text:
Political anthropology

Political anthropology is the comparative study of politics in a broad range of historical, social, and cultural settings.

Origins
Political anthropology has its roots in the 19th century. At that time, thinkers such as Lewis H. Morgan and Sir Henry Maine tried to trace the evolution of human society from 'primitive' or 'savage' societies to more 'advanced' ones. These early approaches were ethnocentric, speculative, and often racist. Nevertheless, they laid the basis for political anthropology by undertaking a modern study inspired by modern science, especially the approaches espoused by Charles Darwin. In a move that would be influential for future anthropology, this early work focused on kinship as the key to understanding political organization, and emphasized the role of the 'gens' or lineage as an object of study.

Among the principal architects of modern social science are French sociologist Emile Durkheim, German sociologist, jurist, and political economist Max Weber, and German political philosopher, journalist, and economist Karl Marx.

Political anthropology's contemporary literature can be traced to the 1940 publication African Political Systems, edited by Meyer Fortes and E. E. Evans-Pritchard. They rejected the speculative historical reconstruction of earlier authors and argued that "a scientific study of political institutions must be inductive and comparative and aim solely at establishing and explaining the uniformities found among them and their interdependencies with other features of social organization". Their goal was taxonomy: to classify societies into a small number of discrete categories, and then compare them in order to make generalizations about them. The contributors of this book were influenced by Radcliffe-Brown and structural functionalism. As a result, they assumed that all societies were well-defined entities which sought to maintain their equilibrium and social order. Although the authors recognized that "Most of these societies have been conquered or have submitted to European rule from fear of invasion. They would not acquiesce in it if the threat of force were withdrawn; and this fact determines the part now played in their political life by European administration" the authors in the volume tended in practice to examine African political systems in terms of their own internal structures, and ignored the broader historical and political context of colonialism.

Several authors reacted to this early work. In his work Political Systems of Highland Burma (1954) Edmund Leach argued that it was necessary to understand how societies changed through time rather than remaining static and in equilibrium. A special version of conflict oriented political anthropology was developed in the so-called 'Manchester school', started by Max Gluckman. Gluckman focused on social process and an analysis of structures and systems based on their relative stability. In his view, conflict maintained the stability of political systems through the establishment and re-establishment of crosscutting ties among social actors. Gluckman even suggested that a certain degree of conflict was necessary to uphold society, and that conflict was constitutive of social and political order.

By the 1960s this transition work developed into a full-fledged subdiscipline which was canonized in volumes such as Political Anthropology (1966) edited by Victor Turner and Marc Swartz. By the late 1960s, political anthropology was a flourishing subfield: in 1969 there were two hundred anthropologists listing the subdiscipline as one of their areas of interests, and a quarter of all British anthropologists listed politics as a topic that they studied.

Political anthropology developed in a very different way in the United States. There, authors such as Morton Fried, Elman Service, and Eleanor Leacock took a Marxist approach and sought to understand the origins and development of inequality in human society. Marx and Engels had drawn on the ethnographic work of Morgan, and these authors now extended that tradition. In particular, they were interested in the evolution of social systems over time.

From the 1960s a 'process approach' developed, stressing the role of agents (Bailey 1969; Barth 1969). It was a meaningful development as anthropologists started to work in situations where the colonial system was dismantling. The focus on conflict and social reproduction was carried over into Marxist approaches that came to dominate French political anthropology from the 1960s. Pierre Bourdieu's work on the Kabyle (1977) was strongly inspired by this development, and his early work was a marriage between French post-structuralism, Marxism and process approach.

Interest in anthropology grew in the 1970s. A session on anthropology was organized at the Ninth International Congress of Anthropological and Ethnological Sciences in 1973, the proceedings of which were eventually published in 1979 as Political Anthropology: The State of the Art. A newsletter was created shortly thereafter, which developed over time into the journal PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review.

Anthropology concerned with states and their institutions
While for a whole century (1860 to 1960 roughly) political anthropology developed as a discipline concerned primarily with politics in stateless societies, a new development started from the 1960s, and is still unfolding: anthropologists started increasingly to study more "complex" social settings in which the presence of states, bureaucracies and markets entered both ethnographic accounts and analysis of local phenomena. This was not the result of a sudden development or any sudden "discovery" of contextuality. From the 1950s anthropologists who studied peasant societies in Latin America and Asia, had increasingly started to incorporate their local setting (the village) into its larger context, as in Redfield's famous distinction between 'small' and 'big' traditions (Redfield 1941). The 1970s also witnessed the emergence of Europe as a category of anthropological investigation. Boissevain's essay, "towards an anthropology of Europe" (Boissevain and Friedl 1975) was perhaps the first systematic attempt to launch a comparative study of cultural forms in Europe; an anthropology not only carried out in Europe, but an anthropology of Europe.

The turn toward the study of complex society made anthropology inherently more political. First, it was no longer possible to carry out fieldwork in say, Spain, Algeria or India without taking into account the way in which all aspects of local society were tied to state and market. It is true that early ethnographies in Europe had sometimes done just that: carried out fieldwork in villages of Southern Europe, as if they were isolated units or 'islands'. However, from the 1970s that tendency was openly criticised, and Jeremy Boissevain (Boissevain and Friedl 1975) said it most clearly: anthropologists had "tribalised Europe" and if they wanted to produce relevant ethnography they could no longer afford to do so. Contrary to what is often heard from colleagues in the political and social sciences, anthropologists have for nearly half a century been very careful to link their ethnographic focus to wider social, economic and political structures. This does not mean to abandon an ethnographic focus on very local phenomena, the care for detail.

In a more direct way, the turn towards complex society also signified that political themes increasingly were taken up as the main focus of study, and at two main levels. First of all, anthropologists continued to study political organization and political phenomena that lay outside the state-regulated sphere (as in patron-client relations or tribal political organization). Second of all, anthropologists slowly started to develop a disciplinary concern with states and their institutions (and on the relationship between formal and informal political institutions). An anthropology of the state developed, and it is a most thriving field today. Geertz's comparative work on the Balinese state is an early, famous example. There is today a rich canon of anthropological studies of the state (see for example Abeles 1990). Hastings Donnan, Thomas Wilson and others started in the early 1990s a productive subfield, an "anthropology of borders", which addresses the ways in which state borders affect local populations, and how people from border areas shape and direct state discourse and state formation (see for example Alvarez, 1996; Thomassen, 1996; Vereni, 1996; Donnan and Wilson, 1994; 1999; 2003).

From the 1980s a heavy focus on ethnicity and nationalism developed. 'Identity' and 'identity politics ' soon became defining themes of the discipline, partially replacing earlier focus on kinship and social organization. This made anthropology even more obviously political. Nationalism is to some extent simply state-produced culture, and to be studied as such. And ethnicity is to some extent simply the political organization of cultural difference (Barth 1969). Benedict Anderson's book Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism discusses why nationalism came into being. He sees the invention of the printing press as the main spark, enabling shared national emotions, characteristics, events and history to be imagined through common readership of newspapers.

The interest in cultural/political identity construction also went beyond the nation-state dimension. By now, several ethnographies have been carried out in the international organizations (like the EU) studying the fonctionnaires as a cultural group with special codes of conduct, dressing, interaction etc. (Abélès, 1992; Wright, 1994; Bellier, 1995; Zabusky, 1995; MacDonald, 1996; Rhodes, 't Hart, and Noordegraaf, 2007). Increasingly, anthropological fieldwork is today carried out inside bureaucratic structures or in companies. And bureaucracy can in fact only be studied by living in it – it is far from the rational system we and the practitioners like to think, as Weber himself had indeed pointed out long ago (Herzfeld 1992 ).

The concern with political institutions has also fostered a focus on institutionally driven political agency. There is now an anthropology of policy making (Shore and Wright 1997). This focus has been most evident in Development anthropology or the anthropology of development, which over the last decades has established as one of the discipline's largest subfields. Political actors like states, governmental institutions, NGOs, International Organizations or business corporations are here the primary subjects of analysis. In their ethnographic work anthropologists have cast a critical eye on discourses and practices produced by institutional agents of development in their encounter with 'local culture' (see for example Ferguson 1994). Development anthropology is tied to global political economy and economic anthropology as it concerns the management and redistribution of both ideational and real resources (see for example Hart 1982). In this vein, Escobar (1995) famously argued that international development largely helped to reproduce the former colonial power structures.

Many other themes have over the last two decades been opened up which, taken together, are making anthropology increasingly political: post-colonialism, post-communism, gender, multiculturalism, migration, citizenship,  not to forget the umbrella term of globalization. It thus makes sense to say that while anthropology was always to some extent about politics, this is even more evidently the case today.

Notable political anthropologists
Some notable political anthropologists include:

 * Marc Abélès
 * F. G. Bailey
 * Georges Balandier
 * Jeremy Boissevain
 * John Borneman
 * Robert L. Carneiro
 * Pierre Clastres
 * E. E. Evans-Pritchard
 * Meyer Fortes
 * David Graeber
 * Ted C. Lewellen
 * Carolyn Nordstrom
 * James C. Scott
 * Audra Simpson
 * Joan Vincent

title: Political anthropology


text:
BMT West End Line

The BMT West End Line is a line of the New York City Subway, serving the Brooklyn communities of Sunset Park, Borough Park, New Utrecht, Bensonhurst, Bath Beach and Coney Island. The D train operates local on the entire line at all times. Although there is a center express track and three express stations along the line, there is no regular express service.

The elevated line, originally mapped as the New Utrecht Avenue Line (though the common name prevailed after construction), replaced the surface West End Line.

Extent and service
The following services use part or all of the BMT West End Line: The line begins as a branch of the BMT Fourth Avenue Line south of the 36th Street station, and it extends through a cut described as the 38th Street cut to Ninth Avenue. Then it becomes an elevated structure over New Utrecht Avenue, before subsequently turning through private property near 79th Street into 86th Street. The line then continues over 86th Street to Stillwell Avenue and to the line's terminal at Coney Island.

History
The line was originally a surface excursion railway to Coney Island, called the Brooklyn, Bath and Coney Island Railroad, which was established in 1862, but did not reach Coney Island until 1864. Under the Dual Contracts of 1913, an elevated line was built over New Utrecht Avenue, 86th Street and Stillwell Avenue.

From 39th Street to Coney Island, the old route was abandoned as a rapid transit line, and it was turned into a surface car line. Surface car operation began on the line once the new elevated service started.

The first portion of the line, between the 36th Street station on Fourth Avenue and 62nd Street station, opened on June 24, 1916, with two tracks. On the same date, the line opened three more stations to 18th Avenue, but with only one track in service. The second track between 62nd Street and 18th Avenue opened on July 8, 1916. The line was then extended to 25th Avenue on July 29, 1916. The line opened to and fully opening to Coney Island on July 21, 1917. The original surface right-of-way was retained for use by trolley cars to provide local service and protect the company's franchise.

As part of an 18-month capital budget that took effect on January 1, 1963, the wooden platforms at the stations on the West End Line were replaced with concrete platforms.

On November 13, 1985, the New York City Transit Authority announced that an almost four-year-long renovation of the line would begin in spring 1986. As part of the project, tracks and girders would be repaired, and stations would be rehabilitated. To enable sections of the local tracks to be taken out of service for long periods of time for the work, trains would operate on the center express track and stop at local stations through the use of temporary platforms that would be constructed atop the local track.

Service history
The West End Line has had an express (on the BMT Fourth Avenue Line) service – labeled 3 in 1924 – since it opened in 1916, passing over the Manhattan Bridge and onto the BMT Broadway Line express tracks. In the late 1950s, midday trains were switched to the local Fourth Avenue tracks and through the Montague Street Tunnel, and late night and Sunday service became a shuttle between Coney Island and 36th Street. The express and local services were assigned the designations and  in the early 1960s. With the opening of the Chrystie Street Connection in late 1967, the train from Manhattan was extended to Coney Island, absorbing the T and TT (both ran express on Fourth Avenue). The TT late night and Sunday shuttle survived until 1968, when the B became full-time. It ran local on Fourth Avenue during late night hours, but express at all other times. Late night operation was cut back to a shuttle to 36th Street in 1976.

In 2001, when reconstruction of the Manhattan Bridge north tracks resumed, the B service in Brooklyn was replaced by the new train, which ran as a shuttle not only to 36th Street during nighttime hours, but also to Atlantic Avenue–Pacific Street on weekends. In 2002, reconstruction of Coney Island–Stillwell Avenue resulted in the West End Line being the only line to serve the terminal and the W was extended full-time into Manhattan, using the local Fourth Avenue tracks and Montague Street Tunnel on weekends and late nights hours.

In 2004, the Manhattan Bridge reconstruction project was completed, and the W was replaced with an extended train, running over the bridge at all hours and express on Fourth Avenue except late nights. D service was moved to the West End Line instead of returning to the Brighton Line, where it ran on from 1967 to 2001, because West End Line residents from Chinatowns in Brooklyn wanted full-time access to Grand Street, on the Sixth Avenue Line in Manhattan's Chinatown. This also eliminated the need to run late-night and/or weekend shuttles on either the Concourse Line or the West End Line.

The other service pattern was the "West End Short Line", a rush-hour local (on Fourth Avenue) service between the BMT Nassau Street Line in Lower Manhattan and 62nd Street or Bay Parkway. It became part of the TT in the early 1960s and was discontinued in 1967. In 1987, the short line service was essentially recreated when the rush-hour extension to Brooklyn was moved from the BMT Brighton Line to the West End Line terminating at Bay Parkway. It terminated at Ninth Avenue during midday hours until 1995, when it was cut back to Chambers Street. It was extended again from 2001–2004 while the Manhattan Bridge was closed for reconstruction. In 2010, as part of a series of MTA budget cuts, rush-hour M service was discontinued.

On July 19, 2019, a project to install elevators at the 62nd Street/New Utrecht Avenue station was completed. Starting on September 18, 2021, and continuing until January 3, 2022, southbound D trains terminated at Bay 50th Street so work could be completed to protect Coney Island Yard from flooding.

In popular culture
Over the years, the West End line has been featured in movies and television shows.
 * The famous chase scene from The French Connection (1971) was filmed under the West End Line.
 * The opening scene of Saturday Night Fever (1977) features Tony Manero (John Travolta) walking down 86th Street, with the West End elevated line above.
 * The opening credits of the television show Welcome Back, Kotter (1975) also featured the West End Line.

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

title: BMT West End Line


text:
Talk:ISRO

Semi-protected edit request on 23 August 2023 (2)
According to ISRO's website "ISRO was previously the Indian National Committee for Space Research (INCOSPAR), set up by the Government of India in 1962, as envisioned by Dr. Vikram A Sarabhai". Please remove reference to INCOSPAR being estabilshed under Jawaharlal Nehru as it may have been during the time of Pt. Nehru but was the vision of Dr. Sarabhai. This institution of national importance and the real people, the pioneering scientists, behind it must be recognised. Tyhwyel (talk) 17:00, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Red question icon with gradient background.svg Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. The Herald (Benison) (talk) 17:27, 23 August 2023 (UTC)
 * My request is to change - "ISRO was previously the Indian National Committee for Space Research(INCOSPAR), set up under Jawaharlal Nehru in 1962 recognising the need for space research." to "ISRO was previously the Indian National Committee for Space Research(INCOSPAR), set up by the Government of India in 1962 recognising the need for space research, as envisioned by Dr. Vikram A Sarabhai." Tyhwyel (talk) 18:28, 23 August 2023 (UTC)

About citations removal (August 2023)
I have removed some duplicate sources (per WP:CITEKILL) in one of my edits. I forgot to mention it in my edit summary so now I'm leaving the notice here. If anyone has any kind of query related to it, disscus it right here! Thank you. — 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™  💬  07:27, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

 * I have reverted your edit as you removed the content from the lead. Per WP:LEAD, the lead should summarize the whole body. TheWikiholic (talk) 09:48, 24 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I've reverted your edits back per MOS:LEADLENGTH, the previous version of lead was not a summary, they were literally reflecting the history section (word by word). Also avoid assumptions while summarising your edits. Happy editing. — 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™   💬  03:07, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Also WP:NOTDICTIONARY, WP:NOTREPOSITORY. — 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™   💬  03:10, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Whenever you get some time, read all three of them thoroughly (all of them are extremely important). Have a good time! — 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™   💬  03:19, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * This article's lead is literally a copy of its history section, and that's why I removed it (per MOS:LEADLENGTH) but you reverted my edist stating "No, can't remove this." Would you like to explain 'why this cannot be removed?'  — 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™   💬  11:59, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

,, , Can you please look into this edit by Akshadev? With this edit, he has unilaterally removed a huge chunk of a long-standing stable version from the lead with an edit summary of “Removed content that is already available in the history section.” I have reverted and left a comment here because WP:Lead and WP:Due clearly say that the lead of the article should summarise what the body covers. But Akshadev reverted my edit again with an edit summary: “WP:LEAD does not suggest us to copy-paste every single detail as a summary in an article’s lede.” I have reverted his edit again because the lead was not a copy/paste of the body and asked him to not make any unilateral changes as the lead was stable for a long time and to obtain consensus on the talk page. Akshay has reverted this again by citing MOS:LEADLENGTH. While I agree that the lead needs some copy editing, there are still many FA and FL articles with bigger leads with more readable prose than this (694 words). I think this is an attempt to remove Nehru’s name from the lead as you can see here. This was removed once Akshadev removed this part from the article.— TheWikiholic (talk) 05:18, 25 August 2023 (UTC)

 * I'd only ask you to stay civil and avoid false assumptions. — 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™   💬  05:14, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The lead should continue to have the essential details. The summary of its history is important for being mentioned on the lead because it is impossible to imagine the existence of this organization without occurrence of those mentioned events. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 12:01, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Got it. Thanks for letting me know. — 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™   💬  12:05, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:ISRO


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Carson

Ben Carson was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep

Ben Carson may well turn out to be notable - but you wouldn't know it from this article. It doesn't tell us anything about him except for his profession.
 * I love these mini-articles which raise more questions than they contain facts (which nation? Why is he an example to those particular children? Where is he Director of Pediatrics Neurosurgery?) I'd like to think this individual is notable, but the way his name has been added to the list of noted surgeons in Surgery is a little doubtful. Delete unless someone comes up with more qualified information . --Ianb 17:21, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, thanks to rewriter. --Ianb 04:51, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep; he's possibly the best-known neurosurgeon in the world. —No-One Jones (m) 20:47, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep now. RickK 20:58, Sep 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Yes, you couldn't get more well-known if your tried, once you have separated twins as successfully as this. Dieter Simon 22:27, 3 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree the article definitely needs updating but there's no way it should be deleted. --ScottyBoy900Q ∞ 18:25, 04 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


text:
Talk:Petaling Jaya

Usage of "PJ"
I propose that future edits of this article use the proper name "Petaling Jaya" instead as "PJ" except in certain common place names such as "PJ North" so that it is consistent through-out the artice.

It would be nice if somebody could list all the divisions in PJ (the sections i.e Sec 1, SS2 etc). As I dont live in PJ, have limited knowledge about it. Anyway, it's one of the hallmark of PJ if compared to all the other cities in Malaysia. Thanks --Bukhrin 15:46, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

590 industries??
Removed "Petaling Jaya provides facilities to more than 590 industries such as Ford, Dunlop, Johnson & Johnson, Hilton Hotel and Siemens. "

Few issues with this one

1) provides facilities --- can we change this to "plays host"??? 2) 590 industries --- What is this number based on? Are you sure you don't mean "companies" or "industrial companies"?? example, Ford is not an industry, mooring is....???

Correction regarding history
The information about PJ's first 4 schools may not be accurate. This was probably picked up by the Wikipedia author from the Star Metro article of 4 May 2007, which has other inaccuracies including the Section 14 mosque being the first mosque in PJ and Jaya being the first supermarket.

The first mosque is that in Section 3, serving the Muslim residents of the Kawasan Melayu.

The first school in PJ is likely the Jalan 10 primary school in PJ Old Town. Other early schools include La Salle and the Assunta primary school. Both La Salle as well as Assunta secondary school came much later. Sri Petaling or SSP is definitely not from PJ's early days. SSP was established as late as 1969 or 1970. Other schools from PJ's 1960s probably include the Petaling Garden Girls School, the Jalan Selangor Primary School, the Methodist Primary School as well as Catholic High School.

218.111.48.241 20:36, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

We must also not forget about the Tamil primary school in Section 8 and the Chinese school in Old Town. I believe both of them existed since the 1960s. 58.26.54.142 03:08, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

A — Preceding unsigned comment added by 175.140.177.238 (talk) 08:48, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:LogoMBPJ.jpg
Image:LogoMBPJ.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:16, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Jaya Supermarket
Is it worth writing so much about Jaya Supermarket?I think the section should be shortened to 1 or 2 sentences.Wai Hong (talk) 07:13, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Removed Otomotif College
I've removed Otomotif College from this section. The content is self-serving, unverifiable, and written like an ad. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leemeng (talk • contribs) 01:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

palajaya
i've never heard anything about Palajaya?Can someone provide a source to support the claim that Pj was named after Palanivel?Wai Hong (talk) 13:20, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I've removed the Palajaya and Palanivel nonsense. It appears to be a prank. Leemeng (talk) 15:54, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Grammar
"Mostly each month average rainfall receives more than 200 mm (7.9 in). " - Not clear what is meant.64.53.191.77 (talk) 02:40, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Badly Written
This article is so badly written. It needs a complete overhaul, it lacks good grammar, intelligently written content, and focus. This page as with alot of pages about Malaysia is utterly despicable. Jdbepono (talk) 13:47, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 19:21, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Skyline of Asia Jaya in Petaling Jaya City.jpg

To add to article
Basic information to add to this article: the etymology/origin of the name "Petaling Jaya." With such a detailed article, how could the author(s) possibly have forgotten to include something so fundamental? 173.88.246.138 (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

title: Talk:Petaling Jaya


text: Category:Towns in Sweden

title: Category:Towns in Sweden


text:
Gazette van Detroit

The Gazette van Detroit ("Gazette of Detroit") was a Flemish newspaper in Dutch and English, published in the United States since 13 August 1914. It was aimed at Flemish immigrants and their descendants living in the United States and Canada, but latterly also some subscribers in Europe. Its parent company was a 501(c)(3) U.S. Internal Revenue Service recognized non-profit called Belgian Publishing Inc. Its final chairman was David Baeckelandt. The newspaper was published by "Belgian Publishing Inc." at 18740 13 Mile Road in Roseville, Michigan.

The Gazette van Detroit first appeared as a weekly newspaper, later it became bi-weekly, and finally monthly. It had become an online-only paper before its ultimate demise. It was the longest lasting Belgian American newspaper, outlasting the Gazette van Moline at Moline, Illinois (1907–40). The newspaper's original mission statement, published in an article entitled "The Light for the People" (Het Licht voor 't Volk) set forward the newspaper's aim:

"'The Gazette van Detroit is an unaffiliated, apolitical, non-profit organization written by and for North Americans of Flemish descent and Dutch-speaking Belgians. Its goal is to serve as a cultural bridge between North America and the Dutch-speaking region of Belgium. Simultaneously, the Gazette seeks cordial relations with all ethnicities and nationalities.'"

By 2004, celebrating its ninetieth birthday, it was still a popular newspaper among North Americans of Flemish ancestry and their relatives in Belgium. In 2006, the Flemish Government donated 12,500 euro to ensure the Gazette van Detroit could continue its operations. The newspaper finally folded in 2018.

The Gazette van Detroit and its parent, The Belgian Publishing Company, ceased publishing and operation on December 31, 2018. All content and holdings have been transferred to the Genealogical Society of Flemish Americans (GSFA).

title: Gazette van Detroit


text:
Talk:Gazette van Detroit

Untitled
Does the Gazette van Detroit not have its own website? All I can see in google are sites mentioning it. Odd. Nadavspi 17:27, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Gazette van Detroit. 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/20040818111157/http://millennium.arts.kuleuven.ac.be/F206/amdoc2002/gazette_van_Detroit/ to http://millennium.arts.kuleuven.ac.be/F206/amdoc2002/gazette_van_Detroit/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928091745/http://jsp.vlaamsparlement.be/docs/handelingen_commissies/2005-2006/c0m175bui11-14032006.pdf to http://jsp.vlaamsparlement.be/docs/handelingen_commissies/2005-2006/c0m175bui11-14032006.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928090027/http://jsp.vlaamsparlement.be/website/htm-vrg/427230.html to http://jsp.vlaamsparlement.be/website/htm-vrg/427230.html
 * Added tag to http://www.flandersnews.be/

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) 19:07, 20 December 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Gazette van Detroit


text:
Missile Technology Control Regime

The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) is a multilateral export control regime. It is an informal political understanding among 35 member states that seek to limit the proliferation of missiles and missile technology. The regime was formed in 1987 by the G-7 industrialized countries. The MTCR seeks to limit the risks of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by controlling exports of goods and technologies that could make a contribution to delivery systems (other than manned aircraft) for such weapons. In this context, the MTCR places particular focus on rockets and unmanned aerial vehicles capable of delivering a payload of at least 500 kg to a range of at least 300 km and on equipment, software, and technology for such systems.

The MTCR is not a treaty and does not impose any legally binding obligations on partners (members). Rather, it is an informal political understanding among states that seek to limit the proliferation of missiles and missile technology.

Guidelines and the Equipment, Software and Technology Annex
The Regime’s documents include the MTCR Guidelines and the Equipment, Software and Technology Annex. The Guidelines define the purpose of the MTCR and provide the overall structure and rules to guide the member countries and those adhering unilaterally to the Guidelines. The Equipment, Software and Technology Annex is designed to assist in implementing export controls on MTCR Annex items. The Annex is divided into “Category I” and “Category II” items. It includes a broad range of equipment and technology, both military and dual-use, that are relevant to missile development, production, and operation. Partner countries exercise restraint in the consideration of all transfers of items contained in the Annex. All such transfers are considered on a case by case basis.

Greatest restraint is applied to what are known as Category I items. These items include complete rocket systems (including ballistic missiles, space launch vehicles and sounding rockets) and unmanned air vehicle systems (including cruise missiles systems, target and reconnaissance drones) with capabilities exceeding a 300km/500kg range/payload threshold; production facilities for such systems; and major sub-systems including rocket stages, re-entry vehicles, rocket engines, guidance systems and warhead mechanisms.

The remainder of the annex is regarded as Category II, which includes complete rocket systems (including ballistic missiles systems, space launch vehicles and sounding rockets) and unmanned air vehicles (including cruise missile systems, target drones, and reconnaissance drones) not covered in item I, capable of a maximum range equal to or greater than, 300km. Also included are a wide range of equipment, material, and technologies, most of which have uses other than for missiles capable of delivering WMD. While still agreeing to exercise restraint, partners have greater flexibility in the treatment of Category II transfer applications.

The MTCR Guidelines specifically state that the Regime is “not designed to impede national space programs or international cooperation in such programs as long as such programs could not contribute to delivery systems for weapons of mass destruction.” MTCR partners are careful with SLV equipment and technology transfers, however, since the technology used in an SLV is virtually identical to that used in a ballistic missile, which poses genuine potential for missile proliferation.

History
The Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) was established in April 1987 by the G7 countries: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States. It was created to curb the spread of unmanned delivery systems for nuclear weapons, specifically systems which can carry a payload of 500 kg for 300 km.

The MTCR applies to exports to members and non-members. An aide-mémoire attached to the agreement says that it does not supersede prior agreements, which NATO members say allows the supply of Category 1 systems between NATO members. An example is the export by the United States of Trident missiles to the United Kingdom for nuclear-weapons delivery.

At the annual meeting in Oslo from 29 June to 2 July 1992, chaired by Sten Lundbo, it was agreed to expand the MTCR's scope to include nonproliferation of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) for weapons of mass destruction. Prohibited materials are divided into two categories, which are outlined in the MTCR Equipment, Software, and Technology Annex. Thirty-five nations are members, with India joining on 27 June 2016.

According to the Arms Control Association, the MTCR has been successful in helping to slow (or stop) several ballistic missile programs: "Argentina, Egypt, and Iraq abandoned their joint Condor II ballistic missile program. Brazil and South Africa also shelved or eliminated missile or space launch vehicle programs. Some former Warsaw Pact countries, such as Poland and the Czech Republic, destroyed their ballistic missiles, in part, to better their chances of joining MTCR." In October 1994, the MTCR member states established a "no undercut" policy: if one member denies the sale of technology to another country, all members must do likewise.

China originally viewed the MTCR as a discriminatory measure by Western governments, which sold sophisticated military aircraft while restricting sales of competing ballistic missiles. It verbally agreed that it would adhere to the MTCR in November 1991, and included the assurance in a letter from its foreign minister in February 1992. China reiterated its pledge in the October 1994 US-China joint statement. In their October 1997 joint statement, the United States and China said that they agreed "to build on the 1994 Joint Statement on Missile Nonproliferation." The Missiles and Missile-related Items and Technologies Export Control List, a formal regulation, was issued in August 2002. The following year, the MTCR chair invited China to participate. China requested to join the MTCR in 2004, but membership was not offered because of concerns about the country's export-control standards. Israel, Romania and Slovakia have agreed to follow MTCR export rules, although they are not yet members.

The regime has its limitations; member countries have been known to clandestinely violate the rules. Some of these countries, with varying degrees of foreign assistance, have deployed medium-range ballistic missiles which can travel more than 1,000 km and are researching missiles with greater ranges; Israel and China have deployed strategic nuclear SLCMs, ICBMs and satellite-launch systems. Countries which are not MTCR members buy and sell on the global arms market; North Korea is currently viewed as the primary source of ballistic-missile proliferation in the world, and China has supplied ballistic missiles and technology to Pakistan. China supplied DF-3A IRBMs to Saudi Arabia in 1988 before it informally agreed to follow MTCR guidelines. Israel cannot export its Shavit space-launch system due to its non-member MTCR status, although the Clinton administration allowed an import waiver for US companies to buy the Shavit in 1994.

Over 20 countries have ballistic missile systems. The International Code of Conduct against Ballistic Missile Proliferation (ICOC), also known as the Hague Code of Conduct, was established in 2002. The code, which calls for restraint and care in the proliferation of ballistic missile systems capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction, has 119 members. Its mission is similar to the MTCR's, an export group.

India applied for membership in June 2015 with support from Russia, France and the United States, and became a member on 27 June 2016.

Pakistan is not a member of the MTCR. Although it has expressed a desire to join the group, it has not submitted an application. The Pakistani government has pledged to adhere to MTCR guidelines, and analysts believe that the country is doing so.

In 2020, the U.S. government announced that it would reinterpret its implementation of the MTCR to expedite sales of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) to other countries. The revised U.S. policy will reinterpret how the MTCR applies to drones which travel at speeds under 800 km/h, such as the Predator and Reaper drones (made by General Atomics) and the Global Hawk drone (made by Northrop Grumman).

Members
The MTCR has 35 members.

 * 🇦🇷 Argentina, 1993
 * 🇦🇺 Australia, 1990
 * 🇦🇹 Austria, 1991
 * 🇧🇪 Belgium, 1990
 * 🇧🇬 Bulgaria, 2004
 * 🇧🇷 Brazil, 1995
 * 🇨🇦 Canada, 1987
 * 🇨🇿 Czech Republic, 1998
 * Denmark, 1990
 * 🇫🇮 Finland, 1991
 * 🇫🇷 France, 1987
 * 🇩🇪 Germany, 1987
 * Greece, 1992
 * 🇭🇺 Hungary, 1993
 * 🇮🇸 Iceland, 1993
 * 🇮🇳 India, 2016
 * Ireland, 1992
 * 🇮🇹 Italy, 1987
 * 🇯🇵 Japan, 1987
 * 🇱🇺 Luxembourg, 1990
 * Netherlands, 1990
 * New Zealand, 1991
 * 🇳🇴 Norway, 1990
 * 🇵🇱 Poland, 1997
 * Portugal, 1992
 * Republic of Korea, 2001
 * 🇷🇺 Russian Federation, 1995
 * South Africa, 1995
 * 🇪🇸 Spain, 1990
 * 🇸🇪 Sweden, 1991
 * Switzerland, 1992
 * 🇹🇷 Turkey, 1997
 * 🇺🇦 Ukraine, 1998
 * United Kingdom, 1987
 * 🇺🇸 United States, 1987

Non-members pledging to adhere to MTCR include:

 * 🇨🇳 China, 2002
 * 🇮🇱 Israel
 * 🇷🇴 Romania
 * 🇸🇰 Slovakia

title: Missile Technology Control Regime


text:
.nz

.nz is the Internet country code top-level domain (ccTLD) for New Zealand. It is administered by InternetNZ, with oversight and dispute resolution handled by the Domain Name Commission Limited (DNCL). Registrations are processed via authorised registrars. there were 750,200 registered .nz domains.

History
As with many long-standing domain registries, the registry was maintained informally for some time. The first formally recognised administrative organisation was the University of Waikato until the responsibility was delegated to InternetNZ when it was formed in 1995.

Prior to the current structure, the registry operator of .nz was Domainz. Historically, Domainz was a subsidiary of InternetNZ which also operated as a registrar and vendor of other add-on services such as DNS. This combination of a natural monopoly (the registry activities) and vertical integration (the registrar and other services) was seen by some as restricting competition so InternetNZ moved to separate the provision of registry services into a separate organisation with strong oversight. The final part of this transition process was the sale of Domainz to Melbourne IT in August 2003.

From 1 April 2008 the "Office of the Domain Name Commissioner" (several employees of InternetNZ, including the Domain Name Commissioner herself) became the "Domain Name Commission Limited", a subsidiary company of InternetNZ.

Registry software and protocol
The Shared Registry System (SRS) was initially developed in 2002, and provided .nz registry services until November 2022. In January 2004 the source code to the SRS system was released to the public under a GPL license. Since 2010 the SRS also supported the standard Extensible Provisioning Protocol (EPP).

In September 2019 InternetNZ announced their intent to replace the SRS and that the new system would not include the SRS protocol. The transition to a closed-source commercial registry product provided by the Canadian Internet Registration Authority was completed on the 1st of November, 2022. This transition replaced both the public facing WHOIS service and the APIs used by registrars to interact with the registry.

Māori domain names
On 22 July 2010, the Domain Name Commission announced that .nz domain names with macron vowels (ā, ē, ī, ō and ū) would be available from the following week to allow Māori language words to be correctly represented in domain names.

Second-level domain changes

 * .geek.nz - This second level domain was approved by the council of InternetNZ on 5 July 2003.
 * .kiwi.nz - This second level domain was approved on 24 August 2012 and made available for registrations on 11 September 2012.

Second-level domains
There are a number of second-level domains that identify whether the user is a company, a non-commercial organisation, government body or other classification.

In October 2013, InternetNZ decided to allow domain names to be registered at the second level in the .nz domain name space, aligning the .nz domain name space with a majority of other top level domains that already allow registrations directly at the second level. The second level domain names were launched with a sunrise period from 30 September 2014 to 30 March 2015 (to allow people with similar domains to register the shorter version). From 30 March 2015 .nz domain names were available to everyone.

The early New Zealand second-level domains ac.nz, .co.nz and .govt.nz were based on those used in the UK. At the time it was considered desirable that the names were not in use as first-level domains, so .edu.nz, .com.nz and .gov.nz were rejected. There are also sub-level domains unique to New Zealand, such as iwi.nz for Māori iwi and the broader maori.nz for other Māori organisations, and geek.nz for "geeks".

The following second-level domains are in use with their official descriptions. Since only some of the domains are moderated, it is possible to register outside the area intended.

Unmoderated

 * .nz – First level NZ domain, general use
 * .ac.nz – Tertiary educational institutions and related organisations
 * .co.nz – Organisations pursuing commercial aims and purposes
 * .geek.nz – For people who are concentrative, technically skilled, and imaginative who are generally adept with computers
 * .gen.nz – Individuals and other organisations not covered elsewhere
 * .kiwi.nz – For people or organisations that associate with being 'Kiwi' (the colloquial term for New Zealanders)
 * .maori.nz – Māori people, groups, and organisations
 * .net.nz – Organisations and service providers directly related to the NZ Internet
 * .org.nz – Not-for-profit organisations
 * .school.nz – Primary, secondary and pre-schools and related organisations

Moderated

 * .cri.nz – Crown Research Institutes
 * .govt.nz – National, regional and local government organisations operating with statutory powers. The government registrar, DNS.govt.nz controls registration; a government portal operates at www.govt.nz
 * .health.nz – Health organisations
 * .iwi.nz – Traditional Māori iwi (tribes), hapū, or Taura here groups
 * .mil.nz – The military organisation of the New Zealand government, the New Zealand Defence Force
 * .parliament.nz – Reserved for parliamentary agencies, offices of parliament, and parliamentary political parties and their elected members; main website operates at www.parliament.nz

Previously used

 * archie.nz – used for an Archie search engine server operated by the University of Waikato until the mid-1990s.

title: .nz


text:
User talk:Hmmm~enwiki

 If you wish to talk to me on a subjet that is not discussed in my talk page Please use the + sign located at the top of this page.You may prefer talking to me at my Hebrew talk page Here

Orphaned non-free media (Image:HamasLogo.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:HamasLogo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:14, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Non-free rationale for File:One east caribbean dollar.gif
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:One east caribbean dollar.gif. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:53, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

The developer team at Wikimedia is making some changes to how accounts work, as part of our on-going efforts to provide new and better tools for our users like cross-wiki notifications. These changes will mean you have the same account name everywhere. This will let us give you new features that will help you edit and discuss better, and allow more flexible user permissions for tools. One of the side-effects of this is that user accounts will now have to be unique across all 900 Wikimedia wikis. See the announcement for more information.

Unfortunately, your account clashes with another account also called Hmmm. To make sure that both of you can use all Wikimedia projects in future, we have reserved the name Hmmm~enwiki that only you will have. If you like it, you don't have to do anything. If you do not like it, you can pick out a different name. If you think you might own all of the accounts with this name and this message is in error, please visit Special:MergeAccount to check and attach all of your accounts to prevent them from being renamed.

Your account will still work as before, and you will be credited for all your edits made so far, but you will have to use the new account name when you log in.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 00:35, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Hmmm~enwiki


text:
Weight transfer

Weight transfer and load transfer are two expressions used somewhat confusingly to describe two distinct effects:

 * the change in load borne by different wheels of even perfectly rigid vehicles during acceleration
 * the change in center of mass (CoM) location relative to the wheels because of suspension compliance or cargo shifting or sloshing

In the automobile industry, weight transfer customarily refers to the change in load borne by different wheels during acceleration. This would be more properly referred to as load transfer, and that is the expression used in the motorcycle industry, while weight transfer on motorcycles, to a lesser extent on automobiles, and cargo movement on either is due to a change in the CoM location relative to the wheels. This article uses this latter pair of definitions.

Load transfer
In wheeled vehicles, load transfer is the measurable change of load borne by different wheels during acceleration (both longitudinal and lateral). This includes braking, and deceleration (which is an acceleration at a negative rate). No motion of the center of mass relative to the wheels is necessary, and so load transfer may be experienced by vehicles with no suspension at all. Load transfer is a crucial concept in understanding vehicle dynamics. The same is true in bikes, though only longitudinally.

Cause
The major forces that accelerate a vehicle occur at the tires' contact patches. Since these forces are not directed through the vehicle's CoM, one or more moments are generated whose forces are the tires' traction forces at pavement level, the other one (equal but opposed) is the mass inertia located at the CoM and the moment arm is the distance from pavement surface to CoM. It is these moments that cause variation in the load distributed between the tires. Often this is interpreted by the casual observer as a pitching or rolling motion of the vehicles body. A perfectly rigid vehicle, without suspension that would not exhibit pitching or rolling of the body, still undergoes load transfer. However, the pitching and rolling of the body of a non-rigid vehicle adds some (small) weight transfer due to the (small) CoM horizontal displacement with respect to the wheel's axis suspension vertical travel and also due to deformation of the tires i.e. contact patch displacement relative to wheel.

Lowering the CoM towards the ground is one method of reducing load transfer. As a result load transfer is reduced in both the longitudinal and lateral directions. Another method of reducing load transfer is by increasing the wheel spacings. Increasing the vehicle's wheelbase (length) reduces longitudinal load transfer while increasing the vehicle's track (width) reduces lateral load transfer. Most high performance automobiles are designed to sit as low as possible and usually have an extended wheelbase and track.

One way to calculate the effect of load transfer, keeping in mind that this article uses "load transfer" to mean the phenomenon commonly referred to as "weight transfer" in the automotive world, is with the so-called "weight transfer equation":

 * $$\Delta \mathrm{Weight}_\mathrm{front} = a\frac{h}{b}m$$ or $$\Delta \mathrm{Weight}_\mathrm{front} = \frac{a}{g} \frac{h}{b}w$$

where $$\Delta \mathrm{Weight}_\mathrm{front}$$ is the change in load borne by the front wheels, $$a$$ is the longitudinal acceleration, $$g$$ is the acceleration of gravity, $$h$$ is the center of mass height, $$b$$ is the wheelbase, $$m$$ is the total vehicle mass, and $$w$$ is the total vehicle weight.

Weight transfer involves the actual (relatively small) movement of the vehicle CoM relative to the wheel axes due to displacement of the chassis as the suspension complies, or of cargo or liquids within the vehicle, which results in a redistribution of the total vehicle load between the individual tires.

Center of mass
Weight transfer occurs as the vehicle's CoM shifts during automotive maneuvers. Acceleration causes the sprung mass to rotate about a geometric axis resulting in relocation of the CoM. Front-back weight transfer is proportional to the change in the longitudinal location of the CoM to the vehicle's wheelbase, and side-to-side weight transfer (summed over front and rear) is proportional to the ratio of the change in the CoM's lateral location to the vehicle's track.

Liquids, such as fuel, readily flow within their containers, causing changes in the vehicle's CoM. As fuel is consumed, not only does the position of the CoM change, but the total weight of the vehicle is also reduced.

By way of example, when a vehicle accelerates, a weight transfer toward the rear wheels can occur. An outside observer might witness this as the vehicle visibly leans to the back, or squats. Conversely, under braking, weight transfer toward the front of the car can occur. Under hard braking it might be clearly visible even from inside the vehicle as the nose dives toward the ground (most of this will be due to load transfer). Similarly, during changes in direction (lateral acceleration), weight transfer to the outside of the direction of the turn can occur.

Weight transfer is generally of far less practical importance than load transfer, for cars and SUVs at least. For instance in a 0.9g turn, a car with a track of 1650 mm and a CoM height of 550 mm will see a load transfer of 30% of the vehicle weight, that is the outer wheels will see 60% more load than before, and the inners 60% less. Total available grip will drop by around 6% as a result of this load transfer. At the same time, the CoM of the vehicle will typically move laterally and vertically, relative to the contact patch by no more than 30 mm, leading to a weight transfer of less than 2%, and a corresponding reduction in grip of 0.01%.

Traction
Load transfer causes the available traction at all four wheels to vary as the car brakes, accelerates, or turns. This bias to one pair of tires doing more "work" than the other pair results in a net loss of total available traction. The net loss can be attributed to the phenomenon known as tire load sensitivity.

An exception is during positive acceleration when the engine power is driving two or fewer wheels. In this situation where all the tires are not being utilized load transfer can be advantageous. As such, the most powerful cars are almost never front wheel drive, as the acceleration itself causes the front wheels' traction to decrease. This is why sports cars usually have either rear wheel drive or all wheel drive (and in the all wheel drive case, the power tends to be biased toward the rear wheels under normal conditions).

Rollover
If (lateral) load transfer reaches the tire loading on one end of a vehicle, the inside wheel on that end will lift, causing a change in handling characteristic. If it reaches half the weight of the vehicle it will start to roll over. Some large trucks will roll over before skidding, while passenger vehicles and small trucks usually roll over only when they leave the road. Fitting racing tires to a tall or narrow vehicle and then driving it hard may lead to rollover.

title: Weight transfer


text:
John Farey Jr.

John Farey Jr. (20 March 1791 – 17 July 1851) was an English mechanical engineering, consulting engineer and patent agent, known for his pioneering contributions in the field of mechanical engineering.

As consulting engineer Farey worked for many well-known inventors of the later Industrial Revolution, and was a witness to a number of parliamentary enquiries, inquests and court cases, and on occasion acted as an arbitrator. He was polymathic in his interests and contributed text and drawings to a number of periodicals and encyclopaedias.

Farey is also remembered as the first English inventor of the ellipsograph, an instrument used by draughtsmen to inscribe ellipses.

Youth and education
Farey was the eldest son of John Farey Sr. (1766–1826), the geologist, and Sophia Hubert (1770–1830). He was the older brother of Joseph Farey (1796–1829), who also became a known mechanical engineer and draughtsman and member of the Institution of Civil Engineers in 1822. He remained in the shadow of his older brother and died young.

From 1791 to 1802 he grew up in Woburn, Bedfordshire, where his father was stationed as surveyor and land agent for Francis Russell, 5th Duke of Bedford. Back in London he might have received training at the school of William Nicholson, established in 1799 in London's Soho Square. He did later on work together with Nicholson on patent assignments. From 1804 to 1806 he studied the machinery and processes in manufacturing factories in and around London.

Early career
At the age of fourteen Farey was commenced to make drawings for the illustrative plates of Rees's Cyclopædia and the 'Edinburgh' encyclopedias, 'Tilloch's Magazine,' Gregory's 'Mechanics' and 'Mechanical Dictionary,' the 'Pantalogia,' and many other scientific works. He edited some of these, and contributed to others.

For the Rees's Cyclopædia, which appeared serially between 1802 and 1820, Farey wrote several articles, including the articles on Machinery, Manufactures, Mechanics, Mill, Steam Engine, Water etc.

He came into the possession of the manuscript and drawings of the engineer John Smeaton and made extensive use of them in his writing and drawing. He was involved in the production of the second volume of Smeaton's Reports (1812), the plates engraved by Wilson Lowry.

In 1819 he went to Russia for a month, where be was engaged as a civil engineer in the construction of ironworks.

Later career

In 1821 Farey stepped down in the consulting engineering family business in favour of his younger brother, Joseph Farey (1796–1829). Farey accepted an appointment at the lace manufactory of John Heathcoat in Devonshire, which, however, he gave up in 1823,

In 1825 took the engineering direction of Messrs. Marshall's flax-mills at Leeds; this position he was obliged to relinquish in 1826 in consequence of the failure of his brother's health and the necessity for his return to London, where he resumed his profession of consulting engineer, and from that time was engaged in most of the novel inventions, important trials in litigated patent cases, and scientific investigations of the period.

Farey joined the Institution of Civil Engineers as a member in 1826, served several offices in the council, and always took great interest in its welfare. His residence, 67 Great Guilford Street, Russell Square, London, was burnt down in 1850, when considerable portions of his library and documents were injured or destroyed.

His health, which had been failing since the death of his wife, now received an additional shock, and he died of disease of the heart at the Common, Sevenoaks, Kent, on 17 July 1851. and was buried on the western side of Highgate Cemetery (plot no.3864). The grave, which is behind that of John Harrison in the dissenters section, no longer has a decipherable inscription.

Instruments for drawing
The necessity of accomplishing drawings with accuracy in a limited time led Farey to invent in 1807 an instrument for making perspective drawings, for which he received a silver medal from the Society of Arts in 1814. In an accompanying letter printed in the Transactions, Farey explained in general:

"WITH this you will receive an instrument of my invention for drawing lines converging to a distant point. This I have found extremely useful in making perspective drawings, as it gives an artist the means of making a drawing upon a. board or table of moderate dimensions though the vanishing points fall at ever so great a distance; for the instrument is quite general in its proper ties, being capable of drawing parallel lines, which may therefore be considered as converging to a point at an infinite distance, or it may in a moment be altered to draw to a point within a few inches distance. I shall be obliged to you to communicate this to the Society. The first instrument of this kind, I made in the year 1807, and I have had it in constant use ever since, as it applies with advantage to almost every perspective drawing; l have been induced to present it to the Society, at the request of several members..."

An additional four page long explanation of Farey's "Instrument for drawing Lines to an inaccessible center" in Plate 2 (see image fig. 4, 5.) started explaining: "This instrument acts upon the drawing board, or table, on which the paper is fastened, with as much facility and as little attention as a T square does, when drawing parallel lines, and will be found extremely useful to those who draw buildings, etc. in perspective, as the points to which the lines for such drawings should converge, will often fall at a distance of I2 and 15 feet from the picture, so as to render it impracticable to employ rulers of sufficient length to reach the points, and there is, except this instrument and Mr. Nicholson’s lately invented, no other practicable method of drawing such lines. The instrument consists of three rulers, A B and D, figs 4, which are united by a common centre-screw a, and have a thumb screw d, which fixes them fast at any angle at which they may be placed...etc, etc."

In 1813 Farey also constructed a machine for drawing ellipses, the so-called ellipsograph. The device became so popular, that the 6th edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica (1824) included an article about it, which started with: "ELLIPTOGRAPH, an instrument for drawing ellipses. The trammel is an instrument that has long been known and used for describing ellipses. On the principle of the trammel, Mr Farey constructed his elliptograph in a form much more commodious for drawing. Mr Farey's elliptograph is represented at fig. 5. Plate LXXIX. The circle A slides between the two parallel rulers D E. The circle 13 slides between two parallel rulers FG, at right angles to the former. In this way, if a line, joining the centres of the circles, is made to revolve, M, the extremity of that line, will describe an ellipse in the same manner, as the extremity E of the line C D E, fig. 1, does in the trammel. The elliptograph may be considered as a trammel, in which the pins C and D, rig. 1, are enlarged into the circles A and B, fig. 5...etc, etc."

The drawing device was described in many other publications in his days, for example in Smith's The Mechanic; Or, Compendium of Practical Inventions, 1825 (see image), and it was described in the Edinburgh Encyclopædia (1832) along with four other devices by Farey. For this invention the gold medal of the same society was awarded hun.

Steam-engine indicator and indicator-diagram
At the construction of ironworks in Russia since 1819 he first saw a steam-engine indicator; on his return to England he employed McNaught to make indicators for general use, and thenceforth he was continually requested to use the instrument in disputed cases of the power of steam-engines.

A Treatise on the Steam Engine, 1827
Farey wrote the two-volume work A Treatise on the Steam Engine, which has been described as the finest work on technology published in the Industrial Revolution.

The first volume covered the early developments of steam pumps, atmospheric engines and low pressure steam engines through the eighteenth century. In particular, the work of Savery, Newcomen, Smeaton and Watt. It was published in 1827. Rekers & Koetsier (2007) commented on this work:

"Of Farey’s work, only the first of two volumes was published at the time, which dealt mostly with the history of steam engines up to the death of James Watt. Farey described all sorts of engines, but gave special attention to those designed by Smeaton. Besides this, the volume also included sections on the principles of mechanics and the design of engines, avoiding mathematical formulas as most engineers at the time would not have been able to understand them, according to Farey..."

The second volume covered the development of high-pressure steam and the simple expansion steam engine from 1800, by Trevithick and Woolf. This volume was never published; at the time of Farey's death it had been typeset, but not sold.

The book was never sold as the sheets were pulped. It was reprinted in facsimile since from the author's proof, with hand-written corrections by the author, that is now in the National Reference Library of Science and Invention.

Selected publications

 * Farey, John. A treatise on the steam engine : historical, practical, and descriptive. 1827

 * Articles, a selection:
 * Farey, John. Contributions to Rees's Cyclopædia, etc., 1808–1818
 * Farey, John. "Force of Steam," in: Transactions of the Institution of Civil Engineers, (1836), i. p. 85-94, p. 111-16.

 * Articles about
 * Charles Mamby (ed.). "John Farey," obituary in: Minutes of Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Institution of Civil Engineers (Great Britain), 1852. p. 100-102
 * Alec Skempton. "Farey, Jr., John," in: A Biographical Dictionary of Civil Engineers in Great Britain and Ireland: 1500–1830. 2002. p. 223-224
 * Woolrich, A. P., "John Farey and the Smeaton Manuscripts", History of Technology vol 10, 1985, pp. 181–216
 * Woolrich, A. P., "John Farey, Jr., technical author and draughtsman: his contribution to Rees's Cyclopadia". Industrial Archaeology Review, 20, (1998), 49-68
 * Woolrich, A. P., "John Farey and his Treatise on the Steam Engine of 1827", History of Technology, vol 22, 2000, pp. 63–106

In 1831, Farey gave evidence to a Parliamentary select committee on steam carriages, which is included in the committee's report, published in 1834.

title: John Farey Jr.


text:
Talk:Executive Office of the President of the United States

Deleted sentence
I deleted the following sentence from the first paragraph of the article: "In contrast to the agencies of the Federal government such as the United States Department of State, all of the people within the EOP serve with the President and when there is a new President, the entire office is reconstituted." In actuality, there are hundreds of regular government employees (i.e., not political appointees) employed by the Executive Office of the President. Many of those employees stay at the EOP across administrations, even across administrations of different political parties. - Walkiped 17:38, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No More Condi!
Condi Rice resigned her post as National Security Advisor to become Secretary of State. I'll remove her and add Stephen Hadley, her successsor. Someone should check to see what other positions have changed now that Bush is in his second term. --Boetron 16:09, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

EOP power
Hey, can anyone let me know is the power of EOP confined to executive functions? Do the executives have the legislative power? and is it those executives = the heads of govt. depts. in the US? and is it the executives who choose the cabinet members?

I would be thankful for your generous help! scarlett_tong 14:06, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I think you should read Federal Government of the United States to help answer your question. In the US the legislative and executive functions are strictly separated by the US Constitution. The United States Congress has full legislative authority. The President possesses the "executive power" as defined in Article Two of the United States Constitution. The EOP assists the President in developing his agenda and carrying it out. EOP staff members advise the President of legislative, legal, military, economic, and other matters. Additionally, they promote the President's ideas in Congress, design media campaigns, and reflect the perspective of the Office of the President wherever the President asks them to. They are not members of the Cabinet. Cabinet members are appointed by the President and approved by the Senate. Cabinet members direct Federal Executive Departments. Reading the Constitution of the United States may also help answer your questions. Ryanluck 16:49, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Difference between EOP and White House Staff
I believe this should be under consideration for removal:
 * 1) White House Chief of Staff
 * 2) Deputy White House Chief of Staff
 * 3) White House Press Secretary
 * 4) White House Office of Presidential Communications
 * 5) White House Office of Presidential Speechwriting
 * 6) White House Office

Those are the personal staff of the President and therefore report to him whereas the EOP offices are formed by Congress and controlled by them through appointments/etc. The EOP has to report to Congress, the President, and the people the represent. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yoshi9143 (talk • contribs) on 20 December 2006.

Dear fellow editors: It appears that all the above, including the "White House Office," are part of the Executive Office of the President. It's unclear what editor Yoshi9143 means by the phrase the "EOP has to report to Congress." Certainly there may be various specific statutes requiring various components or employees of the Executive Office of the President to report to Congress on various matters, like maybe the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (I haven't researched the matter). However, the Congressional "control" over EOP offices with respect to "appointments" would presumably be limited to those positions which require Senate approval (and the number of those positions would be relatively few). (By the way, off the top of my head, I'm not aware of any position in the Executive Office of the President for which the Congress itself makes the appointment.) Anyway, as best I can tell, all the offices and positions listed above are indeed part of the Executive Office of the President. Yours, Famspear 22:39, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Response: The link provided by Famspear makes no mention of the
 * 1) White House Chief of Staff
 * 2) Deputy White House Chief of Staff
 * 3) White House Press Secretary
 * 4) White House Office of Presidential Communications
 * 5) White House Office of Presidential Speechwriting

Furthermore in "American Government Continuity and Change (2000)", Karen O'Connor and Larry Sabato separate the Executive Office of President and White House Staff but they both remain under the Presidential Establishment (pages 282-283), which shows the difference between the Staff and EOP.

Another key difference: For EOP:

"Although the president appoints the members of each of these bodies, they must still perform their tasks in accordance with congressional legislation. Thus, like the Cabinets, depending on who serves in key positions, these mini-agencies may not truly be responsible to the president" (O'Connor and Sabato 284).

For White House Staff:

"often more directly responsible to the president are the members of the White House staff: the personal assistants to the president, including senior aides, their deputies, assistants with professional duties, and clerical administrative aides. As personal assistants, these advisers are not subject to Senate confirmation, nor do they have divided loyalties" (O'Connor and Sabato 284).

Another important difference is the EOP was created by FDR in 1939 whereas the White House Staff has existed before then such as Andrew Jackson's Kitchen Cabinet.

All of the following are considered the White House staff and I believe should be separated from this EOP article:

 * 1) White House Chief of Staff
 * 2) Deputy White House Chief of Staff
 * 3) White House Press Secretary
 * 4) White House Office of Presidential Communications
 * 5) White House Office of Presidential Speechwriting

Originally the White House Office was included on that list because ambiguity.

END Yoshi9143 03:48, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

 * Dear Yoshi9143: I have reviewed the White House web site at www.whitehouse.gov and various other materials and I cannot find any support for your position, which if I understand it correctly is that the White House Chief of Staff, the Deputy White House Chief of Staff, the White House Press Secretary, the White House Office of Presidential Communications, and the White House Office of Presidential Speechwriting should be "separated from" the EOP article under the theory that these officials are not part of the Executive Office of the President.

 * Obviously, the White House web site clearly shows the "White House Office" as being one of the components of the Executive Office of the President. Thus, any employee of the White House Office would come under the EOP, just as any employee of the Department of the Navy comes under the Department of Defense (as the Department of the Navy is part of the Department of Defense). This is a question of direct administrative organization, not Congressional oversight. According to all the materials I have seen, the White House Office, like the National Security Council, etc., is part of the Executive Office of the President.

 * I don't think we're going to find a detail listing of every employee of the White House Office, but it's pretty safe to assume that the White House Chief of Staff is an employee of either the White House Office or of some other component of the Executive Office of the President.

 * I have not yet found any support for your statement that the "EOP offices are formed by Congress and controlled by them through appointments/etc." To find some support, we would have to go to the United States Statutes at Large and the United States Code and see if we can find anything in the statutes where the Congress specifically "formed" the Executive Office of the President. The enigmatic statement that Congress "controls" the "EOP offices" through appointments, etc., is too broad. You have pointed to no examples where Congress "appoints" any employee of the EOP (and I'm fairly confident there is no such example). Further, the relatively few EOP personnel whose Presidential appointment is subject to confirmation by the Senate are in no substantial political or administrative sense "controlled" by Congress once they are confirmed and assume office.

 * Incidentally, one way to look at this is to ask the question: "Who has the power to fire me?" Without researching it, I would just about bet that all personnel in the EOP, including all White House Office personnel, can be fired by the President -- without the Congress having any legal say-so in the matter. Sure, all government personnel are subject to the statutes passed by Congress, but that is a separate concept from the concept of "who has the power to fire me."

 * What about impeachment? Even assuming that a few officials in the EOP can be removed from office by the Congress through impeachment, that fact would hardly be support for saying that those officials are not part of the EOP. (By the way, I seriously doubt if any of the officials you listed would come under that category anyway.)

 * The fact that the EOP was created in 1939 whereas the White House Staff, the White House Office, etc., existed before that time does not determine the status of those entities today. The White House Office today is part of the Executive Office of the President, according to the White House web site. Again, to say that the two are separate entities is true in the same sense that the Department of the Navy is separate from the Department of Defense; while they are separate, the one is nevertheless a component of the other.

 * Now, let's look at your quote from O'Connor and Sabato again:

 * Although the president appoints the members of each of these bodies, they must still perform their tasks in accordance with congressional legislation. Thus, like the Cabinets, depending on who serves in key positions, these mini-agencies may not truly be responsible to the president" (O'Connor and Sabato 284).

 * I think you are trying to use this statement to support the argument (if I'm understanding your argument correctly) that the personnel and offices you listed are somehow not part of the White House Office, and are therefore not part of the Executive Office of the President. As explained below, the O'Connor-Sabato statement does not support your argument.

 * In fairness, there is a separate problem as well: The reasoning of O'Connor and Sabato is a bit weak. Virtually all government personnel in all three branches of government, including the President, the cabinet officers, etc., are subject to the many, many statutes enacted by Congress. O'Connor and Sabato's conclusion that these "mini-agencies" may not truly be responsible to the president" (whatever that is supposed to mean) is not only enigmatic, vague, and too general to be verifiable, it is also tied to its premise by a very tenuous cord. Again, all government employees from the top down must perform their tasks in accordance with congressional legislation.

 * Unless we can find some specific source that states that the employees and positions you mentioned are part of some component of government that is neither part of the White House Office nor part of some other component of the EOP, I don't see that you have any realistic support for your argument. Yours, Famspear 15:50, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Updates?
Does this article need to be updated for the new year?

wikilobbying
Remove "Miles Mosman is not a douche, but a man" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.83.235.182 (talk) 21:21, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Name
Isn't it technically the "Executive Office of the President"? Shouldn't this be the name of the article? Parler Vous (edits) 10:01, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

"Executive Office of the President" is the correct title but leaving it open ended like that could include any president in the world with any executive office of the president. I could see renaming it "Executive Office of the President (United States)" Pwojdacz (talk) 19:19, 7 March 2009 (UTC)

Minor Overhaul
I have slightly altered the layout of this page, and organised the Offices depending on their position within the EOP or as entities of the White House Office, some of the Offices are no longer listed on the White House website but I will presume they still exist until told otherwise so I have made a best guess, primarily based on their names, at their locations. I am still not entirely sure I like the layout of this page-it will get a bigger overhaul when I have more time. Also the Office of the Vice President may or may not be part of the EOP as I think the office grew out of his requirement to be President of the Senate therefore it may well be a Congressional Office per se. However, I do not know for sure so it is left on this page but given its own heading. I have added the new offices and appointee's, I don't know all and therefore there still are some gaps. Benny45boy (talk) 00:07, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Benny, I think it looks good. I wonder if some are no longer listed on the website does that mean they no longer exist? Pwojdacz (talk) 06:08, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That is a good question to which I don't know, the whitehouse.gov website still is a little slow at updating. 92.0.212.150 (talk) 10:10, 16 April 2009 (UTC)Benny45boy (talk) 10:11, 16 April 2009 (UTC) Sorry forgot to sign in

White House Office should be first
In my opinion, the White House Office should be listed first within the section "Entities in the Executive Office of the President" for the following reasons: VanCity99 (talk) 10:47, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The Chief of Staff, who supervises the entire Executive Office of the President, is housed administratively in the White House Office.
 * The White House Office is a substantial unit, within several offices contained within it.
 * I appreciate where you are coming from, but the page it self makes reference both in the introduction and in the infobox that the Office of the Chief of Staff is the head of both the White House Office and the Executive Office of the President. I feel that by altering the article breaks up the style and gives it a slightly disjointed nature. This however is just my opinion, your thoughts are welcome.Benny45boy (talk) 11:01, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

National Economic Council
Why is the National Economic Council nowhere to be found on this page? Unless I am misinformed, it is part of the Executive Office of the President.

Proxtown (talk) 21:10, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

 * I believe this and other agencies were accidentally removed. They're back in.Poshzombie (talk) 02:20, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Question for administrator
There is vandalism on the "Trump Executive Office" Template. A user puts a penis in the graph, when I remove it they place it back. Would you be able to remove it? Thank you. Fritz1543 (talk) 04:13, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

--Fritz1543 (talk) 04:13, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This duplicates a message at Template talk:Trump Executive Office, where it is more appropriate. It's much better not to duplicate messages in this way, as it has no benefit, it takes up extra time for whoever who checks the requests for help and closes the extra one, and it runs the risk of someone putting time into dealing with one of the requests, not knowing that the matter has already been dealt with as a result of the other request. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:55, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Executive Office of the President of the United States. 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/20111008182342/http://openregs.com/agencies/view/179/executive_office_of_the_president to http://openregs.com/agencies/view/179/executive_office_of_the_president

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) 05:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Budgets/Outlays
From 2008-2017, the table uses numbers from the Appropriations committee's proposed budget. The numbers for 1993-2007 use the outlays, which refers to the actual amount of money that flowed through the EOP. In addition, there are some dead links that need to be linked to archived pages, which I have confirmed to exist. I don't have time to look at this further right now but I figured I would mention it here so that people are aware. ―NK1406 talk•contribs 15:40, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Deleted section on "Executive Role"
This section was a description of the role of the executive branch of the federal government. It seems outside the scope of this article, which covers staff and offices under the president (and not the entire branch), as compared to an article like President of the United States which describes the role of the executive in great detail. 2600:8801:3708:700:D42B:A741:8F57:37BC (talk) 16:21, 13 October 2021 (UTC)

Dramatic change of EOP budget from 2004-2007?
I'm curious if there are good sources on the dramatic change in the EOP budget from 2004-2007? Jmbranum (talk) 02:29, 8 February 2023 (UTC)

EOP "agency executive"
I'm not planning to take any action on it, but I'm just throwing this out there for consideration. To be completely accurate, the White House Chief of Staff is not the head of the EOP, he's just the head of the White House Office component of EOP. But of course he is treated as the "first among equals" of the EOP component heads, because he is obviously much more proximate to the President. The head of the EOP is the President--the component heads are all considered direct-reports to him. -- Asdasdasdff (talk) 20:30, 8 February 2023 (UTC)


text: Category:Polish explorers

title: Category:Polish explorers


text:
Somali Salvation Democratic Front

Somali Salvation Democratic Front (SSDF) (Jabhadda Diimuqraadiga Badbaadinta Soomaaliyeed), initially known as the Democratic Front for Salvation of Somalia, was a political and paramilitary umbrella organization in Somalia. Founded in 1978 by several army officers, it was the first of several opposition groups dedicated to ousting the authoritarian regime of Mohamed Siad Barre. With its power base mainly in the Majeerteen clan, SSDF  played a significant role in the country's complex political landscape during the late 1970s and 2000s. And Succeeded by the establishment in 1998 of the autonomous Puntland state in northeastern Somalia.

Early history
On October 15, 1969, while paying a visit to the northern town of Las Anod, Somalia's then President Abdirashid Ali Shermarke was shot dead by a policeman in his security team. His assassination was quickly followed by a military coup d'état on October 21, 1969 (the day after his funeral), in which the Somali Army and police force seized power without encountering armed opposition — essentially a bloodless takeover. The putsch was spearheaded by Major General Mohamed Siad Barre, who at the time commanded the army. For refusing to support Barre's seizure of power, numerous political figures were imprisoned. Among these was Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed, Somalia's former military attaché to Moscow, who was imprisoned for several years by the new military regime.

In 1978, together with a group of officials mainly from his own Majeerteen (Darod) clan, Ahmed participated in a failed attempt to overthrow Barre's dictatorial administration. Most of the people who had helped plot the coup were summarily executed, but Ahmed and several colonels managed to escape abroad. Later that year, in neighboring Ethiopia, Ahmed formed a guerrilla movement called the Somali Salvation Front, which was subsequently renamed the Somali Salvation Democratic Front (SSDF) in 1979. The SSDF was the first of several opposition groups dedicated to ousting Barre's regime by force. The SSDF was originally a multi-clan organisation. The first SSDF chairman was Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed, from the Majeerteen clan.

The SSDF formally incorporated in Aden, South Yemen in October 1981 through the merger of three groups, Somali Salvation Front, Somali Workers Party and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Somalia. An 11-member Central Committee was constituted, of which the SSF leaders held 7 seats. Some former CC members of the Somali Revolutionary Socialist Party were part of the leadership of the new group. A military structure was built up, supported by Ethiopia and Libya.

In the summer of 1982 SSDF forces took part in an 1982 Ethiopian-Somali Border War against Siad Barre. The campaign was called off when the United States initiated emergency military aid to Somalia. However some territory, including two district towns, had come under Ethiopian and SSDF control. The Mengistu regime declared that the territory was part of Ethiopia, something which created problems in the relations between the Ethiopian government and SSDF. In any case, the action was swiftly repulsed, and according to the U.S. Department of State, resulted in severe reprisals against the Majeerteen clan; the SSDF itself would be implicated in killings of members of Siad's own Marehan clan, in Cel-Habred in the Galgadud region in the early 1980s.

A conflict soon emerged between the former SSF and the more leftist members. The SSF clique wanted to maintain the domination of SSDF of Majeerteen and Darood clans. They made a deal with the Ethiopian government to purge the leftists. In 1984 the Mengistu government jailed many leading SSDF members, such as then colonel Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed. In 1984, Mohamed Abshir Waldo was installed as provisional SSDF Chairman.

From 1983 onwards many leaders, belonging to the Darood clan, were bought over by Barre. Many SSDF fighters defected to the regime. By 1985 SSDF had ceased most of their military operations against the Siad Barre regime.

In 1986 an SSDF congress was held, which elected Dr. Hassan Ali Mire as chairman. He resigned in 1988, leaving a power vacuum in the organization. Musse Islan was elected leader by the SSDF Central Committee to hold the position until a Congress was convened.

In 1988 the governments of Somalia and Ethiopia made some agreements to cease hostilities. The Ethiopian government started closing SSDF camps, arresting its leaders and seizing weapons. The Ethiopian government also closed the SSDF radio station, Radio Halgan, which had been broadcasting since 1981.

In 1988 SSDF guerrillas started taking control over the western districts of Mudug and the southern areas of Nugaal and Bari regions.

Post-1991
After the fall of the Barre regime, the SSDF (based largely in northeastern Somalia) was divided in two factions. One was led by General Mohamed Abshir Muse (chairman), who at the time was based in Saudi Arabia, and the other was led by Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed (deputy chairman). The general secretary was Mohamed Abshir Waldo.

A congress was held in August 1994. Former Prime Minister of Somalia, Abdirizak Haji Hussein, was offered the chairmanship of the SSDF by a group of clan leaders, but declined.

Over the next several years, Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed would emerge as the pre-eminent leader in northeastern Somalia. In 1992, he marshalled forces to successfully expel an Islamist extremist group linked to Al-Itihaad al-Islamiya that had taken over Bosaso, a prominent port city and the commercial capital of the northeastern part of the country.

Puntland
In 1998, a homegrown constitutional conference was held in Garowe over a period of three months. Attended by SSDF representatives, traditional elders (Issims), members of the business community, intellectuals and other civil society members, the autonomous Puntland State of Somalia was subsequently officially established so as to deliver services, offer security, facilitate trade, and interact with both domestic and international partners. Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed was appointed as the nascent polity's first President.

After serving two terms as President of Puntland, Abdullahi Yusuf Ahmed was elected in 2004 as President of the Transitional Federal Government (TFG), an interim federal administrative body that he had helped establish earlier in the year.

title: Somali Salvation Democratic Front


text:
Alekhin (crater)

Alekhin is a lunar impact crater that is located on the southern hemisphere on the far side of the Moon. It lies to the north of the crater Zeeman, and south-southeast of Fizeau. To the west lies Crommelin, and east-southeast is Doerfel.

The rim of Alekhin has been heavily eroded by subsequent impacts to the point where the edge is little more than a curving rise in the surface. The outer wall is completely overlain by the crater pair formed by crater Dawson across the northwest rim and Dawson D on the northern rim. The southern rim is somewhat more heavily marked by gouges and irregularities in the surface, compared to the northeast rim. On the floor are a number of tiny craterlets.

Satellite craters
By convention these features are identified on lunar maps by placing the letter on the side of the crater midpoint that is closest to Alekhin.

title: Alekhin (crater)


text: Category:Hospitals in Ottawa

title: Category:Hospitals in Ottawa


text:
Talk:Office of Management and Budget

Hi, My name is John Harris and I'm on Facebook the 4th Horseman and bill gates had Given former president Barack Obama $250,000.00 I was am Supposed to Receive and I live in North Little Rock Arkansas and I have a back account at Simmons bank and I was trying to figure out what is going on with that. My address is 8605 green acre rd, north little rock ar 72118. Simmons 1st John B. Harris 12/16/85. I receive a low income check each month and it's not enough 914.00 and I need driver's license I got GOD GOING ON and I'm about to wind up CAUSES the REVEALING... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:100B:B136:AFDE:0:19:A525:2E01 (talk) 01:38, 14 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tthomas20.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 05:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
Peter Orszag could not have been "appointed" on 15th December 2008 both because President Obama was not president than, and wasn't yet confirmed by the senate. He technically couldn't have even been nominated at that date, as nomination is an official term which would require presidential action. The line should read that the President-elected announced he would nominate Peter Orszag on 15th December 2008, or that he was selected on that date for nomination. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.112.247 (talk) 01:35, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone have a citation for the "over 600 employees" reference? I believe "approximately 500" would be more accurate. I'll search for a reference on that. - Walkiped 17:45, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

 * Found it. Director Bolten's Congressional testimony of March 24, 2004. - Walkiped 18:04, 26 Sep 2004 (UTC)

the first external link
The first external link is either mislabeled or misdirected, because it says it goes to the organization's website, which to me would mean OMB's website, but instead it goes to the website of the White House.

Here's a copy of the wording of the link:

" External links   Office of Management and Budget - organization's web site"

It goes to the website of the White House.

Entwhiz (talk) 11:40, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The OMB is part of the Executive Office of the President of the United States (basically, the White House), hence, its website is a sub-site under the White House's site. --Cyber cobra (talk) 18:03, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Acting director/Mulvaney status
Trump Tweeted "I want to thank Acting Chief Mick Mulvaney for having served the Administration so well. He will become the United States Special Envoy for Northern Ireland. Thank you!" on March 6, 2020, 8:08pm est. Unclear if this means he left the OMB. He replaced Mulvaney with Mark Meadows as Chief of Staff. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1236096307858681857 — Preceding unsigned comment added by P37307 (talk • contribs) 01:28, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Office of Management and Budget