text:
User:Slrubenstein/Case Against CheeseDreams

Complaint
I (Slrubenstein) would like to add a request for arbitration, specifically concerning two articles: Cultural and historical background of Jesus, and a set of articles entitled Jesus in a cultural and historical background and Historical reconstruction of the sort of person Jesus would be.

Concerning the first article The first article was originally a section of Jesus ; when the Jesus article became too long it was made a daughter article. I am one of several editors who has worked on it. In late October or early November CheeseDreams began working on the article. I questioned many of her edits, which I believed were inaccurate or unverifiable; she began reverting my changes. During this period she often called for votes -- in my opinion, substituting votes for discussion (there is a clear pattern, when a vote supports her view she demands that the vote be considered established consensus; when the vote does not support her position she explains that votes do not determine the truth). By November 2 we were in a revert war. Many of the differences between our versions were stylistic, but some were substantive: CheeseDreams refered to the area as "Palestine" although at the time in question Romans and Jews refered to Judea and the Galilee separately; CheeseDreams insisted that there were many messianic groups, among them Mandeanists, but there is no evidence for this and when I asked CheeseDreams to verify her claims, she refused. Here are the two versions:. On Nov, 3 the page was protected. On Nov. 18 it was unprotected, and a new editor, FT2, revised the article and attempted to incorporate as much material from the discussion as possible. I felt that FT2's version was a good start given the previous conflicts on the talk page, but was poorly organized and included many claims that were inaccurate; moreover FT2's article had explicit gaps where FT2 did not know the appropriate information. Striving to keep as much material from FT2's version as possible, I revised the article:. I spent the better part of the day Nov. 19th working on the article and made over 50 edits, using the edit summary for each one to explain what I was doing. During this period CheeseDream periodically reverted all of my edits without any explanation. On Nov. 20th FT2 made a series of edits which I believe left the artice in even worse condition -- very poorly organized, and replete with factual inaccuracies. I posted a list of over a dozen problems with FT2's version on the talk page, went back to my last version, and spent the better part of the 22nd working on the article making substantial additions of verifiable and NPOV content, leading to this version. At that point, CheeseDreams and Amgine took turns reverting my work -- with the effect of deleting much content I had added -- and without any explanation or justification. They did not respond to my list of problems with FT2s version, and did not post any specific criticisms of my version (Amgine did provide some explanations/examples of problems at one point). Here is John Kenney's analysis of the revert war:. Fundamentally, FT2s version was replete with inaccurate and unverifiable information; I have done considerable research and added verifiable, accurate content which CheeseDreams and others kept reverting. Theresa Knott protected the article on Nov. 23. Since that time, I have continued to try to suggest substantive, verifiable, relevant changes to the article (e.g. and ). CheeseDream simply rejects every edit I have made or proposed. CheeseDream never provides any substantive reason for rejecting my work (she simply doesn't like it), and CheeseDream refuses to justify her changes to me, or to provide evidence or sources. In short, FT2 and I simply disagree about organization (he prefers topical, I prefer chronological), but most other contributors prefer my organization. CheeseDream rejects any work I do and reverts it.

On November 14 I requested mediation in my conflict with CheeseDreams, Amgine, and FT2. Amgine and CheeseDream would nat accept anyone I nominated as mediator. They choose Llywrch. Llywrch attempted mediation, but Amgine and CheeseDream expressed dissatisfaction and then rejected him as mediator. By this time I was communicating more constructively with Amgine and FT2, but still could not communicate with CheeseDreams. I made a second request for mediation, but no one volunteered to be mediator, and CheeseDream (who had stated that she would not accept anyone I nominated) did not nominate anyone. Llywrch suggested we go to arbitration. CheeseDream has often suggested arbitration, as has John Kenny.

I would like CheeseDreams banned from the article. I can find no good contribution to the article by her -- she has never improved the clarity of the prose, and has never added verifiable content; she only disrupts mine and others' attempts to improve the article.

Concerning the talk page of the first article Wikipedia talk pages often get too long. Wikipedia policy is to archive material. We archived a good deal of the discussion. CheeseDreams summarized this discussion and placed it back into the article. This is bad for two reasons: first, her summary is biased; she rewrites what others said and condenses arguments to support her views. Second, her summaries are very long and defeat the purpose of archiving. I archived her summary. Over the past several days she continues to move archived material back into the article; I put it back in the archive; she puts it back in the article. This defeats the purpose of the archives, and makes the talk page excessively long (160 kilobytes long!).

Concerning the other two articles In the second article, CheeseDream simply copied the first (protected) article and gave it a new title, Jesus in cultural and historical background. Someone put in a redirect to the original page Cultural and historical background of Jesus. CheeseDream reverted that and eight other attempts to redirect it. When I redirected and protected the redirect, CheeseDream accused me of abusing my sysop powers. At the request of another editor I unprotected it. CheeseDream reverted it and instituted a complaint at RfC against me. See, and. John K. redirected and protected the page, and CheeseDream created a new namespace (Historical reconstruction of the sort of person Jesus would be) with the same old article content that is Cultural and historical background of Jesus. I redirected and protected the page. She claims that this creation of two or three separate namespaces for the same article content is in the spirit of compromise, and I believe that this is laughable on its face. Presumably, the compromise would be that the original article (Cultural and historical background of Jesus) would be reverted to the form she likes, leaving me to enjoy the form I like. There are three reasons why this is not a good-faith compromise. First, I know of no example in wikipedia where a conflict over an article was resolved by having two versions of the article. Our goal should be one verifiable NPOV article for one topic or issue, not several articles on the same topic, different only in representing the views of a different editor. This smacks in the face of everything Wikipedia stands for and is a bad precedent. Second, CheeseDreams' move is disingenuous because she added all sorts of tags (neutrality and accurcacy under dispute) to the second copy of the article. In other words, she simply wishes to continue the arguments she has had with me over the original article, at a second space. Third, the article she favors is still, in the mind of me and several other editors, deeply flawed and will continue to be questioned and worked on.

I do not know if this is a bannable offense -- it certainly is in my opinion trolling. I believe it requires some sort of strong disciplinary action. Slrubenstein

Evidence presented by Slrubenstein
Evidence pertains to three complaints: first, that CheeseDreams is generally obstructionist; second, that she refuses to verify her work; third, that practically speaking she wishes to block me from the article Cultural and historical background of Jesus. She accomplishes this in two ways: first, by refusing to accept anything I write on the talk page, and second, by reverting my work.

1-8 December
These provide evidence of general obstructionism.
 * 00:05, 8 Dec 2004
 * 00:07, 7 Dec 2004
 * 07:15, 6 Dec 2004
 * 19:30, 5 Dec 2004
 * 19:27, 5 Dec 2004
 * 12:41, 5 Dec 2004
 * 22:57, 4 Dec 2004
 * 21:46, 3 Dec 2004
 * 21:42, 3 Dec 2004
 * 21:13, 3 Dec 2004
 * 20:36, 3 Dec 2004
 * 19:42, 3 Dec 2004
 * 19:14, 3 Dec 2004
 * 21:50, 2 Dec 2004
 * 00:37, 2 Dec 2004
 * 18:55, 1 Dec 2004
 * 01:12, 1 Dec 2004
 * In each of the above instances, she repeatedly put large summary into article. The particular summary in questioned had been archived because the article was over 130 kb. CheeseDreams reverted the archiving of the summary.  This went on and on.                   ... there are more, I am just getting tired of looking for each example.  Surely, you get the idea!
 * There was discussion about the summaries ; everyone except CheeseDreams felt that the summaries at best wasted space, and at worst disrupted the process of improving the article. There are three problems with the summaries.
 * First the "summary" is a way for CheeseDreams to put my words, and the words of others in dispute with CheeseDreams, into different words. This allows CheeseDreams to control the representation of the discussion and the participants of this discussion.  She often uses this control to editorialize about the discussion, to misrepresent people she disagrees with, and or slander other editors.

 * Example: Part of the discussion involved how best to translate words and names. FT2 mistakenly claimed that "John" is English for the Hebrew name Yonatan.  I objected to this error, and explained that "Yohanan" is the Hebrew version of the name "John."  FT2 wrote, "I like this:  "Yohanan" is not Hebrew for Jonathan; the Baptist's name was "John" (or it's Hebrew equivalent, Yohanan). Does anyone else spot the illogic?" I tried to explain again what FT2's error was (and it really is a big error in that it reveals tremendous ignorance about the Bible and Jewish culture, i.e. the general topic of the article).  When FT2 wrote "Remember Davids friend "Jonathan"? David and Jonathan? Universally called "Jonathan" not John? Yohannan? Check it out. "John" is not hebrew......" (21:45, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)), I lost patience at his combination of ignorance and sarcasm.

 * My response to FT2, as I wrote it (04:23, 23 Nov 2004; see ):
 * What on earth are you saying? There are two Hebrew names: Jonatan and Yohana.  Yonatan is represented in English as Jonathan.  Yohanan is represented in English as John.  Are you making fun of me?  Ar eyou yanking my chain?  Waht does "Jonathan" have to do with "Yohanan?  John the Baptist was not names Jonathan -- Jon is not John.  Jesus, are you seriously trying to argue this?  Do you know anything?  I am seriously starting to question your competence here and I really am serious, not trying to be rude, because I know you have made some reasonable edits to other articles.  But what you are saying here is a charicature of a nut, you must be making fun of me somehow ... Slrubenstein

 * CheeseDream's "summary" (see ):
 * Slrubenstein disputes translating "Yohanan" as "Jonathan" rather than "John". FT2 points out how David's associate "Jonathan" is "Yohanan" in Hebrew, to which Wesley states that the New Testament is Greek. Slrubenstein states that "Yonatan" is "Jonathan" and "Yohanan" is "John" (4). Slrubenstein states that FT2 is a nut, and questions whether FT2 is masturbating Slrubenstein (5).
 * I find the remark about masturbating offensive; I said so (see for example ) and deleted it. Another editor explained to CheeseDreams that it is an erroneous paraphrase (see ).  That CheeseDreams persists in restoring or creating new summaries to repeat it (see ) is a sign of willful spite.  CheeseDreams often editorializes in her summaries; this summary was really just a vehicle for her insulting me.

 * Second, the main way that CheesDreams summarizes is by cutting any explanation, reasoning, or evidence -- in other words, material that could constructively go into the article. What is left in these "summaries" is only the worst part of any discussion -- a list of editors who have taken opposing positions, and a record of conflict.  The best part of the discussion -- a process by which people come to clarify their understanding of the topic, or in the course of dicsussion bring to light more facts or explanations -- is gone.  This is certainly unhelpful.
 * Third, the summaries waste too much space (note in the example above, the summary is almost as long as what is summarized!) Each summary is itself over 30 kb. long -- long enough to be archived -- and should be archived.

I want to be clear that my objection is not merely to the many times that CheeseDreams has inserted the summary into the talk page -- a series of acts that wastes space on the page and the time of oother editors. The summary is symptomatic of more general and profound problems with CheeseDreams -- it reveals her intent on hijacking a page; her complete disregard for the views of other editors and their reasoning; her bias in reporting what others have said; her malice, as she seeks every opportunity to slander other editors through editorializing (e.g. when she explains, in the text itself, or in the edit summary, that the reason she is summarizing is that other contributors are verbose and obscure) or misrepresenting others (e.g. claiming that I have questioned whether FT2 is masturbating me). It is this general pattern of destructive behavior that is the real issue, not the fact that she reverted the archiving of the summary x number of times.

3 December
My second main complaint against CheeseDreams is that she refuses to verify her work. I have done considerable research on the topic and believe her claims to be false. When I offer her an opportunity to verify her claims, she mires me in a miasma of meaningless dialogue. This exchange provides a good example:.

28 November
Another example where CheeseDreams refuses to verify claims, this time from the Koan discussion on the Jesus page:. I admit the header reflects my irritation; be that as it may, there was an endless discussion about whether Jesus used Koans (CheeseDreams being the only advocate of this view) and I pointed out simply that if some scholar has made this claim we should include it -- if not, we needn't argue it. CheeseDreams has continued to revert any deletion of this material from the article, and her only contribution to the talk page continues to be defensive or offensive -- but she still hasn't provided any verification at all to support this highly contested claim.

22 November
My third main complaint is that she rejects all of my work. By late November there were two versions of the article -- one that I had crafted, and one that FT2 had crafted. See my complaint for the general context and sources. I had explained in the talk pages that there were many mistakes in fact in FT2's version, and that it was poorly organized, and explained that my version was better organized and fully verifiable. Here is a more recent example (I put it here because it makes the same point as the Nov. 22 example):
 * 15:43, 22 Nov 2004
 * Reverted my work; explanation was that I am arrogant and POV.
 * 21:07, 17 Dec 2004
 * Provides an explanation of why she prefers FT2's version over mine. Her explanation reveals that she has not read my version at all, or if she has she read it in a careless fashion and that she is ignorant of the topic.  From this example I conclude that she reflexively argues against anything I say even if it means she has to misconstrue what I wrote, or make up facts without any evidence.  (Note: in many cases in this excerpt, I simply identify claims she makes as ignorant or wrong.  If any arbitrator likes, I would be happy to explain in detail what is ignorant and why she is wrong, and provide verification.)

It is true that I have rejected most of CheeseDreams' work. But every time, I have provided substantive reasons. In most cases I believe that CheeseDreams' additions are either not based on any research at all, or based on a distorted understanding of the scholarship. I have always made my objections clear and have asked CheeseDreams to provide verification.

20 November

 * 00:19, 20 Nov 2004
 * 00:00, 20 Nov 2004
 * repeated reverts

19 November

 * 20:04, 19 Nov 2004
 * reverted work

6-7 November
These exchanges provide good examples of my difficulty discussing changes constructively with CheeseDreams. Whenever I raise a verifiable problem of fact or interpretation, CheeseDreams effectively dismissed any contribution I could make:

1-3 November
There is only one discussion I recall in which CheeseDreams claimed to verify her position. It was on the Jesus talk page:. Here we perhaps get to the root of my conflict with CheeseDreams. In this example she does provide sources -- but in a way that makes me even more skeptical of her research. I say this because none of the people she cited were important contemporary scholars; because several of the people she cited were not scholars on Jesus, critical Bible studies, or history of 1st century Judea; and because in at least one case she was entirely wrong (she provides Albert Schweitzer as an example of a scholar who claims that Jesus never existed, when in fact Schweitzer most definitely believed Jesus existed). Moreover, I provided sources to verify my claim, that scholars (meaning, critical scholars -- PhD.s who have academic appointments and publish in academic journals) believe that Jesus did exist (Crossan, Vermes, Bartman, Fredriksen, Sanders, Meier). CheeseDreams not only utterly disregarded my claim and evidence -- she seemed utterly unaware of these scholars. It is very hard to believe that anyone could do anything close to serious research on 1st Century Jewish history, early Christian history, or critical Bible studies, and not be familiar with at least a few of these names. The problem is, you have to know something about these issues to be sure that I am right and she is wrong. All one has to do is go to a few websites to see that A. Schweitzer really did believe in Jesus. A little work on the web would provide you with the c.v.s of most of the people I cited, or reviews of their books. One problem with earlier attempts to resolve my conflict with CheeseDreams is that others, like FT2 and Amgine, didn't know and didn't do much research on this period. What concerns me even more is that when CheeseDreams and I came into conflict on the Historical and cultural background to Jesus article, they did not insist that CheeseDreams provide sources for her claims. Indeed, Amgine felt that my demanding verification was a sign of bad faith on my part.

To be blunt, I think many people have been fooled by CheeseDreams. She makes her points so firmly, and sticks to them, and in some cases provides the names of authorities, and others assume she is correct. These people are acting "in good faith" and were I ignorant of critical Bible research and 1st century history, I too would have assumed CheeseDreams was acting "in good faith." But I have done considerable research on these matters and all of my research gives me reason only to question CheeseDreams' research.

Final Note: the Nature of my Complaint
I have requested arbitration not because CheeseDreams has violated specific wikipedia policies -- she may have, but my complaint is more complex. She has accused me of pretty much everything I have accused her of. Moreover, much of the evidence can be interpreted either way. For example, below Amgine provides evidence of my abusing CheeseDreams. In fact, I am proud of almost every example Amgine provides -- I believe that they show a pattern in which I contribute well-researched, verifiable material to an article; in which I provide explanations for my changes; and in which I demand that CheeseDreams do the same. This is not merely a situation where the process has broken down. If it were, then perhaps RfC and mediation would have worked. This is a case where two different people have different notions of what "NPOV" and "verifiable" mean. CheeseDreams (and Amgine) and I fundamentally differ on matters of content, and in many cases I believe the conflict between us can be understood only by looking at the content and the reasons we give, respectively, for the changes we make. Slrubenstein


text:
1984 (Roger Miret and the Disasters album)

1984 is the second studio album by Roger Miret and the Disasters. It was released on February 22, 2005.

Credits

 * Roger Miret – vocals, guitar
 * Rhys Kill – guitar, backup vocals
 * Brian Darwas – bass, backup vocals
 * Mike Mulieri – drums, backup vocals
 * Al Barr – guest vocals on "The Boys"
 * Matt Ciotti – backup vocals
 * Dave Alvarado – backup vocals
 * John Jensen – backup vocals
 * Luke245 – backup vocals
 * Franco Bronx – backup vocals
 * Zeuss – engineering, mixing
 * Alan Douches – mastering

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


text: Talk:1984 (Roger Miret and the Disasters album)


text:
CMT (Canadian TV channel)

CMT is a Canadian English language discretionary specialty channel owned as a joint venture between Corus Entertainment (which owns a controlling 90% interest) and Paramount Networks Americas (which owns the remaining 10%), owners of the flagship CMT channel in the United States.

As with its U.S. counterpart, CMT previously devoted a large amount of its programming to country music, with such programming as music videos and concert specials. Over time, the channel shifted its focus towards family-oriented general entertainment such as sitcoms, to the point where music programming was eventually axed in August 2017.

It is one of two Paramount-branded channels that are owned by Corus; the companies also partner on Nickelodeon (which is wholly owned by Corus).

Launch and dispute
Prior to the launch of CMT Canada, the U.S.-based country television network, Country Music Television, had been available in Canada since 1984, one year after the channel's launch in the United States.

In June 1994, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) licensed a series of new Canadian specialty television channels; among the ones whose licence was granted was The Country Network, whose programming provisions required it to primarily feature country music videos (a minimum of 90%). The licence was granted to a partnership between Maclean-Hunter (which owned 60% majority control) and Rawlco Communications (which owned the remaining 40%).

At this time, the CRTC had a policy that if a Canadian specialty service was licensed and that service's format was competitive with a foreign service's format that was licensed to operate in Canada, the foreign service could be dropped from the list of channels eligible for cable carriage in Canada. Due to Country Music Television's competitive format, the CRTC terminated CMT's eligibility rights in Canada as a foreign service on June 6, 1994. Television distributors such as cable and satellite television operators could continue distributing Country Music Television until The Country Network began operations.

In March 1994, one year before the channel's launch, Maclean-Hunter had been purchased by Rogers Communications.

On January 1, 1995, the channel launched as New Country Network (NCN). On that date, Canadian pay television service providers were not allowed to offer Country Music Television. In retaliation for being barred from Canada, the U.S. service launched a complaint under the North American Free Trade Agreement and ceased carriage of videos by Canadian artists without major U.S. record deals.

After months of negotiations, the matter was settled when it was announced that CBS Cable, then owners of CMT, would purchase a minority stake in the service. NCN was relaunched as CMT on September 14, 1996. The majority interest was acquired by Shaw Communications at the same time; it was later included in the spinoff of the broadcasting assets then owned by Shaw as Corus Entertainment in 1999. The controversy also resulted in an effective change to CRTC policy – if a foreign channel is already available in Canada and a new Canadian equivalent is subsequently licensed, cable providers are no longer required to drop the foreign service.

Shift away from country music
In 2016, as part of the removal of the genre protection rules, CMT was migrated to the CRTC's new standard conditions of license for discretionary services; these changes removed the requirement for CMT to air any music programming at all. Corus stated in its description of service for CMT that it would be devoted to comedy and reality programming, films, and "one of a kind music programming". Despite the changes, Corus must still invest at least 11% of CMT's annual gross revenue to fund the production of Canadian music videos, but they no longer necessarily have to be for country music videos.

These programming changes took effect on August 28, 2017, when CMT dropped all country music video programming from its schedule. The change in programming was widely criticized by stakeholders in Canada's country music industry, due to the loss of what had been a major promotional platform for Canadian performers; Corus stated that it would still promote Canadian country music through its other platforms (including its country music radio stations and some Global programming).

Canada wouldn't have another country music-related TV channel until rival broadcaster Stingray Group launched Stingray Country in 2019.

Programming
, CMT's programming consists primarily of acquired sitcoms, dramas (specifically Degrassi: The Next Generation), reality shows, and lifestyle programming, some of which are reruns of Canadian-produced series to fulfill Canadian content obligations. It no longer originates any original programming of its own, nor does it air any original programming emanating from the American CMT channel such as the CMT Music Awards (which remains available to most Canadian cable subscribers through CBS affiliates).

When CMT was launched as New Country Network on January 1, 1995, the CRTC required that 90% of the station's programming consist of music videos. The CRTC dropped that requirement to 70% on February 28, 2001, and reduced it even further to 50% on February 28, 2006. With the retirement of genre protection rules in 2016, CMT was no longer required to air music videos, leading to the channel dropping music programming altogether the following year in favor of comedy programming—drawn primarily from off-network reruns of sitcoms.

Under its country music format, CMT previously produced its own original Canadian programming, such as Karaoke Star Jr., Tori & Dean: Cabin Fever, and The Wilkinsons, with much of the channel's country music-related programming hosted by Paul McGuire.

Former hosts/presenters

 * Paul McGuire – host of Chevrolet Top 20 Countdown and CMT's Hottest (now at Stingray Radio)
 * Casey Clarke (now at Stingray Radio)
 * Cliff Dumas (now host of the Weekly Country Countdown)
 * Shannon Gaye
 * Gnarley Charley (was at KSKS in Fresno, California)
 * Stu Jeffries (now at CHBM-FM in Toronto)
 * Nicola Jones (was at CHCH in Hamilton, Ontario) - now deceased (October 2014 )
 * Ashley Kranz (winner of CMT Canada's "CMT Casting Call 2007" competition)
 * Elissa Lansdell (was host of My Rona Home)
 * Beverley Mahood (was at Breakfast Television Vancouver)
 * Melissa Parrott (winner of CMT Canada's "CMT Casting Call 2009" competition)
 * Hal Roberts (now News Director and Anchor with Bridge City News on CJIL-TV)
 * Colleen Rusholme (now at CJOT-FM in Ottawa, Ontario)
 * Greg Shannon (now at CFCW in Edmonton, Alberta)
 * Nancy Sinclair
 * Brian "Hurricane" Smith
 * Tamara Stanners (was at CKPK-FM in Vancouver, British Columbia)
 * Lindsay Stone

title: CMT (Canadian TV channel)


text: User talk:69.151.254.48

title: User talk:69.151.254.48


text:
Vexin

Vexin is a historical county of northern France. It covers a verdant plateau on the right bank (north) of the Seine running roughly east to west between Pontoise and Romilly-sur-Andelle (about 20 km from Rouen), and north to south between Auneuil and the Seine near Vernon. The plateau is crossed by the Epte and the Andelle river valleys.

History
The name Vexin is derived from a name for a Gaulish tribe now known as the Veliocasses. They had inhabited the area and made Rouen their most important city.

The Norse nobleman Rollo of Normandy (c. 846 – c. 931), the first ruler of the Viking principality that became Normandy, made several incursions into the western half of the county. He halted his actions when the Carolingian king Charles the Simple abandoned the part of the territory that Rollo occupied under the Treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte in 911. The terms of the treaty established the Duchy of Normandy and fixed its boundary with the Kingdom of France along the river Epte. This divided the county of Vexin into two parts:

 * Norman Vexin (Vexin normand), bounded by the rivers Epte, Andelle and Seine, which became part of the Duchy of Normandy.
 * French Vexin (Vexin français), bounded by the rivers Epte, Oise and Seine, which remained part of the Île-de-France province.

During the twelfth century, the county of Vexin was a heavily contested border between the Angevin kings of England and Capetian France (see Capetian-Plantagenet rivalry). It was of particular importance due to its close proximity to Paris and the location of the route to the coastal cities of Normandy. As a result, Vexin was the site of defensive castle construction, notably at Château Gaillard.

Geography
Today, the county's territory is shared by parts of five departments of France: Val-d'Oise and Yvelines in the Île-de-France region; Oise in the Hauts-de-France region; and Eure and Seine-Maritime in the Normandy region. The major towns are Pontoise, Vernon, Meulan-en-Yvelines, Gisors, and Les Andelys. The plateau is primarily an agricultural region with some manufacturing located in the valleys.

The French Impressionist artist Claude Monet made his home at Giverny, and the Dutch Post-Impressionist Vincent van Gogh painted the wheat fields of Vexin.

A regional nature park was established in the area in 1995.

In popular culture
Ownership of Vexin, and the court intrigue related to securing it, is a key plot point in James Goldman's play The Lion in Winter (1966). It also features in the Angevin novels of Sharon Kay Penman, and in the BBC series The Devil's Crown (1978), which stars Brian Cox.

title: Vexin


text:
Margaret Illmann

Margaret L. Illmann (born 9 December 1965) is an Australian prima ballerina with an international career.

Born in Adelaide, South Australia, she danced with The Australian Ballet between 1985 and 1989, in roles such as Beyond Twelve with Kelvin Coe, In the Night, The Three Musketeers and Giselle. She moved to Canada in 1990 to work with the National Ballet of Canada. From there her career led her to all major stages in the world as a guest artist. She worked and lived in Stuttgart and Berlin (Germany) and in Vienna (Austria).

She played Victoria Page in the 1993 musical The Red Shoes by Jule Styne on Broadway in New York City. In 1999 she returned to Australia for the first time, to dance Odette/Odile in the English National Ballet's production of Swan Lake.

She also played in films, such as Young Rosalie in Rossini's Ghost.

title: Margaret Illmann


text:
Karl Ferdinand von Gräfe

Karl Ferdinand von Gräfe, (8 March 1787 – 4 July 1840) was a German surgeon from Warsaw.

He was the father of ophthalmologist Albrecht von Graefe (1828–1870) and grandfather of politician Albrecht von Graefe (1868-1933).

Biography
Gräfe studied medicine at Halle and Leipzig, and after obtaining his licence from Leipzig, he was in 1807 appointed a private physician to Duke Alexius of Anhalt-Bernburg. In 1811, he became a professor of surgery and director of the ophthalmological institute at the University of Berlin. His lectures at the University of Berlin attracted students from all parts of Europe. During the Sixth Coalition against Napoleon, he was a superintendent of military hospitals.

When peace was concluded in 1815, Gräfe resumed his professorial duties. He was also appointed physician to the general staff of the Prussian army, and he became a director of the Friedrich Wilhelm Institute and of the Medico-Chirurgical Academy (Charité). Gräfe died suddenly at Hanover, where he had been called to operate on the eyes of the crown prince. His grave is preserved in the Protestant Friedhof II der Jerusalems- und Neuen Kirchengemeinde (Cemetery No. II of the congregations of Jerusalem's Church and New Church) in Berlin-Kreuzberg, south of Hallesches Tor.

He was a pioneer of plastic and reconstructive surgery, and a founder of German rhinoplastic surgery. He developed his own techniques in regards to rhinoplasty, being modifications of the Italian methods of Gasparo Tagliacozzi (1545–1599) as well as Indian surgical practices from long ago. He also made contributions towards the development of cleft palate repair, and was a pioneer of eyelid surgery, coining the term "blepharoplasty" in 1818. He is also reputed to have carried out the first reported clitoridectomy in the Western Europe, which was done on a teenage girl regarded as an "imbecile" who was masturbating.

Works
The following are his principal works: With Philipp Franz von Walther, he edited the Journal für Chirurgie und Augenheilkunde.
 * Normen für die Ablösung größerer Gliedmaßen (Berlin, 1812) – Standards for the removal of larger limbs.
 * Rhinoplastik (1818) – Rhinoplasty.
 * Neue Beiträge zur Kunst, Teile des Angesichts organisch zu ersetzen (1821).
 * Die epidemisch-kontagiose Augenblennorrhoe Ägyptens in den europäischen Befreiungsheeren (1824) – The epidemic involving ophthalmic blennorrhea in Egypt affecting the European liberation armies.
 * Jahresberichte ber das klinisch-chirurgisch-augenarztliche Institut der Universität zu Berlin (1817-1834) – Annual reports on the clinical-surgical-ophthalmology institute at the University of Berlin.

title: Karl Ferdinand von Gräfe


text:
Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham

The Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham is the diocesan bishop of the Church of England Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham in the Province of York.

The diocese covers 847 sqmi including the whole of Nottinghamshire and a small area of South Yorkshire. The see is in the town of Southwell where the seat is located at the Cathedral and Collegiate Church of the Blessed Virgin Mary (also known as Southwell Minster), which was elevated to cathedral status in 1884. The bishop's residence is Bishop's Manor, Southwell — in the minster precincts.

The diocese was created in 1884. Until 2005 it was known simply by the name "Southwell"; Nottingham was added to the title in that year. The current bishop is Paul Williams, whose election was confirmed on 11 May 2015. There are 314 church buildings in the Diocese.

The bishop is assisted by the suffragan Bishop of Sherwood, the current incumbent being Andy Emerton.

Assistant bishops
Among those called Assistant Bishop of Southwell:
 * 1901 – 1913 (res.): Hamilton Baynes, Vicar of Nottingham, former Bishop of Natal and later Assistant Bishop and Provost of Birmingham
 * 1934 – 1943 (d.): Neville Talbot, Vicar of St Mary's, Nottingham and former Bishop of Pretoria
 * 1944 – 1945 (res.): Douglas Wilson, former Bishop of British Honduras; became Bishop of Trinidad
 * 1946 – 1952: John Weller, Vicar of Edwalton (until 1949), Rector of Holme Pierrepont (from 1951) and former Bishop of the Falkland Islands and in Argentina and Eastern South America
 * November 1952 – 1968 (death): Morris Gelsthorpe, former Bishop in Sudan
 * 1960–1971 (ret.): Mark Way, Rector of Averham, former Bishop of Masasi
 * 1972–1977 (ret.): Bernard Markham, Rector of East Bridgford, former Bishop of Nassau

title: Bishop of Southwell and Nottingham


text:
Scientific Data Systems

Scientific Data Systems (SDS), was an American computer company founded in September 1961 by Max Palevsky, Arthur Rock and Robert Beck, veterans of Packard Bell Corporation and Bendix, along with eleven other computer scientists. SDS was the first to employ silicon transistors, and was an early adopter of integrated circuits in computer design. The company concentrated on larger scientific workload focused machines and sold many machines to NASA during the Space Race. Most machines were both fast and relatively low priced. The company was sold to Xerox in 1969, but dwindling sales due to the oil crisis of 1973–74 caused Xerox to close the division in 1975 at a loss of hundreds of millions of dollars. During the Xerox years the company was officially Xerox Data Systems (XDS), whose machines were the Xerox 500 series.

Early machines
Throughout the majority of the 1960s the US computer market was dominated by "Snow White", IBM, and the "Seven Dwarves", Burroughs, UNIVAC, NCR, Control Data Corporation, Honeywell, General Electric, and RCA. SDS entered this well developed market and was able to introduce a time-sharing computer at just the right time. Much of their success was due to the use of silicon-based transistors in their earliest designs, the 24-bit SDS 910 and SDS 920 which included a hardware (integer) multiplier. These are arguably the first commercial systems based on silicon, rather than germanium, which offered much better reliability for no real additional cost.

Additionally, the SDS machines shipped with a selection of software, notably a FORTRAN compiler, developed by Digitek, that made use of the systems' Programmed OPeratorS (POPS), and could compile, in 4K 24-bit words, programs in a single pass without the need for magnetic tape secondary storage. For scientific users writing small programs, this was a real boon and dramatically improved development turnaround time.

The 910 and 920 were joined by the SDS 9300, announced in June 1963. Among other changes, the 9300 included a floating point processor for higher performance. The performance increase was dramatic; the 910/920 needed 16 microseconds to add two 24-bit integers, the 9300 only 1.75, almost 10 times as fast. The 9300 also increased maximum memory from 16 kWords to 32 kWords. Although its instruction format resembled that of the earlier machines, it was not compatible with them.

In December 1963 SDS announced the SDS 930, a major re-build of the 9xx line using integrated circuits (ICs) in the central processor. It was comparable to the 9300 in basic operations, but was generally slower overall due to the lack of the 9300's memory interlace capability and hardware floating point unit (although a hardware floating point "correlation and filtering unit" was available as an expensive option). The 930 cost less than half that of the original 9300, at about $105,000. Cut-down versions of the 920 also followed, including the 12-bit SDS 92, and the IC-based 925.

Project Genie developed a segmentation and relocation system for time-sharing use on the 930 at the University of California, Berkeley, which was commercialized in the SDS 940. It had additional hardware for relocation and swapping of memory sections, and interruptible instructions. The 940 would go on to be a major part of Tymshare's circuit-switched network system growth in the 1960s (pre-ARPAnet and before packet-switching). A 945 was announced in July 1968 as a modified 940 with less I/O and the same compute power, but it is unclear whether this shipped.

SDS 92
The SDS 92 is generally accepted as the first commercial computer using monolithic integrated circuits. ICs were used on about 50 circuit cards.

The SDS 92 is a small, high-speed, very low-cost, general purpose computer 12-bit system introduced in 1965. it was not compatible with other SDS lines such as the 900 series or the Sigma series. Features included: Peripheral equipment available from SDS standard peripheral line included:
 * 12- and 24-bit instructions
 * 12-bit word plus parity bit
 * 2048-word basic memory (1.75 μsec memory cycle) expandable to 4096, 8192, 16,384 or 32,768 words, all directly addressable
 * 10 cps Keyboard/printer (teletype) with or without paper tape reader and punch
 * 300 cps paper tape reader
 * 60 cps paper tape punch
 * MAGPAK Magnetic Tape System

Sigma series
In December 1966 SDS shipped the entirely new Sigma series, starting with the 16-bit Sigma 2 and the 32-bit Sigma 7, both using common hardware internally. The success of the IBM System/360 and the rise of the 7-bit ASCII character standard was pushing all vendors to the 8-bit standard from their earlier 6-bit ones. SDS was one of the first companies to offer a machine intended as an alternative to the IBM System/360; although not compatible with the 360, it used similar data formats, the EBCDIC character code, and in other ways, such as its use of multiple registers rather than an accumulator, it was designed to have specifications that were comparable to those of the 360.

Various versions of the Sigma 7 followed, including the cut-down Sigma 5 and re-designed Sigma 6. The Xerox Sigma 9 was a major re-design with instruction lookahead and other advanced features, while the Sigma 8 and Sigma 9 mod 3 were low-end machines offered as a migration path for the Sigma 5. The French company CII, as a licensee of SDS, sold about 60 Sigma 7 machines in Europe, and developed an upgrade with virtual memory and dual-processor capability, the Iris 80. CII also manufactured and sold some 160 Sigma 2 systems.

The Sigma range was very successful in the niche real-time processing field, due to the sophisticated hardware interrupt structure and independent I/O processor. The first node of ARPANET was established by Leonard Kleinrock at UCLA with an SDS Sigma 7 system.

Xerox models
Even with these successes, when Xerox bought the company in 1969 they sold only about 1% of the computers in the United States, something Xerox never seemed to improve. When they were purchased, about 1,000 SDS machines of all types were in the market, and by the time the division closed in 1975 this had increased to only about 2,100. By this point, the newer Xerox 550 and 560 models, extensively re-designed Sigmas, were about to come to market and were extensively back ordered. Most rights were sold to Honeywell in July 1975 who produced Sigmas for a short period, and provided support into the 1980s.

Several manufacturers attempted to enter the Sigma 9 replacement market. The first successful design was the Telefile T-85, but it is not clear how many were sold. Other efforts, including the Modutest Mod 9, Ilene Model 9000 and Real-time RCE-9 were designed, but it is not clear if they were ever produced past the prototype stage.

A new start
Former SDS employees restarted the company with funding from Max Palevsky, Sanford Kaplan, Dan McGurk, and others in 1979. Jack Mitchell, William L. Scheding, and Henry Harold, along with some other former SDS engineers introduced a microprocessor-based computer called the SDS-420 built on a 6502A-based processor design with up to 56 KB of memory and a proprietary OS, SDS-DOS, along with the BASIC programming language from Microsoft. The SDS-420 featured a dual single-sided-double-density (400 KB per side) floppy disk drive, Model 70, manufactured by PerSci (Peripheral Sciences), of Santa Monica and Marina del Rey, California. The SDS-422 Model offered some of the first dual double-sided-double-density floppy drives. Other hardware options were a 6551-A USART and a proprietary network SDS-NET using a Z8530 SDLC/HDLC chip and software patterned after the early Xerox 3.0 Mbit/s Ethernet and transceivers produced by Tat Lam of the Bay Area.

The company sold about 1,000 machines worldwide, including Tahiti, London, Italy, New York City and Los Angeles. The 400 Series had little to do with scientific computing and more with word processing and business services.

SDS announced a fully operational local area network (LAN)-based file server called SDS-NET at COMDEX in the early 1980s. SDS-NET was based on a Model 430 and written by Sam Keys, of Westchester, California. The SDS 430 Server offered file and printer sharing services over SDS-NET or using a modem and was based upon a 10 MB hard disk manufactured by Micropolis of Chatsworth, California. SDS Offered other models, including the SDS-410, a diskless work station that booted and ran off the SDS-NET or optionally could boot off-of and run over a 1200 bit/s modem link.

Products offered were: Word (word processing, written by John McCully, formerly of Jacquard Systems, Manhattan Beach, California), and fully functional accounting software: balance-forward and open-item accounting with General Ledger, Accounts Receivable, Accounts Payable, and Payroll (written by Tom Davies and Sandra Mass, both formerly with Jacquard Systems).

Other offerings included: Legal Time and Billing, Medical Time and Billing, and TTY an early terminal emulation program using the 6551 USART. Through partnerships with their value-added resellers (VARs) other software product offerings included a solid-waste management system with automated truck routing and a country-club accounting package. One UK-based VAR was Jacq-Rite, a vertical market software house run by Ken Groome and Vivienne Gurney and based in Dorking, Surrey. Jacq-Rite had developed a range of specialist insurance software for the Jacquard machine but transferred to the SDS 400 following the advice of John McCully. Jacq-Rite installed several SDS 400 series networks in Lloyd's Managing and Members Agencies during 1982 and 1983. One of Jacq-Rite's programming staff that worked on the software porting was Justin Hill. Jacq-Rite's hardware sales were managed by David Ensor.

SDS in the United Kingdom
In 1983 Ensor and Hill left Jacq-Rite and formed a company calling itself 'Scientific Data Systems UK Limited' or 'SDS UK' (but actually unrelated to SDS) in Crawley, West Sussex in the UK. This coincided with SDS's announcement of their 4000 series computer; they hoped to build a business around this machine (including supplying it to Jacq-Rite) and negotiated an exclusive arrangement with SDS.

The SDS 4000 was a complete re-design, both cosmetically and with all-new internal hardware, but the architecture was basically the same as the 400 series - and ran the same software. The machine had a 1/2 height $5 1/4$-inch hard disk drive bay and used Seagate 10 and 20 MB hard drives or SyQuest removable drive units. The 4000 motherboard had a SCSI interface (still known as SASI at the time) and an Adaptec 4000 SASI controller board was shoe-horned into the case to connect the drives. The diskette drive was also half-height $5 1/4$-inch (the 400 series had used 8 inch diskettes). Like the 410, there was a diskless version too. Local Area Networking capabilities were carried over from the 400 series.

The 4000's major aesthetic departure from its predecessor was the use of a separate 12-inch tilt-and-swivel Visual Display Unit (VDU) and CPU case. The keyboard was detachable for the first time and the system had a beige colour scheme (dictated by the colour of the third party VDUs) in place of the black and white appearance of the 400.

However, financial problems at SDS were already substantial, and the UK business only ever received a small number of hastily completed machines. In an attempt to bypass these problems Hill produced a clone of the 4000 series computer by reverse-engineering an original model with the aid of a set of paper schematics obtained on a visit to SDS. This was neither approved nor supported by SDS, but Mitchell alone [and not Scheding] made a confidential visit to the UK to help debug the new computer. This was fortunate because, being unable to confer with SDS, Hill had unwittingly used schematics referring to a forthcoming revision of the machine, for which no firmware had yet been completed. Mitchell alone [and not Scheding] finished the new firmware at SDS UK's offices. This meant that Hill's 'unofficial 4000' was actually a later revision than any US machines completed. Hill also improved the board layout, rear-panel connectivity and power supply.

The new machine worked, and a number of examples were made using a prototyping firm in Poole, Dorset. Several were even sold, including a 5-station network with external storage (see below) to the UK Institute of Legal Executives ('ILEX') in Bedford which remained in use for several years. This was supplied with bespoke software (also produced by Hill, with the assistance of Paula Flint) to store examination results and print certificates. However, any hope of selling into the lucrative Lloyd's insurance market in conjunction with Jacq-Rite was short-lived as Jacq-Rite had abandoned SDS and moved to the IBM PC platform, taking their customers with them, as soon as SDS UK was formed. (This decision was also influenced by John McCully, who was now developing his word-processing software for MS-DOS.)

The 'unofficial' 4000 series machine was at least a finished computer, and the small number produced worked reliably. Taking advantage of the SCSI implementation, Hill added an external connector to his version of the machine and developed a matching hard drive enclosure. This enclosure accommodated higher capacity, full-height $5 1/4$-inch drives.

However, the UK company's lack of capital to invest in the machine's manufacture meant that the cosmetic appearance of the computer left a lot to be desired. Furthermore, the machines were extremely costly – IBM's new Personal Computer/AT was shipping at about half the price SDS UK Limited needed to sell their computer for. Relationships between SDS and its UK namesake had broken down completely by this time, and SDS UK did not have the resources to develop new versions of the hardware or operating system.

SDS went out of business in the US 1984. The UK company of the same name ceased trading in the same year.

Known users
Although initially intended as a Scientific Computer System, the 900 series and the Sigma series were used extensively in commercial time-sharing systems. The biggest such user was Comshare Inc. of Ann Arbor, Michigan, who extensively developed the hardware during the 1980s and the Sigma 9 was operated commercially until c. 1993. Developments and improvements by Comshare included the I-Channel, which allowed the utilization of Bus/Tag (IBM compatible) devices and the ISI Communications interface. These innovations allowed Comshare to capitalize on the Sigma CPU's and their software development (Commander II) by gaining access to current technology storage systems. When Xerox withdrew from the mainframe computer manufacturing business and relinquished all assets to Honeywell Corporation, Comshare opened a Research and Development facility in Phoenix Arizona, where they manufactured three Sigma 9 systems from spare and remanufactured parts acquired from Modutest, Inc. of Westlake Village, California and Modutest Systems, Inc., Phoenix, Arizona. Recognition Equipment Inc. of Dallas, Texas used 910s in the 1960s to control its optical character recognition machines.

Other known users of SDS systems in the USA include:

Known users outside the U.S. include:

SDS software
The primary operating system for the 900 series was called Monarch. For the Sigma 32-bit range RBM, a real-time and batch monitor, and BTM, a batch and timesharing monitor were available. In 1971 a more sophisticated timesharing system UTS was released, which was developed into CP-V. The RBM operating system was replaced by CP-R, a real-time and timesharing system. In March 1982 Honeywell gave the remaining software for the 900 series to a group in Kansas City that offered to continue making copies for people still using the systems. Honeywell had stopped supporting the systems many years before this. In September 2006, this collection was donated to the Computer History Museum along with all of the program's original documentation, and copies of most of the SDS user's manuals. This is one of the largest collections of software to have survived from the 1960s intact. Unfortunately, the timesharing software for the 940 series was not present in the Honeywell LADS Library and does not appear to have survived. Copies of the original system developed at UC Berkeley exist as file system backups. Most of the customers for 940 systems (in particular Tymshare) made extensive modifications to the 940 system software, and no copies of that version of the software are known to have survived.

Multiple simulators for the Sigma series are known to exist, and Sigma series software is being collected by the Computer History Museum. Early versions were not copyrighted (CP-V C00 and earlier), while later versions developed by Honeywell were (CP-V E00 and F00). Some copies of CP-V D00 were released without licensing agreements and subsequently public domain status was claimed by users.

CE16 and CF16
The Xerox CE16 and CF16 minicomputers, announced in May 1969, were small 16-bit computers designed primarily for process control applications. Both systems came with a base 4 KW of 16-bit core memory, expandable to 16 KW, and three "interrupt channels." The CE16 CPU can perform an addition in 16 μsec and a (software) multiplication in 126 μsec. Its price of $12,800 was. The CF16 CPU is rated at 5.33 μsec for addition and 42 μsec for (hardware) multiplication. It cost $14,900,.

title: Scientific Data Systems


text:
Gipsy Moth IV

Gipsy Moth IV is a 53 ft ketch that Sir Francis Chichester commissioned specifically to sail single-handed around the globe, racing against the times set by the clipper ships of the 19th century. Gipsy Moth IV was the first ever purpose-built ocean racer and has over the years become the most famous of small sailing vessels. Gipsy Moth IV's voyage was the inspiration for the Golden Globe Race (GGR) which continues today.

The name, the fourth boat in Chichester's series, all named Gipsy Moth, originated from the de Havilland Gipsy Moth aircraft in which Chichester completed pioneering work in aerial navigation techniques.

Background and design
After being nursed back to health from a suspected lung abscess by his wife, Chichester undertook two single-handed Transatlantic races from Plymouth to New York in 1960 and Plymouth to Newport in 1964 in Gipsy Moth III. He won the '60 race and was runner-up in the '64 race. During the '64 race he became inspired to challenge the times set by the tea and wool clipper ships. The tea clippers took an average of 123 days to make their passage to the East Indies, so Chichester set himself the target of making the passage in 100 days. He subsequently wrote his book Along the Clipper Way, which charts the voyage taken by 19th century wool clippers returning from Australia.

In 1965 Chichester commissioned Gosport-based ship yard Camper and Nicholsons to build the boat, designed by John Illingworth and Angus Primrose. Launched in March 1966 with yard number 916, Gypsy Moth IV is 38 ft on the waterline and 53 ft overall, with a hull constructed of cold-moulded Honduras mahogany. The scheduled displacement (to follow Chichester's requirements of maximum weight) was 10.4 tons, after trials increased by 1 ton of added ballast to cope with insufficient righting moment. Ketch rigged, she has a sail area of 854 sqft, extendable with a spinnaker to over 1500 sqft. The boat incorporated the maximum amount of sail for the minimum amount of rigging, whilst employing tiller based self-steering using design principles established by Blondie Hasler that could enable steerage from the skipper's bunk, essential for solo sailing for a voyage of this length.

1967 voyage
Gipsy Moth IV set out from Plymouth on 27 August 1966 with 64-year-old Sir Francis at the helm. The voyage was not uneventful, and Chichester later recalled three moments where he noted that the trip nearly ended. The first was when part of the frame holding the wind vane self-steering failed, when still 2,300 mi from Sydney. Not wanting to put in at Fremantle, Western Australia, Chichester spent three days balancing sails and experimenting with shock-cord lines on the tiller, once again getting the boat to hold a course to enable her to cover 160 mi a day.

An exhausted Chichester entered Sydney harbour for a stopover 107 days later. He enlisted the help of America's Cup designer Warwick Hood, who added a piece to the boat's keel to provide Gipsy Moth IV with better directional stability to stop her broaching, but the modification did nothing to improve her stability.

One day out on the return trip via Cape Horn, the boat was rolled in a 140-degree capsize. Chichester calculated the angle by measuring the mark on the cabin roof made by a wine bottle. He commented in his diary and in a later interview with Time magazine that he knew she would self-right as she was designed to, but was concerned by the incident as this was a light storm and he still had to pass Cape Horn, where the third and most significant event of the voyage would occur: "The waves were tremendous. They varied each time, but all were like great sloping walls towering behind you. The kind I liked least was like a great bank of gray-green earth 50' (15 m) high and very steep. Image yourself at the bottom of one. My cockpit was filled five times and once it took more than 15 minutes to drain. My wind-reading machine stopped recording at 60 knots. My self-steering could not cope with the buffeting....I had a feeling of helplessness." Just as he thought all hope was lost and he was alone, on exiting the cockpit one day he was followed by the British Antarctic Survey vessel HMS Protector (A146), and later the same day a Royal Air Force plane broke through the clouds. On 28 May 1967 having logged 28500 mi in just 274 days (226 days actual sailing time), the voyage claimed the following records:
 * Fastest voyage around the world by any small vessel
 * Longest non stop passage that had been made by a small sailing vessel (15000 mi)
 * More than twice the distance of the previous longest passage by a singlehander
 * Twice broke the record for a singlehander's week's run by more than 100 mi
 * Established a record for singlehanded speed by sailing 1400 mi in 8 days

Because of the boat lacking of directional stability (despite fin extension) and righting moment, Chichester commented: "Now that I have finished, I don't know what will become of Gipsy Moth IV. I only own the stern while my cousin owns two thirds. My part, I would sell any day. It would be better if about a third were sawn off. The boat was too big for me. Gipsy Moth IV has no sentimental value for me at all. She is cantankerous and difficult and needs a crew of three - a man to navigate, an elephant to move the tiller and a 3'6" (1.1 m) chimpanzee with arms 8' (2.4 m) long to get about below and work some of the gear."

Greenwich
In July 1968, Gipsy Moth IV was put on permanent display at Greenwich in a land-locked purpose-built dry dock next to the Cutty Sark. The yacht was open to the public for many years. In September 1977 a ceremony was held to mark her 1 millionth visitor on board.Eventually, due to general deterioration from allowing visitors to walk across her decks, Gipsy Moth was permanently closed to visitors, remaining on display at Greenwich next to the Cutty Sark. Her “entombment” at Greenwich was referred to in the song "Single Handed Sailor" by the band Dire Straits. Chichester died at the age of 71 on 26 August 1972.

After 37 years (in 2005) she was freed and relaunched.

Gipsy Moth IV's restoration
By the early 2000s, the condition of Gipsy Moth IV, even though she continued to rest in a Greenwich dry dock hoist, had seriously deteriorated. In 2003, Paul Gelder, editor of the London-based sailing magazine Yachting Monthly, launched a campaign to restore the yacht and sail her around the world in 2006 on the 40th anniversary of Chichester's voyage, and the 100th birthday of the magazine. He enlisted the support of The Blue Water Round the World Rally, a club-style cruising rally that the magazine had been covering since 1995.

In 2004, in a joint proposal with Yachting Monthly and Gipsy Moth IV's owners, The Maritime Trust, the yacht was purchased by the United Kingdom Sailing Academy (UKSA) in Cowes, Isle of Wight, for a token sum of £1 and a gin and tonic (Sir Francis' favourite tipple). The UKSA, Yachting Monthly and the Maritime Trust were the three major project partners in the campaign to save the yacht.

In November 2004 Gipsy Moth IV was lifted out of Greenwich dry dock and taken by road to Camper and Nicholson's yard in Gosport, where she had been built and launched in 1966, for restoration. Although C&N did the work at cost price, the structural restoration cost more than £300,000, with money raised by donations from the public. Over 9000 hours were spent during the 28 week project. The additional equipment and services were provided by the British marine industry. As part of the yacht's restoration, the original B&G Navigation equipment was replaced with up to date electronics, but the original devices were left on a covering panel to maintain the feel of the 1966 build. On 20 June 2005, Gipsy Moth IV was relaunched and put back into "active service" by HRH Princess Anne.

Second voyage
Gipsy Moth IV set sail from Plymouth Sound on the first leg of the 2005-07 Blue Water Round the World Rally on 25 September 2005. She had a mixture of experienced crew and teams of disadvantaged youth on board, including for part of the voyage:
 * Skipper: Richard Bagget
 * First mate: Dewi Thomas
 * Crew Leader: Paul Gelder (Editor of Yachting Monthly)
 * Crew: Matthew Pakes (Isle of Wight), Peter Heggie (Plymouth), Elaine Cadwell (Scotland)

The first leg took just over two weeks to reach Gibraltar, the official starting point for the Blue Water Round the World Rally. After crossing the Bay of Biscay to make landfall in Bayona, Spain, where Paul Gelder left to return to the UK, there was a crew change at Vilamoura, Portugal, and Tom Buggy joined the yacht as Crew Leader for the rest of the leg. Yachting Monthly's Dick Durham sailed the next leg and crew leader to the Canary Islands, where James Jermain took over as Mate to Richard Baggett for the Atlantic crossing to Antigua. The yacht went through the Panama Canal in February 2006 and headed for the Galapagos islands and the Marquesas.

On April 29, 2006, after a navigational error, Gipsy Moth ran aground on a coral reef at Rangiroa, an atoll in the Tuamotus, known as The Dangerous Archipelago in the Pacific Ocean. She was just 200 mi from her next landfall, Tahiti. The yacht was seriously damaged. After six days, a major salvage operation was undertaken with Smit, the Dutch big ship experts who were called in by the UKSA, with local help from Tahiti and Rangiroa. After a day-and-a-half spent patching up the holes in the hull with sheets of plywood, the yacht was successfully towed off the reef into deep water on a makeshift 'sledge'. She was towed to Tahiti and put on a cargo ship to be taken to New Zealand. In Auckland, Grant Dalton's America's Cup team donated help and premises at their HQ in Viaduct Harbour, and the yacht underwent a second restoration. After two weeks or so she was sailing again on 23 June 2006.

Her return leg was via Cairns and Darwin, in Australia; Indonesia, Singapore, Phuket, Sri Lanka, the Red Sea, Suez Canal and the Mediterranean. She docked in Gibraltar for a crew change, with skipper John Jeffrey joined by British teenagers: Grant McCabe (Plymouth), Kerry Prideaux (Lynton, Devon), Glen Austin (Isle of Wight) - the last of 90 disadvantaged young people who had crewed the yacht on her 28264 mi voyage round the world. She was accompanied into Plymouth by a flotilla of small craft, Gipsy Moth IV docked at West Hoe Pier on 28 May 2007, as she did exactly 40 years earlier. She was welcomed home by Giles Chichester, son of Sir Francis.

The Gipsy Moth Trust
For some time Gipsy Moth IV lay in Lymington Marina, stored at the end of a line of yachts for sale in the boat yard. In November 2010, she was sold to new British owners and remained at Cowes on display to the public.

Gipsy Moth IV sailed at classic regattas in the summer of 2011, including Suffolk Yacht Harbour Classic Regatta (18–19 June), JP Morgan Asset Management Round the Island Race (25 June), Panerai British Classic Week (16–23 July) and Aberdeen Asset Management Cowes Week (6–13 August). She was one of a number of important vessels which were moored along the route of the Thames Diamond Jubilee Pageant, to celebrate the diamond jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II. Due to her size, she was not part of the flotilla of vessels, and instead was moored with other vessels at St Katharine Docks, in a display known as the Avenue of Sail.

Gipsy Moth IV was a regular visitor to Bucklers Hard, especially for winter maintenance, during which times she was viewed by the public on special open days. In May 2017 she attended the Jersey Boat Show to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Chichester's circumnavigation.

The yacht was owned and maintained by The Gipsy Moth Trust, a registered charity, until 2021. Her costs were funded by paying passengers and crew, and by donations to the Trust.

In February 2021 she was put up for sale by the Trust when COVID-19 badly affected the continued operation of the Trust.

The third life of the legend
In March 2022, Gipsy Moth IV was purchased by Simon Oberholzer who has undertaken her second complete restoration, back to her original "1967 state". As Gipsy Moth has a full keel and wide turning circle, and in order to manoeuver her into small spaces in today's marinas, a specially designed electric powered water thruster was developed and has been installed in the bow during the 2022 restoration at the Elephant Boatyard, on the Hamble River. This allows Gipsy Moth IV now to turn easily without compromising her structural integrity or ruining the aesthetics of her classic lines. Gipsy Moth IV's 2022 outer-restoration was completed, just a day before her Royal Review by the Princess Royal at Cowes Week and the Solent Platinum Jubilee Celebration on 6 August 2022. The cumulative cost of the Gipsy Moth IV and restorations now exceeds £2 million.

In addition to the restoration, Oberholzer has collected more than one thousand documents, articles, artifacts and other memorabilia (ranging from minted coins to issued stamps and tea clothes) which relate to Gipsy Moth IV and which secures her status as a sailing legend.

As of November 2015 the inside back cover of all new British passports have an illustration of Gipsy Moth IV.

The restoration activities surrounding Gipsy Moth IV during 2022–2023 have not been limited to the yacht itself, but have been extended to include the creation and updating of the Gipsy Moth IV logo by Bas van der Heide, who has a long association with various of The Ocean Race yachts (and who designed boats like ABN Amro 1 and 2 - and most recently Jajo in 2023). In addition, a Gipsy Moth IV and Sir Francis Chichester knowledge platform for educational purposes has been started: www.gipsymothiv.com.

Channel crossing
On the day of the Coronation of King Charles III (6th May, 2023) Gipsy Moth IV departed Ramsgate for The Netherlands, making her first voyage away from British waters in 16 years. The last time was during the Blue Water Rally voyage in 2005–2007. Gipsy Moth IV's first port of call was Scheveningen, The Netherlands.

The origin of ocean racing

Chichester's and Gipsy Moth IV's voyage in 1966 is regarded as the first race-around-the-world and the origin of ocean racing.

At the start of the final leg of the Ocean Race 2023, at the Hague, Gipsy Moth IV provided a full dress salute to the participating boats and the following day, the same to the Admiral of the Dutch navy at the Scheveningen harbour's "Vlaggetjesdag" festival which has been held annually since 1947.

Flag and club affiliation
Gipsy Moth IV sails under the British flag (Red Ensign) and is linked to the Royal Thames Yacht Club.

Some key facts
Gipsy Moth IV...

 * is the first sailing boat to be raced solo around the world in 1966/67.
 * was sailed by Sir Francis Chichester, who was knighted by Queen Elizabeth II for this first ever solo round-the-world voyage.
 * despite her small size of 53 feet, beat the times of the great tea clippers like the Cutty Sark.
 * was designed by Illingworth and Primrose and is the first ever specifically designed round-the-world ocean racer.
 * is a very light composite yacht made of Honduran mahogany and epoxy weighing circa. 13 tons.
 * was visited by more than 1 million people already in 1977.
 * has been either visited, inspected or sailed by the British royals on five official occasions.
 * was out of the water on display at the British National Maritime Museum as Greenwich, London, for 37 years.
 * has a song written about her by Dire Straits: "Single-Handed Sailor."
 * has been restored twice to sailing condition in 2005 and 2022 and has had cumulatively more than 2 million pounds spent on her build and restorations.
 * was run aground on a reef, during her second circumnavigation in the South Pacific in 2006 and she was repaired by the Emirates America’s Cup Team New Zealand in Auckland.
 * was illustrated on the inside pages of the British passport in 2015.
 * is the origin of ocean racing and has inspired more than 45 round-the-world ocean races since her first voyage.

title: Gipsy Moth IV


text:
Vova and Olga Galchenko

Vladimir (born September 15, 1987), known as Vova, and Olga Galchenko (born July 31, 1990) were a brother and sister juggling team originally from Russia, active from approximately 2001 to 2009. They specialized in club juggling, particularly technical solo juggling, technical club passing and numbers club passing.

Biography
Vladimir Vasilievich Galchenko, known as Vova, and his sister Olga Vasilievna Galchenko are originally from Penza, Russia, and both started juggling at a very young age. At age seven, Vova joined a circus school. Olga joined the circus school several years later. Vova Galchenko is one of two jugglers that have successfully executed a 7 club 7 up 360.

With the encouragement of their parents, Vova and Olga began performing together. In 2001, their father began filming them performing tricks and posted the videos on a website. They soon began receiving invitations to perform abroad. Vova and Olga soon became widely known in the European juggling community for their high level of technical ability, both on and off stage, especially as they were both very young. Even at the ages of 12 and 15 they were featured performers at many large juggling conventions and festivals in Europe, including the British Juggling Convention 2002, Dresden Juggling Convention 2002 and 2003, the European Youth Circus Festival 2002 and the European Juggling Convention 2003. They also performed at the Israel and Japan juggling conventions.

In 2003 they moved from Russia to the United States, where they settled in Los Angeles and began working with Jason Garfield to improve their technical skills. Also in July 2003 they travelled to the International Jugglers' Association Summer Festival in Reno, Nevada. Many expected them to win all three stage championship categories (Individual, Junior and Team). However, due to their lack of experience on a competition stage, they failed to take gold in any category, though as a team they won a silver medal, and many awards in other events.

In December 2004 they also took part in the first World Juggling Federation competition in Las Vegas, Nevada. Vova won the Advanced Clubs, Five Club Moves, Three Club 360s and Five Club 360s competitions, and came second in the only other event he entered. Olga won the Junior Clubs and came second in the Women's Advanced Clubs. Together they won the Teams Six Club and the Teams Seven Plus.

In 2005, the siblings' partnership began to splinter, in part because Olga wanted to concentrate on school. Vova began performing on his own.

In the 2006 World Juggling Federation competition in Las Vegas, Nevada, Vova and Olga won the Team Club Passing competition. This was their first performance as a pair in competition for one and a half years. Vova also competed individually and won the Endurance - Clubs, 5 Ball 360s (together with Thomas Dietz), 3 Club 360s, 5 Club 360s, 5 Ball Freestyle, 7 Ball Freestyle, 3 Club Freestyle, 5 Club Freestyle competitions.

Juggling style and records
The Galchenko siblings are known within the juggling world as being "obsessive" about perfecting their technical skills. Penn Jillette asserts that "if you're talking about club passing, the two of them together are the best in the world. Not just the best in the world. The best there has ever been." Writing in Time, Lev Grossman describes their performance as "beautiful--a kind of kinetic sculpture, a bravura display of human determination bringing order to the chaotic physical world." According to Jason Fagone in The New York Times, Vova "is able to blur the transitions between tricks so completely that it often seems as if he’s not doing tricks at all".

Unlike many other jugglers, however, the siblings do not excel at performing; they do not banter on stage or veer towards comedy. This is, in part, due to Vova's almost crippling stage fright. Vova, who has earned the nickname "The Russian Robot" for his refusal to try to engage his audiences, maintains that juggling has nothing to do with artistry: "There’s nothing you can express through juggling. It’s just throwing and catching ...". Because their interests lie in the technical aspects of the discipline rather than entertainment, they joined the World Juggling Federation, whose mission is to transform juggling into a sport.

Olga and Vova previously held several juggling world records for team club passing. Some of their records included:
 * Ten Clubs - 378 passes caught
 * Eleven Clubs - 152 passes caught
 * Twelve Clubs - 54 passes caught

Other endeavors
Vova and Olga Galchenko have recently shifted their focus somewhat away from juggling in pursuit of other ambitions. The siblings studied Computer Engineering and Computer Science at rival universities in Los Angeles: Olga at UCLA, and Vova at USC. Both have had some success in their studies. Most notably, Vova has released a number of iPhone applications, one of which is geared towards jugglers. Since 2012, Vova has been working at Box.

title: Vova and Olga Galchenko


text:
The Sovereign State

The Sovereign State: The Secret History of International Telephone and Telegraph is a non-fiction book by Anthony Sampson published on July 1, 1973, by Hodder & Stoughton Ltd. The book focuses on the history of ITT Corporation to make a broader point about the weakening of the authority of traditional national governments by the multinational corporations.

In some editions it was sold under the title of The Sovereign State of ITT.

Plot
In part, it was a portrait of Harold Geneen, the chief executive of ITT from 1959 until 1977. Geneen was a legendarily hands-on manager, who believed it necessary to penetrate through layers of "false facts" to get to the "unshakable facts" about any of the markets or divisions of his conglomerate. In terms of its broader themes, though, this book was one of a spate of early-70s books that promoted the thesis that multinational corporations were taking over the traditional prerogatives and functions of national governments.

In a review of Sampson's book in the Sunday Telegraph, Sir Frank McFadzean, Vice Chairman of Royal Dutch/Shell, took issue with that thesis. Such corporations are "prisoners of their past investments," he wrote, because "even the most puny government can nationalize, and the only redress is to seek compensation."

Although as Sampson's book shows ITT has used other means of redress to defend its own business interests from nationalisation, that have not been confined to the courts. These have ranged from supporting the 1930s military takeover by General Franco in Spain, investing in Hitler's war machine throughout World War II, and funding a CIA-backed coup led by General Pinochet in Chile 1973.

Official information

 * Stein and Day, US publisher (1973)
 * Stein and Day, US publisher (1973)

title: The Sovereign State


text:
Talk:Tree climbing

= Commercial external links =

I think that Wikipedia's tree climbing article isn't a "directory" for all the recreational tree climbing companies. Please stop to add external links of your commercial organisation. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.69.62.41 (talk) 10:16, 5 May 2011 (UTC)

= TCI 'Ad' =

The TCI 'Ad' should be removed from the introduction and to the bottom under a headline 'Treeclimbing Organisations' or something. Peter Jenkins seems to have a large fanbase but he's quite unlikely the only one who had the idea of climbing trees with modern ropes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.110.95.2 (talk) 11:22, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

 * You're right, TCI 'Ad' can be treated as advertising. —86.69.62.198 (talk) 00:58, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

= Redirect = There is currently a recreational tree climbing article, while tree climbing is a red link. Because there are many things that could be written that would apply equally well to commercial or activist tree climbing as recreational climbing, it seems logical to move this article to tree climbing (leaving a redirect at recreational tree climbing, of course) and then make the current content of this article a mere section of a larger one. Any objections? Anyone else want to be bold and do it before I get around to it? - leif ☺ (talk) - 22:36, Jun 23, 2005 (UTC)

 * Seems sensible to me - MPF - 21:56, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

 * Makes sense to me, does anyone object? - John.james - 14:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

= Recreational activity origins =

Started by children
Isn't it safe to say that recreational tree climbing was started by children, and not environmentalists? - 165.91.174.179 - 09:10, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree. I just don't believe "Tree climbing as a recreational activity emerged in the early 1980s".  Surely recreation and tree-climbing are way older than that! 82.45.8.208 (talk) 15:16, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

 * Yeah, I've tried to clarify. Still needs sourcing, though. — Satori Son 15:48, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

First grove
The first tree climbing grove was established in Atlanta, Georgia by Peter "Treeman" Jenkins in 1983 (see "The Founder's Grove" in www.treeclimbing.com ). In France, the first tree climbing organization was created in Annonay, Ardèche, by "Les ACCRO-Branchés" in 1989. - 84.100.185.207 - 09:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

 * Small mistake, in France the first tree climbing organization was created in Paris, Ile-de-France by "Tree Climbing France" in 2005 (www.treeclimbing.fr). Following the meeting of Peter Jenkins with the two "Tree Climbing France" founders at the 2005 Tree Climbing Rendez-vous, in Oregon. In 1989, "Les ACCRO-Branchés" created the first Accrobranche® organization in Annonay, Ardèche, France (see "Historique" in http://www.accrobranche.org ). - 79.89.109.158 - 10:22, 8 October 2008 (UTC)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.81.151.72 (talk)

 * "L'Accrobranche" (trademark) is not the same activity as the "tree climbing"! Ok it's two activities take place in the trees with ropes, but this is not the same history, philosophy, technology, education, vision of the tree, etc. In France these two activities are distinguished: there is a French national organization for "L'Accrobranche" and a French national organization for "tree climbing". If you want more information about it, thank you to contact Yac at TreeClimbing.free.fr). —86.69.62.101 (talk) 07:23, 01 June 2010 (UTC)

Climb trees in Germany
The 14 April 2009 at 15:30, 79.110.95.2 (talk) adds the text below on "Tree climbing history" :

 * Christian Kiel and Phillip Richdale started climbing large trees considered unclimbable with traditional climbing techniques in the early 1980s in northern Germany. They are generally credited for being the first to broadly apply modern climbing equipment, styles and techniques specifically to climb high trees in a non-invasive and non-destructive fashion. Kiel and Richdale were the first to use sophisticated mountaineering and climbing gear such as modern free climbing harnesses, jacket-core climbing ropes, climbing-snaplinks made of zirkal-aluminum-alloy and various types of static climbing and spelunking-ropes and hoops specifically assembled for the purpose of climbing trees such as old beeches, sycamores and other larger leaf trees suited for extended climbing. They developed a ranking system for difficulty levels in tree climbing and a terminology for describing trees from a climbing perspective. They also adopted the habit of naming trees as free climbers commonly name their climbing routes. Their tree climbing style emphasizes leaving wildlife undisturbed (to the extent of avoiding a tree entirely), ascending 'unclimbable' leaftrees, safety-first, a wide variety of knots and rope techniques and non-destructive treetop summiting. They used the English term "tree climbing" to distinguish from its more general sense in the native German word "Baumklettern" and refer to the free climbing and later big wall climbing movement as inspiration for their style of tree climbing.

 * Thank for this information, but can you give citations and references on this discussion page. In the meantime, I have deleted this text because the world tree climbing community consider that Peter Jenkins (with his Atlanta school created in 1983) is the "father" of recreational tree climbing. Moreover I have not found German organization who purpose recreational tree climbing like TC-Japan, TC-USA, TC-France, TC-Canada, TC-Taiwan, etc. —86.69.62.198 (talk) 14:01, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

 * IIRC they were even featured with fotographs in a Lowe catalog using Lowe backbacks wilst climbing trees. That was around 1986. There are some quotes from Phillip here: http://modern-treeclimbing.blogspot.com/ I think it's fair to mention them, as they did some serious stuff very early on and were also featured in newsreports. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.110.95.2 (talk) 10:18, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

= Techniques & gear origins =

Tree climbing techniques and gear aren't derived from "professional tree climbers (arborists)". Tree climbing gear & techniques are principaly derived from rock climbing and caving. And also used to climb trees by "Arborists climbers". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.195.83.28 (talk) 16:29, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

The techniques described here don't look anything like the what the tree service guys do that I've seen. They ususally just have a strap around the trunk of the tree and they move the strap up as they ascend. —66.60.137.134 (talk) 18:10, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * there are a wide variety of techniques in use by professional arborists. Check out arboristsite.com and treebuzz.com for extensive discussion of these techniques. --john.james (talk) 01:51, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, the main technique used by professional climbers, the so called doubled dynamic rope technique or dDRT, has very little relation to any common rock or cave techniques. In terms of gear, yes they use Carabiner, but that's about it.  Different harness, knots (mostly), and ropes.--john.james (talk) 01:34, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

=Nature of Activity= Does anyone object to me changing the first line to remove the word recreational? It seems to me that we are talking here about all kinds of tree climbing.--john.james (talk) 01:06, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Since the creation of this Tree climbing's article, "recreational" is the common sens of this activity. All around the world, "tree climbing" means a recreational activity like outdoor sport, ecotourism, adventure... You can see all the recreational organizations names like : TC Japan, TC USA, TC France, TC Taiwan, TC Canada, etc.

 * And all around the non-english speaking world, when we talk about "techniques of climbing" for Arborist / Tree surgeon, the correct word is "Arboriculture". The word "tree climbing" is used only for recreational activity.

 * There was no ambiguities before the Treeandgarden revision's, the 11 April 2011 at 13:42.  This person has added spiked climbing techniques (for the first time since the creation of this article).

 * Consequently I propose that this article returns to its original meaning: a recreational activity. And the paragraph on spiked climbing techniques is to be removed.

 * To stop any ambiguity, it might be possible to create a technical pargraph in Arborist's article?
 * What do you think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.192.46.206 (talk) 23:02, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

 * The article focuses mainly on technique. As such I do not see the value in labeling it as the way this or that group does things.  Many arborists do not climb trees at all, and those who do share some techniques with recreational tree climbers and 'climbers' of other types.  To the extent that this article discusses the challenges and common approaches to actually climbing trees I believe it should generalize and talk about all people who climb trees and how they do it.  Otherwise we'll have some text that is duplicated in two places. This duplicate text will diverge and leave readers of each article with a less interesting experience.  Also, there were previously references to spiked climbing as far back as 2007.  --john.james (talk) 01:02, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
 * -Also, read "Redirect" section above. This article was moved from Recreational tree climbing in 2005 with the intention of making it recreational / professional neutral.   Perhaps that merge should be undone?--john.james (talk) 01:12, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Tree climbing


text:
Iwye

Iwye (Іўе, ; Ивье, ; Yvija; Iwje; איוויע) is a town and former shtetl in Grodno Region, Belarus. It serves as the administrative center of Iwye District. It is located 158 km east of Grodno. It is a station on the railway line between Lida and Maladzyechna. The population of Iwye was 8,900 in 1995. As of 2024, it has a population of 7,089.

It was the site of a dangerous rescue mission by the Bielski Brothers in late 1942, as the Germans prepared to liquidate the ghetto, as the area was occupied during Operation Barbarossa.

Sights

 * Saints Peter and Paul Church
 * Old wooden mosque

Notable people

 * Chaim Ozer Grodzinski, Rebbe of Vilnius, born in Iwye
 * Moshe Shatzkes, Rebbe of Iwye, 1913–1941

title: Iwye


text:
John Ernest Grabe

John Ernest Grabe (10 July 1666 – 3 November 1711), Anglican divine, was born at Königsberg, where his father, Martin Sylvester Grabe, was professor of theology and history.

Life
In his theological studies Grabe succeeded in persuading himself of the schismatical character of the Reformation, and accordingly he presented to the Lutheran consistory of Samland in Prussia a memorial in which he compared the position of the evangelical Protestant churches with that of the Novatians and other ancient schismatics. He had resolved to join the Church of Rome when a commission of Lutheran divines pointed out flaws in his written argument and called his attention to the English Church as apparently possessing that apostolic succession and manifesting that fidelity to ancient institutions which he desired.

He came to England, settled in Oxford, and made heavy use of the Bodleian Library. He was ordained in 1700, and became chaplain of Christ Church. His inclination was towards the party of the Nonjurors. The learned labours to which the remainder of his life was devoted were rewarded with an Oxford degree (DD) and a royal pension.

He died on 3 November 1711. He was buried in St Pancras Old Church, London on 9 November 1711. His name is listed on the Burdett Coutts Memorial as one of the important graves lost. In 1726 a monument by Francis Bird was erected to him by Edward Harley, Earl of Oxford, in Westminster Abbey.

Some account of Grabe's life is given in Robert Nelson's Life of George Bull, and by George Hickes in a discourse prefixed to the pamphlet against William Whiston's Collection of Testimonies against the True Deity of the Son and of the Holy Ghost. Dr George Smalridge (who also granted him his degree) wrote a biography of Grabe.

Works
His works, which show him to have been learned and laborious but somewhat deficient in critical acumen, include a Spicilegium SS. Patrum et haereticorum (1698-1699), which was designed to cover the first three centuries of the Christian church, but was not continued beyond the close of the second. A second edition of this work was published in 1714.

He brought out editions of:

 * Justin Martyr, Apologia prima (1700)
 * Irenaeus, Adversus omnes haereses (1702)
 * Bishop Bull's Latin works (1703).
 * Septuaginta interpretum. tomus 1. Oxford 1707

His edition of the Septuagint was based on the Codex Alexandrinus; it appeared in four volumes (1707–1720), and was completed by Francis Lee and by George Wigan.

title: John Ernest Grabe


text:
Slave River

The Slave River is a Canadian river that flows from the confluence of the and Peace River in northeastern Alberta and runs into Great Slave Lake in the Northwest Territories. The river's name is thought to derive from the name for the Slavey group of the Dene First Nations, Deh Gah Gotʼine, in the Athabaskan languages. The Chipewyan had displaced other native people from this region.

Rapids and kayaking
The Slave River and the rapids surrounding Fort Smith are known for whitewater kayaking. The river consists of four sets of named rapids: Pelican, Rapids of the Drowned, Mountain Portage, and Cassette. The rapids range in their difficulty to traverse, ranked from Class I to Class VI according to the International Scale of River Difficulty. Huge volume, massive waves, and the home of the northernmost river pelican colony in North America characterize this river. These islands serve as a sanctuary to the birds and are closed to human traffic from April 15 to September 15.

Crossing the Slave River has proven to be fatal; the earliest recorded fatalities as a part of Cuthbert Grant's expedition of 1786 at the Rapids of the Drowned (a class II-IV rapid set).

Course
The Slave River originates in the Peace-Athabasca Delta, at the forks of Peace River and, which drains the Athabasca River and Lake Athabasca. The Slave River flows north into the Northwest Territories and into the Great Slave Lake north of Fort Resolution. From there the water reaches the Arctic Ocean through the Mackenzie River.

The river is 434 km long and has a cumulative drainage area of 616400 km2.

Portage and navigation
Prior to the extension of railway service to Hay River, Northwest Territories, a river port on Great Slave Lake, cargo shipment on the Slave River was an important transport route. Locally built wooden vessels were navigating the river into the late 19th century. The rapids required a portage of 16 mi. Tractors were imported from Germany to assist in the transport of goods around the rapids. Tugs and barges of the Northern Transportation Company's "Radium Line" were constructed in the south and disassembled. The parts were then shipped by rail to Waterways, Alberta, shipped by barge to the portage, and portaged to the lower river for reassembly, where they could navigate most of the rest of the extensive Mackenzie River basin.

Tributaries

 * Peace-Athabasca Delta
 * Athabasca River
 * Lake Athabasca
 * Chilloneys Creek
 * Revillon Coupe
 * Dempsey Creek
 * Peace River
 * Scow Channel
 * Murdock Creek
 * Darough Creek
 * Powder Creek
 * La Butte Creek
 * Hornaday River
 * Salt River
 * Little Buffalo River
 * Little Buffalo River

title: Slave River


text:
River Dove, Suffolk

The River Dove is a river in the county of Suffolk. It is a tributary of the River Waveney starting near Bacton going through Eye to the Waveney.

Course
The Dove rises as several minor streams in the parish of Bacton at around 63 metres above sea level. It descends to the west of the village and flows north, before turning east to pass through the village of Finningham where it passes under the Stowmarket to Norwich railway. At Thorndon it merges with another stream and its course turns north. The river then skirts the eastern edge of the village of Eye, running alongside the former Eye Priory.

Below Eye, it largely forms the western boundary of the parish of Hoxne in a meandering course to the west of Hoxne village. Here it is joined by Gold Brook, before emptying into the River Waveney at the county boundary with Norfolk.

Gold Brook
The stream known as Gold Brook flows around 8 km north from the parish of Southolt through Redlingfield to Hoxne before emptying into the River Dove. As it enters Hoxne it is crossed by Goldbrook Bridge on the road to Cross Street. It is here that, according to legend, King Edmund the Martyr hid from the invading Danes. Whilst hiding under the bridge, a newly-wed couple saw his spurs glistening in the light and after capture by the Danes supposedly placed a curse on all bridal couples who should cross the bridge. Even up to the 19th century it is said that wedding parties would avoid the bridge rather than take the risk. According to the same legend, Edmund was then killed on the hill above the bridge.

History
The river passes alongside the town of Eye, known for its important medieval castle. The name "Eye" is believed to derive from an old word for "island", as in medieval times the River Dove, its tributaries and marshland would frequently flood and render it effectively an island. The area around the river still floods frequently.

The river is the subject of a 1909 work by Alfred Munnings entitled A Suffolk Pastoral, the River Dove with a distant clover field.

title: River Dove, Suffolk


text:
File:Rock Island TA 4.jpg

Rock Island TA #604 photographed at Wichita, Kansas, May 25, 1940 by Otto Perry.

Permission requested and received by User:Morven.

title: File:Rock Island TA 4.jpg


text:
Offensive counter air

Offensive counter-air (OCA) is a military term for the suppression of an enemy's military air power, primarily through ground attacks targeting enemy air bases: disabling or destroying parked aircraft, runways, fuel facilities, hangars, air traffic control facilities and other aviation infrastructure. Ground munitions like bombs are typically less expensive than more sophisticated air-to-air munitions, and a single ground munition can destroy or disable multiple aircraft in a very short time whereas aircraft already flying must typically be shot down one at a time. Enemy aircraft already flying also represent an imminent threat as they can usually fire back, and therefore destroying them before they can take off minimizes the risk to friendly aircraft.

Air-to-air operations conducted by fighter aircraft with the objective of clearing an airspace of enemy fighters known as combat air patrols can also be offensive counter-air missions, but they are seen as a comparatively slow and expensive way of achieving the final objective - air superiority. The opposite term is defensive counter air, primarily referring to the protection of territory, men and/or materiel against incursion by enemy aircraft, usually with a combination of ground-based surface-to-air missiles and anti-aircraft artillery but also through defensive combat air patrols.

History
Offensive counter-air strikes have been used since World War I. The Teishin Shudan and Giretsu Kuteitai carried out two OCA raids in the Pacific theatre against B29s. In one measure the most successful single OCA mission to date was Operation Focus, the Israeli offensive that opened the Six-Day War of 1967, when the Heyl Ha'avir destroyed a large portion of the air power of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, mostly on the ground, totaling roughly 600 airframes destroyed by a force of 200 aircraft. However, in sheer number of planes destroyed, the opening two weeks of Operation Barbarossa saw some 3-4,000 Russian planes destroyed in total. Other successful attacks include US counter-air operations in Korea in 1950 and 1953, French and British attacks during the Suez Crisis and many others. However, there have also been notable failures like Operation Chengiz Khan initiated by Pakistan during the Indo-Pakistani War of 1971 and Iraqi attacks on Iran.

Although OCA missions are often carried out via air strikes, they are not limited to aerial action. The Teishin Shudan and Giretsu Kuteitai commandos carried out two notable OCA raids during World War II, as did the British Long Range Desert Group. The Vietcong successfully destroyed a number of American aircraft with mortar fire during the Vietnam War, and more recently a Taliban raid in Afghanistan destroyed eight AV-8B Harriers.

The Swedish Air Force developed and used the Bas 60 and Bas 90 air base systems as a defensive measure against offensive counter air operations during the Cold War.

Weapons used
During the 1950s, the Cold War strategy of both NATO and the Warsaw Pact called for OCA to be carried out with tactical nuclear weapons, but by the mid-1960s, new policies of 'proportional response' brought about a return to conventional tactics. Beginning shortly before the Six-Day War, specialized weapons were developed for disrupting runways, such as the BLU-107 Durandal anti-runway bomb. Various such weapons continue to be fielded, notably the Hunting JP233 munition used by RAF Panavia Tornado aircraft during the 1991 Gulf War.

title: Offensive counter air