text:
Talk:Fly Like an Eagle (album)

Postal service
I just removed "The US Postal Service theme song and used in many of their older commercials" from the trivia, since it doesn't say which song is their theme song. somebody more motivated than me should find out which song that refers to, and put it back in. --dan 00:28, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

 * Probably just someone writing a little quicker than they were thinking; it's the title track, so "Fly like and Eagle" was the song they were talking about, even though the article is actually about the album. Minor issue, I clerified it in the trivia section.  B. Mearns * , KSC 12:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
 * clarified*? -- HyperKraz

Requested move

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

The result of the move request was: no consensus to move the page at this time, per the discussion below. A large majority of commenters oppose the change in capitalization, in an ongoing trend that indicates the importance of resolving conflicts between WP:COMMONNAME and WP:MOSCAPS. However, given that the change is recommended by WP:MOSCAPS, not closing this as consensus not to change the capitalization at this time. There is ongoing discussion of the problem at WT:MOSCAPS. As for the addition of "album", there is no consensus evident for the move here, and since the song is also discussed, in part, in this article that treatment, along with a hatnote, currently appears sufficient for navigational purposes. Dekimasu よ! 20:14, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Fly Like an Eagle → Fly like an Eagle (album) – I would prefer like because like is a four-letter preposition in this title. Per WP:NCCAPS, a preposition no more than four letters must be lowercased. If sources matter to you, I guess many use "Like", but they are not grammar experts. Source that uses "like" is this book, and I guess more sources should exist. If you disagree, how about Fly Like an Eagle (album)? Why adding "(album)"? Stats for the album may be including readers seeking the well-known song. I really wanted to make "(song)" the primary topic, but the album also includes another hit, Rock'n Me, which I haven't yet listened. Therefore, I propose that the current title be of the disambiguation page. --Relisted. Dekimasu よ! 20:54, 5 November 2014 (UTC) George Ho (talk) 02:31, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose - The current title is overwhelmingly preferred by the policy of using the most common name, and the manual of style specifically encourages editor discretion. The MOS is great for our writing style and when the official or common name might be unknown, but to argue that it should be used to take an official name with a specifically chosen title that is used by the absolutely overwhelming majority of reliable sources, including books, newspapers, and websites, as well as is the generally common name is fairly absurd. Our title guidelines and policies are unfortunately somewhat murky. But, what it comes down to can be gleaned from Naming conventions (capitalization), which states that "an adherence to conventions widely used in the genre are critically important to credibility". If Billboard is using a style, and Rolling Stone or the New York Times or Spin or just the bulk of reliable sourcing in general largely use the official title, is it really common sense for us to be saying we shouldn't be following the sources here in order to somehow adhere to conventions and gain credibility? Wikipedia is a unique construct in that our work is so clearly tied and based off of reliable sourcing about the subject -- making us stand out and go against the grain here just doesn't make much sense.There's also just the general notion (which certainly should not be the deciding factor in finding consensus) that certain lowercase words just look weird in titles. Perhaps this may give some indication as to why "like" and other 3 or more letter words are very often capitalized in composition titles but words like "a", "to", or "and" often aren't.--Yaksar (let's chat) 03:27, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * However, no current opinion on the disambiguation or possible primary topic at the moment.--Yaksar (let's chat) 03:27, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, not Life thru a Lens. Propose page move on that if you want, but get ready... --George Ho (talk) 03:36, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I think it's been told to you about a billion times at this point, but consensus on Wikipedia is not decided by "if one page doesn't match then all arguments are invalid", as explained at Talk:On a Night Like This and numerous others.--Yaksar (let's chat) 04:03, 27 October 2014 (UTC)

 * Oppose - Concur with Yaksar. In the first several pages of results from a Google search there were numerous instances of the title capitalized as "Fly Like an Eagle", as well as "Fly Like An Eagle", some in all caps, and one instance of "Fly like an eagle" but not a single occurrence of "Fly like an Eagle". mwalimu59 (talk) 18:19, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Mwalimu59, What about adding "(album)" then? --Gh87 in the public computer (talk) 20:00, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
 * I am Neutral on the addition of (album), still opposed to changing the capitalization. mwalimu59 (talk) 17:17, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

 * Support some sort of rename, it should have "(album)" attached, regardless of the other points, since I think the song is the primary topic, not the album -- 67.70.35.44 (talk) 02:42, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Support addition of (album), and add Sandra Marton novel as third item on the dab page. In ictu oculi (talk) 08:57, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose the capitalisation change and oppose a disambiguator for this article. I believe the album is the primary topic as it contained a number of hits, "Fly Like an Eagle" not even being the highest-charting of those. The album was multi-platinum. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:30, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
 * As of now, the album is viewed 14,000+ times in the last 90 days; the song, 11,000+. Of course, the numbers of the album may be inaccurate because people only heard of the song and not other songs of the album. --George Ho (talk) 15:26, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * They "may" be. We have no way of knowing how many people clicked on the song article just because they saw it on the album, and nor do we know about all the people who wanted the album article so they could find out about all the other songs, including the #1 hit "Rock'n Me". Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:25, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, maybe we shouldn't limit ourselves to both the song and the album of the same name. The singles of the album aren't as popular as "Fly like an Eagle". Take the Money and Run has been viewed 4900+ times in the last 90 days; Rock'n Me, 4600+ times. The other people's songs that the band rendered aren't as popular either. Mercury Blues has been viewed 3900+ times; You Send Me, 7200+. Shall we combine the numbers or treat them as one-clickers? --George Ho (talk) 23:34, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

 * Support. We should apply our own guidelines on capitalization as a matter of house style and consistency. If we don't like the guideline, we should change it rather than only applying it where it seems most popular. Styling is simply a matter of house style, and sourcing is irrelevant for that unless some sources can be found that specifically say that the styling matters for some exceptional reason for some particular work. Adding "(album)" is also a helpful disambiguation. —BarrelProof (talk) 16:49, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose Either the song or the album should be the primary topic. There should be no DAB. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:50, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Which one, Walter Görlitz? Both can't be the primary topic at the same time. --George Ho (talk) 23:42, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Oppose - The capital "L" is used widely for the song album so we imho should follow suit. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  20:58, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Davey2010, what about adding "(album)" then? --George Ho (talk) 23:42, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * ......aaaaaand again!. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  00:57, 7 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Support - I really should quit copy-pasting the same pointless rationale without reading!.... Support move to Fly Like an Eagle (album) but obviously oppose the capital change. – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  06:28, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Oppose decapitalization and only support adding (album) if the song takes this article's place at Fly Like an Eagle. Clearly one or the other should have primary topic. Then we get at worst a 50% chance of meeting our readers' needs. Red Slash 00:30, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * We do not know which topic readers refer to. I mean, is a dabpage with two topics unlikely? --George Ho (talk) 17:48, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

 * Oppose decapitalization and oppose addition of "(album)". All evidence suggests this is the primary topic in a WP:TWODABS situation. It received 14737 views in the last 90 days, compared to 10955 for Fly Like an Eagle (song). Even if every single reader of the song article came to the album article first, the album article still has half again the views.--Cúchullain t/ c 15:57, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The numbers of the album will fall if moved. They are not absolute and accurate. --George Ho (talk) 17:46, 17 November 2014 (UTC)
 * It goes without saying that the numbers would likely fall, but it gets so many more views that by all evidence, it's "highly likely—much more likely than any other topic, and more likely than all the other topics combined—to be the topic sought when a reader searches for that term"--Cúchullain t/ c 19:58, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

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

Policy discussion in progress
There is a policy discussion in progress at the Manual of Style which affects this page, suggesting that the capitalization of "like" should be removed. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. — Llywelyn II   16:10, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Fly Like an Eagle. 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/20090924015932/http://www.bpi.co.uk/certifiedawards/search.aspx to http://www.bpi.co.uk/certifiedawards/search.aspx

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:12, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 22 November 2016

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

The result of the move request was: move to Fly Like an Eagle (album). Consensus is there that shows that neither the album nor the song is the primary topic, and therefore this page should be moved to a disambiguation. JudgeRM  (talk to me)  01:56, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Fly Like an Eagle → Fly Like an Eagle (album) – I heavily emphasized the word "like" as the huge capitalization issue in the previous RM. The result was "no consensus" due to more focus on the "like" and less on the primacy. This time I won't emphasize the word "like" as the huge issue, though MOS:CT recommends lowercasing it. I don't mind people supporting Fly like an Eagle (album) and Fly like an Eagle (song). However, as said before, the capitalization is not much of a big deal to waste energy on.

On to the main issue, neither the album nor the song is the primary topic. This year's statistics prove that the album is just as popular as (or less popular than) the song. Also, the album has notable singles, while the eponymous song itself is well known. Even Seal sang it for the Looney Tunes film, Space Jam. I am more concerned about giving readers the right page to access. I would propose the song to be the primary topic, but the stats would not make either album or song primary. Instead, the precedents Like a Virgin, Like a Prayer, Baby One More Time, Born This Way, and Love to Love You Baby should be good examples of pop culture music titles lacking primacy. Of course, someone might use Hotel California as precedent and then make the song primary, but the move would benefit pop culture elitism or something instead of general readers. (Well, the "Hotel California" song benefit readers more as most recognizable, while "Fly Like an Eagle" is yet to be determined). "Baby One More Time" and "Oops!... I Did It Again" changed primary topics from albums to songs; consensus later realized that songs and albums are equally notable and decide to make the disambiguation pages obtain the base titles. In other words, we must be careful about emphasizing pop culture.

Almost forgot, about WP:TWODABS situation, a disambiguation page is not ruled out. The dabpage would be necessary when neither of two eponymous topics is primary. George Ho (talk) 10:02, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Survey

 * Oppose My opinion has not changed since we went through this exact same debate, proposed by the same editor, two years ago. Nothing has changed. "Fly Like an Eagle" was not even as successful as another track, "Rock'n Me", so how can we reasonably claim it to be as popular as the entire album? Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:37, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

 * Support per detailed and reasoned nomination. —Roman Spinner (talk)(contribs) 19:49, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

 * Support per nom. The album era is over and the song has more long-term notability.  —  AjaxSmack   03:03, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Support. I opposed this move before, but the current page view stats suggest a much greater parity between album and song than was present before. The album only leads at 52% to 48% now,|Fly_Like_an_Eagle which is close enough that it may be inflated by people actually looking for the song and getting the album because it's at the base name. I don't see the call for treating the album as the primary topic anymore.--Cúchullain t/ c 19:09, 29 November 2016 (UTC)

Discussion
How do you explain the statistics, Bretonbanquet? What about the song and the album? --George Ho (talk) 19:47, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Also, the numbers came close in the last 90 days. Why assuming that readers shall read the whole article about the eponymous album by The Steven Miller Band? Most views consist of probably those who read the hatnote and then skipped the whole article, including the intro to the album. George Ho (talk) 19:52, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

 * Looks to me like the album is more popular according to your statistics, and anyway, it is impossible to tell what people were looking for. Why not assume they were looking for the album? Your last sentence is pure and utter speculation - you say people "probably... skipped the whole article". What possible evidence can you have for that? Explain to me one thing: why would we abandon a situation where 50% or more people are directed to the article they want, to a situation where everybody gets a dab page they don't want? Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:22, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

And your theory that the song is as popular as the album is flawed. "Fly Like an Eagle" was not even the most successful song on the album, yet you think it's as popular as the album in its entirety. How do you actually square that fact into your theory? Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Compared to other songs of the album, here are the statistics. I'll find sources that inform sales of the single. George Ho (talk) 22:53, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The two songs, "You Send Me" and "Mercury Blues", are not original Steve Miller songs, but I include them in statistics. George Ho (talk) 22:56, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

 * Every time you post statistics, I see that the album is the most popular topic. Don't forget that a large proportion of article visits come from accurate links, not necessarily from people just typing words in the search box. I'm not seeing any evidence that large numbers of people visiting the album article actually wanted the song article. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:23, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Why concluding that most viewers of other pages came through the album page? The numbers for the album page may not be very accurate; if moved, the numbers might drop tremendously. Also, what's your opinion about other eponymous albums and songs? Anyway, as promised, I added sales information with sources. George Ho (talk) 23:33, 22 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, a primary topic lacks a criterion or may not require one. Somehow, a "usage" is misused or misinterpreted to justify the album as a primary topic. George Ho (talk) 00:02, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not drawing any conclusions as to how people arrive at articles, just that there are several ways to do it. You seem to making guesses that people arrived at one article but wanted another, with no proof possible. Other albums and songs that share the same name are utterly irrelevant, as it's plainly obvious that each example is entirely different. So the single sold a million copies. The album sold four million in the US alone. Sales figures aren't helping you here. I'm sorry, I do not understand your last point. Bretonbanquet (talk) 00:05, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Rephrasing the last point, the "Is there a primary topic?" rule, including WP:DETERMINEPRIMARY, says that we consensus, not the rules (which are not absolute), can decide which is and is not the primary topic. We can decide whether a primary topic of the same name exists, particularly "Fly Like an Eagle". If "usage" aspect applies, which is what you interpret, then use it. To put this another way, neither usage nor long-term significance defines a primary topic. Views do not define a primary topic. Significance, well, may not define a primary topic. Nothing else defines a primary topic. Our interpretations may influence the consensus... Well, we have different interpretations, so there. As far as I see, we are reaching our peaks of our disagreements. Does the whole world know more about the album by Steve Miller Band than the eponymous song? --George Ho (talk) 00:22, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
 * In other words, policies that we have now do not define the primary topic. I can use a policy rule to prove a lack of primacy. Criteria are goals, not rules, so I must use the criteria carefully. "Recognizability" is interpreted differently; in my interpretation, the album is less recognized than the song because... I heard Seal sing the song for the movie. Also, WP:PARENDIS says use parenthetical disambiguation when other types of disambiguation fail to produce the best or most favorable title. The base title is clearly ambiguous. Which policies do you want to use and interpret? George Ho (talk) 00:31, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

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

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fly Like an Eagle (album). 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/20111109073849/http://www.theofficialcharts.com/archive-chart/_/3/1976-06-19/ to http://www.theofficialcharts.com/archive-chart/_/3/1976-06-19/

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) 00:37, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

30th Anniversary release section
It appears that the second paragraph is a repeat of the first paragraphs information. In light of that I have removed the second paragraph. If this is a major faux pas, it can easily be reinserted. THX1136 (talk) 13:04, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Album Cover Picture
The album cover picture shows Steve Miller playing a Fender Stratocaster Guitar, which seems to be upside down. Most pictures of people playing guitars upside down are because the player is left handed, and they are playing a right handed guitar. A good example of this would be Jimi Hendrix. Now Steve Miller seems to be playing a left handed instrument as a right hand player, this strikes me as odd. Left handed guitars are a lot less common and are usually a lot more expensive. 2A02:C7F:CF79:F900:F881:8996:7477:DF36 (talk) 21:47, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

"Wild Mountain Honey(1976 song)" listed at Redirects for discussion
The redirect [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wild_Mountain_Honey(1976_song)&redirect=no Wild Mountain Honey(1976 song)] has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached. Steel1943 (talk) 21:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Fly Like an Eagle (album)


text:
Talk:San Marino Grand Prix

Did I miss this on the disambiguation page, or what...? Also, I somehow doubt it was a Lotus-powered Lotus in the '90s. Lotus-Cosworth? (BTW, it's technically N a -Ford, despite what's indicated, unless you change TAG to Porche...) Trekphiler 07:24, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Too small?
How can San Marino be too small to host a Grand Prix? Monaco is much smaller and manages it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lenzar (talk • contribs) 23:21, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

 * Indeed, it is not too small. :) Ecclestone wanted to keep the race in the calendar when Monza returned and simply needed to call it something else than "Italian GP". See Luxembourg Grand Prix for how the FIA rulings require this. So San Marino's inability to host a race within it's borders is not relevant. I tried twice to correct the article but it was reverted.--88.112.76.119 (talk) 00:28, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

 * Never said it was too small. I said there is no infrastructure. Accurate, and not even remotely the same thing. --Falcadore (talk) 00:35, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

 * It does not matter what infra they have. It is not a reason for the existence, name or location of the GP.--88.112.76.119 (talk) 01:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

F1-related deaths since 1983 include María de Villota
María de Villota's death in October 2013 came as a direct consequence of serious head and facial injuries she incurred while conducting straight-line testing of a Marussia Formula 1 car at Duxford in July 2012. Therefore I believe that it is incorrect to state that the only F1-related driver deaths since 1983 (apart from Senna and Ratzenberger) are de Angelis and Bianchi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.147.160.144 (talk) 11:14, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Consensus is that de Villota doesn't qualify as an F1 related death. See Talk:List of Formula One fatalities. The consensus is based on the fact that she largly recovered from her accident before her death and large amounts of sourced say she died of natrual causes. SSSB (talk) 11:41, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:San Marino Grand Prix


text:
Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association

HCSA - the hospital doctors' union (Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association) is a nationally recognised professional association and trade union in the UK dedicated solely to hospital consultants, specialty doctors and core/specialty hospital doctors in training and Foundation grades ("junior doctors"), originally established in 1948 as the Regional Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association.

Medical Students can also join as associates.

It was granted national collective bargaining rights for all grades of hospital doctors in England by NHS Employers on 22 December 2016. This is the first time any trade union for doctors other than the British Medical Association has been nationally recognised by the NHS.

In 1974 the association's rules were amended to extend membership rights to all senior hospital doctors, and its members voted for a new name, the Hospital Consultants and Specialists Association, to reflect this change.

HCSA has been affiliated to the Trades Union Congress (TUC) since 1979. It is also affiliated to the General Federation of Trade Unions (UK).

The association has admitted hospital specialty doctors in training ("junior doctors") since a rule change announced on 1 May 2013.

On 28 April 2017 members voted for a rule change that extended membership further to encompass all post-graduate hospital doctors, including Foundation grades for the first time.

On 25 June 2013 HCSA attended is first meeting of the NHS Staff Council, a body containing representatives of staff-side unions and NHS employers.

In April 2018, the HCSA AGM endorsed Dr Claudia Paoloni as President-elect. When she took up her post in 2019 she became the first ever woman President in the association's history.

The association publishes a bi-monthly magazine for members, Hospital Consultant & Specialist.

Organisational structure
Every four years HCSA members elect members to the ruling Council, with representation based on relevant Constituencies as determined by the Council, which meets every six months. Currently there are 13 geographical constituencies, each with the right to elect up to four representatives to the Council. Day-to-day decisions are made by a standing committee, known as the Executive, which meets regularly and is drawn from Council members who are appointed to National Officer roles.

The Executive's current membership comprises:
 * President Dr Naru Narayanan, FRCOG
 * Chair of the Executive Dr Bernhard Heidemann, FRCA
 * Immediate Past President Dr Claudia Paoloni, FRCA
 * Honorary Treasurer Dr Patrick McGowan, FRCA
 * Honorary Secretary Dr Sarah Tennant
 * Honorary Secretary Dr Emma Cox
 * Honorary Secretary Mr Harish Parmar, FRCS
 * Honorary Secretary Dr John West, MD FRCP
 * Independent Healthcare Matters Mr Christopher Khoo, FRCS

In addition, HCSA is represented at the TUC and within the NHS Staff Council by its general secretary:

 * General Secretary Dr Paul Donaldson

2014-15 NHS pay dispute
On 28 July 2014 a consultative ballot of HCSA members was announced over the government's decision to ignore a Review Body on Doctors' and Dentists' Remuneration (DDRB) recommendation of a 1 per cent pay rise for all NHS staff.

An extraordinary meeting of the HCSA executive met to consider the results of the ballot, which closed on 18 August 2014, after 80 per cent of those voting backed some form of industrial action. The executive subsequently voted to hold a formal ballot on industrial action.

In the wake of the consultative ballot results HCSA President Professor John Schofield said: "Doctors have only very rarely indicated any willingness to undertake industrial action, and it demonstrates the strength of feeling within our profession. We will continue to listen to our members and represent their views to NHS Employers. I hope that we can encourage further dialogue between the government, employers and unions to avoid the possibility of action.”

HCSA members mounted industrial action in the form of "work to rule" alongside other health unions in October 2014.

2015 Consultants' Contract
On 16 July 2015 the DDRB published its recommendations following an independent review of the Consultants' Contract and the Doctors in Training Contract.

In the wake of the report, on 30 July 2015, HCSA stated its position In Favour of A Safe Seven-Day Service, highlighting the need for the principles of safety, fairness and work-life balance to be maintained in any changes.

2015 Junior Doctors Dispute
On 5 October 2015, then HCSA General Secretary Eddie Saville set out the association's position calling for A Fair Deal for Doctors In Training.

Explaining the HCSA position, he said: "As with our position on the consultant aspect of the DDRB proposals currently being pursued by the government and employers, this stance is guided by the principle that any successful outcome must balance safety, fairness and work-life balance. It must also meet the recruitment and retention test needed to ensure that the health service remains properly staffed. What's more any attempt to impose contractual changes on doctors in training is completely unacceptable, flying in the face of the basic tenets of trade unionism - that negotiation not imposition is the way to bring about a positive outcome that delivers for trainee doctors, patients and the health service as a whole."


text:
Video for Windows

Video for Windows was a suite of video-playing and editing software introduced by Microsoft in 1992. A runtime version for viewing videos only was made available as a free add-on to Windows 3.1, which then became an integral component of Windows 95. Video for Windows was mostly replaced by the July 1996 release of ActiveMovie, later known as DirectShow. Apple filed a lawsuit in 1994 alleging theft of several thousand lines of QuickTime source code to improve the software. The case was settled in 1997, when Apple agreed to make Internet Explorer the default browser over Netscape, and in exchange, Microsoft agreed to continue developing Microsoft Office and other software for Mac OS for the next 5 years, and purchase $150 million of non-voting Apple stock.

Overview
Video for Windows was first introduced in November 1992. It was developed as a reaction to Apple Computer's QuickTime technology, which added digital video to the Macintosh platform. Costing around $200, the product included editing and encoding programs for use with video input boards. A runtime version for viewing videos only was also made available as a free add-on to Windows 3.1 and Windows 3.11; it then became an integral component of Windows 95 and later.

Like QuickTime, Video for Windows had three key aspects: Audio Video Interleave (AVI), a container file format designed to store digital video; an application programming interface (API) that allowed software developers to play or manipulate digital video in their own applications; a suite of software for playing and editing digital video. VfW software suite consisted of:
 * Media Player
 * VidCap
 * VidEdit
 * BitEdit
 * PalEdit
 * WaveEdit

The original version was limited to a maximum resolution of 320 pixels by 240 pixels and a maximum image rate of 30 frames per second.

Video for Windows was mostly replaced by the July 1996 release of ActiveMovie, later known as DirectShow. It was first released as a beta version along with the second beta of Internet Explorer 3. ActiveMovie was released as a free download, either standalone or bundled with Internet Explorer. ActiveMovie, however, did not support video capture. Video for Windows was still used for video capture until the release of Windows Driver Model capture drivers, which only started to become popular in 2000.

Video for Windows became an issue in a lawsuit Apple filed in December 1994 against San Francisco Canyon Company and in 1995 against Microsoft and Intel alleging theft of several thousand lines of QuickTime source code to improve the performance of Video for Windows. This lawsuit was ultimately settled in 1997, when Apple agreed to make Internet Explorer the default browser over Netscape; in exchange, Microsoft agreed to continue developing Microsoft Office and other software for Mac OS for the next 5 years, and purchase $150 million of non-voting Apple stock.

In March 1997, Microsoft announced that ActiveMovie would become part of DirectX 5, and around July started referring to it as DirectShow.

title: Video for Windows


text:
User talk:Monkeyleg

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

June 2007
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the external links you added to the page Refinancing do not comply with our guidelines for external links. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Versageek 19:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. OhNo itsJamie Talk 14:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Firearms Link and the AR-15 article
Its not that world.guns.ru is free of advertising or the link you're adding has it. The stated aim of the link you posted is advertising. The information it provides has been liberally lifted from manufacturer websites, unlike world.guns.ru which is original content put on the web by a published author. There is a difference, and its not arbitrary or ill defined. I'm not sure I would've deleted the link you added myself, but deleting world.guns.ru based on the fact that it, like most websites, uses advertising to support itself seems like an incorrect interpretation of why the link you added was deleted. -- Thatguy96 (talk) 05:09, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

__________

I'm sorry, it's nothing personal or anything to do with your website, I'm just trying to follow Wiki policy. I have added links too that have been removed because they are commercial, even though they were quite useful. Having ads on a website is different to a website that is designed to sell products. World Guns features ads to other websites to help fund their own website and keep it on the net (similar to many others). Your website is mainly intended to sell firearms with facts to complement them. Thanks. Hayden120 (talk) 06:37, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

August 2014
Please do not add or change content, as you did to Stevie Ray Vaughn, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Yworo (talk) 18:06, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Is citing Jim Hamilton, maker of Stevie Ray Vaughan's "Main" guitar, from a personal conversation, considered a "source"? Is the author of several books on Stevie Ray Vaughan a reliable source? These are the two of the sources for the changes I made.

title: User talk:Monkeyleg


text:
Talk:Vitali–Hahn–Saks theorem

Untitled
The following link seems to be irrelevant, so I'm putting it here for now.

http://www.zuease.com [] Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List-of-file-formats"

title: Talk:Vitali–Hahn–Saks theorem


text:
Business as Usual (Men at Work album)

Business as Usual is the debut studio album by Australian new wave band Men at Work, which was released in November 1981 in Australia, and April 1982 in the United States. It spent nine weeks at the top of the Australian Kent Music Report Albums Chart from December 1981 through to March 1982. The Australian version had a black and white cover design; overseas releases had a similar design, but in a black and yellow colour scheme. Business as Usual was one of the most successful albums internationally by an Australian group. It spent an unprecedented 15 weeks at No. 1 on the US Billboard 200 from late 1982 to early 1983; and five weeks at No. 1 in the United Kingdom Albums Chart in early 1983. Business as Usual was also one of the highest selling Australian albums in the early 1980s, with 6 million copies shipped in the US.

In February 2010, a Federal Court judge in Sydney found that the flute riff from "Down Under" had been plagiarised from the Australian song "Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gum Tree", written in 1932 by Marion Sinclair. The Federal Court determined that the copyright was still current (Sinclair died in 1988) and had been assigned to Larrikin Music. The judge found that "a substantial amount of the original song" had been reproduced in "Down Under". Larrikin Music had suggested 60% of the royalties would be appropriate compensation, but the court decreed they shall receive only 5%, and only on mechanical rights for the song since 2002, and on future profits.

In October 2010, Business as Usual was listed in the book 100 Best Australian Albums.

Background
By early 1981, Australian new wave group, Men at Work consisted of Greg Ham on flute, saxophone, keyboards and vocals; Colin Hay on vocals and guitar; John Rees on bass guitar; Jerry Speiser on drums and backing vocals; and Ron Strykert on lead guitar and vocals. Hay was the group's main songwriter both on his own, with Strykert, or with other bandmates. The group signed with the Australian branch of Columbia Records, which issued their second single, "Who Can It Be Now?", in June that year. As record producer they used United States-born Peter McIan (Franne Golde, Serious Young Insects). The track was one written by Hay alone, and, in August, it peaked at No. 2 on the Australian Kent Music Report Singles Chart.

The group had already returned to the studio to continue working with McIan, who produced their debut album, Business as Usual, which included the earlier single. The second single from the album, "Down Under", was released in November and was a reworked version of the B-side to their debut single, "Keypunch Operator", from the previous year. "Down Under" was co-written by Hay and Strykert, and became the group's first number-one hit in December – which stayed at the top for six weeks. The album was released on 9 November 1981, it entered the top 50 on the Australian Kent Music Report Albums Chart in December peaking at No. 1 for nine weeks and appearing in the top 50 for 118 weeks.

The non-album B-side, the jam-oriented instrumental "Anyone for Tennis", was omitted from the 2003 remaster of Business as Usual (which contained both the other non-album B-sides from this era). It appears only on the B-side to "Who Can it Be Now?".

Reception
Australian musicologist Ian McFarlane described Business as Usual: "Aside from the strength of the music, part of the [its] appeal was its economy. The production sound was low-key, but clean and uncluttered. Indeed, the songs stood by themselves with little embellishment save for a bright, melodic, singalong quality". Gerry Raffaele for The Canberra Times felt "[it] generally stays at a high level, tight and jerky, although I still favour the tracks which have appeared as singles ... There is a delicacy about this music – and that is not a thing you can say about too many rock groups".

Countdown Music and Video Awards

 * width="35" align="center" rowspan="3"|1981 || Business as Usual || Best Debut Album || Won
 * "Who Can It Be Now?" || Best Debut Single || Won
 * Men at Work || Best New Talent || Won
 * width="35" align="center" |1982 || Men at Work || Most Outstanding Achievement || Won
 * Men at Work || Best New Talent || Won
 * width="35" align="center" |1982 || Men at Work || Most Outstanding Achievement || Won
 * width="35" align="center" |1982 || Men at Work || Most Outstanding Achievement || Won
 * width="35" align="center" |1982 || Men at Work || Most Outstanding Achievement || Won

Grammy Awards

 * width="35" align="center"|1983 || Men at Work (performer) || Best New Artist || Won
 * width="35" align="center"|1983 || Men at Work (performer) || Best New Artist || Won

Brit Awards

 * width="35" align="center" |1984|| Men at Work (performer) || Best International Artist || Nominated
 * width="35" align="center" |1984|| Men at Work (performer) || Best International Artist || Nominated

Track listing

 * Notes
 * "Crazy" is a B-side of the "Down Under" single in Australia and North America.
 * The live versions of "Underground" and "Who Can It Be Now?" were recorded at a concert at Olympia in São Paulo, Brazil on May 6, 1996 and are also from the 1998 live album Brazil.
 * "F-19" is a B-side of the "Be Good Johnny" single in Australia.

Personnel
Credits adapted from the liner notes of the 2003 remaster of Business as Usual.

Musicians

 * Colin Hay – guitar (all tracks), lead vocals (tracks 1–4, 6–13)
 * Greg Ham – flute, keyboards, saxophone, "fiddly things" (attributed in the liner notes) (all tracks), background vocals (tracks 1–4, 6–10, 12–13), lead vocals (tracks 5, 11)
 * Ron Strykert – guitar, background vocals (all tracks)
 * John Rees – bass, background vocals
 * Jerry Speiser – drums, background vocals

Technical

 * Peter McIan – production, engineering
 * Jim Barbour – engineering
 * Paul Ray – additional engineering

Artwork

 * John Dickson – front cover illustration

Singles

 * "Who Can It Be Now?" was the first single released from the album. It was released as a single in Australia in June 1981 and in the U.S. in May 1982. It reached #2 on the Australian Kent Music Report Singles Chart in August 1981.
 * "Down Under" was the second single released from the album. It was released as a single on 2 November 1981. The single peaked at #1 on the Australian Kent Music Report Singles Chart for six weeks.
 * "Be Good Johnny" was the third single and final single released from the album. It was released in April 1982 and reached #8 on the Australian Kent Music Report Singles Chart.

title: Business as Usual (Men at Work album)


text:
California State Police

The California State Police (CSP) was a state level security police agency founded on March 15, 1887 which primarily served to protect the State Capitol Building, the Governor and other state officials, and other state agencies that did not have their own police force. The CSP also provided services to many different California state agencies, including performing tax seizures for the California Franchise Tax Board and Board of Equalization, as well as patrolling the California Aqueduct. They provided investigative services to elected officials through their Threat Assessment Detail and criminal investigations of crimes committed against the state through the Bureau of Investigative Services. Detectives and line officers routinely conducted investigations with other state agencies and allied law enforcement departments. The California State Police merged with the California Highway Patrol in 1995.

History
The agency traces to 1853, when the California State Legislature authorized a law enforcement body called the California Rangers, their primary objective being to capture notorious gang leader Joaquin Murrieta. Following his arrest and execution, however, the rangers were disbanded. On March 15, 1887, the California State Legislature authorized a law enforcement body with former leader of the Rangers, Captain Harry Love, and one other ranger, as its sole members to protect the State Capitol and grounds. They were paid $100 monthly and grew to a force of 12 officers. In 1911 the legislature approved more positions, uniforms, and defined the department giving it the official name of, "California State Capitol Police". Eventually, as the department grew to approximately 400 personnel and its duties expanded, the word "Capitol" was dropped from the agency's name.

Public awareness
The California State Police (CSP) Division was a small agency, with its official title being a division of the California Department of General Services. Officers and patrol cars of this division were rarely seen outside of the state’s larger metropolitan areas, with its largest presence being situated in the areas of Sacramento (State Capitol Division), Los Angeles, San Francisco, Redding, and San Diego. Its aircraft could be seen flying along the California Aqueduct. Some of the most visible personnel of the CSP were its State Security Officers (SSOs) who were peace officers while on duty. SSOs held powers of arrest as regular police officers under the California Penal Code (CPC), but were not full-time peace officers. Their powers of arrest were only while on duty performing their specific assignments. SSOs were usually at fixed locations at state buildings on foot beats. SSOs sometimes performed patrol (automobile) duties in very limited geographical areas such as Exposition Park in Los Angeles.

Despite the California State Police presence in large metropolitan cities, at the State Capitol, at busy State office buildings, on foot beats, on patrol in fully marked police vehicles on the streets and highways, there were many Californians who were still unaware that California had its own State Police. This public knowledge of the California State Police didn't fully come to light until its merger with the California Highway Patrol when it received major state news coverage in 1995. At the time of the merger, the California State Police was the state’s oldest law enforcement agency (1887-1995 (~108 years)), a record that is still held today. The California Highway Patrol (CHP) was founded in 1929 and its officers were classified as "State Traffic Officers" until the merger. After the merger and subsequent charter responsibilities were taken over by the CHP, their official title was simply reduced to "Officer", thus dropping "traffic" from their current seven-point star badge.

While they did maintain security personnel at major State facilities, they also maintained SCUBA units, Air Patrol Sections with their own fixed wing aircraft, equestrian mounted units, special investigations personnel, EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) bomb techs and equipment, Special Weapons And Tactics teams (SWAT), bicycle patrols, 4WD patrol units, regional detective squads, training personnel, Dignitary Protection Command, which saw to not only the security and safety of State elected and appointed officers, but also often to visiting dignitaries who might not have their own protective staff and provided training for like units from other agencies, Threat Assessment Investigations, armorers, and clerical personnel, as well as routine uniformed patrol officers and vehicles.

CSP sworn personnel were regulated and certified by the State's Department of Justice Commission On Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST). CSP officers were expected to, at any time and at any place, perform the same duties of any city, county or other state law enforcement personnel except those relating to custodial duties (jail/prison). As such, they were the State's oldest general law enforcement agency. Beyond the previously described duties, CSP personnel regularly served and executed State tax warrants, notices of seizure and maintained the peace (bailiff duties) in thousands of State Administrative Court hearings, meetings and procedures. The CSP regularly provided support personnel to other law enforcement agencies such as the State's Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC), the State's Department of Justice Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement (BNE), State DMV investigations, Department of Health Services investigations, local law enforcement and coordinated State, Federal, Local Joint Agency Task Forces.

Organization
The last Chief of the CSP was long-time Sacramento County Sheriff (1971–1983) Duane Lowe. Lowe served as a Deputy Commissioner of the California Highway Patrol (CHP) during the transitional period of the merger of the two organizations. Lowe retired in 1996, a year after the CSP and CHP merged into one agency.

Penal Code Status
At the time of the merger into the California Highway Patrol the California State Police received its peace officer authority under the California Penal Code (CPC). California State Police Officers were defined as Peace Officers under CPC section 830.2 and its Security Officers were defined as Peace Officers under CPC section 830.4. California State Police Officers had to attend and pass a California Peace Officer Standards and Training (POST)-certified Academy consisting of up to 23 weeks of instruction depending on academy location.

Equipment
In the final years of its existence the CSP fleet consisted of white Dodge Diplomats, then Chevrolet Caprices and finally Ford Crown Victorias with a large green and gold stripe running the length of the car. On the trunk lids in gold with green trim were the words “State Police". On each driver and front passenger door was a large seven-point gold-star badge with the State Capitol on the center seal. The words "State Police" in gold with green trim were on the front fenders.

Prior to 1983 the CSP fleet consisted of Dodges and Plymouths, also white, with no striping and the State Police shoulder patch as the door insignia.

CSP patrol cars (circa 1975-1983) were Plymouth Volares as part of a state fleet fuel saving directive by Governor Jerry Brown during his first two terms. State University and State Hospital Police downsized their vehicles or utilized Plymouth Fury IIIs with 225 c.i.d. “slant sixes” known as “campus police specials”. The California Highway Patrol by nature of their mission was exempted from this directive.

CSP 1988 Chevrolet Caprice

CSP 1995 Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor

title: California State Police


text:
Talk:South African Grand Prix

Since when?
"F1 Supremo Bernie Ecclestone revealed that South Africa is going to start hosting a Formula 1 race starting 2013. The race will be held in Cape Town, SA." I have not read anything about this...since when did he announce it? Should we consider this vandalism?--Josh Mertz (talk) 07:55, 18 December 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:South African Grand Prix


text:
User talk:Romalar

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! Hope you like it here, and stick around.

Here are some tips to help you get started:

 * Try the Tutorial, and feel free to experiment in the test area.
 * If you need help, post a question at the Help Desk
 * Eventually, you might want to read the Manual of Style and Policies and Guidelines.
 * Remember Neutral point of view
 * Explore, be bold in editing pages, and, most importantly, have fun!

Good luck!

[[User:Meelar|Meelar (talk)]]

P.S. One last helpful hint. To sign your posts like I did above (on talk pages, for example) use the '~' symbol. To insert just your name, type ~~~ (3 tildes), or, to insert your name and timestamp, use ~~~~ (4 tildes).

Greetings,, and welcome to Wikipedia's deletion process! Thank you for your contributions. As a newcomer, it may be helpful for you to read the Wikipedia deletion policy, and the pages describing the article deletion process, proposed deletion, and speedy deletion. Remember that deletion debates are not votes, and reasons matter, especially reasons relating to the central content policies of WP:V, WP:NPOV, WP:NOR, and WP:NOT, and to the consensual community guidelines WP:BIO, WP:CORP, WP:MUSIC, and WP:FICT. Also remember that deletion isn't always the answer to a bad article. Feel free to drop me a line at my talk page if you have any questions. Again, welcome!

In regards to the article Malotts in cuba, which you proposed for deletion, I have marked the article for speedy deletion, as I feel that the article meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion. In cases where it applies, speedy deletion is preferable to proposed deletion. I have left the prod tag in place, so that if speedy deletion is rejected, your proposed deletion will remain in place. Thanks! Mango juice talk 05:11, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

title: User talk:Romalar


text: Talk:Spanish Grand Prix

title: Talk:Spanish Grand Prix


text:
No. 24 Squadron RAF

No. 24 Squadron (also known as No. XXIV Squadron) of the Royal Air Force is the Air Mobility Operational Conversion Unit (AM OCU). Based at RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire, 24 Squadron is responsible for aircrew training on A400M Atlas and C17 Globemaster. The squadron also delivers or oversees engineer training for these aircraft.

Fighter squadron (1915–1919)
The squadron was founded as No. 24 Squadron, Royal Flying Corps on 1 September 1915 at Hounslow Heath Aerodrome. It arrived in France equipped with D.H.2 fighters in February 1916. The DH.2 came with a reputation for spinning because it had a rotary engine "pushing" it, but after Officer Commanding Major Lanoe Hawker demonstrated the recently discovered procedures for pulling out of a spin, the squadron's pilots came to appreciate the type's manoeuvrability.

By early 1917 the DH.2 was outclassed and they were replaced by the Airco DH.5. The DH.5 did not prove suitable as a fighter but the squadron used it in a ground-attack role. One of the first actions was during the Battle of Messines, and they took part later in the Battle of Cambrai. The DH.5 was phased out of operations and the squadron were given the SE.5a in December 1917. After a few months in the ground-attack role the squadron returned to air combat operations. By October 1918 the squadron had destroyed 200 enemy aircraft. With the armistice the squadron returned to England and was disbanded in February 1919.

As a VIP transport squadron (1920–1968)
On 1 February 1920 the squadron was re-formed at RAF Kenley as a communications and training squadron. During the General Strike of 1926, because of the lack of a postal services, the squadron was used to deliver government dispatches around the country.

Following the outbreak of the Second World War the squadron acquired civil airliners which were impressed for wartime service. It provided a detachment in France to run courier services, but with the withdrawal of British troops it was soon used to evacuate men back to England. Former British Airways and Imperial Airways aircraft were put to use on a network of communications flights including trips to Gibraltar and later Malta.

The squadron had grown into a large organisation, with a network of routes around the United Kingdom and eventually extended to India. It also operated VIP transports including Sir Winston Churchill's personal aircraft. It was decided to break the squadron up: the internal communication flight became 510 Squadron in October 1942. In June 1943 a second squadron, No. 512, equipped with Douglas Dakotas was split off from No 24. This left 24 Squadron to concentrate on the long distance routes using the Avro York.

After many years the squadron had to leave RAF Hendon in February 1946 as the airfield was now too small to operate the larger Avro Yorks and Avro Lancastrians. The squadron was also designated a Commonwealth squadron with crews from various Commonwealth countries joining the squadron strength.

As a Transport Command Squadron (1968–2011)
In 1968 the squadron moved from RAF Colerne to RAF Lyneham and re-equipped with the Lockheed Hercules. The squadron re-equipped with the new generation Hercules C.4 and C.5 (RAF designations for the C-130J-30 and C-130J respectively) in 2002. It celebrated 40 years of Hercules operation in 2008 and remained at Lyneham until July 2011 when the squadron relocated to RAF Brize Norton.

As a Training Squadron (2011–present)
In January 2011, 24 Squadron started its transition from a front-line C130J Hercules Squadron to become the Air Mobility Operational Conversion Unit. This transition brigaded the majority of flying and engineer training within the Air Mobility Force under one specialist training unit. 24 Squadron is currently responsible for the provision of training to aircrews flying the C17 Globemaster and A400M Atlas aircraft, and formerly the C130J Hercules until its retirement in 2023.

As a Central Flying School accredited training establishment, 24 Squadron is the professional training body for the Air Mobility Force delivering flying and engineering training. The Squadron also oversees Aircrew Instructor Development delivering initial aircrew instructor courses.

Aircraft operated

 * 1915-1915 Curtiss JN-4
 * 1915-1915 Caudron G.III
 * 1915-1915 Avro 504
 * 1915-1915 Royal Aircraft Factory BE.2C
 * 1915-1915 Bleriot IX
 * 1915-1915 Bristol Scout
 * 1915-1915 Maurice Farman Longhorn
 * 1915-1915 Maurice Farman Shorthorn
 * 1915–1916 Vickers FB.5
 * 1916–1917 Airco DH.2
 * 1917–1918 Airco DH.5
 * 1917–1919 Royal Aircraft Factory SE.5A
 * 1920–1930 Bristol F.2 Fighter
 * 1920–1927 de Havilland DH.9A
 * 1927–1933 Avro 504N
 * 1927–1933 de Havilland Moth
 * 1927–1933 Westland Wapiti
 * 1927–1933 Fairey IIIF
 * 1930–1933 Hawker Tomtit
 * 1931–1932 Avro Tutor
 * 1933–1941 Hawker Hart
 * 1933–1938 de Havilland Tiger Moth
 * 1933–1938 Hawker Audax
 * 1933–1944 de Havilland Dragon Rapide and Dominie
 * 1937–1938 Miles Nighthawk
 * 1937–1943 de Havilland Express
 * 1938–1940 Miles Magister
 * 1938-1938 Avro Anson I
 * 1938–1944 Miles Mentor
 * 1938–1942 Percival Vega Gull
 * 1939–1940 de Havilland Leopard Moth
 * 1939–1940 de Havilland Fox Moth
 * 1939–1941 de Havilland Dragon
 * 1939–1942 Lockheed 10 Electra
 * 1939–1942 Percival Q.6
 * 1939–1940 de Havilland Puss Moth
 * 1939–1944 de Havilland Flamingo
 * 1939–1940 Airspeed Envoy
 * 1940–1942 Miles Whitney Straight
 * 1940-1940 Heston Phoenix
 * 1940-1940 Savoia-Marchetti S.73
 * 1940-1940 Douglas DC-3
 * 1940-1940 Avro Anson I
 * 1940-1940 Armstrong Whitworth Ensign
 * 1940–1942 de Havilland Hornet Moth
 * 1940–1944 Airspeed Oxford
 * 1941–1943 Stinson Reliant
 * 1941–1942 General Aircraft Cygnet
 * 1941–1942 Blackburn Botha
 * 1941–1945 Beech 17 Traveler
 * 1941-1941 Parnall Heck III
 * 1941–1942 de Havilland Leopard Moth
 * 1941–1943 Lockheed Hudson I
 * 1941–1942 Lockheed Hudson II
 * 1942-1942 Messerschmitt Bf 108 Aldon
 * 1942–1943 Fokker F.XXII
 * 1942–1943 Foster Wikner Wicko
 * 1942-1942 Lockheed Hudson IV
 * 1942–1945 Lockheed Hudson III
 * 1942-1942 Heston Phoenix
 * 1942–1943 Lockheed Hudson VI
 * 1942–1944 Lockheed 12
 * 1942–1943 Percival Proctor
 * 1943–1944 Grumman Goose
 * 1943–1944 Vickers Wellington XVI
 * 1943–1944 Avro York I
 * 1943–1952 Douglas Dakota
 * 1944-1944 Avro Anson XX
 * 1944–1945 Douglas Skymaster
 * 1946–1949 Avro Lancastrian C2
 * 1946–1951 Avro York C1
 * 1950-1950 Vickers Valetta C1
 * 1950-1950 Handley Page Hastings C1
 * 1951–1968 Handley Page Hastings C2
 * 1951–1968 Handley Page Hastings C4
 * 1968–2000 Lockheed Hercules C130K
 * 2000–2023 Lockheed Hercules C130J
 * 2013-present Airbus A400M Atlas
 * 2021-present Boeing C-17 Globemaster III

Commanding officers
The following officers have held command of No. 24 Squadron:

 * 1 September 1915, Captain A G Moore
 * 29 September 1915, Major L G Hawker
 * 29 November 1916, Major C E Rabagliati
 * 23 March 1917, Major A G Moore
 * 22 August 1917, Major J G Swart
 * 2 February 1918, Major V A H Robeson
 * 1 April 1920, Squadron Leader E H Johnston
 * 23 October 1922, Squadron Leader O T Boyd
 * 22 October 1923, Squadron Leader R S Maxwell
 * 27 August 1925, Squadron Leader W H L O'Neill
 * 20 September 1927, Squadron Leader S N Cole
 * 20 March 1929, Squadron Leader D S Don
 * 3 October 1931, Squadron Leader J Whitford
 * 1 December 1935, Squadron Leader H K Goode
 * June 1939, Wing Commander J Anderson
 * October 1939, Wing Commander H K Goode
 * April 1941, Wing Commander H G Lee
 * June 1941, Wing Commander P M W Wright
 * June 1942, Wing Commander H B Collins
 * September 1944, Wing Commander T H Archbell
 * October 1945, Wing Commander E L A Walter
 * September 1946, Wing Commander C W K Nicholls
 * March 1948, Wing Commander P H Lombard
 * March 1950, Wing Commander C F Read (RAAF)
 * December 1950, Squadron Leader H A Nash
 * October 1951, Major J N Robbs (SAAF)
 * October 1953, Squadron Leader J L Kerr
 * September 1955, Squadron Leader R B Bolt (RNZAF)
 * February 1957, Squadron Leader M M Mair
 * October 1957, Wing Commander D W Hitchins (RAAF)
 * October 1959, Wing Commander H D Archer
 * November 1961, Wing Commander R B Sillars
 * November 1963, Wing Commander R T Saunders
 * January 1966, Wing Commander G Moss
 * January 1968, Wing Commander J E H Tetley
 * July 1970, Wing Commander R D Bates
 * July 1972, Wing Commander M J Hardy
 * July 1974, Wing Commander C E Evans
 * February 1976, Wing Commander M C A Davis
 * August 1978, Wing Commander K Chapman
 * October 1980, Wing Commander D R Jones
 * March 1983, Wing Commander C J M Carrington
 * June 1985, Wing Commander R M Peach
 * December 1987, Wing Commander D B Farquhar
 * April 1990, Wing Commander R D Iredale
 * October 1992, Wing Commander M D Stringer
 * June 1995, Wing Commander R M Bailey
 * April 1998, Wing Commander P N Oborn CBE
 * August 2000, Squadron Leader G C Cook
 * December 2000, Wing Commander R Hobson
 * June 2003, Wing Commander K Groves
 * October 2005, Squadron Leader S K Marston
 * December 2005, Wing Commander D Turnbull
 * June 2008, Wing Commander A Bacon
 * November 2010, Wing Commander P G Cochrane
 * February 2011, Wing Commander T Jones
 * December 2012, Wing Commander D James
 * January 2015, Wing Commander D Rawlins
 * March 2017, Wing Commander G Burdett
 * October 2019, Wing Commander A McIntyre
 * May 2022, Wing Commander G T M Anderson

title: No. 24 Squadron RAF


text: Category:Logan County, Oklahoma

title: Category:Logan County, Oklahoma


text: File:Men at Work - Cargo.jpg

title: File:Men at Work - Cargo.jpg


text:
Talk:Swiss Grand Prix

Most wins (constructors)
Currently, the statistics table says, that Mercedes-Benz has 4 wins, together with Alfa Romeo and Ferrari. In fact, Mercedes Benz achieved 5 wins (35, 37, 38, 39, 54), but the last not running under the Nazi flag. How shall the 5th win be considerd in the statistics table? --92.202.52.3 (talk) 12:11, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * As a Mercedes win, its been added SSSB (talk) 10:22, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

Updates to images
I have replaced Bremgarten Circuit with images of Dijon_Prenois as the latter was the most recent host of the event even though that track is in France. Also for those saying it would be confusing for general readers to see a French Track on an article about the Swiss Grand Prix didn't stop people putting an image of the German track Nurburgring on articles regarding the Luxembourg Grand Prix did it?--Stewikiaman1 (talk) 17:18, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Swiss Grand Prix


text: Category:Noise music

title: Category:Noise music


text:
Talk:M,n,k-game

Drawing-strategy scalability
I think there's a hole in the proof that a drawing strategy on a larger board can be converted into a drawing strategy on a smaller board. There can exist a sequence of moves which ends in a win for the second player on move N on the larger board, but not on the smaller board because the winning move lies outside the board. Then the first player can win the game on move N+1. In fact I doubt if the theorem is true at all. Arvindn 21:37, 17 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * No, the proof is correct. Your counterexample assumes the second player has a winning strategy.  But it is proven earlier in the article that the second player can never have a winning strategy at all. vslashg 23:01, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * No, I didn't assume any such thing. Let me be more verbose. Suppose the second player plays according to his drawing strategy. Then the first player plays *suboptimally*. That is, her play would be suboptimal if the game were being played on the larger board. The second player continues following the optimal strategy, and expects to win on move N. However, the winning move turns out to lie outside the smaller board, so the second player cannot finish the game on move N, and the first player ends up winning on move N+1. Have I made myself clear now? Arvindn 23:55, 18 Oct 2004 (UTC)

 * OK, its been a while, no response to above; I've mailed the author (Uiterwijk) asking for the proof; gave essentially the same flawed proof as mentioned above; I replied pointing out about the bug, again no response; so I'm assuming that the proof is wrong and removing it and all consequent information from the article. Arvindn 03:15, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

 * Agreed -- I've never seen a valid proof that a draw holds when the board size is decreased and by similar logic, we can't say that a win holds on a larger board (the new space might yield a winning play for player 2, changing p1's strategy, and giving a drawn result). The line in the article asserting this should be removed.  Also, references should be given for what we know to be true, right? Mikebell 01:21, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

 * Right. Somebody keeps putting it back in, and I keep removing it. Almost all the stuff that's in the article right now, though, deals with specific board sizes and we can trust that whoever proved them got their computer programming right :) Arvindn 05:36, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree that the proof didn't quite hold up as it was written—I think that it confused the ideas of "the second player can always draw the game" and "the second player can always either draw the game or win." However, I think that the following result (with a strengthened hypothesis) is correct: If there is a strategy for a given m,n,k for Player 2 that can always draw the game, then Player 2 can always draw or win on a smaller board by mimicking the larger board's strategy when possible, and making random plays when he can't mimic it. (Since the pairing strategy for k ≥ 9 does guarantee a draw (it never results in a Player 2 win), then 9-in-a-row is drawn on any board size if both players play optimally.) I don't know enough about the strategies on other board sizes to know if this carries over for board sizes other than k ≥ 9 or not. Thoughts? —Babcockd 17:04, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

 * But what you have proven here is exactly what you want (by basically the same argument). If player 2 can draw on a board of size (m,n)>(M,N), then he can also draw on a board of size (M,N). This is true because he simply pretends he is playing on the larger board. Any move he would need to make on the larger board will not be needed to block anything (because player 1 can't play outside of the board), so replacing these with random moves yields a draw on a board of size (M,N). This means, effectively, that draw on large - > draw on small. Because the game (given perfect play) must end either in win for player 1 or draw, the contrapositive of this is that player 1 will win on a large board if he wins on a small one. I'm not sure I understand the original objection to this statement, but hopefully this has clarified it. In any case I'll be writing it into the article again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.109.9.165 (talk) 02:38, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Now has anyone found a Proof for this problem? The Problem mentioned by Arvindn does not seem trivial to me. A citation or a proof would be very helpful. The person who wrote the last Comment(unsigned) didn't seem to get the Point. ---19:39, 21. January 2012(UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.73.55.171 (talk)

What about the assertion ? Isn't the fourth clause of the first sentence subject to the same logic? —Simetrical (talk) 02:42, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
 * k ≥ 8 is a draw: it has been shown that when k is at least 8, the second player can force a draw even on an infinite board, and hence on any finite board. This means that when the board is infinite the game will go on forever with perfect play, whereas if it is finite the game will end in a tie. It is not known if the second player can force a draw when k is 6 or 7.

 * Excellent question, I've been thinking about that myself. I initially thought that that assertion is true, but now I realize the same flaw exists in a strategy transfer argument in this case too.

 * For k=9, a draw via pairings has been shown: the second player pairs the squares of the board in a certain way and always plays in the same pair as the first player. This is a strategy in which the second player doesn't try to win, so it transfers to any smaller board.

 * But you are totally right about k=8. Arvindn 04:28, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

 * A general k=8 strategy wouldn't necessarily work on a finite board, but the Zetters strategy does because it only impacts player 1's strategy by picking squares in which she may not play. This means that shrinking the board helps it the same way it does for pairing strategies.

 * In fact, a more general statement that captures Zetters and Hales-Jewitt would be that any drawing strategy which still holds in a tic-tac-toe where player-2 can never win (that is, a game where player 2's winning lines are ignored) will be a valid drawing strategy in normal tic-tac-toe on any sub-board. Mikebell 20:02, 6 February 2006 (UTC)

I just removed "(k,k,k) is a draw if and only if k ≥ 2 (pairing strategies for k ≥ 6, special cases otherwise)". It seems highly plausible that replacing the first "≥" with ">" would make that true, hopefully someone can show that. JumpDiscont (talk) 05:21, 25 October 2012 (UTC)

Strategy Stealing Argument
Check for a discussion on if the strategy stealing argument is valid. 70.111.251.203 13:43, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Problem with k=3
The article states: I think it should state that it is a win if m > 3 OR n > 3. Also, if m ≤ 3 AND n ≤ 3, the game is a draw. For example, (3,4,3) and (4,3,3) are both wins.
 * k = 3 is a draw for (3,3,3) (see Tic-tac-toe) and a win otherwise if m > 3 and n > 3. If m ≤ 3 or n ≤ 3, the game is a draw.

Yeah, this was obviously a mistake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.177.122.124 (talk) 14:26, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think this is right; in a (1,4,3) game it's obviously impossible to win. Maybe it should say if m≥3,n>3 or vice versa it's a win? CHL (talk) 08:35, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

General result?
If k<m and k<n, there is a draw. Should this be added to the general results section? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.156.40.94 (talk) 17:09, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Pairings to draw (9,6,6) and (7,7,6)
JumpDiscont (talk) 17:23, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

m×n
What does "m×n" that mean????? Readers don't know Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:27, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

weak (m,n,k) game
This is defined as 'k-in-a-row by the second player does not end the game with a second player win.' What does that mean? What's the winning condition of this game? Surely it doesn't mean "no matter how bad the first player plays, the second player is never declared a winner". 2001:981:4B0C:1:DAA2:5EFF:FE8E:C8D8 (talk) 19:34, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually it does, the second player is playing to avoid a loss. If it were a real game you would probably say the second player was the winner if the the first player did not get n-in-a-row, but weak (m,n,k) games are mainly a mathematical tool to analyze normal (m,n,k) games (themselves mostly of mathematical interest). The notion of Maker-Breaker games is very similar. MathHisSci (talk) 09:51, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Two-dimensional corollaries of result stated in section "Multidimensional variant"
Consider the case of k-in-a-row on a 2-dimensional hypercube with all edges having length k (more commonly known as a k-by-k square). Then the Hales and Jewett result quoted from the Berlekamp, Conway, Guy book in the aforementioned section of the article applies, with n=2: that is, the game is a draw if k is odd and k ≥ 3^2-1 = 8 or if k is even and k ≥ 2^(2+1)-2 = 6. We already have in the Wikipedia article the statement that (m,n,k) is a draw for k≥9 for any m,n, which is stronger than the "k is odd" case already, but the second case also gives us that both (6,6,6) and (8,8,8) are draws, neither of which is implied by any of the statements in the "General results" or "Specific results" sections as of the writing of this comment. If anyone is familiar with either the BCG book in the references or the apparent Hales and Jewett paper, can they please confirm that the result is indeed proven for n=2? If not, this condition should be mentioned where the result is stated. If so, it seems that (6,6,6) and (8,8,8) need to be added to the "Specific results" section as draws. Note that in the case n=1, i.e. a (k,1,k) game, the HJ result, that this is a draw for all k≥2, trivially holds. Adam Dent (talk) 19:18, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

(6,6,6) being a draw is implied by "(9,6,6) and (7,7,6) are both draws via pairings.", and the statement I just quoted was in the "Specific results" section as of the writing of your comment.  I'm not familiar with the sources you mentioned, although I might get around to finding a pairing draw against 8-in-a-row for boards at least as large as 8x8.    JumpDiscont (talk) 13:17, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

title: Talk:M,n,k-game


text:
Talk:Para-Methoxyamphetamine

Untitled
PMA also means Program Memory Area, which contains a temporary Table of Contents describing the place where data are writen on the CD-R/CD-RW and when the session is not yet closed.

CDR/RW areas: PCA - PMA - Lead-in - Program Area - Lead-out

"Drown themselves"!?
"Due to the nature of PMA raising your body temperature, it is easy for a person to drink so much water that they acutally drown themselves."

This is really dubious. Drowning occurs from filling one's lungs with water. Conscious people who inhale water will reflexively choke and cough to clear their lungs. I'm removing this sentence. --Shyland 00:58, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

As Shyland correctly points out, "drowning" does not correctly describe this phenomenon. It is correctly described as Water intoxication. This phenomenon is, as the Wikipedia article states, sometimes fatal. Can we agree to re-edit the PMA article so that it includes a reference (and link) to "water intoxication"? Sdsds 23:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

hyperthermia not hyperpyrexia?
Maybe I do not understand the difference properly, but I thought hyperthermia was a result of outside influences making your body too hot, whereas hyperpyrexia was your body making itself too hot. 67.5.156.28 (talk) 08:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Major changes
I fixed up the article, and changed a lot of things. If you disagree with any of the changes please discuss it here. Erowid trip reports constitute as original research, though Erowid,org itself is considered reliable in Wikipedia.--Astavats (talk) 02:13, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Cause of body temperature increase
it appears that PMA activates the hypothalamus much more strongly than MDMA and other drugs like ephedrine, thereby causing rapid increases in body temperature (which is the major cause of death in PMA mortalities).[26][27][28] Many people taking PMA try to get rid of the heat by taking off their clothes, taking cold showers or wrapping themselves in wet towels, and even sometimes by shaving off their hair.
 * Not sure what's meant by "activating the hypothalamus", but if the rise in body temperature was caused by hypothalamic temperature set point abnormality, those people would be shivering, and want to put on more clothes instead of taking them off. Isn't it more likely that just as with serotonine syndrome, muscular activity is the cause? Ssscienccce (talk) 17:38, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Names
I cant find any references to backup the use of the some of the names attributed, and i'm finding it very hard to believe anyone other than the Daily Mail actually refers to it at Dr Death. "Hi mate, good rave isn't it. Wanna buy some Dr Death." "Sounds peachy, give me 2." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.143.228.51 (talk) 13:26, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Pharmacology
There appears to be contradicting information in the two Pharmacology paragraphs: "However, relative to MDMA, it is considerably less effective as a releaser of serotonin and behaves more like a reuptake inhibitor in comparison." vs. "It appears that PMA elevates body temperatures dramatically; the cause of this property is suspected to be related to its ability to inhibit MAO-A and at the same time releasing large amounts of serotonin, effectively causing serotonin syndrome."

Technically, the first quoted sentence does not exclude "large amounts of serotonin" if and only if "large amounts of serotonin" are less than the amounts released by MDMA as suggested by the first sentence. Nevertheless, this can be confusing to the reader. I suggest changing the first sentence quoted to exclude the mention of MDMA as the comparison is nonessential to understanding the effects of PMA as a selective uptake inhibitor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ikyork (talk • contribs) 19:18, 9 August 2013 (UTC)

The Mandelin Reagent test available at a few places can test for PMA,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandelin_reagent cites PMA along with http://dancesafe.org/sites/default/files/imagecache/product_full/DS_TestingKit_Final_wBleeds_back_rgb_5.jpg Showing in the test results table, so can we have that changed from not testable to testable using the Mandelin Reagent ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siorai (talk • contribs) 00:35, 5 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The two sentences have been removed as being unreliably sourced and unsourced. They were also blatantly false. That however, was not the reason I removed them. AlanS''talk 11:03, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

erowid dosing regimen
dont trust a word those ***********s tell you about dosing this chemical

pharmaceutical dose of dextroamphetamine is 5mg; racemate and weight adjusted dosing of paramethoxyamphetamine is circa 6-12mg tops. you will end up in hospital or die if you dose more. --0dorkmann (talk) 03:31, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Para-Methoxyamphetamine


text:
Alfred Grünwald

Alfred Grünwald may refer to:
 * Alfred Grünwald (librettist) (1884–1951), Austrian librettist
 * Johannes Theodor Baargeld, pseudonym of Alfred Emanuel Ferdinand Grünwald (1892–1927), German painter and poet
 * Al Grunwald (1930–2011), American baseball player

title: Alfred Grünwald


text:
No. 30 Squadron RAF

Number 30 Squadron of the Royal Air Force operates the Airbus A400M Atlas transport aircraft and is based at RAF Brize Norton, Oxfordshire.

The squadron was first formed as a unit of the Royal Flying Corps in 1915, serving through the rest of the First World War in Egypt and Mesopotamia, carrying out both reconnaissance, bombing and air-to-air combat duties. After the end of the war, the squadron continued to serve in Iraq, attacking rebels against the British rule in Iraq and later rebels against the Iraqi government.

First World War
In November 1914 the British Royal Flying Corps despatched a flight of aircraft from Britain to Egypt to defend the Suez Canal, as war with the Turkish Empire became increasingly likely. Initial equipment consisted of Farman Longhorn and Shorthorn biplanes, which were soon supplemented by Royal Aircraft Factory B.E.2s and Farman HF.20s sent from India. The flight, based at Ismailia Airfield, was redesignated No. 30 Squadron on 24 March 1915.

On 24 August 1915, the Mesopotamian Half Flight, a unit of the Australian Flying Corps stationed in Mesopotamia (now Iraq) was formally attached to 30 Squadron. For several months the Half-Flight, under Captain Henry Petre, and equipped with a mixture of Farman Shorthorns, Farman Longhorns and Caudron G.3s had been flying operations in support of the Indian Army, against Turkish ground forces, during the Mesopotamian campaign.

On 26 August 1915, a second flight, equipped with Martinsyde Scouts, arrived at Basrah to join the 30 Squadron forces operating in Mesopotamia. The Martinsydes suffered from poor engine reliability in the heat and dusty conditions encountered. Despite this, a forward deployed detachment of the squadron supported the army's advance along the Tigris river, with reconnaissance by the squadron's aircraft helping the British and Indian forces to win the Battle of Es Sinn and capture Kut al-Imara in September 1915. In October 1915, the rest of the squadron moved to Mesopotamia, being relieved in Egypt by 14 Squadron. On 7 November, the squadron was reorganised with headquarters and B Flight at Basra and A Flight deployed forward at Azizaya.

The squadron continued to support the British forces as they advanced towards Bagdhad, until the advance was stopped by the Battle of Ctesiphon on 22–25 November 1915. An air reconnaissance mission on the eve of the battle carried out by Major H. L Reilly of the squadron spotted that the Turkish positions in front of Ctesiphon had been heavily reinforced, but his aircraft was shot down by ground-fire and Reilly captured. It has been suggested in the Official Histories of the Air War and the Campaign in Mesopotamia, that if Reilly had successfully returned with his intelligence to the British lines, Major General Townshend, commander of the British force, would have aborted the attack. After Ctesiphon, the British column retreated to Kut al-Imara, pursued by the Turkish Army, and Kut was besieged from 7 December 1915. Those aircraft that could evacuate left Kut earlier that day, but most of the personnel of the forward deployed A and B flights of the squadron, along with three unserviceable aircraft, were trapped in the besieged town.

While reduced in serviceable strength to only a single B.E.2, the Squadron provided reconnaissance support to the force sent to relieve the troops trapped at Kut. The squadron was reinforced by four more B.E.2s in February 1916. The relief column failed to break through to Kut, and in April 1916, the squadron, with eight B.E.2s, together with seven RNAS aircraft, carried out one of the earliest air supply mission when it air-dropped food and other supplies to the besieged garrison. While 19000 lb of food was dropped between 15 and 29 April, this was insufficient to feed the trapped troops and the civilian population of the town, and Major General Townshend surrendered on 29 April. The squadron built up its strength over the summer, and by August had 13 B.E.2s, which were supplemented by six Martinsyde Elephant scouts in September 1916. The squadron supported the resumed British offensive that started in December 1916, which resulted in the British capture of Baghdad on 11 March 1917, with the squadron moving to Baghdad airfield later that day. In April 1917, the Ottoman air defences were strengthened by the arrival of Halberstadt fighters from Germany, which outclassed 30 Squadrons B.E.2s. In response, two Bristol Scout fighters joined the squadron, with the promise that more capable Spad VIIs would follow.

In August that year, 63 Squadron arrived in Mesopotamia, so that 30 Squadron was no longer the sole source of air support for the British forces. In September the promised Spads arrived to replace 30 Squadron's Bristol Scouts, while from October Royal Aircraft Factory R.E.8s arrived to supersede the obsolete BE.2s, which were phased out by February 1918. In December 1917–January 1918, the squadron received two Airco DH.4 bombers, but both had been lost by the end of January 1918.

1920s & 1930s
In 1919 the squadron was sent to Iran as part of the Norperforce. In April 1919, the squadron was reduced to a cadre at Baghdad, but not disbanded, and in February 1920, it returned to full strength at Baghdad as an Army co-operation squadron equipped with RE.8s, with these gradually being replaced by Airco DH.9A light bombers, with re-equipment being complete by early 1921. From June 1920, the squadron, along with the rest of the RAF's strength in Iraq, was deployed against an Iraqi revolt against British rule. In May–June 1921, 30 and 47 Squadron's DH.9As supported the establishing of a permanent Cairo–Baghdad land route, providing an air escort for vehicle convoys creating a visible track across the desert, while from 21 June that year the two squadrons began air-mail runs along the Cairo-Baghdad route.

In early 1924, aircraft from the squadron were deployed to Kirkuk for operations against a revolt led by the Kurdish leader Sheikh Mahmud Barzanji. The city of Sulaymaniyah, the base of Mahmud's operations was bombed, and Mahmud withdrew into the mountains. The squadron again saw action in the summers of 1925 and 1926 as Mahmud's rebellion reignited, attacking rebel-held villages. In late February 1938, a flight of 30 Squadron aircraft joined 'Akforce', a force of aircraft set up to stop Ikhwan nomadic raiders from Saudi Arabia attacking Iraq and Kuwait, these operations continuing until June.

In 1929 the squadron replaced its DH.9As with Westland Wapitis. In September 1930, Mahmud again raised a rebellion against the British and Iraqis, and 30 Squadron supported Iraqi Army operations against the rebels. The campaign against Mahmud continued until May 1931, when Mahmud surrendered. Wapitis of 30 Squadron flew 2204 hours between October 1930 and May 1931 in operations against Mahmud. In March 1932, the Iraqi Army launched an offensive against a revolt by the supporters of Ahmed Barzani in Southern Kurdistan. 30 Squadron initially provided reconnaissance support to the Iraqi Army columns, but after one column was heavily attacked and forced to retreat, the RAF launched a series of air attacks against Barzani's forces until Barzani crossed the border into Turkey. In April–August 1935 the squadron received Hawker Hardys (a tropicalised, general purpose version of the Hawker Hart light bomber), being the first squadron to receive the Hardy. In 1936 the squadron moved to the RAFs new base in Iraq, RAF Habbaniya. It re-equipped with modern Blenheim I monoplane bombers in 1938.

Second World War
In August 1939, as war loomed, the squadron moved back to RAF Ismailia in Egypt and carried out escort missions in the Western Desert and provided fighter defence of Alexandria. In November 1940, it was sent to Greece to operate its Blenheims in both the bomber and fighter roles, with the first of its Blenheims arriving at Eleusis airfield near Athens on 3 November, with forward deployments of the bombers to an airfield at Paramythia, while the squadron's fighter Blenheims remained back at Eleusis to protect Athens. In March 1941 the squadron was redesignated a fighter unit. On 5 April, five Blenheims were detached to Crete, and tasked with maritime reconnaissance, convoy escort and night fighting. More of the squadron's Blenheims were sent to Maleme on Crete on 17 April. By the middle of May German air attacks on Crete had made the squadron's operations from the island untenable, and on 15 May the squadrons remaining three airworthy Blenheims were evacuated to Egypt. Despite this, 229 officers and men from 30 and 33 Squadrons remained at Maleme when the Germans launched an attack on the airfield by airborne troops on 20 May. Many of these Airmen, despite being poorly armed took part in the defence of Maleme before the survivors attempted to evacuate via Sfakia. Losses were heavy. After the losses during the fall of Greece and the Battle of Crete the squadron was rebuilt as a fighter unit equipped with Hawker Hurricanes and employed on night defence of Alexandria and shipping protection patrols before moving on to operations in the Western Desert.

When the situation in the Far East worsened the squadron was ordered to reinforce allied forces in Java, but by the time the squadron left Egypt, Java, had already fallen, and the squadron was ferried by the aircraft carrier HMS Indomitable (92) to Ceylon arriving on 6 March 1942, just in time to assist in resisting the Japanese carrier strike against the island. This raid took place on 5 April 1942 with 21 aircraft being launched from its base at RAF Ratmalana whilst under heavy fire from Japanese aircraft. Seven of the squadron's Hurricanes were lost, with five of its pilots being killed or dying later of wounds received during the battle. It claimed 14 Japanese aircraft shot down, together with six probably destroyed and five damaged, out of a total claim for the whole of the island's defences of 24 shot down, 7 probables and 9 damaged. In fact, the Japanese lost seven aircraft, with a further 15 damaged.

On 28 January 1944, the squadron left Ceylon for the Burma front, flying escort missions for Dakota and C-46 transports over the Kaladan valley. In March, it added night ground-attack sorties against river craft to its escort duties, and moved to Comilla on 10 April 1944. On 25 May 1944, the squadron was pulled out of the front line back to Yelahanka near Bangalore for re-equipment with American Republic P-47 Thunderbolts. It returned to action in October, carrying out bomber and transport escort, and ground attack with guns, bombs and napalm. It operated in support of 15 Corps until the end of March. Operating from Akyab, the squadron supported Operation Dracula, the Anglo-Indian amphibious landings at Rangoon on 1 May. Following the capture of Rangoon, with a lull of operations, the squadron was pulled out of the front line to prepare for Operation Zipper, the planned British invasion of Malaya, but the Japanese surrender on 15 August meant that the squadron was not needed to support the landings.

Post-War
After the Japanese surrender the squadron remained in India and its Thunderbolts were replaced by Hawker Tempest F Mk 2s in March 1946. No. 30 Squadron lost its aircraft on 1 December 1946, before being disbanded on 1 April 1947 at Agra.

On 24 November 1947 the squadron was reformed at RAF Oakington, Cambridgeshire in the transport role, operating as a unit within the Royal Air Force Transport Command. It flew the Dakota on many humanitarian supply flights during the Berlin Airlift. Re-equipment with the Vickers Valetta came in December 1950. The heavier four-engine Blackburn Beverley was flown between April 1957 and September 1967. From November 1959 30 Squadron operated out of RAF Eastleigh in Kenya before moving on to RAF Muharraq in October 1964.

Hercules and Atlas (1968 – present)
The Squadron temporarily disbanded in September 1967 but quickly reformed at RAF Fairford in June 1968 equipped with turbine-propeller powered Lockheed Hercules transports, maintaining the units transport role. the squadron moved to RAF Lyneham in September 1971.

During 2008 'A' flight was based at RAF Al Udeid with the Hercules C.4.

The squadron flew its last Hercules flight on 8 December 2016. It then took on an administrative role and later reformed on 28 September 2021 to become the second frontline squadron operating the Airbus A400M Atlas.

Aircraft operated

 * Farman Longhorn 1915
 * Farman Shorthorn 1915–1916
 * Voisin LAS 1915–1916
 * Henry Farman F27 1915
 * Caudron G.3 1915
 * Royal Aircraft Factory B.E.2 1915–1917
 * Royal Aircraft Factory R.E.8 1917–19
 * Airco D.H.9 1921–1929
 * Westland Wapiti 1929–1935
 * Hawker Hardy 1935–1938
 * Bristol Blenheim 1938–1941
 * Hawker Hurricane 1941–1944
 * Republic P-47 Thunderbolt 1944–1946
 * Hawker Tempest F2 1946
 * Douglas Dakota 1947–1950
 * Vickers Valetta 1950–1957
 * Blackburn Beverley 1957–1967
 * Lockheed C-130 Hercules 1968–2016
 * Airbus A400M Atlas 2021 – present

Memorials
There is a Royal Air Force (RAF) memorial in Crete to the airmen of 30 and 33 Squadrons who died during the Battle of Crete. The memorial is located (35.52536°N, 23.82862°W) behind the roadside hedge between Maleme and Tavronitis overlooking the (35.52663°N, 23.8256°W) Iron Bridge across the Tavronitis River and the end of Maleme Airport runway.

Another memorial was unveiled at the National Memorial Arboretum in Staffordshire in September 2008.

Battle honours
From Ashworth except where stated. Honours marked with an asterisk may be emblazoned on the Squadron Standard.

 * Egypt (1915)*
 * Mesopotamia (1915–1918)*
 * Iraq (1919–1920)
 * North West Persia (1920)
 * Kurdistan (1922–1924)
 * Iraq (1923–1925)
 * Iraq (1928–1929)
 * Kurdistan (1930–1931)
 * Northern Kurdistan (1932)
 * Egypt and Libya (1940–1942)*
 * Greece (1940–1941)*
 * Mediterranean (1940–1941)*
 * Ceylon (April 1942)*
 * Arakan (1944)*
 * Burma (1944–1945)*
 * South Atlantic (1982)
 * Gulf (1991)
 * Afghanistan (2001–2014)
 * Iraq (2003–2011)
 * Libya (2011)

title: No. 30 Squadron RAF


text: File:30 Squadron RAF.jpg

title: File:30 Squadron RAF.jpg


text:
Vicar of Christ

Vicar of Christ (from Latin Vicarius Christi) is a term used in different ways and with different theological connotations throughout history. The original notion of a vicar is as an "earthly representative of Christ", but it is also used in the sense of "person acting as parish priest in place of a real person." The title is now used in Catholicism to refer to the bishops, and more specifically, was historically used to refer to the Bishop of Rome (the pope).

History and different uses
During the history of Christianity, the title of Vicar of Christ was used in different ways, with implications for theological, pastoral or different time.

Use for the bishops
An early appearance of a similar concept of the Vicar of Christ is mentioned in the Epistle to the Magnesians of St. Ignatius, Bishop of Antioch (who was possibly a disciple of both John the Apostle and Saint Peter ), written between the years AD 88 and 107, which states: "your bishop presides in the place of God". Although Ignatius did not explicitly use the term Vicar of Christ, he sets out the concept, with regard to local bishops. More recently, the Second Vatican Council's Dogmatic Constitution on the Church Lumen gentium noted that bishops are "vicars and ambassadors of Christ," and the Catechism of the Catholic Church notes that each bishop governs his diocese "[a]s Christ's vicar."

The first recorded use of the term "Vicar of Christ" is found in the epistles of Tertullian in the late 2nd and early 3rd centuries, referring to the Holy Spirit, that is, as Christ is not physically performing miracles in the Church, Holy Spirit acts as his Vicar on his behalf, performing miracles and preventing the Church from error. Other roles Tertullian attributed to the Holy Spirit as Vicar were: the direction of discipline, the revelation of the Scriptures, the reformation of the intellect, and the advancement toward the better things.

Use for the popes
The third use of the term Vicar of Christ appears in the 5th century, in a synod of bishops to refer to Pope Gelasius I. The theological connotations of the title got a pastoral sense, evoking the words of Christ to the Apostle Peter, regarded by the first Catholic Pope in John 21:16-17, "Feed my lambs [...] Feed my sheep". Catholics interpret this as Christ making Peter his vicar and pastor with the responsibility to feed his flock (i.e. the Church) in his own place.

However, the use of the title to refer to the popes in the early Church was unstable, and several variants of the use of Vicar were used for the Pope, as "Vicar of Peter", indicating that they were the successors of St. Peter, "Vicar of the Prince of the Apostles" or "Vicar of the Apostolic See", among other variants. This title is used by the Roman Missal in their prayers for a dead pope, and the oath of allegiance to St. Boniface to Pope Gregory II. Since 1200, Popes have consistently used this title. Insisting that he — and he alone—had the right to remove bishops from office, Pope Innocent III appealed to the title of Vicar of Christ. Occasionally, Popes like Nicholas III used "Vicar of God" as an equivalent title The 2012 edition of the Annuario Pontificio gives "Vicar of Jesus Christ" as the second official title of the Pope (the first being "Bishop of Rome"). The edition of the same book published on March 25, 2020, included the title of "Vicar of Christ" to the section "Historical titles" section, to indicate its bond with the history of the papacy.

Use in caesaropapism
Another use of the title, with a different meaning, appeared in the Eastern Churches between the fifth and sixth centuries. The term was used to refer to the Byzantine emperor, showing the apex of caesaropapism. Though decisions on doctrine, liturgy and spirituality were left to the bishops.

title: Vicar of Christ


text:
Talk:Detroit Grand Prix

Merge requested
Since this race is now being renewed for the 2007 season from the IRL I think it sohuld be proper that the page should be moved to Detroit Indy Grand Prix or Detroit Grand Prix to use it current name instead of its old F1 Name.

Also part of the Belle Isle (Michigan) article that talks about the Circuit should be partialy merged into the Detroit Indy Grand Prix article.

Most definitly the Article United States Grand Prix East and Detroit Indy Grand Prix are already the same aritlces in 2 locations and shoud definitly be merged.

Sawblade05 21:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I'll second that. It is my thinking that all content should be merged onto Detroit Indy Grand Prix, and that is now the current name of the event. Doctorindy 16:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I think that United States Grand Prix East should become a simple disambiguation page, as it resembles one in the first few lines anyway. Doctorindy 16:35, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

 * third, although i think leaving the official grand prix events here and use this page for that and other indy races can be merged. --Dan027 07:28, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

 * I'm going to go ahead and make some changes, since we seem to have come to a consensus. I'll send all of the CART/IRL related material to Indy Detroit Grand Prix...leave all of the F1 material at United States Grand Prix East. I'll make Detroit Grand Prix a disambig page, and have links to both the F1 event and the CART/IRL event. The Belle Isle page will stay, but it's racing content will be at the race page instead, that's what's been done with most of the temp. street course races. Doctorindy 17:02, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons files used on this page or its Wikidata item have been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussions at the nomination pages linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:22, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Detroit Grand Prix III Info & Course Map.jpg (discussion)
 * Detroit Grand Prix III Tri-Fold Brochure.jpg (discussion)

title: Talk:Detroit Grand Prix