text:
Melbourne Sports and Entertainment Precinct

The Melbourne Sports and Entertainment Precinct is a series of sports stadiums and venues, located in Melbourne, Victoria, in Australia. The precinct is situated around 3 km east of the Melbourne central business district, located in suburbs of Melbourne and Jolimont, near East Melbourne and Richmond.

It is considered to be Australia's "premier sports precinct" and regularly hosts some of the biggest domestic and international sporting events, including the AFL Grand Final (Australian rules football), Australian Open (tennis) and Boxing Day Test (cricket). The venues have also previously hosted the 1956 Summer Olympics (for which the Precinct served as the Olympic Park) and 2006 Commonwealth Games.

The precinct comprises three areas: Olympic Park, Melbourne Park and Yarra Park.

Sports venues and stadiums
Of the three Park precincts; Olympic Park, Melbourne Park and Yarra Park, the Olympic and Melbourne Parks are jointly managed by the Melbourne & Olympic Parks Trust, and Yarra Park is managed separately by the Melbourne Cricket Club. The precinct is bordered to the north by Wellington Parade, to the east by Punt Road, to the south by the Yarra River, and to the west by Batman Avenue.

Olympic Park

 * AAMI Park (capacity 30,050; outdoor), the premier purpose-built venue for rectangular field sports (rugby league, rugby union and association football), and used for large outdoor stadium concerts.
 * Melbourne Sports & Entertainment Centre (indoor), a training facility used by the Collingwood Football Club, but formerly a 7,000 capacity stadium used originally for swimming, then later for basketball.
 * Olympic Park Oval (capacity 3,000; outdoor), a public playing field & running track, now primarily used for training purposes by the Collingwood Football Club.
 * Gosch's Paddock, a public playing field, previously used for training by the Collingwood Football Club, and now used by the Melbourne Football Club, Melbourne Storm Rugby League Club and Melbourne Victory FC for training and administrative purposes.

Former venues

 * Eastern Sportsground (aka No. 2 Oval), the stadium that hosted the preliminary rounds of the field hockey competition at the 1956 Olympics. Afterward it was used for greyhound racing, then demolished for the first Collingwood training ground (Edwin Flack Field) in the precinct and later became the site of the southern section of AAMI Park.
 * Motordrome (capacity 32,000 for racing and 15,000 for football; outdoor), a former speedway and Australian rules football ground. Demolished in 1951 and replaced by Olympic Park Stadium.
 * Olympic Park Stadium (capacity 18,500; outdoor), formerly the premier venue for track and field and rectangular field sports. The stadium was superseded for rectangular field sports by AAMI Park in 2011 and was demolished in 2011/12.
 * Velodrome (capacity 4,400; indoor), a 333 metre long velodrome that was used for the track cycling events at the 1956 Olympics. This venue was located on the northern section of AAMI Park.

Melbourne Park

 * Rod Laver Arena (capacity 15,000; retractable roof), the premier venue for large indoor stadium concerts, and centre court for tennis in Melbourne Park. Also used in the past for basketball.
 * John Cain Arena (capacity 10,500; retractable roof), the premier venue for basketball and netball, the second largest court for tennis in Melbourne Park, and a venue for indoor stadium concerts. Can be converted to a velodrome for major track cycling events.
 * Margaret Court Arena (capacity 7,500; retractable roof), the third-largest capacity tennis court in Melbourne Park. Also used for netball, basketball, music and other types of events.
 * Show Court Arena (capacity 5,000; no roof), the fourth-largest capacity tennis court in Melbourne Park, was opened prior to the 2022 Australian Open.
 * Melbourne Park Tennis Complex/National Tennis Centre, including two outdoor show courts (each with a 3,000 seating capacity), five indoor courts and twenty-eight outdoor Greenset courts, eight clay courts (which are not used professionally), all which are used for professional matches and available for public hire.

Yarra Park

 * Melbourne Cricket Ground (capacity 100,000; outdoor), the premier venue for cricket and Australian rules football, and occasionally for other high-drawing field sports events.
 * Punt Road Oval (capacity 2,800; outdoor), training facility for the Richmond Football Club, but formerly used for VFL/AFL Australian rules football matches and premier grade cricket.
 * National Sports Museum, located at the Melbourne Cricket Ground.

Former venues

 * East Melbourne Cricket Ground, located in the north-western corner of Yarra Park, and used for Australian rules football and premier grade cricket. Demolished 1922 to make way for the Jolimont railyards.

1956 Olympic Games
For the 1956 Summer Olympics, several venues hosted Olympic events. The track cycling, field hockey, soccer, and the aquatic events.

Access
The precinct is located adjacent to both the Richmond and Jolimont railway stations; every train servicing the eastern side of Melbourne passes through one of these two stations. The precinct is also serviced by tram route 70 from the city centre. Three footbridges are provided to cross the railway lines which divide the northern and southern halves of the precinct. The area in Yarra Park surrounding the Melbourne Cricket Ground is made available for ticketed car parking during major events in the precinct; free parking in the surrounding streets is available but limited.


text: User talk:64.142.71.40

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

title: User talk:64.142.71.40


text:
Talk:Archaeology/Archive 1

Regarding Thor Hyerdahl...I'd say he's more of an anthropologist than an archaeologist. Remember, all archaeologists are anthropologists, but not all anthropologists are archaeologists. At least in the U.S. that is.

--->Susan

Skeeter451

Please don't take down the link to the /Talk page.

Ammendment by guerilla1138: I hate to correct others so I will just add this. I dont see Archaeology as being the study of what we can learn about human cultures as much as the study of human cultures, and I would also say that in archaeology those studies are only limited to pre-cultures, meaning those cultures before this one. Where as the study of todays cultures and also older cultures I would classify as cultural anthropology. But I am not an expert nor am I trained in either of these fields, just stating my opinion based on limited experiance of working in the Maxwell Museum on the University of New Mexico campus and attending a few archaeology and anthropology classes with friends at said university.

''The above sort of comment belongs on a /Talk page, not the main page. See Wikipedia policy and keep exploring...''

I notice that you've removed the text "typically from their physical remains (such as masonry, pottery, coins, engravings, and the like)" twice. This must mean that you think there's something wrong with this. I'm not an archaeologist, but I always thought that this was really quite essential to archaeology. Am I wrong? --Larry Sanger

Actually, I'm quite sure I'm right. Have a look at this article: http://www.britannica.com/bcom/eb/article/9/0,5716,9369+1+9259,00.html?query=archaeology

Response to Larry: Physical remains are archaeological data, yes, but I'm wary of focusing on them in a definition. I'd rather get away from the "Indiana Jones" mentality that a lot of the general public - at least in the U.S. - seems to have. It's tough to get people past the idea that archaeologists look for neat "things" for the sake of the things themselves. In American archaeology, at least, material objects are only important insofar as they convey information about the people who made and used them. There's a huge range of other archaeological evidence that's just as important as material objects. Besides, the list of examples in the quoted text is not very illuminating, unless you're talking about a pretty narrow range of times and places. Most of the listed artifact types are not found in a significant percentage of the world's archaeological sites. So why didn't I just construct a better list? Any list will inevitably leave something out. In a short definition, I'd rather focus on the goals of the discipline than on one part of the method. Or maybe it's just an idiosyncrasy :). - Pemerson

Given the Britannica article, I'm betting it's an idiosyncracy. :-) The list was parenthetical, after all, and of course physical remains are a sine qua non of archaeological work.  Talking about archaeology without mentioning the physical remains of cultures is a little like talking about music without mentioning musical instruments.  Sure, you can do it, but it's kind of funny not to.  So, why not just choose the artifact types that happen to be most common?  I don't know what they are, so you'll have to change the list. --LS

Ah, there is our difficulty. IMHO, the Britannica definition does not apply well at all to modern American archaeology. The authors seem to have missed some major changes that took place about 30 years ago. (Not to denigrate E.B., but when the first few paragraphs were circulated among my colleagues, they inspired reactions ranging from head-shaking to outright laughter.) Note that Britannica defines archaeology as the study of "remains" - not the study of human cultures, which is what it is in the Americas. For a non-scholarly alternative, see the Society for American Archaeology at http://www.saa.org/Whatis/index.html. My essential objection to the text I removed is this: there has been more than enough emphasis on archaeology as the study of physical remains - as though that is a goal instead of a method. It is an impression that is stuck in the popular imagination and, frankly, it continually causes problems. I hoped to have an opportunity here to present a definition that might make people stop and think precisely because it didn't mention artifacts. ("Archaeology - it's not just about artifacts anymore.") Maybe I need to spin off a new page specifically on American archaeology. - pemerson (BTW - noticed your correction to my spelling of "idiosyncra**". I had yours originally but checked and discovered the "sy" version prevails, at least with Webster and American Heritage. Creeping Americanism, I guess.)

- One option is to admit that archaeology may have once been about artifacts but recently is about something else. Use headers to divide the entry into 'the history of archaeology' and what you're calling 'American archaeology' - is that, by the way, archaeology as practiced in America, by Americans, on ancient American sites, or what? I admit that I, myself, only read Medieval archaeology for professional purposes, but the adjective there is much clearer.

I've tried to give a bit more of a rounded impression, but I fear I may have gone a bit overboard, particularly in para 3 - but that some (or indeed many) archaeologists are barrow pushing is something that's often forgotten. I would really like to put this link in: http://202.84.17.11/english/htm/20001218/273470.htm (see the bit about bejing in the middle of the page) but it probably is a bit un-NPOV.

A few paras on human heritage would be good - as I read things this is very much the point. I can't express these ideas cleanly right now, but I think a statement to the effect of heritage being importnat to most people and archaeiology being ther study of this heritage might be good. I'm not sure if "heritage" is exactly the right word.

Probably a separate article on field archaeology and field techniques would not go astray. A para on most stuff found being detritus would be good as well. - Iwnbap

 * this is much improved! Thanks! Oh - and I don't find paragraph 3 at all problematic, especially the 'original settler' kind of use and abuse of the past. --MichaelTinkler

Concerning Thor Heyerdahl -- I do not know much about his career, but for current purposes, he is better characterized as an archeologist than as a cultural anthropologist (to characterize him merely as an anthropologist only begs the question, what kind of anthropologist). He trained in Geology and Zoology, and has worked in museums, but I do not believe he has a degree in either anthropology or archeology, and I do not know whether he had a position in an anthropology department.

He is seldom mentioned in cultural anthropology textbooks. When he is mentioned in archeology textbooks, it is as an example of "experimental archeology," reconstructing past practices by using past technologies. All textbooks make the same criticism of experimental archeology in general and Heyerdahl's work in particular: it reveals what is possible, but adds nothing to our knowledge of what actually happened. SR

 * Alright. I didn't realize he had any degrees at all - I thought of him as a journalist of sorts. MichaelTinkler

 * Heyerdahl should certainly be disscussed somewhere, but I really think it's misleading to list him an archaeologist. He did some ethnographic work (though that's not what he's best known for), but I think it's stretching the definition too far to call him an archaeologist. Infrogmation

On preconceptions influencing archaeology: an example near and dear to my own heart is the excavations of Jeannine Davis-Kimball in Kazakstan. She uncovered a number of female bodies in the kurgan which had been buried with weapons. Some archaeologists presumed immediately that the weappons were there for ceremonial/religious purposes. Dr. Davis-Kimball observed that, had the bodies been male, archaeologists would have immediately presumed that the weaponry was indicative of the former owner's status as a warrior! To be fair, bias exists the other way as well, with some over-eager attempts to extrapolate the role of women in that society from very little data. I fear, however, that this might be too contentious a point to include in the Wikipedia article proper. -- April

 * I think the "patricarchal" example (i.e. men=hunters, women=gatherers as a theory now demolished) is a simple potted example of this; if you could formulate your example into something more immediate and referenced[!] of something similar that would be very good. Iwnbap

(1/14/03) The problem is that Archaeology is a part of Anthropology in America, but not in much of Europe, where it's a History. Most archaelogists there still see archaeology as nothing more than the collecting of neat things for the purpose of collecting neat things. You find a coin, you catelogue it, and you fit it into your historical timeline, but you [i]don't[/i] ask "what does this coin tell me about their culture?" It may be necessary to add a section discussing the differences between American and European archaeology. -- Zach

 * I agree that it is worth clarifying the differences, Slrubenstein

 * I agree also, but it is quite untrue to suggest that in Europe, archaeology is simply a subdivision of history. There is far more to it than that.  The fact is that, because of the comparatively short period of recorded history in America, the anthropological aspect takes on a greater importance there, whereas in Europe, prehistory and recorded history are of roughly equal importance, though they necessarily call for different archaeological techniques.  I'll also have to take issue with your reference to "England" in the article, when you clearly mean Britain. Deb

 * I think Deb is on to something, but I question the reasoning. It is true that the written record in the Americas, with a few exceptions, is only about 500 years.  But human beings have been in the Americas for probably fewer than 40,000 years.  The written record in Europe goes back much further -- but so does human occupation of Europe.  If we compare the difference between the ratio of written record for human occupation, I am not sure if the two places are so different.  To claim that the archeological record is of more importance in the Americas but of equal importance in Europe is logocentric/Eurocentric, I think.

 * Also, many US archeologists work outside of the Americas (in the Near East, even in Europe) just as European archeologists are not limited to working in Europe.

 * That said, there still are differences in the place and self-conception of archeology in Europe and the US, and it is worth exploring reasons. As an archeologist, andthropologist, or historian might suspect, the real reasons for these differences may diverge from the reasons US or European archeologists might themselves give.  My guess is that it has a lot more to do with institutional politics -- who controled academic positions and funding for research.  But this is just a guess; who has done research on this?  Maybe George Stocking?  I do not know. Slrubenstein

 * With all due respect to Deb, and apologies, I deleted the following text from the article:
 * This often depends on the nature of the sites available for investigation -- for example, what proportion of them fall into the category of prehistory, to what extent have they been built over, what technological resources are available to archaeologists, etc.
 * because I do not know what the evidence for this claim is. Part of NPOV is resisting our own views and placing in articles established views.  If archeologists themselves have made this argument, or historians, I would have no problem with putting it back in.

 * In the meantime, I do agree completely that the article should specify differences between US archeology and archeology in other countries. But I just don't find this explanation satisfactory.  The nature of sites in Europe in no way preclude American-styled archeology; American styled archeology is applied to historical sites in the US as well.  Slrubenstein

 * Well, I am an archaeologist, albeit amateur. I don't mind that sentence of mine being removed, because I only put it in as a replacement for what was there already - the bit about archaeology being somehow different in "England".  You're right that the differences in technique don't actually make a difference to what constitutes archaeology - but then I don't accept that there is really a great difference between the American way of doing it and the European way.  However, there is a big difference between, for example, how you go about excavating a mesolithic site and how you go about excavating a Roman one.  And even Roman and mesolithic happen in different centuries depending which country you're in.  What I'm trying to say, I suppose, is that, if you don't have much "history" available, then you'll be thrown back on "anthropology".  Likewise, if you don't have the opportunity to work in the Olduvai Gorge, you'll be thrown back on coin-collecting.  It's all relative, really.  Does any of that make sense to you - or to Zach, or anyone else who's interested? --Deb

 * Yes this makes sense. I think there are really three issues here, each of which belong in the article but I think should be treated separately.  If you want to have a go at it, please do so!
 * different techniques for surface surveys and excavations that vary with the kind of site (e.g. Roman vs. paleolithic vs. Inkan)
 * different styles of research and writing (e.g. the difference between American Antiquity and the comparable British journal; do many Brits publish in AA? Do many Yanks publish in British journals?  Are articles more analytic or descriptive; expository or argumentative?  What are the larger theoretical purposes of archeology -- of what use is it? (to reconstruct past events, or to reconstruct a past way of life?  On both sides of the Atlantic archeologists have had to articulate with other anthropological and historical research, but perhaps in different ways.))
 * different institutional arrangements in different countries: do archeologists hold positions in anthropology departments, or classics, or history? Are archeologists trained by (besides other archologists) anthropologists, historians, or classicists?  Who controls funding?
 * Does this make sense? I am not an archeologist, although I have some decent general knowledge -- could others address these three points knowledgably, and substantively? Slrubenstein

 * I agree, there's plenty of food for thought there... --Deb

 * yeah, I guess it is a lot... Perhaps the first thing to do (if you agree with me about the above three points) is to think about the general structure of the article, provide sub-headings, and locate places in the article where these three points could be discussed; that might encourage others to contribute bit by bit.  Since you are an archeologist (albeit amateur) I would defer to you, Slrubenstein

 * I must say that, up to now, I've been deliberately not adding much to the main article because it appears to be more than a little controversial. What would you say to separate pages dealing with the situation in different countries/continents, which would cover at least some of the ground we want to cover?  For example, I could write on "Archaeology in the UK" (history of, education and training, favoured techniques, etc), but I wouldn't feel qualified to write on "Archaeology in the USA".  But would anyone then be interested in reading the separate articles? --Deb

 * Well, I know there are US students who train in Britain; UK professors who lecture in the US; and so on -- ultimately, I would hate to see the field broken up in different articles when there are so many connections. On the other hand you are quite right that there are different institutional histories and arrangements.  Do you think we could have one article with different sections?

 * The article itself is only vaguely historical, focussing mostly on how archeology is practiced in the present (and as you say mainly in the Americas). How about a brief and general introduction, followed by different sections that focus on different time periods in different places (say, 19th century through WWII). followed by a general section on contemporary trends? Slrubenstein

 * Possible. Some of the potential headings are already there as redirects.  I wouldn't like to see the main page get too big.  We're almost going back to square one with this, now, aren't we?  But I think it's right to reassess at this stage, otherwise we'll get nowhere. --Deb

 * Well, I do not mean to be obstructionist. The problem is, "archeology" is not a specific institution like law or government.  There may be something particular about archeological excavations in the UK, and there may be something particular about archeologists who have been trained, and hold positions, in the UK.  But "archeology" is an idea and I would hate to reduce it to local manifestations.  I mean, we aren't going to have an article on "the history of medicine in the UK" and another article on "the history of medicine in the US" even though the health institutions of the two countries are organized differently, and even though US and UK phsyicians have all made important discoveries.

 * I think the real issue is, how detailed would such historical articles get? I didn't think too much detail would be needed, if the purpose is to 1) explain how we got from there to here and 2) help orient people, if they are reading a journal publishe din one country or another, or applying for graduate schools.  Also, I do not object to relatively long articles since this is web-based and we are not wasting paper.

 * of course, it is always easy to divide an article or to combine two articles -- so whatever we decide now it is far from irrevocable. There is nothing wrong with working on one article and splitting it later if it gets unweildly -- or on working on two or three articles now and combining them later if it seems appropriate.

 * The fundamental issue is, what is the purpose of this article? That will determine what should be included here or be put elsewhere, and also how the contents of this article should be organized.  I myself tend to be ecumenical and inclusive.  What were you thinking? Slrubenstein

 * I'm not disagreeing at all. I tend to think that sub-fields like "Industrial Archaeology" belong elsewhere (partly because those who work in such fields are specialists), subjects like "Excavation techniques" also belong elsewhere because of the level of detail they need to include (ultimately), and of course "lists" need to be separated off.

 * Other than that, I would like to keep an open mind, but I just know that if I make any generalised statements about archaeology on the basis of my own knowledge, it will be argued over by those with different experience. Having said that, I'll try and make a start. --Deb

 * sounds great! Slrubenstein

 * I've got a feeling the layout and headings I've just put in may be a bit too "traditional" for some people's taste. And I'm not sure that the "Regions of archaeology" section is fulfilling a real need, even though some of them have already been created as articles.  What does it really mean?  Views, please, from anyone who is interested... --Deb

List of years in archaeology
I'm not necessarily opposed to the inclusion of news items as external links, but the page could get out of control very quickly unless they are regularly weeded. Comments? Deb 17:56, 9 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * Wikipedia is not a link repository. I think the links should be more general, perhaps to prestigious archeology organisations or departments.  Perhaps the links to the news archives should stay, but I don't believe we should try to be a news archive ourselves. -- sannse 18:23, 9 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * Perhaps an alternative idea could be to have a page like Archeology in 2003 which summarized archeological news items. --Imran 14:05, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)

 * I've made a fairly feeble start on this at List of years in archaeology by completely ripping off List of years in science. It could do with some input from people with broader interests than myself, mind. Penfold 12:05, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)

Hancock!?
Sorry folks but I couldn't stomach seeing Graham Hancock and Erick von Danniken listed as archaeologist, pseudo or otherwise. The former certainly has no qualifications in the business -even Indiana Jones has a doctorate!

I hope you don't mind me internationalising the CRM chapter a bit either.

Adamsan 00:00, Apr 18, 2004(UTC)

 * Of course we don't mind the internationalization. I'm the one who wrote most of the text in that section, and I know rather little about anything archaeological outside the U.S. --Smack 23:42, 18 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Thanks smack- I love the article- it really reads like an encyclopaedia entry on a subject like this should- I'm just going to add a few bios and fill in some of the blank links where I can Adamsan 22.05, Apr 19, 2004(UTC)

I will reinsert Graham Hancock and Erick von Danniken sentence (ala, "It is also promulgated by some high-profile authors and researchers, such as Graham Hancock searching for the Ark of the Covenant and Erich von Däniken (author of "Chariot of the Gods")."). I do, though, like the changes that Smack and Adamsan have done though for the most part. JDR

 * But these guys are not archeologists! Moreover, in their work there is no use of archeological method or theory!  Thus, to include them in an article on archeology is positively misleading.  Slrubenstein

 * I agree. It makes nonsense of the concept. Deb 17:59, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Hancock and von Daniken are at best footnotes in the bumpy story of archaeology. To mention them at the beginning of a broad summary of the subject is misleading whether you point out the lack of support their ideas receive or not. I suppose the equivalent would be listing mermaids in the entry on Oceanography. Adamsan 22:50, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * Ok I propose the compromise in my most recent edit. This should satisfy those who inexplicably think Hancock and archaeology deserve to share the same IP address whilst salving my professional conscience as well. Adamsan 23:10, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

 * I find that your (Adamsan) insertion of a crack at pseudoarchaeologists is not a compromise. Pseudoarchaeology gets a somewhat thorough treatment in =Relations with the public=.  Inserting a brief crack at von Daniken and Hancock before the issue can be addressed in full is POV.  These authors' lack of scientific rigor does not necessarily invalidate their conclusions.  A good number of discoveries in the exact sciences has been made by accident, or amateuristic dabbling, and the social sciences are even more susceptible to unorthodox methodology.  Granted, pseudoarchaeologists are much less likely to come up with the right answers than scholars who take more scientific perspectives, but we cannot simply discount them at one fell swoop.  --Smack 04:27, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

--Smack, I cannot agree for two reasons. First, the whole point of this sentence is to call attention to Von Danniken and Hancock, whose work is useless and exemplify pseudoscience; you cannot fault the passage for overgeneralizing when it is so specific. Second, you fail to distinguish between dilettantes and pseudoscientists. You are correct that amateurs (usually called diletants in the history of archeology) have made important contributions. But pseudoscience is another thing -- people who use the cloak of science to pursue theories that are on their face unscientific, using methods that are unscientific. This is not amateurism, it is misrepresentation. Amateurs are non-professionals who seek to contribute to a professional project. Pseudoscientists are nonprofessionals who falsely claim to be professionals in order to propose a competing non-professional project. Slrubenstein

 * I am certainly not against amateurs in modern archaeology Smack, and have added bits in the Relations with the Public chapter that I hope will lead interested people towards getting involved in the subject. Although you may consider my language as un-wiki like I would point out that Hancock and von Danniken's credibility is derided not just by archaeologists but by meterologists, science journalists, astronomers etc and not just the archaeological profession. The links I have added to Graham Hancock bear this out. Archaeology is a profession and demands professional standards from those that practise it. I like the parallel of alchemy; early investigators were able to contribute (knowingly or otherwise) to scientific knowledge but their ill-informed interpretation is no longer acceptable and is positively misleading to anyone looking to study chemistry today. In the same way, early antiquarians made a valuable contribution to archaeology but to leap to unsubstantiated conclusions such as attributing every stone circle to the Druids would get a modern scholar laughed out of town. Hancock is just such a methodological anachronism.I fully support the thoughts of Slrubenstein on the issue of the difference between the amateur and the pseudo practitioner Adamsan 16:30, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

Can you -- or anyone else -- write some discussion of William Duncan Strong, and V. Gordon Childe's, influence on archeology in the history section? I am not qualified but it is my sense that they are or were in their time very important. Perhaps more history of how modern scientific archeology came to be will help explain why pseudoarcheology is pseudoarcheology ... Slrubenstein

 * I could certainly do something on Childe- his contribution to theory ought to be acknowledged. Can't help with the other fella but will look into him. Adamsan 18:00, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Having thought about it, I feel Childe's contribution site more comfortably in the theory section as he did a lot more writing than digging, Adamsan 19:15, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

Fair enough -- I think the main point still is to illustrate and explain what real (as opposed to pseudo) archeology is, in part by explaining how it came to be. I do hope someone knows enough about Strong's contribution to American anthropology -- I thought the prior to Binford he was one of the most important. Slrubenstein

The wiki keeps complaining about the article's excessive length. What would you folks say if I split off the History section into a separate article? I know, it's a difficult decision, but that section is the longest, and I think it's the most able to stand alone.

Also, I've been thinking about creating a List of archaeological terms to contain the large number of technical terms that don't merit articles of their own (i.e. 'cropmarks', 'provenience', 'matrix', 'stratigraphy', 'shovel test').--Smack 01:01, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Sounds good to me. If you fancy it, you could even incorporate the theoretical growth of the subject as method and theory are so closely intertwined. I'd certainly like to contribute to an archaeological glossary too.

 * Does this comment regard the list of terms or the split? --Smack 03:30, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Whoops sorry Smack didn't notice your comment earlier. I was thinking more about merging history and theory as I think it would be difficult to write about one without touching on the other. The argument at the top of this page about the intro wording illustrates how theory gets everywhere adamsan  09:49, 9 May 2004 (UTC)

I'm not altogether happy with Wetman's revision of the introduction though. It seems unecessarily verbose when as far as I can tell, archaeology is a separate discipline everywhere outside America and tying oneself into verbal knots for the sake of covering that one exception seems to me out of place in an introduction. The mention of palaeontology also seems a bit shaky to me as I was always taught that it was a branch of geology and that terms like environmental archaeology, archaeobotony and palaeoarchaeology were more correct for pre-homo sapiens studies. I don't want Wikipedia to contribute to the public confusion that already exists regarding cavemen hunting dinosaurs Adamsan 12:30, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

 * That's an odd reading. But say it better in fewer words, if brevity is the aim. It was poor before, with a strained US/British contrast. Wetman 11:30, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I agree that the US/UK thing was inelegant and I certainly applaud the way you have rendered the whole thing in a more international vein. I'm wondering though if it would be better to simply define archaeology as the study of the material past and then thrash out the subsets and supersets of the discipline further down the page rather than bringing all these related terms into play so early on. Suggestions? Adamsan 13:20, 5 May 2004 (UTC)

Range of the field of Archaeology
What does Ötzi the Iceman have to do with paleontology? Also, why is he mentioned by name to the exclusion of all other mummies? --Smack 03:30, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

 * I too was curious about this. Eventually I rationalised it as a geological reference to the glacier that moved him about but it hardly seems like introduction material. Surely palaeontology is about fossils, not mummified Neolithic dudes. --adamsan 07:33, 8 May 2004 (UTC)

 * Ötzi the Iceman can't be linked if he's not named. Archaeology is an approach to lost culture, without a cutoff date: in England, archaeologists have uncovered the long-lost layouts of medieval villages abandoned after the Black Death and the equally lost layouts of 17th century parterre gardens. In downtown New York archaeologists have exhumed the 18th century remains of the Black burial ground. Wetman 15:18, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Currently the introduction states that palaeontologists study past life, excluding humans, but then mentions palaeontology in connection with Ötzi, a modern human. I think Smack's first question was asking about this apparent contradiction and requesting clarification. Please could you explain further adamsan 18:21, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I did some rewrite in order to clarify things. Incidentally, I removed the mention of the ice-man. Archeology indeed has no cutoff date (neither does physical anthropology; osteologists study contemporary human skeletons). In mentioning adjunct fields I tried simply to mention first other subfields of anthropology, and second other disciplines. Slrubenstein

 * Thanks Slrubenstein that's much more comprehensible. adamsan 19:45, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The Hillfort or Hill fort or Hill-fort? discussion has been moved to Talk:Hill fort adamsan 20:57, 12 May 2004 (UTC)

why is archaeology in a different category than history on the mainpage?--BozMo|talk 15:13, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
 * Interesting point - looks like a whole theoretical can of worms to me. adamsan 18:31, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * To clarify, it looks like it's down to whether you see the subject as being closer to anthropology or history. Take a look at the discussion at the top of the page, the archaeological theory subsection and Processual archaeology for more info on the differing ideas on this subject. Perhaps Archaeological theory could be a candidate to be spun off as I note we're now up to 43KB on the main page. adamsan 19:45, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Anachronistic wishful thinking? Documentation
" In 1803, there was widespread criticism of Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin for removing the "Elgin Marbles" from their rightful place on the Parthenon in Athens; " What some editor meant is that there should have been criticism. I'm reluctant to turn this particular stone... The development of this kind of criticism in the 20th century is part of the history of ideas and has had an effect on the practice of archaeology. Now that would be authentic. The more we know the less self-righteous we become, often... Wetman 19:51, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * You're mistaken. There was lots of criticism of Elgin at the time, as you'll find out when you read about him.  Byron was one of the most vociferous, but even some of the locals were writing about it as Elgin was in the process of pulling them down.  It surprised me too, but it's a well-attested fact. Deb 11:55, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * In the Athens Gazette? Do you have any concept of what Athens looked like in 1803? What are you reading? Wetman 19:12, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I don't know any specifics, but didn't Greece achieve independence form the Ottomans in 1830? If so, it seems reasonable to suppose that there was a nationalist movement in Greece in the early 19th century. Wouldn't we expect Greek nationalists at that time to oppose a foreigner removing the marbles (either with Ottoman support, or without Ottoman opposition)? I am not claiming that this is what happened, I really odn't know. I am only claiming that it wouldn't be so surprising if it did happen. Slrubenstein

 * I never claimed that all the opposition came from Greeks. However, there are eye-witness accounts and documents, in English.  I don't feel obliged to go back and check on all the sources, but here's Byron's take on it: ‘‘Dull is the eye that will not weep to see/ Thy walls defaced, thy mouldering shrines removed/ By British hands, which it had best behoved/ To guard those relics ne’er to be restored.’’

 * "The Honourable Lord has taken advantage of the most unjustifiable means and has committed the most flagrant pillages. It was, it seems, fatal that a representative of our country loot those objects that the Turks and other barbarians had considered sacred," said Sir John Newport, a contemporary MP.

 * Thomas Hughes, an eye witness, later wrote: "The abduction of small parts of the Parthenon, of a value relatively small but which previously contributed to the solidity of the building, left that glorious edifice exposed to premature ruin and degradation. The abduction dislodged from their original positions, wherefrom they precisely drew their interest and beauty, many pieces which are altogether unnecessary to the country that now owns them."

 * These sources are not difficult to track down. I begin to wonder what the motivation is for refusing to believe they exist. Deb 20:41, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

 * Excellent! Thanks Deb. I've added your quotes to Elgin marbles. and a ? mark to my title above. My skepticism is axiomatic not peculiar: experience has taught me to doubt "well-attested" but unquoted historic facts when they gibe so very neatly with modern agendas. I'm glad to be shown wrong in this case. Wetman 21:40, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

title: Talk:Archaeology/Archive 1


text:
File:M1867 1.jpg

Remington M1867 rifle. From "Det kgl norske Artilleris Aarsberetning", dated 1867.

title: File:M1867 1.jpg


text:
Trond Sollied

Trond Johan Sollied (born 29 April 1959) is a Norwegian football manager and former player. He last managed Lokeren.

During his playing career, Sollied was a defender who won the Norwegian top flight five times. He also played for Norway's national team.

He began his managerial career with Bodø/Glimt, and has also been in charge of Rosenborg, Gent (on three separate occasions), Club Brugge, Olympiacos, Heerenveen, Al-Ahli, Lierse and Elazığspor. As of 2012, teams under his leadership have won 12 titles.

Playing career
During his career as an active player, Sollied played for Mo IL, Vålerenga, Rosenborg and finally Bodø/Glimt as player-manager. He earned fifteen caps for the Norwegian national team, scoring one goal.

Managerial career
He has education from the Norwegian School of Sport Sciences. Sollied started his career as a manager in 1992 at Bodø/Glimt where he was player/manager in the 1. divisjon (second tier). Sollied and Bodø/Glimt won the league, and were thus promoted to the Tippeligaen. In 1993, Bodø/Glimt, as a newly promoted team, won silver in the Tippeligaen as well as winning the Norwegian Cup. After that season, Sollied retired as player and focused on the coaching job. Bodø/Glimt also finished third in the top division in 1995, and lost the cup final against Tromsø in 1996.

Sollied was dismissed from Bodø/Glimt after a disagreement with the players and the club board. He went on to Rosenborg where he served as the assistant manager under legendary coach Nils Arne Eggen in the 1997 season. That year Rosenborg won the championship. During the 1998 season Eggen took a year off, placing Sollied in the manager seat. With him in charge, Rosenborg – once again – won the league and qualified for the UEFA Champions League.

In 1999, Sollied wanted a new challenge and therefore left the Norwegian League to try his luck in the Belgian League. His first team there was Gent. In 2000, he was offered a job at Club Brugge and stayed there until 2005. In six seasons, Sollied won everything: two championships (2003 and 2005), two cups (2002, 2004) and two Supercups (2002, 2004).

After the Norwegian national coach Nils Johan Semb retired in 2003, Sollied was mentioned as a replacement, but Sollied stated that he was only interested if he could combine the national team with his club position. This was not accepted by the Norwegian Football Association and Åge Hareide, Rosenborg coach at that time, became the new national manager.

In 2005, one year before the end of Sollied's contract with Club Brugge, a video message was leaked to the Belgian press, in which Sollied stated that he left Brugge for Olympiacos. Sollied disputed that this video was released without his permission. It was only meant to be published after he had signed a contract, which was not yet the case according to him. In Belgium, this affair was seen as a trick to force Brugge to suspend his contract, to prevent Olympiacos from paying a hefty compensation. In a press release, Club Brugge stated that they had taken note of Sollied's decision to suspend his contract. Sollied was officially presented by Olympiacos chairman Socrates Kokkalis as the club's new manager. In his debut season, he won the league title and the Greek Cup, and was ranked ninth in Europe on UEFA's list of top coaches in 2006. He also achieved winning the league title in three different countries. In December 2006, after two disappointing Champions League seasons, with Olympiakos finishing fourth (last) at group stage on both occasions, chairman Kokkalis decided to sack Sollied, despite the club being at the top of the table of Greek Super League. Former Skoda Xanthi manager, Panagiotis Lemonis, was his replacement, returning to the club after 4 years.

In June 2007, Gent confirmed the return (after seven years) of Sollied as club manager. He led the team to the Belgian cup final in 2008. On 15 March 2008, it was confirmed that Sollied had signed a two-year deal with Dutch club Heerenveen. As per 9 December 2008, the press stated that Sollied was a strong candidate to coach the national Norwegian team. On 31 August 2009, Heerenveen announced Sollied's dismissal.

On 19 November 2009, MKE Ankaragücü made an official statement that they hired the Norwegian manager however Sollied publicly stated that he has not signed a contract with the Turkish club. Instead he signed for Al-Ahli, where he was fired after only three matches in 2010. On 3 January 2011, Sollied signed a contract with the Belgian First Division-team Lierse to save the club from relegation. With one point against his old club, Club Brugge, in the decisive round, Lierse was saved from relegation. On 6 June 2011, he announced that he had signed a contract in Gent once again, the third time in his career. He got fired from Gent on 23 October 2012, with the team positioned 7th in the league.

In June 2013, he was signed as manager for the Turkish Süper Lig side Elazığspor. With the team positioned in 16th place after nine matches, and five straight losses, Sollied resigned as manager in October 2013.

Managerial style
His preferred formation, 4–3–3, is not changed under almost any circumstances. He uses a zonal four-man defence, a holding midfielder behind two central midfielders, two wingers left and right and finally a powerful striker. He loves and adopts attacking football in all of his teams. This style is similar to that of Nils Arne Eggen.

Manager

 * Bodø/Glimt
 * 1. divisjon: 1992
 * Norwegian Cup: 1993
 * Tippeligaen runner up: 1993

 * Rosenborg
 * Tippeligaen: 1998
 * Norwegian Cup runner up: 1998

 * Club Brugge
 * Belgian First Division: 2002–03, 2004–05
 * Belgian Cup: 2001–02, 2003–04
 * Belgian Supercup: 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005

 * Olympiacos
 * Super League Greece: 2005–06
 * Greek Cup: 2005–06

 * Gent
 * Belgian Cup runner-up: 2007–08

 * Heerenveen
 * KNVB Cup: 2009

Player

 * Vålerenga
 * 1. divisjon (2): 1983, 1984

 * Rosenborg
 * Norwegian top flight (3): 1985, 1988, 1990
 * Norwegian Cup (2): 1988, 1990

 * Bodø/Glimt
 * 1. divisjon: 1992
 * Norwegian Cup: 1993

title: Trond Sollied


text:
Michael Malone (author)

Michael Christopher Malone (November 22, 1942 – August 19, 2022) was an American author and television writer. He was noted for his work on the ABC Daytime drama One Life to Live, as well as for his novels Handling Sin (1983), Foolscap (1991), and the murder mystery First Lady (2002).

Early life
Malone was born in Durham, North Carolina, on November 22, 1942. His father worked as a psychiatrist; his mother was a teacher who was deaf. His family relocated to Atlanta when he was six years old. He lived with his mother after his parents divorced. He studied English at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, graduating in 1964. He then obtained a master's degree from that institution two years later. Although he commenced a Doctor of Philosophy in English at Harvard University, he dropped out before finishing his thesis.

Career
Malone's first novel, Painting the Roses Red, was inspired in part by his new wife and released in 1975. He recounted that he had authored the book in order to put off writing his doctoral thesis. He ultimately published 14 novels during his career. One of these, Handling Sin (1983), retold Don Quixote with the Southern United States as its setting. Another book, Foolscap (1991), was about a university professor tasked with authoring an old playwright's biography, while First Lady, published in 2001, recounted a serial killer preying on women in a fictitious North Carolina town and became a bestseller. Malone set many of his stories in Piedmont, including First Lady and the other Justin & Cuddy novels, in his region of North Carolina.

Outside of writing books, Malone became best known for his stint writing the soap opera One Life to Live. He was the serial's head writer after being hired by Linda Gottlieb from 1991 to 1996 and garnered critical acclaim for his storylines, which included a tale involving the tight bond between an ostracized homosexual teenager and a preacher, the creation of villain/rapist Todd Manning and the character's gang rape of Marty Saybrooke, as well as the subsequent rape trial. Entertainment Weekly wrote that OLTL was "airing some of the most literate drama ever to hit daytime – too good to be called 'soap opera.'"

One Life to Live was averaging 5 million viewers when Malone left in 1996. His next soap opera writing job was with Another World in 1997. He returned to write One Life to Live from 2003 to 2004. While writing One Life to Live, Malone wrote a novel called The Killing Club, which was tied into the show. For months, viewers watched character Marcie Walsh (Kathy Brier) write the book. The book was published in February 2005 with the authors listed as Marcie Walsh and Michael Malone. To explain this, Marcie said she took the book to "Professor Malone" at Llanview University, who helped her re-write it. After Malone's departure from the show, Dena Higley continued this storyline, as a copycat killer murdered characters on the show exactly as had occurred in the book. In its first week of publication The Killing Club went to No. 16 on The New York Times Best Seller list for Hardback Fiction. It later rose to No. 11.

Personal life
Malone was married to Maureen Quilligan, a professor of English at Duke University, for 47 years until his death. They met while he was studying at Harvard. Together, they had one child (Maggie). They resided in Hillsborough, North Carolina, from 2000, while maintaining a second home in Connecticut. Malone was a board member and a supporter of the Burwell School Historic Site.

Malone died on August 19, 2022, at his home in Clinton, Connecticut. He was 79, and suffered from pancreatic cancer for over a decade prior to his death.

Writing credits
Another World One Life to Live
 * Head writer: April 1997 – December 1997 (hired by Charlotte Savitz)
 * Head writer: 1991–1996 (hired by Linda Gottlieb); September 2004 – November 24, 2004
 * Co-head writer: March 10, 2003 – September 2004 (with Josh Griffith)
 * Story Consultant: February 3, 2003 – March 7, 2003 (hired by Brian Frons)

13 Bourbon Street
 * TV pilot (co-written with Josh Griffith & produced by Linda Gottlieb)

Books

 * (1975) Painting the Roses Red. New York: Random House. ISBN 9780394495989
 * (1976) The Delectable Mountains: Or, Entertaining Strangers. Sourcebooks Landmark, ISBN 1-4022-0006-4.
 * (1980) Dingley Falls. Sourcebooks Landmark, ISBN 1-4022-0007-2.
 * (1983) Handling Sin. Sourcebooks Landmark, ISBN 1-57071-756-7.
 * (1983) Uncivil Seasons. Sourcebooks Landmark, ISBN 1-57071-755-9.
 * (1989) Time's Witness. Sourcebooks Landmark, ISBN 1-57071-754-0.
 * (1991) Foolscap: Or, the Stages of Love. Sourcebooks Landmark, ISBN 1-57071-757-5.
 * (2001) First Lady. Sourcebooks Landmark, ISBN 1-57071-971-3.
 * (2002) Red Clay, Blue Cadillac: Stories of Twelve Southern Women. Sourcebooks Landmark, ISBN 1-57071-824-5.
 * (2002) The Last Noel. Sourcebooks Landmark, ISBN 1-4022-0147-8.
 * (2005) The Killing Club. Hyperion, ISBN 1-4013-0156-8. (co-credited with Marcie Walsh, based on a story by Josh Griffith)
 * (2009) "The Four Corners Of The Sky" Sourcebooks Landmark

Short stories
(Recipient of the 1997 Edgar Award for Best Short Story)
 * "Red Clay" (can be found in Best American Mystery Stories of the Century, published by Houghton Mifflin)
 * "Blue Cadillac"
 * "Murdered for Love"

Awards

 * Writers Guild of America Award for Television: Daytime Serials (1992) – One Life to Live
 * Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Drama Series Writing Team (1994) – One Life to Live

title: Michael Malone (author)


text:
File:M1867 2.jpg

Remington M1867 rifle. From "Det kgl norske Artilleris Aarsberetning", dated 1867.

title: File:M1867 2.jpg


text: User talk:213.208.88.200

title: User talk:213.208.88.200


text: User talk:206.186.8.66

title: User talk:206.186.8.66


text:
Kosheen

Kosheen are a British electronic music group based in Bristol, United Kingdom. The group consist of singer-songwriter Sian Evans, songwriter-producer Ron Mcelroy and drummer Mitchell Glover. The name Kosheen derives from the name of a North American Apache warrior, Cochise. In Japan, it was discovered that a combination of the Japanese words for "old" (古, romanised transliteration "ko") and "new" (新, "shin") would make "Kosheen" in Japanese.

Resist (1999–2002)
Their first album, Resist, was released in September 2001 on Moksha Recordings/BMG and reached number eight in the UK album chart.

Kokopelli (2003–2005)
Their second album, Kokopelli—released in August 2003 on Moksha Recordings/Sony and named after a mythical Native American spirit—focused less on drum and bass beats and more on guitar riffs and darker-toned lyrics. It outperformed its predecessor in the UK album chart by reaching number seven, and the single "All In My Head" also reached number seven, but it did not sell as well as its predecessor.

Damage (2007–2008)
Their third album, Damage, was released in Europe via Moksha/Universal Germany in March 2007. The UK edition of Damage, featuring two new tracks—"Analogue Street Dub" and "Professional Friend" (not included on the European edition)—was released via Moksha Recordings in September 2007.

The first single from Damage was "Overkill", released in March (Europe) and August (UK) 2007.

Independence (2012–2013)
In 2010, Kosheen set up their own label, Skeleton, with its first release, "Warning", released on 27 September. On 19 December 2010, they posted the first track, "Belladonna", from Independence, on their Facebook page, along with three more tracks ("Waste", "Enter" and "You Don't Own Me") on their Soundcloud page.

On 25 October 2011, fresh from the success of Sian Evans collaboration with DJ Fresh "Louder" which had reached number 1 in the UK Singles Chart in July, Kosheen confirmed an album release in May 2012, and a single, titled "Get a New One", on 13 February. The second single, "Holding On", features Susie Ledge as the guest vocalist. An announcement was made by the band on their official website that Independence would be released at the end of September 2012. It was released on 1 October 2012. "Mannequin" was later released as the third single from the album. Other songs on the album include "Waste", "Spies", "Addict" and "Tightly".

Solitude (2013–2015)
On 8 November 2013, Kosheen debuted a video for the song "Harder They Fall" as an introduction to their fifth studio album, Solitude. Four days later, the band uploaded the artwork to Solitude along with a release date of 25 November 2013.

Reunion (2019–present)
In 2019 the band reunited and started touring. No plans have been announced for new albums.

Solo projects
In September 2015, Markee Ledge announced he was releasing a solo album, Elevate, featuring Susie Ledge on the title track.

As of 2017, the members were working on their solo projects.

title: Kosheen


text:
Stercorite

Stercorite is the mineral form of microcosmic salt. The name comes from the Latin "stercus", meaning dung, since the mineral was originally discovered among guano.

title: Stercorite


text:
File:Sita rama lakshmana hanuman BVManor.JPG

Image of Sri Sri Sita, Rama, Lakshmana and Hanuman at Bhaktivedanta Manor, Watford, England


text: User talk:65.102.219.81

title: User talk:65.102.219.81


text:
Proto Motors

Proto Motors (프로토자동차) was a South Korean sports car manufacturer and coachbuilder.

History
Proto Motors was established in 1997 by the couple Han-chul Kim and Ji-sun Choi. The company has forged partnerships with Hyundai Motor Company, Kia Motors, and GM Daewoo. In 2001, the company custom-made a convertible limousine for Cheongwadae (the Equus), the South Korean presidential residence.

Proto Motors introduced the Spirra (a production model of PS-ll) at the 4th Seoul Motor Show. In 2006, Proto Motors was acquired by Oullim Motors and the development of the Spirra was continued, and in 2010 Proto Motors introduced the first Korea-made supercar. In 2014, the Oullim Motors Spirra EV, the electric version of the Spirra, was introduced.

Previously, the company specialized in redesigning existing models by developing electric cars or convertibles based on them. The company closed in 2017.

Models

 * RT-X (1998)
 * PS-II (2000)
 * Spirra (2007–2017)
 * Kia Grand Carnival Limousine (2006–2017)

title: Proto Motors


text: Category:1072 deaths

title: Category:1072 deaths


text:
Fred Levin

Fredric Gerson Levin (March 29, 1937 – January 12, 2021) was an American plaintiffs' lawyer who served as chairman of Levin, Papantonio, Rafferty, Proctor, Buchanan, O'Brien, Barr, Mougey, P.A., a law firm in Northwest Florida. The Fredric G. Levin College of Law at the University of Florida is named for him because of a monetary donation he made to the school in 1999.

He was best known for rewriting Florida's Medicaid Third-Party Recovery Act to allow the State of Florida to sue and recover billions of dollars from the tobacco industry for smoking-related illnesses. His flamboyant and brazen personality resulted in him being prosecuted by the Florida Bar two times, and investigated two additional times.

Levin's life was summarized in the weekly medical journal The Lancet. In its December 2014 edition, the author wrote: "And Give Up Showbiz? explores the extraordinary life of a pioneering and often controversial lawyer. Seen as an inspiring innovator by some, and a flamboyant self-promoter by others, Levin's work was not always met with a favourable outcome. Levin was accused of two murders, and often met with controversy because of his relentless fight for justice against big companies. His home life, while loving, was often neglected in his pursuit of business, and this is mentioned several times in the book—bringing a sense of balance to the stories."

Personal life
Levin was born in 1937, in Pensacola, Florida. He grew up in a conservative Jewish household, with his mother (Rose), father (Abe), and brothers (David, Herman, Stanley, Martin, and Allen). His father was a pawnbroker catering to the large military presence in the Pensacola area, and also ran the concessions at the Pensacola Greyhound Park and at a store on Pensacola Beach. Levin attended the University of Florida in Gainesville, Florida, as an undergraduate, but did not do well academically. Instead, he was known as a drinker, smoker, and gambler. He was a member of Pi Lambda Phi, one of two Jewish fraternities on campus. It was at the University of Florida where he met his future wife, Marilyn, who was a member of the Jewish sorority Alpha Epsilon Phi. The Levins had been married for 51 years upon her death on February 6, 2011, survived by four children, seven grandchildren, and one great-grandchild.

In 1958, Levin entered the University of Florida College of Law, mainly because he didn't want to leave the college party lifestyle, and his older brother David had established a small law firm where he could work. He had to attend summer school to get into law school, as his grades were below the required minimum 2.0 average. In 1958 virtually anyone who was white could get into a Florida public law school, but approximately one-third would graduate.

In Levin's first few weeks of law school, he received news that his brother Martin didn't have long to live, succumbing to the end-stages of leukemia. Levin approached the dean of the law school, and asked for a few days away from school to attend his brother's funeral. The dean looked at Levin's undergraduate record, and told him that he could take the time off and that he didn't need to return as he never would make it through law school.

Levin drove from Gainesville to Pensacola, but did not make it to Pensacola before his brother died. Ignoring the advice of the dean, Levin returned to law school where he thrived, finishing third in his class. Levin's plan after law school was to return to Pensacola and practice with his brother for one year, and then return to law school to get a masters in tax law. He had no intention of becoming a trial lawyer as he was terrified by public speaking.

On January 12, 2021, Levin died from COVID-19 complications.

Legal career
In 1961, Levin began practicing in the law firm of Levin & Askew (now known as Levin Papantonio Rafferty) in Pensacola. The firm was founded by his brother David and Reubin Askew, who eventually would go on to become a two-term governor of Florida and candidate for President of the United States.

Levin began his legal career in family law, but once a client explained that her husband said he would kill her divorce lawyer, he chose to switch to general civil law. His first case involved an insurance dispute over a residential fire claim. The case ended up before a jury. Levin won the case and decided he wanted to become a trial lawyer.

In the late 1960s, Levin handled a case involving the wrongful death of a child who had taken the antibiotic Chloromycetin. Levin won the case. While the compensatory damages were not large, the judge allowed Levin to pursue a punitive damage claim which ended up playing a role in the drug being pulled from the market in the United States for most uses.

Levin received national attention with the case of Thorshov v. L&N. On November 9, 1977, Dr. Jon Thorshov, a thirty-eight-year-old physician, his wife, his four-year-old daughter, and his one-year-old son were at their home in Pensacola when a freight train operated by L&N derailed near their home and released anhydrous ammonia. The family attempted to escape their home, but were overcome by the fumes. Dr. and Ms. Thorshov died, and both children sustained serious physical injuries. In 1980, Levin received a jury verdict for the family in the amount of $18 million. As a result of the verdict, Us magazine did a story on Levin in its swimsuit preview issue. On the cover were Randi Oakes from CHiPs, Morgan Fairchild from Flamingo Road, and Donna Mills from Knots Landing. Inside was a half-page picture of Levin standing in front of an L&N railcar under the headline, "I'll Sue".

Levin received more than thirty jury verdicts in excess of $1,000,000 (six in excess of $10,000,000). At various points in his career he held the national record for jury verdicts involving the wrongful death of a child, the wrongful death of a housewife, the wrongful death of a wage earner, and the largest personal injury verdict in the state of Florida. He was listed in every edition of Best Lawyers in America; was a member of the Inner Circle of Advocates; and was inducted into the National Trial Lawyers Hall of Fame in 2009.

Tobacco litigation
Levin played a significant role in the litigation brought by numerous states against the tobacco industry during the 1990s. Levin was at a trial lawyer conference when another attorney saw Levin drinking whiskey and smoking a cigarette. The attorney told Levin that smoking was going to kill him, and that he was working with the State of Mississippi to sue the tobacco industry for compensation for all the money Mississippi was spending in Medicaid dollars treating smoking related illnesses. Levin did not believe the legal theory would be successful, explaining that the tobacco industry had never paid a penny to anyone as a result of smoking injuries.

Levin returned to Pensacola and thought about the potential case, and went to the Florida statute allowing the state of Florida to recover against individuals and companies that harm someone where the State has to pay Medicaid. Levin thought that with a few changes in the statute's language, he could rewrite the law so that the State could sue the tobacco industry without the tobacco industry being able to raise the numerous defenses it had relied upon in winning the cases against it.

Levin made the changes, and then approached a good friend who was the dean of the Florida Senate. The two then went to the Governor of Florida, who supported the concept. The dean of the Senate was able to get the law passed on the last day of session and at the last minute. The Senator made it part of another law that received unanimous support in the Senate, and Levin's amendments passed. When the tobacco industry discovered the true intent of the law, it began donating money to Florida senators to repeal the statute. The Senate voted to repeal it, but the Governor vetoed the repeal. The Senate then came within one vote of overriding the Governor's veto, but could not, and the law stood.

After the passage of the law, John French, a lobbyist for Philip Morris USA, stated, "This is probably the single biggest issue to ever have been run through in the dead of the night." John Shebel, president of the pro-business organization Associated Industries of Florida, told the Orlando Sun-Sentinel, "This law is probably one of the worst laws ever passed by any Legislature." Walker Merryman, vice president of the Tobacco Institute, said, "It's certainly creative, and it demonstrates how a government will try to impose a significant financial burden on one portion of the economy."

Gannett News Service wrote: "What they engineered was a first-of-its-kind bill making it much easier for the state to recoup money it spends for treating cancer patients and others with smoking-related diseases. ... Its created such an uproar in Tallahassee that tobacco companies have pledged millions of dollars to fight the bill either by getting it vetoed or using the upcoming special session on health care to change or eliminate it."

"I could say, I think without exaggerating, that the financial life of the tobacco industry is riding on [the veto of the bill]", said John Banahaf, executive director of Action on Smoking and Health. Professor Richard Daynard of Northeastern University called the bill: "the single biggest blow against the tobacco industry and for the public health that's ever been done in the United states."

Challenges to the law made it the United States Supreme Court, but was upheld. Immediately after jury selection, the tobacco industry settled with the State of Florida for a record $13 billion. Levin's law firm would end up earning a fee of more than $300 million. Soon thereafter, Levin appeared on ABC's 20/20 talking to reporter John Stossel. While interviewing him for the piece, Levin lit up a cigarette, which ABC highlighted in the segment. Next, he appeared on two full pages of George magazine, standing on his putting green in a tuxedo, drinking Crown Royal whiskey and smoking a cigarette. He was then highlighted in a Time article entitled: "Are Lawyers Running America?"

Florida Bar
Levin had a lengthy and hostile relationship with the Florida Bar whom he often and openly referred to as "lily-white elitists, country club, men". He has been prosecuted by the Florida Bar on two occasions, and formally investigated on another two occasions. In the first investigation, Levin stated on his primetime, live, call-in, television show that doctors have "this God-complex--they think they are above the law." The investigation did not result in bar charges. In the second investigation, and first prosecution, Levin admitted on his television show to gambling on football games, and said he found nothing wrong with it. He mocked law enforcement for arresting and prosecuting local bookies, as if they were an elite swat team fighting terrorism. He commented that the local law enforcement and prosecutors wouldn't have the guts to go down to the high crime streets in Pensacola to arrest drug dealers and rapists because they would be scared to get shot. The Florida Bar charged Levin with ethics violation as he was admitting to violations of Florida law, and demeaning the legal profession. Levin was found guilty and a public reprimand was recommended. Levin challenged the decision to the United States Supreme Court, but in the end he received his public reprimand.

The third investigation, and second prosecution, involved Levin's use of the word "ridiculous" to describe the defense in two separate civil cases. Levin won both cases and received large jury verdicts, but both verdicts were taken away on appeal because the appellate court believed Levin inflamed the jury by calling the defense ridiculous. The Florida Bar then brought charges against Levin alleging that his closing argument violated ethics rules because he was stating his personal opinion. This was the first time in U.S. history that a lawyer was charged by a bar disciplinary committee in a situation such as this. This time Levin was found innocent.

The fourth investigation occurred when a friend of Levin's, the Senator who passed the tobacco legislation, was being prosecuted for violations of the Florida Sunshine Law. The key witness against the Senator (who now was a county commissioner) was another local county commissioner who claimed the now former Senator offered him a bribe to pass an item before him. When the former Senator was convicted of violation of the Sunshine Law, Levin made comments to the press calling the witness a "rat fink". He then told the Pensacola News Journal, "If [the witness] was on the Titanic, he would dress like a woman and jump on the first lifeboat." Levin called the judge's ruling not to free the politician while he appealed "unconscionable". He also assailed the judge. "I have never been so embarrassed or ashamed of the legal profession", he told the paper. "I believe the inmates have taken over the asylum." Asked what exactly he meant, Levin replied, "That means the nuts are in charge."

Levin's comments led to an ethics complaint being filed against Levin with the Florida Bar—the third in his career. Months later, the Florida Bar's grievance committee ruled there was no cause to pursue a full investigation into the matter. However, the Florida Bar sent Levin a "letter of advice" as to how to act in the future. The letter said: "While your conduct in this instance does not warrant formal discipline, the committee believes that it was not consistent with the high standards of our profession. The committee hopes that this letter will make you more aware of your obligation to uphold these professional standards, and that you will adjust your conduct accordingly."

Death of Jake Horton
On April 10, 1989, at approximately 1:00 p.m. C.S.T., a twin-engine Beechcraft King Air 200 crashed within minutes of takeoff from Pensacola Regional Airport, killing the two pilots and the single passenger, Jacob F. "Jake" Horton. The plane was owned by Southern Company, an American electric utility holding company headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. The company is currently the 16th largest utility company in the world, and the fourth largest in the U.S.

Jake was a senior vice-president at Gulf Power Company, a subsidiary of Southern Company. The cause of the plane crash has never been solved, with theories including pilot error, poor maintenance, sabotage, and suicide. Levin became embroiled in the incident because he was one of the last people to speak with Jake, and he also was legal counsel for Gulf Power.

In the months before the plane crash, Southern Company was under a federal grand jury investigation for possible tax evasion and inappropriate political contributions. Gulf Power and Jake were at the center of the investigation, with Southern Company claiming that Jake was the primary responsible party. Between 9:30 a.m. and 11:15 a.m. C.S.T. on April 10, 1989, Jake met privately with Levin in his office. Levin's law firm had been serving as private counsel for Gulf Power for many years, and Levin also was a close personal friend of Jake. Southern Company wanted Levin to convince Jake to resign, but Jake wished to remain employed and clear his name. Prior to leaving Levin's office, Jake ordered a corporate plane to take him from Pensacola to Atlanta where he wished to meet with the president of Southern Company. Jake boarded the plane approximately 1.5 hours later, and within minutes the plane crashed, killing all on board. Within three hours after the crash, the Escambia County Sheriff's Office received an anonymous call stating: "You can stop investigating Gulf Power now. We took care of that." Within two weeks of the plane crash, and in protest to Southern Company blaming Jake, Levin quit as counsel for Gulf Power.

Over the next year, the federal grand jury investigation continued, and Levin eventually was called to testify. Southern Company took the position that Levin was not permitted to testify because his knowledge was subject to attorney–client privilege. Southern Company finally agreed to allow Levin to testify, but only on the limited subject of his conversation with Jake on the morning of the plane crash. Southern Company would not permit Levin to talk to the National Transportation Safety Board or the Escambia County Sheriff's Office.

In the days before Levin was scheduled to testify, someone began leaving parakeets at his home and office with their necks broken. Also, someone called the FBI stating that Levin would be killed if he were to testify. Levin testified with U.S. Marshals escorting him to and from the hearing.

Despite numerous federal and state investigations, and multiple lawsuits, the cause of the plane crash has never been solved. Gulf Power ended up pleading guilty to illegal political contributions and other violations, and paid a $500,000 fine. Gulf Power blamed Horton for the illegal events.

Career in boxing

In 1989, Levin began managing the boxing career of Roy Jones Jr., who had just returned from Seoul, Korea, having earned a silver medal in the 1988 Olympic Games. The fact that Roy did not win the gold medal became an international issue after it was discovered that three of the judges had been subject to inappropriate contact, and yet awarded the gold medal to Roy's opponent or ruled it a draw. Roy had dominated his opponent (Park Si-hun), landing almost three times as many punches. Although the three judges were suspended, with two being banned for life, Roy was not awarded the gold medal. He was, however, awarded the outstanding competitor in the games by the International Amateur Boxing Association.

The fact that Levin was chosen to help manage Roy's career was controversial considering he had no experience in the boxing business. Roy had been courted by some of the biggest names in boxing, including Don King and Sugar Ray Leonard. Roy's father, Roy Jones Sr., chose Levin to manage his son's career because Jones Sr. no longer trusted the boxing establishment after the Olympic decision. Jones Sr. once stated: "The boxing biz has stolen the medal from my son."

Levin negotiated a middleweight championship fight for Roy against James Toney. Roy won the fight, and then earned a multimillion-dollar long-term contract with HBO. Levin received the 1995 Al Buck Award from the Boxing Writers Association of America as boxing manager of the year; and received the Rocky Marciano Foundation President's Award in 2001.

Levin managed Roy's boxing career from 1989 to 2003. Levin's last fight with Roy involved heavyweight champion John Ruiz on March 1, 2003. Ruiz had recently defeated Evander Holyfield for the championship. Jones officially weighed in at 193 pounds to Ruiz's 226 pounds. Jones won by unanimous decision, becoming the first former middleweight title holder to win a heavyweight title in 106 years, the last being Bob Fitzsimmons in 1896. Jones also became the first fighter in history to start his career as a junior middleweight and become a heavyweight champion.

Fighting racial injustice
When Levin entered the University of Florida College of Law in 1958, George Starke, the first African American student to enter a public institution in the state of Florida, entered with Levin's class. Levin described the first day as follows: "They had all of us on one side of the auditorium and he was all by himself, except for all the Secret Service people. Up to that point, I had not thought much about racial issues. I looked over and my heart went out to him. Here were 350 white law students and this one black guy. He was dressed in a suit, and the rest of us were dressed like bums. They started shuffling him, which is rubbing your feet together on the floor like they do in prison. ... I always studied in the library, and I would look across at George because he always had to sit at a table by himself and everybody would shuffle their feet. It just tore me up. I wanted to go over and sit with him, but I didn't have the guts."

After the first semester of law school, Levin approached George to become his study partner. The two remained friends for the next two years. Although Levin ended up graduating number three out of his graduating class, George failed to graduate.

In an oral history interview conducted by Samuel Proctor at the University of Florida, Levin described the final events leading to George leaving the University of Florida. "We were going to study for the exam the next day, I told him to meet me at my apartment. I was running a little late, and I got there, and he's sitting on the steps, we were an upstairs apartment. I said, 'Why didn't you go on in?' He said, 'You don't understand, a colored man doesn't go into an apartment where a white woman is.' I said, 'Oh the hell with it, come on.' So we came in, Marilyn cooked supper for us, and we studied all night long. I had these little flip cards that worked real well. All night long. He goes home, and I clean up and go to the exam, and he never shows up. He had gone home just to lay down for a second [snap of fingers], slept through the exam. They wouldn't give him another exam, they flunked him."

When the law school was renamed to the Fredric G. Levin College of Law in 1999, George attended in support of Levin.

Shortly after becoming a lawyer in Pensacola, Levin nominated Nathaniel Dedmond to be the first African American as a member of the Escambia-Santa Rosa Counties Bar Association. Several lawyers in the association were offended by the nomination and had their wives call Marilyn, Levin's wife. They asked Marilyn how she would like to be sitting next to Nathaniel Dedmond's wife at a bar meeting. They were hoping to get Marilyn to go to Fred and have him drop the nomination. Instead, Marilyn replied: "Oh, yes, that will be fine." Levin commented that he had never been more proud of Marilyn. When the nomination came up for vote, the association voted against Levin's nomination.

In 1999, Levin received recognition for his support of the African American community by being named a chief of the country of Ghana,  and receiving a citation from the U.S. Congressional Black Caucus; which provides in part: "We of the Congressional Black Caucus wish to join with the distinguished world citizens and other leaders in congratulating you on your designation as a Ghanaian Chief. But more specifically, we wish to honor your lifelong contributions to bettering the lives of the people of Ghana and the people of America. Long before we became aware of your outstanding contributions in Africa, we knew of your work as a lawyer fighting on the side of underprivileged people in America. We thank you for that rich legacy. We are proud that the world community is now beginning to recognize your valuable service to it as well."

Awards and honors
Levin received the Perry Nichols Award in 1994, which is the highest honor bestowed by the Florida Justice Association, and is given in recognition of a person's lifetime achievements in the pursuit of justice.

For the year 1999, The National Law Journal named Levin as the top civil litigator in Florida. This honor encompassed plaintiff and defense counsel. Levin also was named in the October 4, 1999, edition of The National Law Journal as one of the "Top Ten Litigators for 1999", which again included both plaintiff and defense counsel.

In 1999, Levin was honored at the United Nations by being made a chief in the Republic of Ghana. This honor was bestowed on Levin because of his lifetime of dedication to equal justice for people of all races. At the same time, Levin received a citation honoring him by the United States Congressional Black Caucus.

Levin was a member of the Inner Circle of Advocates, an organization limited to 100 of the top trial attorneys in the country, and has been listed in every edition of the publication Best Lawyers in America. In 2009, he was inducted into The National Trial Lawyers Hall of Fame. In 2016, Levin was named Trial Lawyer of the Year by The National Trial Lawyers.

In December 2017, Levin was awarded an Honorary Doctor of Laws from University of West Florida.

Later career
At the age of 80, Levin continued to practice law. "I want the practice of law to continue", he said. "I want there to be lawyers. Less and less people are going to law school now. In 2013, applications to accredited law schools dropped for a third consecutive year. My son, Martin, left the practice of law because of its transformation from the personal--a lawyer representing one client--to a business where a lawyer represents thousands of clients in mass tort or class action." Despite his opposition to mass torts, Levin agreed to transfer his law firm's primary practice to this niche area of law. The firm now runs Mass Torts Made Perfect, a conference held twice a year, usually in Las Vegas, to bring together mass tort lawyers from across the country.

In 2013, when he was 76, he won a $3.4 million jury verdict in an ATV case. In 2014, at the age of 77, he won a $12.6 million jury verdict in an automobile accident case. In 2016 (age 79), he was named national Trial Lawyer of the Year.

Charitable work
In 1995, Levin gave a professorship at the University of West Florida, in honor of his father.

In 1998, Levin gave the University of Florida law school $10 million, the second largest cash donation ever given to a public law school as of that time. In 1999, the law school name was officially changed to the University of Florida Fredric G. Levin College of Law.

In 1998, Levin contributed $2 million to the Levin & Papantonio Family Foundation.

In 2006, Levin gave the University of Florida law school $2 million to help fund the Martin H. Levin Advocacy Center.

In 2013, Levin gave $1 million in memory of his recently deceased wife to the Lubavitch-Chabad Student and Community Center at the University of Florida.

In 2015, Levin (along with his sister-in-law Teri) gave $1 million to the YMCA of Northwest Florida to support the construction of its new facility in downtown Pensacola.

In 2016, Levin gave $1 million to the Florida Institute for Human and Machine Cognition to help fund the institute's 30,000 square foot research facility in artificial intelligence, robotics, human-centered computing, agile and distributed computing, and many related areas.

In 2017, Levin gave $550,000 to the University of West Florida to establish the Reubin O'D. Askew Institute for Multidisciplinary Studies.

In 2017, Levin gave $2 million to the Brigham & Women's Hospital to establish the Fredric G. Levin Distinguished Chair in Thoracic Surgery and Lung Cancer Research. The gift was given in honor of Dr. Raphael Bueno for saving Mr. Levin's life after he was diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer.

In 2018, Levin gave an $8 million home, including its personal belongings, to the University of West Florida. In honor of the gift, the school named its government department the Reubin O'D. Askew Department of Government, after Levin's former law partner and two-term governor of the state of Florida.

In 2019, Levin gave 300,000 shares of Charlotte's Web Holdings, LLC stock to the University of Florida Levin College of Law. At the time of the announcement of the donation, the stock was valued at $6 million.

In 2019, Levin donated $2 million to Dana–Farber Cancer Institute to establish the Fredric G. Levin Endowment in Translational Cancer Research.

In 2021, Levin donated an additional $40 million to the University of Florida Levin College of Law through his estate.

Levin College of Law
The Fredric G. Levin College of Law at the University of Florida is named for him because of a $10 million cash donation he made to the school in 1999. The gift was the largest-ever cash donation to the University of Florida; the second-largest gift ever to a public law school when matched with state funds; and more than three times larger than any gift in the college's 90-year history. The naming drew statewide attention because of the vehement criticism of having the state's prestigious law school named after a person many thought to be reprehensible and undeserving.

One letter to the then dean of the law school read: "I have no problem with naming the law school in honor of an appropriate person, as other colleges have done, but naming our college after Fred Levin does no honor to him, to the institution, or its constituency, and demeans the efforts of the many deans, faculty, and alumni who have worked for so many years to achieve the vision of making our college one of the top twenty law schools. ... You degraded the image and prestige of the University of Florida College of Law by selling its good name to Fred Levin, a lawyer who has been castigated by the courts for abusing the rules, and is notorious for commercializing the practice, thumbing his nose at the bar, and otherwise manipulating the system." In response, Levin told the press: "Two hundred years from now the great, great, great grandchildren (of my critics) will be getting their law degrees from a school with my name on it. It's a good feeling." "It makes me feel great, when their great-grandchildren go up to that stage to get the law degree, they'll know that, dadgum it, that Jew's name is up there on the damn diploma. It's just gotta eat at them."

Health issues and death
In January 2016, Levin was diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer that had metastasized to his brain. The brain tumor was removed at the University of Florida Health, and he was treated for his lung cancer at Dana–Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women's Hospital.

Levin died from COVID-19 on January 12, 2021, after surviving stage 4 lung and brain cancer. He was asymptomatic for 10 days and died within 5 days of experiencing any symptoms. He was 83 years old.

Publications

 * Operations and the Rule Against Perpetuities, 13 Fla. L. Rev. 214 (1960–1961)
 * Wrongful Death and Florida's '10–20' Liability Policy -- The Twilight Zone, 13 Fla. L. Rev. 377 (1960-1961)
 * A Trial Lawyers look at No-Fault, 1 Miss. College L. Rev. 271 (1979)
 * Personal Injury Protection Coverage, Florida No-Fault Ins. Prac. (2d ed. 1979)
 * Attorney's Fees, Florida Civil Practice (2d ed. 1980)
 * Visiting Florida's No-Fault Experience: Is it Now Constitutional?, 54 Fla. Bar. J. 2 (1980)
 * Structured Settlements in Review: A Case Study, The Am. J. of Trial Advocacy Vol. 4, No. 3, pg. 579 (Spring 1981)
 * Effective Opening Statements: The Attorney's Master Key to Courtroom Victory (1983)
 * The Trial Masters, Strategy for Opening Statement: A Case Study pp. 158–196 (1984)
 * The Art of Cross-Examination: A Case Study, 9 Trial Diplomacy J. 1 (1986)
 * Plaintiff's Trial Strategy, Periodic Payment Judgment (1987)
 * The Winning Attitude, 2 Trial Practice News Letter 4 (1988)
 * A Plaintiff's Guide to Effective Opening Statements, 9 Verdicts, Settlements & Tactics (Sept. 1989)
 * Opening Statement, Fla. Civil Trial Prac. (4th ed. 1990)
 * Opening Statement, Florida Civil Trial Practice Ch. 8 (5th ed. 1998)
 * Closing Arguments, The Last Battle (2003)

title: Fred Levin


text:
CFU758

CFU758 is a low-power broadcaster, using the on-air brand 90.7 RAV FM. It is the only licensed high school radio station in Thornhill, Ontario and is owned and operated by Hodan Nalayeh Secondary School. RAV FM is part of the school's radio broadcasting course, and is one of a small number of Canadian radio stations licensed to a high school.

History
RAV FM first signed on in 1999 on 106.3 MHz, utilizing a combination of students and faculty as station operators and program directors.

Rob Basile was the station's original founder, and a teacher at Hodan Nalayeh Secondary School. Under Basile's guidance, the station voluntarily changed to 90.7 MHz to avoid interference with CKAV-FM in 2002. After launching CIRR-FM at the beginning of 2007, he remained that station's program director, the duties of program director were given to Chris "Punch" Andrews, who also continued his on-air duties at CKFM-FM. After the death of Andrews in 2008, Ronald Johnson was named the new program director of the station. To honour the memory of Andrews, the studio was renamed the Punch Andrews Studio. Up until this point it was student-led broadcasting and was still using the original mixer board donated to the station by CHUM FM. In 2009, Matthew Rondina, a media teacher at Hodan Nalayeh Secondary School assumed the program director, removing the elements of student leadership and independence from the station. The original equipment was removed and the studio was completely changed. Under Rondina's changes students were no longer able to run their own shows and the station ceased to exist as a club/ extra curricular activity.

Because RAV FM is no longer student-led, the station continues to run without student support during off times in the scholar year, using a set playlist.

Studio and Equipment
RAV FM provides a low power signal from on top of Hodan Nalayeh Secondary School. The studios are located on the second floor of the school. Additional equipment is placed on the restricted fourth floor. The radio station was originally equipped with Quickpix and  OpLog automation software. Music scheduling was done using MusicMaster. The radio station also used a Nicom transmitter and Omnia 3 Turbo on air processor. All audio was logged using iMediaLogger. Currently, the station utilizes an Allen & Heath XB–14 radio broadcast mixer, equipped with four microphones, a telephone and a main broadcast computer to transmit music and other audio elements.

Signal
This signal is fairly strong around the school, and travels farthest in a southwest direction from the school toward York University and Jane and Finch. The approximate diameter for reception of RAV-FM under normal weather conditions is as far north as Elgin Mills Road, as far west as Highway 400, as far south as Sheppard Avenue and as far east as Yonge Street. Reception will vary greatly depending on the radio being used.

Broadcasting Course
RAV FM was originally run as an extracurricular activity consisting of student-led shows based on a variety of subjects, such as sports, news and music. During the 2012–2013 scholar year, RAV ceased to exist as an extracurricular activity, and became a course, under the code AWS 201. The course has since been taught by Matthew Rondina and explores radio communication as well as the entertainment industry aspects of broadcasting, including social networking.

Co-operative Education Program
During the 2013–2014 scholar year, RAV FM became a co-operative education work placement. Students would assume the role of studio manager and assume the duties of day–to–day operation of the studio and station. These duties include social media updates, music library/playlist updates and promotions/advertising.

Covid-19
RAV-FM shutdown at the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic. The station is not currently in operation, but there are plans to revitalize the broadcasting course and subsequently the radio room in the school. This recommencement of the use of the room should begin by late 2023.

title: CFU758