inc. It is freeware for non-commercial uses. It was one of the first widely available fonts to support a large portion of the Unicode repertoire.

Cyberbit was developed by Bitstream to provide Unicode Consortium members with a large Unicode-encoded font to use for testing and development purposes. The font has 32,910 characters (29,934 glyphs) and 935 kerning pairs in v2.0 beta. The related Bitstream Cyberbase font includes a much smaller number of characters, with 1,249 glyphs and 935 kerning pairs in v1.0 beta.

Bitstream no longer offers Cyberbit as a free download or retail product.

TITUS Cyberbit

TITUS Cyberbit Basic is a typeface derived from the Bitstream Cyberbit family, designed by Bitstream Inc. and the TITUS project for Unicode 4.0. Jost Gippert and Carl-Martin Bunz were the principal developers. It can be obtained for free from TITUS and is freeware for non-commercial uses.

TITUS Cyberbit Basic supports part of the Medieval Unicode Font Initiative, and it includes 10,044 glyphs (9,341 characters) in version 3.0 (2000) (revision 4.0) from the following Unicode blocks:

 * Basic Latin (95)
 * Latin-1 Supplement (96)
 * Latin Extended-A (128)
 * Latin Extended-B (183)
 * IPA Extensions (96)
 * Spacing Modifier Letters (80)
 * Combining Diacritical Marks (106)
 * Greek (128)
 * Cyrillic (247)
 * Cyrillic Supplement (16)
 * Armenian (86)
 * Hebrew (83)
 * Arabic (185)
 * Syriac (76)
 * Thaana (50)
 * Devanagari (106)
 * Thai (87)
 * Georgian (83)
 * Ethiopic (364)
 * Ogham (32)
 * Runic (81)
 * Phonetic Extensions (108)
 * Latin Extended Additional (247)
 * Greek Extended (236)
 * General Punctuation (68)
 * Superscripts and Subscripts (29)
 * Currency Symbols (12)
 * Letterlike Symbols (13)
 * Number Forms (28)
 * Arrows (21)
 * Mathematical Operators (80)
 * Miscellaneous Technical (8)
 * Enclosed Alphanumerics (112)
 * Box Drawing (112)
 * Block Elements (10)
 * Geometric Shapes (53)
 * Miscellaneous Symbols (33)
 * Glagolitic (94)
 * Coptic (114)
 * Georgian Supplement (38)
 * CJK Symbols and Punctuation (31)
 * Hiragana (90)
 * Katakana (94)
 * Bopomofo (37)
 * Private Use Area (4,649)
 * CJK Compatibility Ideographs (1)
 * Alphabetic Presentation Forms (57)
 * Arabic Presentation Forms-A (205)
 * CJK Compatibility Forms (27)
 * Small Form Variants (29)
 * Arabic Presentation Forms-B (140)
 * Halfwidth and Fullwidth Forms (157)

An extended version of this font is TITUS Cyberbit Unicode, which includes 36,161 characters in v4.0.

title: Bitstream Cyberbit


text:
Zlaté Moravce

Zlaté Moravce (1776 Morawce, Aranyosmarót, Goldmorawitz) is a town in south-western Slovakia.

Basic data
It is the capital and the biggest town of Zlaté Moravce District. It is approximately 120 km from the Slovak capital Bratislava and 32 km from Nitra.

History
The town is situated on the banks of the river Žitava, in the northern part of the Podunajská Heights. Nowadays, it also includes the area of formerly separate boroughs Chyzerovce and Prílepy. Thanks to its favourable location on the natural terrace of the river Žitava, the traces of the continuous settlement of this area go back to the Paleolithic Age. The rich archeological findings in the town area also prove intensive Great Moravian settlement in the 9th-10th century. A unique finding – a golden pectoral cross – is associated with this settlement.

The origin of the oldest name of the borough "Morowa" in the Charter of Zobor of 1113 is related to that time as well. This charter is the oldest written proof of the existence of Moravce as Zobor Monastery's property. The borough that was situated on the important route to Tekov was already in the 13th century dominated by a small Roman church surrounded by a cemetery, which was located on the site of today's square.

The first written mentions of the town are from 12th century A.D. (1113 Morowa, 1284 Marouth). "Moravce" [pronounced app. Moravtseh], a word in plural, was a frequent settlement name in Slovakia and means "settlement of (the tribe) Moravians". The attribute "zlaté", meaning "golden", was added only later in order to distinguish the settlement's name from all the other "Moravce"s. Ottomans plundered the city in 1530 and 1573. Rivers (Žitava, Zlatnanka) in the surrounding areas were known in the past for gold washing. Note the name of the second river. Across Slavic languages, Zlato means gold.

In late 1700s, the town was purchased by Cristoph Cardinal Migazzi, who completed renovations of local chateau for purposes of his private summer residence.

Demographics
According to the 2001 census, the town had 15,618 inhabitants. 97.09% of inhabitants were Slovaks, 0.60% Czechs and 0.29% Hungarians. The religious makeup was 82.52% Roman Catholics, 10.59% people with no religious affiliation and 1.48% Lutherans. An active Jewish community had existed here until the Holocaust. Zlaté Moravce has a town status from 1960.

Industry
The town is known for the production of kitchen technologies (well known as a brand CALEX which is actually not existing in the present) and building materials - bricks.

Historical monuments

 * WWI and WWII victims
 * Holocaust victims from Zlaté Moravce memorial

Notable people

 * Janko Kráľ, a poet of Slovak Romanticism
 * Ján Kocian, footballer, football trainer
 * Tono Stano, photographer
 * Imrich Chlamtac, President of EAI

Twin towns — sister cities
Zlaté Moravce is twinned with:

 * 🇨🇿 Bučovice, Czech Republic
 * 🇨🇿 Hulín, Czech Republic
 * 🇨🇿 Velké Přílepy, Czech Republic
 * Našice, Croatia
 * 🇵🇱 Sierpc, Poland
 * 🇵🇱 Szydłów, Poland

title: Zlaté Moravce


text:
BBK

BBK may refer to:

Education

 * BBK DAV College for Women, Amritsar, Punjab, India (founded 1967)
 * Birkbeck, University of London, an English research university (founded 1823)

Finance

 * Barclays Bank of Kenya (founded 1916)
 * Bank of Bahrain and Kuwait (founded 1971)
 * Bilbao Bizkaia Kutxa, Basque Country, Spain (1990–2012)
 * BBK, a company involved in the 2007 BBK stock price manipulation incident

Music

 * "B.B.K." (song), by Korn from their 1998 album Follow the Leader
 * Boy Better Know, a British grime crew and label
 * Breakbeat Kaos, a British drum and bass label

Places

 * Birkbeck Court, a student residence in Glasgow, Scotland
 * Kasane Airport, Botswana
 * White Sea–Baltic Canal (Byelomorsko–Baltiyskiy Kanal)

Sport

 * Blåsuts BK, a Swedish bandy club
 * Brønshøj BK, a Danish football club

Other uses

 * BBK Electronics (Bu Bu Gao), a Chinese electronics producer
 * BBK Russian Library-Bibliographical Classification (Bibliotechno-Bibliograficheskaya Klassifikatsiya), a Russian library classification system

title: BBK


text:
Baxterwood Priory

Baxterwood Priory was a Benedictine monastery originally founded at Haswell, County Durham, England, and later at Baxterwood, with the monastic farm becoming the private residence of Haswell Grange (later demolished) and Elemore Grange since the 18th Century.

Relocation and Re-Endowment
The monastery was originally founded as "The Church of St Mary of Haswell" by Henry Pudsey, a son of Bishop Pudsey, in the latter part of the 12th century. Two vills, Wingate and Haswell, were also conferred, probably, on the Canons of Gisburn. However, a better situation for a monastery was found at Baxterwood, possibly in 1196.

A second establishment was known as the "New Place upon the Browney" and dedicated to the Virgin Mary, with Stephen as the superintendent of the newly founded Augustinian priory. It was later appropriated by the nearby Benedictine monks of Durham Cathedral and became a Benedictine priory, its lands and vills being conferred on Finchale Priory. It was very close to the site of the Battle of Neville's Cross on 17 October 1346 and on the battle site map along with Arbour House some way to the north.

Haswell Grange
Haswell Grange was a Benedictine grange established on the site of the intended Augustinian Baxterwood monastery. The Grange was in use until the Dissolution of the Monasteries when it was sold. It was sold to the Newcastle merchant and politician Bertram Anderson (1505–71).

Elemore Grange
Haswell Grange was later demolished and the present Elemore Grange is believed to have been built on the same site during the later 18th century.

title: Baxterwood Priory


text:
Charley horse

"A charley horse" is an American term for a very painful involuntary cramp in the legs (usually located in the calf muscle) and/or foot, lasting anywhere from a few seconds to a couple days. The phrase formerly referred more commonly to bruising of the quadriceps muscle of the anterior or lateral thigh, or contusion of the femur, that commonly results in a haematoma and sometimes several weeks of pain and disability. In this latter sense, such an injury is known as dead leg.

Dead legs and charley horses are two different types of injuries: A charley horse involves the muscles contracting without warning, and can last from a few seconds to a couple days. A dead leg often occurs in contact sports, such as football, when an athlete suffers a knee or other blunt trauma to the lateral quadriceps causing a haematoma or temporary paresis and antalgic gait as a result of pain.

Colloquially, taking a hit in the thigh area (thigh contusion) can also be referred to as a charley horse or even simply as a charley.

Etymology
The first known use of the term was in 1886 in a West Virginia newspaper. The originator of the phrase is credited to two baseball players, Jack Glasscock and Joe Quest.

Cause
Charley horses have many possible causes directly resulting from high or low pH or substrate concentrations in the blood, including hormonal imbalances, dehydration, low levels of magnesium, potassium, or calcium (evidence has been mixed),  side effects of medication, or, more seriously, diseases such as amyotrophic lateral sclerosis and neuropathy. Charley horses seem to be most common in individuals who engage in strenuous physical activities, such as those who work in construction or play sports. They are also a common complaint during pregnancy.

Treatment
Relief is given by massaging or stretching the leg or foot in the opposite direction of the cramp. Relief also comes from standing up, which serves to counter the muscle-tightening signal.

title: Charley horse


text:
Talk:Rover CityRover

When did they announce a replacement within two years??

--Pseud 10:20, Oct 12, 2004 (UTC)

ShittyRover Quote
I have a copy of the episode where May takes the CitiRover out for a spin, and after replaying it, couldn't find where he called it 'ShittyRover'. As such, I have removed the sentence in this article that states this. Stuart Steedman 06:37, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

 * It's in one of the next episodes, when they discuss car names. James May then says CityRover should have been called "City Rubbish", that's the correct quote.

intended to be the new Metro
I remember when the CityRover first came onto the market, i also remember hearing on TV that it was intended to be the new version of the Rover Metro.

80.192.246.56 (talk) 19:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)Falcon-Eagle200780.192.246.56 (talk) 19:34, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Rover CityRover. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050526023621/http://www.whatcar.com:80/News_Article.asp?NA_ID=212803 to http://www.whatcar.com/News_Article.asp?NA_ID=212803

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 04:30, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rover CityRover


text:
User talk:212.219.190.146

Warnings
 Note: Always remember to substitute user warning templates. For help on user warnings, see the WikiProject on User Warnings. Older warnings may have been deleted, but are still visible in the [ page history]. [Admin: block | [ unblock] / Info: contribs | interiot's tool | [ page moves] | [ block log] | [ block list]]

October 2010
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Hammer drill. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Routerone (See here!) 12:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Hammer drill, you may be blocked from editing. Philip Trueman (talk) 12:21, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits.

The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Drill, you will be blocked from editing without further notice. Wizard191 (talk) 13:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make any unconstructive edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant warnings.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to Diet in Sikhism, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Sikh- History 15:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

To edit, please create an account and log in

Due to persistent vandalism, anonymous editing from your school, library, or educational institution's IP address disabled. You will continue to have access to read the encyclopedia. If you are logged in but still unable to edit, please follow these instructions. To prevent abuse, account creation via this IP address might also be disabled.

If editing is required for class projects, please have your instructor or network administrator contact us (with reference to this IP address) at [mailto:unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org unblock-en-l] from an email address listed on your school's website. Alternatively, if you have no Internet access at home, you may [mailto:unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org email us] using your school-issued email address, telling us your preferred username. Or you may use the form here. An account will be created for you. Please check on [ this list] that the username you choose has not already been taken.

November 2013
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Islam in the United Kingdom. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. —Darkwind (talk) 15:26, 4 November 2013 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Film crew, you may be blocked from editing. Materialscientist (talk) 10:55, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Condensation reaction, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:27, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

October 2018
Hello, I'm Flooded with them hundreds. I noticed that you made a change to an article, Wolverhampton Wanderers F.C., but you didn't provide a source. I’ve removed it for now, but if you’d like to include a citation to a reliable source and re-add it, please do so! If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Flooded  with them hundreds 10:18, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

November 2022
Hello, I'm ButterCashier. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to British Overseas Airways Corporation have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. ButterCashier (talk) 09:56, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
Hello, I'm 3PPYB6. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Jonathan Hood—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. — 3PPYB6 (T / C / L) — 15:24, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Jonathan Hood. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Hey man im josh (talk) 15:35, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

January 2023
Hello, I'm Ingenuity. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Greggs have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 15:35, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Greggs. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism may result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. — Ingenuity (talk • contribs) 15:35, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I'm DarkAudit. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Mass marketing—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. DarkAudit (talk) 10:05, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

title: User talk:212.219.190.146


text:
Šahy

Šahy (Ipolyság, rarely Eipelschlag) is a town in southern Slovakia, The town has an ethnic Hungarian majority and its population is 7,238 people (2018), with an average age of 42.5.

Geography
It is located at the eastern reaches of the Danubian Lowland on the river Ipeľ at the Hungarian border, on the E77 road from Budapest to Kraków. Besides the main settlement, it also has two "boroughs" of Preseľany nad Ipľom (4 km west of centre, annexed 1980) and Tešmák (3 km east of centre, annexed 1986). From 1980 to 1996 it also had now independent village of Hrkovce.

History
The first written mention is from 1237 in a document of King Béla IV under name Saag, when Martin Hont-Pázmány founded a Premonstratensian monastery there. It got character of a small town in the 14th century. It was part of Ottoman Empire between 1541–1595 and 1605–1685 and was known as "Şefradi". It was also sanjak centre in Uyvar eyalet between 1663 and 1685. Before break-up of Austria-Hungary in 1918/1920 and incorporation into Czechoslovakia, it was part of the Hont County, and was from 1806 its capital. It was part of Hungary from 1938 to 1945 as a result of the First Vienna Award.

Demographics
According to the 2014 census, the town had 7,516 inhabitants. In 2001 62.21% of the inhabitants were Hungarians, 34.57% Slovaks, 0.56% Czech and 0.41 Roma. The religious makeup was 84.06% Roman Catholics, 6.87% people with no religious affiliation, and 3.46% Lutherans.

Facilities
The town is home to the Hont Museum and Gallery of Ľudovít Simony.

Twin towns – sister cities
Šahy is twinned with:
 * 🇭🇺 Héhalom, Hungary
 * 🇭🇺 Vác, Hungary
 * 🇭🇺 Veresegyház, Hungary

Notable people

 * Ferdinand Daučík, football player and manager
 * Branko Kubala, football player
 * Ladislav Ballek, writer

title: Šahy