text:
Loch Garry

Loch Garry (Scottish Gaelic: Loch Garraidh) is a freshwater loch 25 km north of Fort William, Lochaber, Scotland. Loch Garry is 11 km long and 50 m deep. It is fed by waters from Loch Quoich 10 km upstream on the River Garry, and drains into Loch Oich in the Great Glen just 5 km downstream. Loch Garry is much photographed from the A87 for its romantic setting and also because a quirk of perspective makes it appear like a map of Scotland.

Both lochs have been dammed for the production of hydroelectricity, the dam on Loch Quoich being the largest rockfill dam in Scotland at 320 m long and 38 m high. Water is fed by tunnel to the two power stations each producing 20MW, and the scheme was completed in 1962.

The Glen used to be home of the Clan MacDonell of Glengarry, but since the Highland Clearances the population has been reduced to a handful of estates. The main activities are deer stalking and forestry, with little tourism apart from Munro-baggers seeking some spectacularly remote mountains at the head of the glen. The minor road along the north side of Loch Garry continues past Loch Quoich to Kinlochhourn from where a footpath continues to Knoydart.

There is another Loch Garry in Glengarry County, Ontario, Canada. This loch is named by Clan MacDonell of Glengarry, after their previous home loch, Loch Garry in Scotland, after their emigration to the county from Scotland in result of the Highland Clearances

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

title: Loch Garry


text:
63rd Street lines

The IND 63rd Street Line and BMT 63rd Street Line, also referred to as the 63rd Street Crosstown, Crosstown Route, or Route 131-A, are two rapid transit lines of the B Division of the New York City Subway system. The two lines run under 63rd Street in the Upper East Side of Manhattan, with a cross-platform interchange at the Lexington Avenue–63rd Street station.

Each line consists of two tracks in a stacked configuration, with the southbound tracks of each line parallel to each other on the upper level, while the northbound tracks are parallel on the lower level. Crossover connections between each line's respective tracks are located just to the west of the Lexington Avenue station. The IND line, the southern of the two lines, is served by F trains at all times; it connects the IND Sixth Avenue Line in Manhattan to the IND Queens Boulevard Line in Queens. It uses the upper level of the bi-level 63rd Street Tunnel to travel under the East River between Manhattan and Queens. The northern, BMT, line is served by the Q train at all times, although a limited number of N and R trains also serve the line during rush hours. Also known as the Second Avenue Connection, it links the BMT Broadway Line to the Second Avenue Subway, both in Manhattan. The crossover between the lines has been used in the past during service disruptions as well as during the Manhattan Bridge closures in the late 1990s.

These lines were conceived as part of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's 1968 expansion plans, and along with the Archer Avenue lines and a small section of the Second Avenue Subway, they were the only portions of the plan to be completed before it was scaled back due to fiscal issues. The IND 63rd Street Line was originally planned to be extended further east into Queens as a super-express bypass of the IND Queens Boulevard Line. After these plans were abandoned in the mid-1970s, it was commonly referred to as a "subway to nowhere" because it ended one stop into Queens, without any infrastructure connecting to other subway lines in Queens. The 63rd Street Tunnel lay unused for over a decade, and its lower level, intended for future Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) service, was completed solely to support the subway line above it.

The IND 63rd Street Line between Queens and Manhattan opened on October 29, 1989, and was connected to the Queens Boulevard Line on December 16, 2001. The BMT 63rd Street Line in Manhattan was only used for regular service starting in 2017, when the Second Avenue Subway's first phase opened.

Extent and service
The following services use the 63rd Street Lines:

The 63rd Street Lines comprise two physical pairs of trackage; each track pair's mileage is measured via different subway chaining schemes. One is chained as part of the Independent Subway System (IND), and the other is chained as part of the Brooklyn–Manhattan Transit Corporation (BMT).

The IND line begins as a northward continuation of the IND Sixth Avenue Line at 57th Street station. It runs under Sixth Avenue and Central Park, turning east under 63rd Street and running through the 63rd Street Tunnel under the East River, with stations at Main Street on Roosevelt Island and at 21st Street-Queensbridge under 41st Avenue in Queens. At its eastern end, the line merges with the IND Queens Boulevard Line under Northern Boulevard, west of 36th Street station. This line is coded as chaining route "T", with the southbound track marked as T1 and the northbound track designated T2. Beneath the subway tunnel is a lower level used by the Long Island Rail Road (LIRR), where it heads to Grand Central Madison. It is connected to Grand Central Terminal as part of the LIRR's East Side Access project, which commenced operations in 2023.

The BMT line begins as a northward continuation of the express tracks of the BMT Broadway Line at the 57th Street–Seventh Avenue station. It runs under Seventh Avenue, Central Park and 63rd Street before turning north under Second Avenue and merging with the Second Avenue Subway. The tracks on this line are coded with BMT chaining, labeled as tracks G3 and G4 to distinguish them from the pre-existing G1 and G2 tracks associated with the 60th Street Tunnel and Astoria Line. The odd-numbered tracks carry southbound trains, while the even-numbered tracks carry northbound trains.

The two lines intersect at the Lexington Avenue–63rd Street station, where there are cross-platform interchanges for both northbound and southbound trains. Just west of Lexington Avenue-63rd Street, two diamond crossover tracks allow trains to switch between the two lines. This connection, not used in passenger service, allows trains to run from the Broadway Line to the Queens Boulevard Line and from the Sixth Avenue Line to the Second Avenue Line.

Service history
The first segments of the two lines opened on October 29, 1989; the IND line opened between 57th Street and 21st Street–Queensbridge, and the BMT line opened between 57th Street-Seventh Avenue and Lexington Avenue-63rd Street. The BMT 63rd Street Line was not used for passenger service. The IND Line was usually served by, and  trains; during this time, Q trains ran on the IND Sixth Avenue Line due to reconstruction of the Manhattan Bridge. From the line's opening until September 1990, service was provided by Q trains during weekdays, by B trains during weekends, and by an F/Q combination route late nights. Starting in September 1990, evening Q service was replaced by the B instead. In April 1993, the F/Q combination designation was dropped and was simply known as F. The JFK Express also served the IND line very briefly; the service was discontinued on April 15, 1990. From April to November 1995, as part of the Manhattan Bridge reconstruction, the bridge's north side (Sixth Avenue) tracks closed during middays and weekends; the Q ran on the BMT Broadway Line during these times, using the BMT 63rd Street Line and switching to the IND 63rd Street Line to Queens west of Lexington Avenue-63rd Street.

In May 1997, 63rd Street Shuttle service via the IND Sixth Avenue Line replaced F service during late nights. Between February 22, 1998, and May 22, 1999, service between the Sixth Avenue Line and the 63rd Street Line was suspended because of construction on the IND tracks. B and Q trains were cut back to 57th Street, and the late night shuttle suspended. During this time, a different shuttle provided full-time service between 21st Street–Queensbridge and 34th Street-Herald Square via the BMT Broadway Line; for instance, in 1995, this shuttle switched between the IND and BMT Lines west of Lexington Avenue station. On May 22, 1999, the B and Q returned to 21st Street–Queensbridge.

On July 22, 2001, the north side tracks of the Manhattan Bridge, which served the Sixth Avenue Line, closed. B and Q service on the IND 63rd Street Line was replaced with a full-time shuttle via the Sixth Avenue Line. On December 16, 2001, the 63rd Street Connector to the IND Queens Boulevard Line officially opened, and the F was rerouted to serve the IND Line at all times, replacing the shuttle and assuming its current service pattern.

On January 1, 2017, the first phase of the Second Avenue Subway opened, extending the Q (now running via the BMT Broadway Line), and some rush-hour N short turn trips, along the BMT 63rd Street Line. The Q and N then turned north to connect to the Second Avenue Subway, terminating at 96th Street. Before the Second Avenue Subway opened in 2017, the BMT line was generally not used for passenger service, except for detours due to emergencies or construction on other lines (including the aforementioned periods in 1995 and 1998). Because the line was not used in regular service from 1989 to 2016, it was not shown on the official subway map, except in 1995 and 1998. Prior to 2011, these tracks were also used to store train sets outside of rush hour.

Early plans
In February 1963, the New York City Transit Authority (NYCTA) proposed a two-track East River subway tunnel under 76th Street with unspecified connections to the rest of the transit network, at a cost of $139 million. In a May 2, 1963, report, the proposed site of the tunnel was switched to 59th Street. On May 24, Mayor Wagner suggested that a tunnel around 61st Street "be built with all deliberate speed". On October 17, 1963, the Board of Estimate approved a new East River tunnel sited at 64th Street, noting that it would cost $30 million and take seven years to build. The 64th Street site was said to be $5.3 million less expensive, "because of easier grades and smaller curves".

The lack of specificity about how the tunnel would be used was criticized at an early date. In December 1964, the Citizens Budget Committee said that the project, now shifted to 63rd Street, was "leading nowhere-to-nowhere". The Committee went on to propose three connections that were eventually adopted (connections to the BMT Broadway Line and IND Sixth Avenue Line, both at 57th Street, and to the IND Queens Boulevard Line near Queens Plaza), and one that was not adopted (a connection to the IRT Lexington Avenue Line).

The route was changed to 63rd Street because officials at Rockefeller Institute at 64th Street feared that heavy construction and later train movements so close to the institute's buildings might have adversely affected delicate instruments at the Institute and change the accuracy of the research being conducted. The Board of Estimate approved the revised 63rd Street route on January 14, 1965, at a budget of $28.1 million and a four-year timetable, with the connections to the rest of the transit network awaiting a study that was then scheduled for completion in mid-1966. The New York Times noted that "A variety of possible connections...are under study," including possible new lines under Madison and Second Avenues. The NYCTA's chairman, Joseph E. O'Grady, said that the tunnel and the subway connections would eventually be completed at about the same time, "since construction of the tunnel takes at least a year longer than the connections".

In 1966, Mayor John Lindsay gave his approval for the 63rd Street option, preferring it over the 61st Street option. Lindsay's administration proposed a new station at 63rd Street to connect with the Lexington Avenue/59th Street station via an underground arcade surrounded by retail areas. Communities along the route of the proposed crosstown tunnel disagreed on the exact routing. Advocacy groups such as the Citizens Budget Commission, Citizens Union, and the Commerce and Industry Association preferred a 61st Street routing for easier interchange with the Lexington Avenue/59th Street station. Queens civic leaders supported the 63rd Street proposal, saying that a transfer station at 61st Street would worsen congestion on the already busy Lexington Avenue Line.

A third track was added to the plans for the tunnel in April 1966. The track would serve Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) trains to east Midtown, alleviating train traffic into Pennsylvania Station. That August, a fourth track was added to the plans after it was determined that LIRR trains would be too large to run on subway tracks. This amendment increased the number of LIRR tracks to two, and provided dedicated tracks for the LIRR and the subway.

In November 1967, voters approved a $2.5 billion transportation bond issue, and in early 1968, under the Program for Action, officials provided detailed plans for how it would be used. Among many other projects, the proposal included:

 * Three portions of a new 63rd Street–Southeast Queens line. This included a bi-level 63rd Street tunnel for both subway and Long Island Rail Road service; a super-express bypass for the IND Queens Boulevard Line running along the LIRR Main Line between Northern Boulevard and Forest Hills–71st Avenue; and an IND Queens Boulevard branch line running along the LIRR Atlantic Branch right-of-way.
 * A new Long Island Expressway line for northeastern Queens, running to Queens College and Kissena Boulevard with a later extension to Springfield Boulevard
 * A new Archer Avenue subway line for eastern Queens, running to 188th Street in Hollis
 * A Second Avenue Subway line, with multiple connections to the 63rd Street line

This proposal, with some modifications, received approval from the Board of Estimate on September 21, 1968.

Construction
Plans for the 63rd Street Line were approved by the New York City Board of Estimate on June 3, 1969. Groundbreaking ceremonies for the line took place on November 24, 1969, at Vernon Boulevard and 21st Street in Queensbridge Park, Long Island City. Workers tunneled westward from Queens, as well as in both directions under Roosevelt Island. Four 38 ft prefabricated sections of the 63rd Street Tunnel were constructed at Port Deposit, Maryland, then towed to New York and sunk under the East River. The first of the tunnel segments was delivered in May 1971 and was lowered into place on August 29, 1971; the last section was lowered on March 14, 1972. The double-deck, 3140 ft tunnel under the East River was "holed through" on October 10, 1972, with the separate sections of tunnels being connected.

One section of the line that ran through Central Park was controversial because it called for 1500 ft of cut-and-cover tunneling, which would require digging an open trench through Central Park. In May 1970, Manhattan Community Board 8 held a meeting so constituents could voice concerns about the project's impact. The next month, Mayor John Lindsay told city engineers to write a report that studied ways to reduce the project's impact. The results of the report, released in January 1971, called for using tunnel boring machines underneath Central Park to reduce disruption. In February 1971, the NYCTA published advertisements in newspapers, seeking construction bids for the tunnels under Central Park. After the advertisements had run for three days, the NYCTA withdrew them after community and conservation groups objected. Later that month, the NYCTA finally agreed to halve the width of the proposed 75 ft-wide cut, which resulted in a proportionate decrease in the area of affected parkland. The NYCTA also agreed to reduce disruption to the Heckscher Playground, located above the proposed subway tunnel's path, by cutting construction time from three years to two years and by constructing a temporary playground nearby. In March, the NYCTA again sought construction bids. The sections that connected to the existing Broadway and Sixth Avenue Lines were holed through on October 11, 1973. Construction on the section between 5th Avenue and Park Avenue began in August 1974. The project involved digging a 45 ft-high cavern underneath the street.

On March 20, 1975, New York mayor Abraham Beame announced significant cutbacks to the plan. Construction of the Southeastern Queens extension was deferred until 1981, and the Long Island Rail Road extension through the lower level of the 63rd Street tunnel was canceled for the foreseeable future. However, it was still anticipated that the Queens Boulevard super-express and the Archer Avenue Line up to Parsons/Archer would still be completed. The Queens project, although curtailed, was given priority because it was "more advanced in construction".

By January 1976, the tunnel was 95% complete. In May, construction was briefly halted when residents jumped into utility pits to protest the cutting of trees near the Lexington Avenue station. A US federal judge issued a stop-work order on May 13, but issued another verdict five days later that allowed construction to proceed. Construction resumed on May 25, after three weeks of protests, and the trees were cut down anyway.

In summer 1976, the NYCTA announced that "it will take an extra five or six years—until 1987 or 1988—to complete the new Manhattan–Queens trunk subway line from Central Park to Jamaica via the new 63rd Street tunnel." The main cause of the delay was the 5.8-mile "super express", although it was expected that the three new Archer Avenue line stations could be ready sooner. As an interim measure, the NYCTA proposed a new station at Northern Boulevard, adjacent to Queens Plaza, which could possibly open by 1983 or 1984. However, there were also a lack of federal funds, so this could not be completed immediately. By this time, there were only going to be seven stations on the 63rd Street and Archer Avenue Lines combined. At the time, these two lines were part of the same route, the 63rd Street–Southeast Queens line.

The Manhattan portion of the line was completed in 1976. The Times noted:

"Underneath Central Park lie two eerily quiet sets of tracks. They have advanced equipment – welded tracks, fluorescent lighting and rubber-based pads under the rail – that have not yet been installed on most of the system's 230 operating miles.

These tunnels were finished in 1976. This year, the contractor will tear down his two-story office in Central Park, remove the fence near Fifth Avenue and restore foliage and the bird house he damaged, at a cost of $300,000.

By 1981, five years after completion of the tunnel, the Transit Authority expects to put it to use; its brand new quiet tracks will be used as a storage yard for out-of-service trains."

Zoo York Wall
The Zoo York Wall was a graffiti wall within the line's length through Central Park, where subway writers and other street artists "made their marks" in the early 1970s. It was a temporary wall, erected by the NYCTA in 1971 to block unauthorized entry into the site of the 63rd Street Line running underneath the Central Park Zoo. Its name originates from the 63rd Street Tunnel (which it was supposed to guard), then called the "Zoo York Tunnel". During the tunnel's construction (1971–1973), the tunnel provided a subterranean gathering place for very early subway artists who hung around together in Central Park, and was named Zoo York by ALI, founder of the SOUL ARTISTS graffiti crew. The name came about because it was in a zoo in New York, hence "Zoo York".

Armored with polished aluminium in the futile hope of resisting spray-paint and permanent marker ink, the wall did little to dissuade teenage graffiti writers from climbing over and descending into the tunnel during its construction. Graffiti artists also marked their territory by "tagging" the wall which had been put up around the construction site. Upon completion of the subway project in 1973, the "Zoo York Wall" was torn down.

The name came about because the Central Park Zoo at that time was a classical 19th-century menagerie, populated by wild animals displayed in open-air cages, who paced the bars back and forth neurotically—always hoping for an escape, yet paradoxically blind to the world beyond their cramped quarters. ALI noted that by contrast, here were these feral teenagers, himself included, living in a free society, who sought nothing more wholeheartedly than to crowd together in a deep, dark hole in the ground. Marvelling at their perverse urban psychologies, ALI decided that all city people were insane for seeking imprisonment in tiny apartments, offices, subway cars and the like, and declared that New York City itself was "not New, but a Zoo!" He named the tunnel itself "Zoo York".

The unused tunnel
In May 1978, the Times noted, "What started out a few years ago as 40 miles of new subway routes to serve the long-suffering residents of Queens has been whittled down to 15 miles, is years behind schedule, and will cost more than twice as much as originally estimated....The line costs $100,000 a foot, will be very short and will serve only a modest number of riders." The article now noted that the Queens super-express had been deferred "to 1988 at the earliest", and the only sections in progress were the 63rd Street Line to Northern Boulevard, and "a small piece along Archer Avenue". The 63rd Street Line's opening date was projected for 1985. The plan depended on the idea that Queens Boulevard riders would be willing to exit the subway at Queens Plaza and walk a city block to a new station at Northern Boulevard to continue their trip. The NYCTA projected that this transfer would draw 11,000 passengers a day.

By October 1980, officials considered stopping both projects and spending the money on maintaining the existing system. By then, the Archer Avenue project was projected for completion in 1984, and the 63rd Street line in 1985. The Times noted that the lower level of the 63rd Street tunnel was still under construction, even though it would remain unused indefinitely. Richard Ravitch, the MTA chairman, said that to stop the work was "so costly as to make it impractical subsequent to the construction of the subway portion." It "had to be finished – largely for structural reasons – to support the subway tunnel above". The line was described as a "tunnel to nowhere" because the tunnel would have one station in Queens, and because it would not connect to any other lines.

In 1979, the New York City Department of Transportation and a steering committee started reexamining the New Routes program. The Queens Transit Alternatives Study was undertaken, evaluated 18 transit plans, and recommended that 5 be further evaluated. The MTA unveiled five proposals to local communities in the spring of 1983. The proposals ranged from leaving it as-is, with the line's terminus in Long Island City, to the original 1960s plan to connect the 63rd Street Line to the LIRR Main Line, the cost of which was now estimated at $1 billion. At 21st Street–Queensbridge, usage estimates for that station in 1984 were 220 passengers per hour unless a connection was made to the rest of the system. These options were formally evaluated by an Alternative Analysis/Draft Environmental Impact Statement completed by the Federal Transit Administration and the MTA in May 1984. The MTA was studying four options for making this line more useful:

 * 1) The Queens Express Bypass: extending the line along the LIRR Main Line to Forest Hills–71st Avenue. It would be completed in 1998 and cost $931 million. This was the original plan for this line proposed in the 1968 Program for Action. This was also the only option that the MTA felt that would add passenger and train capacity to the and  express services. At a proposed station at Northern Boulevard, a transfer concourse to Queens Plaza would have allowed transfers between local, express, and bypass trains.
 * 2) Feeding the line into the IND Queens Boulevard Line's local tracks under Northern Boulevard. This alternative would be completed the earliest, by 1993; ran the shortest distance, with only 1,500 feet between 29th Street and Northern Boulevard; and was the cheapest, at a cost of $222 million. However,  the  and  services in Queens, the most crowded in the system, would not see any added capacity from such a connection,  while the 63rd Street line would run at only $1/3$ of its total capacity, in addition to reducing the viability of future extensions to the line. It would also require the  service to terminate at Court Square instead of operating local on the Queens Boulevard Line. An option similar to this was ultimately chosen, and the  was rerouted through the line to reduce congestion, with G service eliminated north of Court Square.
 * 3) Extending the line through the Sunnyside Yard and onto the LIRR Montauk Branch, running directly to the lower level of the Archer Avenue Line in Jamaica. The Montauk Branch in Queens is currently used for freight service, last seeing passenger service in 1998, and would have been rebuilt and electrified. The Montauk line would merge with the BMT Jamaica elevated at Lefferts Boulevard just west of 121st Street, using the BMT approach to the Archer Avenue subway. The Jamaica El would be truncated to Crescent Street in Brooklyn and replaced by bus service. New stations would be built at Thomson Avenue within the Sunnyside Yard, and at Fresh Pond Road (the site of the former Fresh Pond station) and Woodhaven Boulevard (at the former Ridgewood station site) along the Montauk Branch. The now-closed Richmond Hill station on the Montauk Branch would be renovated and lengthened for subway service. The LIRR would have exclusive use of the tracks during overnight hours for freight service. This $594 million option would be open by 1997, but people living around the Montauk Branch opposed the proposal due to fears of increased traffic and danger from the Montauk Branch's multiple grade crossings, though plans called for new overpasses and access roads to eliminate these crossings.
 * 4) Extending the line to a new subway/LIRR terminal at Thomson Avenue within the Sunnyside Yard, with a walking transfer to the Queens Plaza station, and a transfer to a new LIRR route that would go to Rosedale and Queens Village via the Montauk Branch. The LIRR would be rebuilt, grade-separated, and electrified. The Richmond Hill station would be renovated for additional LIRR service, while the Hollis and Queens Village stations would be converted from side platform stations to island platform configurations. This $488 million option, to be completed by 1995, was also opposed by people living along the Montauk Branch.

The suburban Glendale, Ridgewood and Middle Village communities in central Queens strongly opposed any proposals involving the Montauk Branch, which ran through their neighborhood. The ultimately agreed-on plan was to connect the tunnel to the local tracks of the IND Queens Boulevard Line, at a cost of $222 million, and a timetable of at least eight years. It was estimated that the project would attract 16,500 passengers per hour. This was the cheapest plan besides doing nothing. The MTA board approved this plan on December 14, 1984. The section of the line up to Long Island City was projected to open by the end of 1985.

By June 1985, the project was again delayed indefinitely. According to The New York Times, the tunnel had originally been planned to open that year, but then inspectors found that the tube was not ready for service. The tunnels had been inundated with 6 ft of water, and several girders and electrical equipment had also deteriorated.

Two contractors were hired to assess the structural integrity of the tunnel, and the delay was estimated at two years. The federal government withheld $31 million of funding for the tunnel in July 1985 due to "'wholly inadequate' management of the tunnel's construction". In August 1985, at the instigation of Senator Al D'Amato, the federal government suspended funding on both the 63rd Street and Archer Avenue projects over "concerns with the construction management practices". The two projects had cost nearly $1 billion between them, of which the federal government had provided $530 million for 63rd Street and $295 million for Archer Avenue.

Opening
By February 1987, the MTA's contractors had concluded that the tunnel was structurally sound, although federal funding had not yet been released. The MTA approved a new plan to have the tunnel open by October 1989. The agency also proposed a $550 million, 1,500-foot connector to both the express and local tracks of the IND Queens Boulevard Line. Under the plan, the Queens Boulevard Line would be "reverse-signaled", which would accommodate Manhattan-bound trains on three out of the line's four tracks in the morning rush, and the opposite for the evening rush. This part of the plan was not projected to begin before the 1990s.

In June 1987, the federal government completed its own review of the project. "A little light appeared at the end of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's 63rd Street 'tunnel to nowhere' last week", the Times reported, as the government's own inspector found the tunnel sound, and released the final installment of $60 million for both the 63rd Street and Archer Avenue projects. The first train to use the extension was the "rail polisher train", a non-revenue move that occurred on August 1, 1989.

The 63rd Street lines went into service on October 29, 1989, twenty years after construction began, with new stations at Lexington Avenue, Roosevelt Island, and 21st Street/41st Avenue in Queens. The IND line was served by trains on weekdays and  trains on weekends. The 1,500 ft connector to the Queens Boulevard Line had not yet started construction. The BMT line was not in use at that time. It was built for future service options, including a connection to the Second Avenue Subway for service from the Upper East Side to Lower Manhattan. From May to November 1995, the north side of the Manhattan Bridge was closed for reconstruction during middays and weekends and the Q train was routed via Broadway at this time. It used the BMT 63rd Street Line to connect to the IND 63rd Street Line and serve Lexington Avenue, Roosevelt Island, and 21st Street–Queensbridge stations.

From February 22, 1998, to May 22, 1999, 63rd Street Shuttle trains operated via this line between 21st Street–Queensbridge and 57th Street–Seventh Avenue, later running further to 34th Street–Herald Square. The 57th Street/Sixth Avenue station was closed from 12:30 to 6 a.m. daily during the project. The project had initially been slated to be completed in fall 1999, but normal service resumed in May 1999, ahead of schedule. The 1998–1999 reconstructions were to replace the tracks, which had become deteriorated after eight years of use due to a flaw in the railway ties; namely, an "innovative" design of "shallow epoxy-and-sand pads" had weakened the base of the rails.

Connection to the Queens Boulevard Line
Planning for the connection to the IND Queens Boulevard Line began in December 1990, with the final design contract awarded in December 1992. Two build alternatives were evaluated: a connection to the local tracks of the Queens Boulevard Line, and a connection to the local and express tracks. The goal of the project was to increase capacity on Queens Boulevard by 33% and to eliminate the dead-end terminal at 21st Street–Queensbridge. Bellmouths were constructed to allow for a future bypass line through Sunnyside Yard.

The remaining section from 21st Street to the Queens Boulevard Line, which cost $645 million, began construction on September 22, 1994. The construction project also extended the lower level LIRR tunnel and involved a number of other elements, including the integration of ventilation plants, lowering a sewer siphon 50 feet, rehabilitation of elements of the existing line, mitigating ground water, diverting trains which continued to run through the project area and widening of the entry point to the Queens Boulevard Line to six tracks. In December 2000, the 63rd Street Connector was opened for construction reroutes. The connector was open for off-peak reroutes on January 13, 2001, and regular service was expected to begin by August or September of that year. However, the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks delayed the commencement of regular service. The connector came into regular use on December 16, 2001, with the rerouting of F service at all times to 63rd Street.

The 63rd Street Connector created a new path between Manhattan and the heavily traveled Queens Boulevard Line, increasing the amount of train service that could be run between Manhattan and Queens. With the F rerouted via 63rd Street, service through the 53rd Street Tunnel was replaced by the, a new local service that ran along the Sixth Avenue and Queens Boulevard lines. This service was discontinued on June 25, 2010, and replaced with a reroute of the.

Connections to the Second Avenue Subway

The 63rd Street Lines were envisioned to connect the Second Avenue Subway to the BMT Broadway Line, the IND Sixth Avenue Line, and Queens. The BMT 63rd Street Line would directly connect the upper Second Avenue Line to the Broadway Line. Construction on the IND Second Avenue Line began in 1972, but was halted in 1975 due to the New York City fiscal crisis. As a result, the BMT 63rd Street Line was not finished and instead ended abruptly at Lexington Avenue-63rd Street station. In 2007, construction on the Second Avenue line recommenced and in 2011, construction started at Lexington Avenue-63rd Street to expand and renovate the station, and to complete the connection to the Second Avenue Line. This renovation removed the walls on the platforms and opened new entrances on the Third Avenue side of the station. The tunnel boring machine being used to create the tunnels for the first phase of Second Avenue Line broke through the wall into the lower level of the BMT 63rd Street Line on September 22, 2011.

On January 1, 2017, the first phase of the Second Avenue Line opened, extending the Q and N services under Central Park and eastward to the stop at Lexington Avenue–63rd Street before turning north at Second Avenue to merge with the Second Avenue Line. This created direct service between the Upper East Side and the existing BMT Broadway Line. The double-decked Lexington Avenue–63rd Street station provides cross-platform interchange between the two 63rd Street lines. Northbound trains use the lower level; southbound trains use the upper level.

The third phase of Second Avenue Line construction, which is not funded, is proposed to include a separate connection between the IND 63rd Street Line and the Second Avenue Line, turning southwest from 63rd Street onto Second Avenue. This connection would allow trains coming from the IND Queens Boulevard Line to run on the Second Avenue Line to Midtown Manhattan and Lower Manhattan. However, the MTA does not plan to run passenger trains through this connection and it would be used only for movements by non-passenger trains, although passenger service could be possible if subway capacity in Queens is increased to accommodate extra service. Garbage piled up within the unused bellmouths for this connection; when the trash was cleaned up in 2021, MTA officials estimated that the rubbish piles might have been accumulating in the bellmouths since the 1980s.

2020s repairs
As part of a $107 million project, the tunnels were scheduled to experience numerous service disruptions in 2023 to accommodate replacement of direct fixation track and cables, installation of new signal equipment, leak remediation, and repairs to concrete surfaces. Much of the concrete track was installed in 1981, eight years before the line opened. From August 28, 2023, through the first quarter of 2024, F trains will be rerouted via the 53rd Street Tunnel between Queens and Manhattan, and weekday M trains will be truncated to 57th Street in Manhattan, due to repairs in the 63rd Street Tunnel. An F shuttle train would run between Lexington Avenue-63rd Street and 21st Street-Queensbridge, stopping at Roosevelt Island, at all times except late nights. Shuttle buses would run between Queens Plaza and 21st Street–Queensbridge during the day and between Queens Plaza and Roosevelt Island at night.

title: 63rd Street lines


text:
Talk:Twenty-fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution

"incapacitated"
I've put and  tags on the word "incapacitated" in the Section 4: Declaration by vice president and cabinet members of president's inability section of this article, because the word does not occur in the amendment and is never substantiated anywhere in this wiki article. Softlavender (talk) 03:21, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * The sources, and in particular the scholarly sources, freely use the words incapacity/incapacitated/incapacitation etc. as synonyms for unable and inability, and this is in keeping with the ordinary meaning of these words. Honestly, I don't see what the concern is. EEng 03:36, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * IMHO says the same thing as  but with more words, "incapacitated" and "unable" being synonyms. Levivich harass/hound 03:45, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * A gear seems to have slipped in that usually steel-trap brain of yours. If we do what you appear to be suggesting, we'd have
 * Section 4 addresses the case of a president who is unable or unwilling to execute the voluntary declaration contemplated by Section 3.
 * Well, a normal, fully able president would be unwilling to execute the Section 3 declaration, and that's as it should be. That's not one of Sec 4's use cases, so I think we need incapacitated. EEng 04:04, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Quoting from Feerick p. 117:
 * So Section 4 provides for two categories:
 * Physically unable (physical incapacitation)
 * By reason of mental disability, unable or unwilling (mental incapacitation)
 * A president who is partially but not totally physically incapacitated (e.g. conscious but confined to bed), and not mentally incapacitated, and thus is able, but not willing, to make a declaration, would not be one of Sec 4's use cases. In other words, not every incapacitated president who is not willing is covered: it has to be unwilling due to mental debility, and I don't think that is clear enough in the current language.
 * What about or something like that? Levivich harass/hound 04:33, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * You're like a used car salesman, you know. I came in arguing for fewer words, you've got me walking out arguing for more. Levivich harass/hound 04:38, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, we can't really take legislative history like this on its face, because we need an authoritative source to tell us what specific stuff qualifies as legislative intent. Both Feerick and the Reader's Guide sometimes quote bits of debate as representing scholarly consensus, and sometimes just to show a range of opinion. But I think we can short-circuit this issue by looking to Feerick p115:
 * Section 4 covers the most difficult cases of inability--when the president cannot or does not declare his own inability.
 * It seems to me that the current text ...
 * Section 4 addresses the case of an incapacitated president who is unable or unwilling to execute the voluntary declaration contemplated by Section 3
 * ... paraphrases that just right assuming (a) we're past the incapacitated issue, and (b) we're OK with "unwilling" for "does not". (We could use some kind of "unable to, or fails to," locution, but I think that would be unnecessary and really awkward.) EEng 06:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * ... paraphrases that just right assuming (a) we're past the incapacitated issue, and (b) we're OK with "unwilling" for "does not". (We could use some kind of "unable to, or fails to," locution, but I think that would be unnecessary and really awkward.) EEng 06:00, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Including "incapacitated" implies that there is some status or test required to invoke Section 4, whereas the amendment itself is clear that it is the declaration by the VP et al which is the requirement, the actual status of the president is irrelevant, even in the case where the president transmits a counter declaration.
 * Similarly section 4 does not require that the president is "unable to execute the voluntary declaration contemplated by Section 3", a president fully able to do so could still be declared unable to discharge their office by the VP et al.
 * Wnjr (talk) 10:29, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I don't think incapacitated implies there's a status or test required, any more than does unable, so let's put the issue of that choice of word aside by assuming, for the moment, that we say unable (the amendment's word) instead. So then there are your other points:
 * the amendment itself is clear that it is the declaration by the VP et al which is the requirement, the actual status of the president is irrelevant
 * section 4 does not require that the president is "unable to execute the voluntary declaration contemplated by Section 3", a president fully able to do so could still be declared unable
 * That's all true, but there's a difference between the amendment's procedures and the intent behind those procedures. The former are given in the amendment; the latter, as you note, are not, but that doesn't mean they don't exist, and that's why we look to sources such as the one I quoted just above your post. That quote (by the guy who wrote the amendment) is explicit about what problem this section is meant to address. EEng 15:08, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Actually, to address (I think) everyone's concerns, how about
 * Section 4 addresses the case of a president who cannot, or does not, execute the voluntary declaration contemplated by Section3.
 * That jettisons the whole incapacitated bit, and directly follows Feerick's word choices of cannot and does not (avoiding the connotations of unwilling). Can we all get on board with that? EEng 15:19, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with it. But I still think it would be better as or  I don't think we should omit the most important part of Section 4, which is that a Section 4 declaration is a declaration that the president is incapacitated ("unable to discharge the powers and duties"). Section 4 addresses the situation of a president who can't or won't make the voluntary declaration because of inability; omitting that part seems to leave the sentence incomplete. Levivich harass/hound 17:01, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Are you NEVER satisfied? OK, so how about
 * Section 4 addresses the case of an unable president who cannot, or does not, execute the voluntary declaration contemplated by Section 3
 * That satisfies your desire (with which I agree) that we get back the premise that the prez is unable (but this time using that word instead of incapacitated). However, I violently disagree with anything along the lines of president who, due to mental or physical incapacitation, cannot or does not execute, implying that the debility must not only make him unable to carry out his duties, but also that he won't declare because of that debility. I mean look, a president might know he's unable but refuse to declare just because he's a sociopathic criminal narcissist who puts his own needs above the country's. That seems impossible to believe, of course, and any president doing that would be far and away the worst president in history, but still the text needs to accommodate it. EEng 00:00, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Isn't that what Poff is saying, though ("when the President, by reason of mental debility[,] is unable or unwilling to make any rational decision, including particularly the decision to stand aside"): that the inability or unwillingness to stand aside must be by reason of debility, and not just, hypothetically speaking, run-of-the-mill sociopathic criminal narcissism? And to your earlier point, is Feerick quoting Poff here as an example of consensus, and Yale quotes Feerick quoting Poff in a footnote (too lazy to look up which one) saying the same thing (and including the "by reason of debility" language)? Levivich harass/hound 00:45, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * First of all, I mean, it's Yale so consider the source. Beyond that, the key is to note that Yale introduces Poff's and others' statements with, "Indeed, while they listed a number of potential examples of presidential inability, the framers of the Amendment scrupulously avoided placing specific limits on the term." So we're back to where I said, Well, we can't really take legislative history like this on its face, because we need an authoritative source to tell us what specific stuff qualifies as legislative intent. What Congressmen said is primary, even if quoted by Yale or Feerick; Yale's and Feerick's expert evaluations, however, are secondary. If you look at the material I inserted in recent days about the scope of "inability", you'll see I scrupulously stuck to statements Yale and Feerick make in their own voice, except where I used examples drawn from others, which I labeled as examples illustrating something Yale/Feerick said. EEng 02:12, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * No, you're absolutely right. I apologize for citing Yale. Levivich harass/hound 02:15, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * What do you think of the current ? I like it. Levivich harass/hound 03:55, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

 * I think it approaches perfection. And now that I've removed a surplus comma, it's absolutely perfect. EEng 04:55, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

 * Hi all, I had forgotten about this conversation and EEng just re-pinged me. I'm fine with whatever wording matches the actual amendment and does not take liberties by using other words or interpretations. Either that, or the subsequent interpretations which use words and concepts different from the actual amendment need to be attributed and cited. Thank you. Softlavender (talk) 01:05, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Not that I'm not happy to see you, but I haven't pinged you in ages. I've noticed that sometimes old pings reemerge at random. EEng 01:55, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Wow, that is truly peculiar. It was right near the top of my handful of notifs today, and the time (IIRC) appeared to be within the past 24 hours. It won't show me the the notif now, even if I click "show all", so something is definitely afoot. Softlavender (talk) 02:07, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Colonoscopies on parade
I wonder of there's some way we can soft-pedal the relentless catalog of presidential rectal exams. BTW, didn't Obama and Trump have colonoscopies? I mean, Trump's must have taken hours and hours, the man being such a giant asshole. EEng 22:10, 19 November 2021 (UTC)

Sources for further article development

 * Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History: "articles written by Dean Feerick at the time of the Twenty-Fifth Amendment’s drafting; articles from three symposia at Fordham Law School, one on the vice presidency and two on the adequacy of the presidential succession system; and, the reports by Fordham Law School’s first and second Presidential Succession Clinics"
 * Yale Law School Rule of Law Clinic (2018). The Twenty-Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution: A Reader's Guide (already in article)
 * Feerick, John D. (2014). The Twenty-Fifth Amendment: Its Complete History and Applications. Fordham University Press. ISBN 978-0-8232-5201-5 (already in article)
 * Presidential Disability Under the Twenty-Fifth Amendment: Constitutional Provisions and Perspectives for Congress (PDF). Congressional Research Service.
 * Bayh, One Heartbeat Away
 * https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/twentyfifth_amendment_archive/ Huge amount of stuff
 * See external links

Ideas for further development

 * Inpopcult -- Freerick "complete" Ch.16; Readers guide p.4
 * ✅ Comments on importance of secn 2 to removing Nixon without, effectively, making House Speaker president: Bayh in Feerick p.xix, likely Freerick ch10 on Ford, maybe ch14 on congressional action; definitely Freerick p.255ff
 * McCormack's comments re private agreement during first LBJ administraiton, Feerick pp99-100 (cf. Nixon/Eisenhower -- and see Freerick chapter on history of presidential inability incidents)
 * ✅ Fix department singular/plural drafting error mention

25th amendment section four updates
RE: Recent Edits Regarding Biden's Debate Performance and 25th Amendment Discussions**

Hi everyone,

I've noticed that my recent edits about Joe Biden's performance in the 2024 presidential debate and subsequent discussions of invoking the 25th Amendment are being repeatedly deleted. I believe this information is relevant and well-cited from reliable sources, including the Washington Examiner ([source 1](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/senator-calls-for-cabinet-to-consider-invoking-25th-amendment), [source 2](https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/house-gop-calls-for-biden-removal-from-office-over-debate-performance)).

The debate performance raised significant public and political concerns about President Biden's cognitive abilities, which led to calls from some lawmakers to consider the 25th Amendment. This is a notable development and should be included in the article to provide a complete and balanced view of recent events.

I would appreciate it if we could discuss these changes here and reach a consensus. Wikipedia's core principle of neutrality means we should include all relevant information, regardless of political perspectives.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.

Best, 146.185.56.214 (talk) 06:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

 * Well, they would, wouldn’t they. It would be more noteworthy if hyper-partisan sources like that didn’t.  Acroterion   (talk)   11:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Given the amount of press surrounding the president’s ability to fulfill the duties it is certainly relevant. While the words “25th amendment” haven’t been explicitly used across the board, the volume of non-partisan notables calling for him to resign (like Nate Silver’s comments saying he isn’t even fit to lead right now) are surely worth mentioning. 2601:540:C300:E150:18DB:5751:D3BC:71D0 (talk) 11:49, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * The comment on the removal was “Unsourced apart from the WE; if that section is going to be added, it should be with something more solid.” Perhaps citing the USA Today, Forbes, and Newsweek articles sharing the same information would help? 2601:540:C300:E150:18DB:5751:D3BC:71D0 (talk) 11:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Calls to resign have nothing to do with the subject of this article. EEng 13:30, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Silver are literally talking about Biden being unable to complete the duties of the presidency. 2601:540:C300:E150:18DB:5751:D3BC:71D0 (talk) 14:20, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * ”Silver and others are”
 * 2601:540:C300:E150:18DB:5751:D3BC:71D0 (talk) 14:20, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * @2601:540:C300:E150:18DB:5751:D3BC:71D0 right, but Nate Silver's opinion doesn't really matter. This isn't an article about physical fitness for the US presidency or about Nate Silver, it's about the 25th Amendment specifically AntiDionysius  ( talk ) 14:22, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
 * People are discussing whether Biden should continue to run for re-election, not whether he should be legally removed from power before then by the Cabinet. So it's an electoral politics issue, not a 25A issue.
 * Even if they were talking about that latter case (and I'm sure someone somewhere is), it would only matter if there was indication that those things were being discussed with/by the Cabinet officials who hold the power. Otherwise it's just random people's opinions. Lots of people have lots of opinions on lots of topics. Almost none of those go on those topics' Wikipedia pages AntiDionysius  ( talk ) 14:26, 9 July 2024 (UTC)


text:
User talk:Headcase88

Wow, this Headcase fellow sure sounds at bit odd, doesn't he? --Headcase 22:56, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, rumour has it he posted in his own talk page just so he wouldn't have to see red links at the top of the screen. --Headcase 22:56, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

you don't say? Very odd indeed. --Headcase 22:56, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, it seems you've been passed over by the Welcoming committee. Welcome anyway. Is the "88" in your username your year of birth? JFW | T@lk  12:30, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * 88 is my favourite number, though I never do remember why :(. I usually go with Headcase if possible, then Headcase88.

Headcase
"Headcase," hmm, isn't that also the name of a company that makes novelty hats? Anyhoo, I wanted to let you know that Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs is up for Featured Article Candidacy. We need a few more votes to get this featured, which would make it eligible to appear on the Main Page for 24 hours. 24.54.208.177 01:56, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I should really click when I see I have new messages. Glad to see that the article made it without my help :) By the way, my nickname comes from one of my friends. My last name in real name is Head and he said my nickname should be "headcase". I agreed and have used the name ever since. By coincidence, "Headcase" is the name of a character in one of my favourite games, Dynamite Headdy, something I hadn't considered at the time. --Headcase 23:49, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

42 Puzzle
Solutions as questions? BRILLIANT. Nice touch. --JohnDBuell 20:06, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

F-Zero Changes
Thought you might be interested into how the F-Zero (series) articles are progressing. If you're ever in the rewriting, editing mood please feel free to ask me about new tasks I'm looking forward to complete.  FMF |  contact  03:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of Dr. Eggman's vehicles
I have nominated List of Dr. Eggman's vehicles, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/List of Dr. Eggman's vehicles. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:17, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:55, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Headcase88


text: Talk:Web portal

title: Talk:Web portal


text:
Yermolayev

Yermolayev (Ермолаев, masculine) and Yermolayeva (Ермолаева; feminine) is a Russian surname.

Derivation
Yermolayev is derived from the given name Yermolay (or Ermolai, Ermolay, Yermolai; Ермолай), which was from the Greek Hermolaos, meaning "the people of Hermes".

Alternative variants
"Yermolayev" may also alternatively be spelled or romanized as Ermolaeff, Ermolaev, Ermolajew, Ermolayev, Iermolaïev, Jermolajeff, Jermolajev, Jermolajew, Yermolaeff, Yermolaev, Yermolaieff, Yermolaiev, or Yermolaiew.

Notable people
Notable people with this surname include:
 * Galina Yermolayeva (rower) (b. 1948), Soviet rower
 * Aleksey Yermolayev (1910-1975), Soviet ballet dancer
 * Vadim Yermolayev, Russian ice hockey player
 * Vladimir Yermolaev (1909-1944), Soviet aircraft designer

title: Yermolayev


text:
Ballast Island (Lake Erie)

Ballast Island is a small, 15-acre (0.049 km²) private island on Lake Erie in the U.S. state of Ohio, about 1/4 mi northeast of the northeast tip of South Bass Island. It is known primarily as a navigation point for boats going to or from Put-in-Bay from the east. There are shoals between Ballast and South Bass, but there is a passage between known locally as "the wagon tracks".

History
Ballast Island received its name when commodore Oliver Hazard Perry used rocks from this island, according to legend, to ballast his ships.

Lemuel Brown had acquired the island at one point. The deeds show that Brown acquired the island from Joseph de Rivera St. Jurgo in 1869. George William Gardner purchased Ballast Island from Lemuel Brown in 1874 according to Ottawa County records.

Settlement

After completing his purchase of Ballast, George W. Gardner sold to his friends, including Henry Corning, Will Claflin and Civil War General James Barnett, undivided interests with the right to build a cottage. The island then became a cooperative association of wealthy families. During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, Ballast Island flourished. A large hotel and dining hall were constructed high on the cliffs of the north side of the island. A windmill supplied water and carbide lanterns supplied light. During this time many cottages were built around the east and west shores along with the Gardner Log Cabin. Over the years the Gardner family has lived in this log house, including George W., his son George Henry, Kenneth and Constance Gardner, and currently the daughter of Ken and Constance. During the 1890-early 1900 time span the southeast corner of Ballast facing Buckeye Point on South Bass was adorned by a boat house. This boat house served as the headquarters for the Longworth Canoe club. The canoe club was named after Nicholas Longworth, who was the father-in-law of Theodore Roosevelts's daughter, Alice. Presidents Theodore Roosevelt, William McKinley, James Garfield and Grover Cleveland all have visited Ballast. During the depression years, Ballast was not used as often because of the expense. In the 1930s and 1940s the steamers Goodtime, Put-in-Bay, and Chippewa brought friends to the island, and Ballast once again flourished. In the 1950s, several owners died but the partition deed that was in place, held. This was because one of the original signers, Constance "Kiki" Gardner was still living.

Private Ownership
In 1958 one of Kiki's daughters, Constance Gardner Moore offered to buy Roseanne Gilmore's property. The offer was accepted and the Moore family became part owners of Ballast Island. At the same time the majority of Ballast island was for sale. It was purchased by Cleveland businessman Amerigo (Rick) Nerone in 1966. In his later years, he gave ownership to his five children, all split equally. Ballast now is a private get away for the Nerone family and guests they choose to invite. There are currently seven houses.

title: Ballast Island (Lake Erie)


text:
User:Ronline

'''Welcome. I'm here to help. 2006. Hea energia aasta.'''

Hi! I'm a sysop at the Romanian Wikipedia and, as of December 2, 2005, sysop on the English Wikipedia. I'm also a member of the Mediation Committee as of January 2006. If you:

 * Have any question about Wikipedia, feel free to talk to me on my talk page
 * Would like me to mediate a dispute, please contact me on my talk page or launch a request for mediation
 * Feel that I have taken inappropriate admin action and would like to appeal, feel free to contact me via user page, or if not possible, via e-mail (click on "E-mail this user" in the toolbox).
 * Want to find out my complete admin action log, see here
 * Want me to investigate a case of user misconduct or feel you have been mistreated by another admin, feel free to leave a message on my talk page

I currently live in Taipei, Taiwan.

Personal views
I'm a liberal in the social sense and a centrist in the economic sense. Therefore, I support quite strongly things like minority rights, abortion, same-sex marriage, euthanasia as well as individual liberties, and I'm against the death penalty. I'm atheist and strongly support the separation between the church and state, and I abhor it when the law involves itself in moral issues, particularly victimless crimes (although I strongly support public smoking bans, since smoking indirectly causes so many victims). On economic issues, I support free-market economics, even though I also believe workers' rights should be guaranteed. I'm in favour of flat tax, particularly of the flavour that was recently introduced in Romania, in 2005.

In Romanian politics, I support the governing Justice and Truth Alliance, made up of the National Liberal Party and the Democratic Party, even though I support the Liberal part of the Alliance much more than the Democratic part, which I believe is becoming more right-wing and populist. I'm against the merger of the Liberals and the Democrats, since I believe their ideologies differ fundamentaly, and there is need for a truly liberal party in Romania.

I'm somewhat against the Social Democratic Party, rather against the Christian-Democratic People's Party and the Liberal Democratic Party and particularly dislike the Conservative Party and the New Generation Party. At the European level, I support most of all the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party, and to an extent the Party of European Socialists and the Party of the European Left. I also sympathise with green politics. I generally don't hold common views with the European People's Party-European Democrats and with the Union for a Europe of Nations.

I support granting regional autonomy to the Szekely Land, with Romanian and Hungarian both being official languages of equal status, where there would be a devolved Szekely assembly and a Szekely government, including a chief minister. I believe that ethnic Hungarian deputies in the Romanian parliament should have the right to give their oath in Hungarian, as per the Welsh model.

I support the independence of Transnistria as a multi-ethnic state that offers equal right to all of its constituent people (something akin to Belgian model). This doesn't mean at all that I support the current Smirnov government in Transnistria.

I support the creation of an independent Republic of Taiwan and the establishment of a friendly, mature relationship between the PRC and Taiwan. In a Taiwanese context, I support the Democratic Progressive Party. At the same time, I do not believe in Tongyong Pinyin; for standardisation purposes, I support Hanyu Pinyin as a universal romanisation for Mandarin.

I've been called patriotic by many people, and I love Romania. At the same time, I also see myself strongly as an European citizen and believe in an united Europe. Hence, I see myself as equally Romanian and equally European. I don't, however, believe too much in nationalism, and I definitely don't support the politics of the Great Romania Party. I suppose I'm also an allophile.

ro:Utilizator:Ronline

title: User:Ronline


text:
James Gibbs

James Gibbs (23 December 1682 – 5 August 1754) was a Scottish architect. Born in Aberdeen, he trained as an architect in Rome, and practised mainly in England. He is an important figure whose work spanned the transition between English Baroque architecture and Georgian architecture heavily influenced by Andrea Palladio. Among his most important works are St Martin-in-the-Fields (at Trafalgar Square), the cylindrical, domed Radcliffe Camera at Oxford University, and the Senate House at Cambridge University.

Gibbs very privately was a Roman Catholic and a Tory. Because of this and his age, he had a somewhat removed relation to the Palladian movement which came to dominate English architecture during his career. The Palladians were largely Whigs, led by Lord Burlington and Colen Campbell, a fellow Scot who developed a rivalry with Gibbs. Gibbs' professional Italian training under the Baroque master Carlo Fontana also set him uniquely apart from the Palladian school. However, despite being unfashionable, he gained a number of Tory patrons and clients, and became hugely influential through his published works, which became popular as pattern books for architecture. The naming of the Gibbs surround for doors and windows, which he certainly did not invent, testifies to this influence.

His architectural style did incorporate Palladian elements, as well as forms from Italian Baroque and Inigo Jones (1573–1652), but was most strongly influenced by the work of Sir Christopher Wren (1632–1723), who was an early supporter of Gibbs. Overall, Gibbs was an individual who formed his own style independently of current fashions. Architectural historian John Summerson describes his work as the fulfilment of Wren's architectural ideas, which were not fully developed in his own buildings. Despite the influence of his books, Gibbs, as a stylistic outsider, had little effect on the later direction of British architecture, which saw the rise of Neoclassicism shortly after his death.

Background and education
James Gibbs was born on 23 December 1682 in Fittysmire, Aberdeen, Scotland, a younger son of Patrick Gibbs, merchant, and his second wife Ann (née Gordon). The family was Roman Catholic; there was a half-brother, William, from Patrick's first marriage to Isabel (née Farquhar). Gibbs was educated at Aberdeen Grammar School and Marischal College. After the death of his parents he went in 1700 to stay with relatives in Holland. He later travelled through Europe, visiting Flanders, France, Switzerland and Germany. Some time afterwards he left for Rome, travelling via France. On 12 October 1703 he registered as a student at the Scots College. He would have been studying for the Catholic priesthood but had second thoughts. By the end of 1704 he was studying architecture under Carlo Fontana; he was also taught by Pietro Francesco Garroli, professor of perspective at the Accademia di San Luca. While in Rome Gibbs met John Perceval, 1st Earl of Egmont, who attempted to persuade him to move to Ireland. He moved to London in November 1708; his return was probably due to the terminal illness of his half-brother William, who died before James reached Britain.

Career
Still intending to take up the offer of work in Ireland, he had been befriended by John Erskine, Earl of Mar, while abroad. The Earl persuaded Gibbs to remain in London, offering him his first commission, alterations to his house in Whitehall. Around this time he met Edward Harley, 2nd Earl of Oxford and Earl Mortimer, who would be a powerful patron and friend (Gibbs would later remodel the Earl's house Wimpole Hall) and James Brydges, 1st Duke of Chandos (for whom he would be one of the architects to work at Cannons from 1715 to 1719 ). Gibbs was one of the sixty founder members of Godfrey Kneller's Academy of Painting, founded in 1711. In August 1713 Gibbs discovered that William Dickinson was resigning as architect from the Commission for Building Fifty New Churches; the commissioners included Sir Christopher Wren, Sir John Vanbrugh and Thomas Archer. With the backing of, amongst others, the Earl of Mar and Sir Christopher Wren, Gibbs was appointed architect to the commission on 18 November 1713, where he would have worked with Nicholas Hawksmoor, his fellow architect to the commission. But a combination of events would ensure Gibbs was deprived of his place as architect to the commission by December 1715: Queen Anne had died and a Whig government had replaced the Tories; and the failure of the Jacobite rising of 1715 that was supported by the Earl of Mar were all factors. Still he was able to complete one church, St Mary le Strand, that he described as "the first publick (sic) building I was employed in after my arrival from Italy; which being situated in a very publick place, the Commissioners... spar'd no cost to beautify". On 18 December 1716 Gibbs joined the "Vandykes clubb" (sic), also called the Club of St Luke for "Virtuosi in London". Fellow architects who were members included William Kent and William Talman; other notable members with whom Gibbs would later work included the garden designer Charles Bridgeman and the sculptor John Michael Rysbrack, who sculpted many of the memorials Gibbs designed. In March 1721 Charles Bridgeman, James Thornhill, John Wootton and Gibbs were all travelling together from London to Wimpole Hall where they were all working for Edward Harley, the Earl of Oxford; Thornhill recalled that they drank Harley's "healths over and over, as well in our civil as bacchanalian hours" and talked "of building, pictures and may be towards the close of politics or religion".

In 1720 Gibbs was invited along with other architects to enter a competition to design a new church to replace the dilapidated church of St Martin-in-the-Fields. He won, and on 24 November 1720 he was appointed architect of the new church, which was to be his most famous building. Horace Walpole described Gibbs as being around 1720 as "the architect most in vogue". In 1720 Gibbs was approached by the Provost of King's College, Cambridge to complete the college. The scheme consisted of three buildings, all 53 ft high, forming a courtyard 240 by to the south of the Chapel. In the end only the western block, the 236 ft long Fellows' Building, was constructed from 1721 to 1724; the eastern Fellows' Building would have been identical, and the southern building would have had a great octastyle Corinthian portico, and been 236 ft long, containing the great dining hall, Provost's Lodge and offices. On 11 December 1721 Edward Lany, one of the Syndics of University of Cambridge, thanked Edward Harley, Earl of Oxford for sending "Mr Gibbs's design for our building. I design to offer it to the Syndics as soon as they meet...I have not skill enough myself to judge of it". This referred to a design for a new central building for the University to house the library, Senate House, the Consistory and Register Offices. Gibbs produced a second larger design in 1722, consisting of a courtyard building with two projecting wings to the east, 189 by. Work started on the building in November 1722, but in the end only the Senate House, 110 by, the northern of the two east wings, was built. It was finished in 1730.

By 1723 Gibbs was rich enough to open an account at Drummonds Bank, with his first year's balance being £1055 11 shillings 4 pence. 1723 also saw Gibbs being made a governor of St Bartholomew's Hospital; other governors included fellow architects Richard Boyle, 3rd Earl of Burlington and George Dance the Elder. On 1 August 1728 it was decided to rebuild the Hospital. Gibbs offered his service for free, and designed a quadrangle of 200 by with four near-identical plain blocks. In March 1726 Gibbs was made a member of the Society of Antiquaries of London. and in 1727 he was awarded with the only government post he ever held, Architect of the Ordnance, which he held for life. He was given it thanks to John Campbell, 2nd Duke of Argyll, who was Master-General of the Ordnance and in 1729 he was elected to the Royal Society. One of the most serious disappointments of Gibbs's career was his failure to win the commission for the Mansion House, London. There were two competitions for the building, both of which he entered – the first in 1728 and a second in 1735; in the end George Dance the Elder won the commission. In 1735, Gavin Hamilton painted A Conversation of Virtuosis... at the Kings Arms, a group portrait that included Michael Dahl, George Vertue, John Wootton, Gibbs and Rysbrack, along with other artists who were instrumental in bringing the Rococo style to English design and interiors. After the death in 1736 of Nicholas Hawksmoor, who was architect for the Radcliffe Camera, Gibbs was appointed on 4 March 1737 to replace him. The Radcliffe Camera was finished by 19 May 1749. Gibbs was awarded by Oxford University an honorary degree of Master of Arts in 1749 recognition of the completion of the Radcliffe Camera.

Collections
A list of the nearly 700 books in his library is preserved in the Bodleian Library. While architecture and related crafts made up the bulk of his books, other subjects covered included antiquities, coins, and heraldry; histories of England, Scotland and Rome and other nations; literature including works by Alexander Pope, Jonathan Swift, Daniel Defoe and Matthew Prior; travel books including Egypt, the South Seas, Russia, Hungary, Lapland, Virginia, Ceylon and Abyssinia; missionary travels including China, Formosa, Guinea, Borneo and the East Indies; books on religion including both Anglican and Roman Catholic works; and even cookery books. The most significant of the architectural works were Vincenzo Scamozzi's L'Idea dell'Architettura Universale, Sebastiano Serlio's Sette Libri d'Architettura, Domenico Fontana's Della transportatione dell'obelisco Vaticano e delle fabriche di Sisto V, Colen Campbell's Vitruvius Britannicus, Giacomo Leoni's The Architecture of A. Palladio, in Four Books, William Kent's The Designs of Inigo Jones and Robert Wood's The ruins of Palmyra. Gibbs is also known to have owned at least 117 paintings, including works by Canaletto, Giovanni Paolo Panini, Sebastiano Ricci, Antoine Watteau and Willem van de Velde the Younger. Sculptures owned by Gibbs included a bust of Flora by François Girardon, a bust of Matthew Prior by Antoine Coysevox and busts of Alexander Pope and Gibbs by Rysbrack.

Death and will
By 1743 Gibbs, who was fond of wine and food, was described as "corpulent". In June 1749 Gibbs set out for the spa town of Aix-la-Chapelle for treatment: he long suffered from kidney stones and had lost weight and was in pain. He remained until September when he returned to London. Gibbs never married. He died in his London house on the corner of Wimpole Street and Henrietta Street on 5 August 1754 and was buried in St Marylebone Parish Church, and a modest wall tablet was erected with this inscription: Underneath lye the Remains of JAMES GIBBS Esqr. whose Skill in Architecture appears by his Printed Works as well as the Buildings directed by him, Among other Legacys & Charitys He left One Hundred Pounds towards Enlarging this Church He died Augt. 5th. 1754. Aged 71.

In his will made on 9 May 1754, Gibbs left £1000, his Plate, and three houses in Marylebone to Lord Erskine in gratitude for favours from his father the late Earl of Mar. Further bequests included £1,400 and two houses in Marylebone and Argyll Ground Westminster to John Sherwine of Soho plus £100 to be given to a charity of Sherwine's daughters choice, to Robert Pringle of Clifton a Cavendish Square house and £400 and to Cosmo Alexander (1724–1772) a Scottish painter "my house I live in withall [sic] its furniture as it stands with pictures bustoes [sic] etc". Further bequests of £100 each went to William Thomas, Dr. William King, St Bartholomew's Hospital and the Foundling Hospital. The Trustees of Radcliffe Camera were given "all my printed books, Books of Architecture books of prints and drawings books of maps and a pair of globes with leather covers to be placed ... in the library... of which I was architect ... next to my Bustoe".

Early works
Mar attached Gibbs' name among the list of architects to be responsible for the new churches to be built under the Commission for Building Fifty New Churches, and in 1713 he was appointed one of the Commission's two surveyors, the contemporary term for an architect, alongside Nicholas Hawksmoor. He held this post for two years, until he was forced out by the Whigs, because of his Tory sympathies, and replaced by John James. During his tenure he completed his first important commission, the church of St Mary le Strand (1714–17), in the City of Westminster. A previous design had been prepared by the English Baroque architect Thomas Archer, which Gibbs developed in an Italian Mannerist style, influenced by the Palazzo Branconio dell'Aquila in Rome, attributed to Raphael, as well as incorporating elements from Wren. Such strong Italian influence was not popular with the Whigs, who were now taking political control following the accession of King George I in 1714, leading to Gibbs' dismissal, and causing him to modify the foreign influences in his work. Colen Campbell's Vitruvius Britannicus (1715), which promoted the Palladian style, also contains unfavourable comments regarding Carlo Fontana and St Mary le Strand. Campbell went on to replace Gibbs as the architect of Burlington House around 1717, where the latter had designed the offices and colonnades for the young Lord Burlington.

Other early designs include the house of Cannons, Middlesex (1716–20), for James Brydges, 1st Duke of Chandos, and the tower of Wren's St Clement Danes (1719). At Twickenham he designed the pavilion at Orleans House, called the Octagon Room, for a Scottish patron, James Johnston (1655–1737) former Secretary of State for Scotland, about 1720. It is the only part of the house and grounds that has survived.

Country houses
Gibbs' mature style emerges in the early 1720s, with the house of Ditchley, Oxfordshire (1720–22), for George Lee, 2nd Earl of Lichfield. It typifies his conservative domestic manner, which changed little throughout the rest of his career. His other houses include Sudbrooke Lodge, Petersham (1728), for the Duke of Argyll, works at Wimpole Hall, Cambridgeshire, for Edward Harley, 2nd Earl of Oxford and Earl Mortimer, Patshull Hall, Staffordshire (1730) for Sir John Astley, and modifications to Colen Campbell's designs at Houghton Hall in Norfolk. Gibbs also completed the Gothic Temple (1741–48), a triangular folly at Stowe, Buckinghamshire, and now one of the properties leased and maintained by the Landmark Trust. Other garden buildings at Stowe include the pair of "Boycott Pavilions", which were altered by Giovanni Battista Borra in 1754 to replace the pyramidal stone roofs with more conventional domes.

Churches
Gibbs designed one church for the Commission for Building Fifty New Churches, St Mary le Strand. Construction began in 1714 and it was complete by 1717. Between 1721 and 1726 Gibbs designed his most important and influential work, the church of St Martin-in-the-Fields, located in Trafalgar Square, London. Gibbs' initial radical design for the commission was for a circular church, derived from a design by Andrea Pozzo; its illustration in Gibbs' book was to influence several adaptations by Neoclassical architects. This was rejected by the commission, and Gibbs developed the present rectangular design. The layout and detailing of the building owes much to Wren, in particular St James's Church, Piccadilly. However, Gibbs' innovation at St Martin's was to place the steeple centrally, behind the pediment. By contrast, Wren's steeples were usually adjacent to the church, rather than within the walls. This apparent incongruity was criticised at the time, but St Martin-in-the-Fields nevertheless became a model for church buildings, particularly for Anglican worship, across Britain and around the world.

At the same time, Gibbs designed a chapel of ease for the Robert Harley, 1st Earl of Oxford and Earl Mortimer, now known as St Peter, Vere Street (1721–24). In 1725 he designed All Saints', Derby, now Derby Cathedral, on similar lines to St Martin's, although at Derby the original gothic steeple was retained. Gibbs, the first British architect to do so, created numerous designs for funeral monuments, often collaborating with the sculptor Michael Rysbrack. In 1733 Gibbs was commissioned by Lord Foley to adapt the chapel from Cannons House, as the parish church at Great Witley.

St Bartholomew's Hospital
In 1723 Gibbs was appointed a governor of St Bartholomew's Hospital, which led to him being commissioned to redesign the hospital. In 1728 he produced a design with four near identical blocks around a square 200 by; he gave his services for free. The first block to be built, the north, administration block was constructed from 9 June 1730, using Bath Stone (this would be used for all the blocks). It was finished in 1732 and contains the Great Hall and the main staircase, the walls of which are covered by murals painted by William Hogarth, depicting Christ healing the sick at the Pool of Bethesda and the parable of the good Samaritan. The other blocks contained wards. The south block was built from 1735 to 1740 (demolished 1937). the west block was built from 1743 to 1753; it was delayed due to the War of the Austrian Succession. The east block was built 1758–68 to Gibbs' design.

Universities
Gibbs worked at both Oxford and Cambridge Universities. He shares the credit, with James Burrough, for designing the Senate House at Cambridge. The Fellows' Building at King's College (1724–30) is his work entirely. A simple composition, similar in style to his houses, the building is enlivened by a central feature incorporating an arch, within a doric portal, and a Diocletian window, all under a pediment. This mannerist composition of features from Wren and Palladio is an example of Gibbs' more adventurous Italian style.

More adventurous still was Gibbs' last major work, the Radcliffe Camera, Oxford (1739–49). A circular library building was first planned by Hawksmoor around 1715, but nothing was done at the time. Sometime before 1736, new designs were submitted by Hawksmoor and Gibbs, with the latter's rectangular design being preferred. However, this plan was abandoned in favour of a circular plan by Gibbs, which drew on Hawksmoor's 1715 scheme, although it was very different in detail. Gibbs' design saw him returning to his Italian mannerist sources, and in particular shows the influence of Santa Maria della Salute, Venice (1681), by Baldassarre Longhena. The building incorporates unexpected vertical alignments: for instance, the ribs of the dome do not line up with the columns of the drum, but lie in between, creating a rhythmically complex composition.

Published works
Gibbs published the first edition of A Book of Architecture, containing designs of buildings and ornaments in 1728, dedicated to one of his patrons John Campbell, 2nd Duke of Argyll. It was a folio of his building designs both executed and not, as well as numerous designs for ornaments and including 150 engraved plates covering 380 different designs. He was the first British architect to publish a book devoted to his own designs. The major works illustrated include St Martin-in-the-Fields (including the unexecuted version with a circular nave), St Mary le Strand, the complete schemes for King's College Cambridge and the Public Building (including the Senate House) at Cambridge University, numerous designs for medium-sized country houses, garden building and follies, obelisks and memorial columns, church memorials and monuments, as well as wrought-iron work, fireplaces, window and door surrounds, Cartouche (design) and urns. The first page of the introduction included: '...such a Work as this would be of use to such Gentleman as might be concerned in Building, especially in the remote parts of the Country, where little or no assistance for designs can be procured'. It was intended to be a pattern book for both architects and clients, and became, according to John Summerson, "probably the most widely-used architecture book of the century, not only throughout Britain, but in the American colonies and the West Indies". For example, Plate 58 was an inspiration for the river façade of Mount Airy, Richmond County, Virginia, and perhaps also for the floorplan of Drayton Hall in Charleston County, South Carolina.

Other published works by Gibbs include The Rules for Drawing the Several Parts of Architecture (1732), which explained how to draw the Classical orders and related details and was used well into the 19th century, and Bibliotheca Radcliviana subtitled A Short Description of the Radcliffe Library Oxford (1747) to celebrate the Radcliffe Camera, including a list of all the craftsmen employed in the building's construction as well as twenty-one plates. In 1752 he published a two-volume translation of the Latin book De Rebus Emanuelis by a 16th-century Portuguese Bishop Jerónimo Osório da Fonseca; his English title was The History of the Portuguese during the Reign of Emanuel. It is a history book with accounts of warfare, voyages of discovery from Africa to China (including descriptions of the religious beliefs of these countries) and also the initial colonisation of Brazil.

List of architectural works
The following list includes Gibbs' most significant works.

Secular works

 * Senate House, Cambridge University 1721–30
 * King's College, Cambridge, Fellows Building 1724–42, sole completed part of Gibbs' proposed rebuilding of the college
 * Oxford Market House, Marylebone, London, 1726–37, demolished 1880–81
 * St Bartholomew's Hospital, Smithfield, London 1728–68, rebuilding of medieval and later hospital, Gibbs south block demolished 1937
 * Marylebone Court House, Marylebone, London, 1729–33, demolished 1803–04
 * Radcliffe Camera, Oxford University 1736–49
 * Hertford Town Hall, 1737 (unexecuted)
 * Codrington Library, All Souls College, Oxford, completion of interior following the death of architect Nicholas Hawksmoor, 1740–50
 * St John's College, Oxford, new screen in the Hall, 1743

Ecclesiastical works

 * St Mary le Strand, London, 1713–24
 * Steeple, added to Christopher Wren's church of St Clement Danes, London, 1719–21
 * St Martin-in-the-Fields, London, 1720–27
 * Marybone Chapel (now St Peter's Vere Street, used as offices), London, 1721–24
 * St Giles Church, Shipbourne, Kent, 1722–23, rebuilt 1880–81
 * St Mary's Church, Mapleton, Derbyshire, c.1723
 * Derby Cathedral, formerly All Saints, Derby, rebuilding of existing church except for the tower, 1723–26
 * Lincoln Cathedral, strengthening of western towers, 1725–26
 * St Michael and All Saints, Great Witley, Worcestershire, using decoration and fittings from the chapel at Cannons, 1733–47
 * Chandos Mausoleum, St Lawrence, Whitchurch, Middlesex, for James Brydges, 1st Duke of Chandos, 1735–36
 * Kirk of St Nicholas, Aberdeen, new nave 1741–55
 * Turner Mausoleum, Kirkleatham Church, North Yorkshire, 1740
 * Sir William Turner's Hospital Chapel, Kirkleatham 1741
 * St Mary's Church, Patshull Hall, Staffordshire, 1742

Church memorials

 * Westminster Abbey, to John Dryden, poet, 1720–21
 * Westminster Abbey, to John Sheffield, 1st Duke of Buckingham and Normanby, 1721–22
 * Westminster Abbey, to John Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle, 1721–23, sculpted by Francis Bird.
 * Westminster Abbey, to Matthew Prior, 1721–23
 * Westminster Abbey, to Ben Jonson, playwright, c.1723
 * Westminster Abbey, to John Smith, 1723
 * St Giles Church, Shipbourne, to Christopher Vane, 1st Baron Barnard, 1723, re-erected when the church was rebuilt
 * Westminster Abbey, to William Johnstone, 1st Marquess of Annandale, James Johnstone, 2nd Marquess of Annandale and his wife Sophia Fairholm, 1723
 * Westminster Abbey, to James Craggs the Younger, 1724–27
 * St Mary's Amersham, to Montague & Jane Drake, 1725
 * SS. Peter & Paul, Aston, to Sir John & Lady Bridgeman, 1726
 * SS. Peter & Paul, Mitcham, to Sir Ambrose & Lady Crowley, c.1727
 * St Mary's Bolsover, to Henry Cavendish, 2nd Duke of Newcastle, 1727–28, sculpted by Francis Bird.
 * Westminster Abbey, Catherina Boevey, 1727–28, sculpted by John Michael Rysbrack.
 * St Margaret's, Westminster, to Robert Stuart, 1728
 * All Saints' Church, Bristol, to Edward Colston, slave-trader and philanthropist, 1728–29, sculpted by John Michael Rysbrack.
 * All Saints, Maiden Bradley, to Sir Edward Seymour, 4th Baronet, 1728–30, sculpted by John Michael Rysbrack.
 * Westminster Abbey, to Dr John Friend, 1730–31
 * Turner Mausoleum, Kirkleatham Church, Monument to Marwood William Turner, 1739–41
 * All Saints Soulbury, to Robert Lovett, c.1740
 * St Marylebone Parish Church, own memorial (Gibbs was buried in the previous church, 1754), transferred to the present church

London houses

 * Houses in the Privy Garden, Whitehall, London, 1710–11, demolished 1807
 * Burlington House, Piccadilly, wings and twin colonnades in forecourt, 1715–16, demolished
 * Thanet House, Great Russell Street, Covent Garden 1719, demolished
 * 9–11 Henrietta Street, Covent Garden 1723–27, demolished 1956; drawing room from No.11 preserved in the Victoria and Albert Museum
 * 52 Grosvenor Street, Mayfair alterations 1727
 * Savile House, 6 Leicester Square, 1733, demolished
 * 25 Leicester Square, 1733–34 demolished
 * 49 Great Ormond Street, new library, 1734, demolished
 * 16 Arlington Street, Mayfair 1734–40
 * House in Mortimer Street, Marylebone, London 1735–40, demolished
 * Houses in Argyll Street, Westminster 1736–1761
 * House in Hanover Square, 1740, demolished

New country houses

 * Sudbrook Park, Petersham, 1715–19 (now Richmond Golf Club)
 * Cannons, one of several architects involved, 1716–19, demolished 1747
 * Shrewsbury House, Isleworth, 1718–22, demolished c.1810
 * Ditchley Park, 1720-7
 * Antony House, Cornwall, 1720-4
 * Balveny House, Banffshire, 1724, demolished 1929
 * House for Bartholomew Clarke and Hitch Young, Roehampton, c. 1724–29, demolished c. 1788
 * Acton Place, Acton, Suffolk, c. 1725–26, demolished 1825
 * Whitton Place, Whitton, London, 1725–31, demolished 1935
 * Stowe House, various garden temples from 1726 to 1749
 * Houghton Hall, one of several architects that worked on the building, c. 1727–35
 * Kelmarsh Hall, 1728–32
 * Kirkleatham Hall, designs 1728, probably not executed
 * Gumley House, Isleworth, 1729
 * Hamstead Marshall, work was started on a new house, 1739, but abandoned after the client died the year work started
 * Catton Hall, 1741
 * Patshull Hall, Staffordshire. 1742–54. The house was completed by William Baker of Audlem
 * Bank Hall, Warrington, 1749–50 (now Town Hall)

Alterations to existing country houses
,
 * Orleans House, Twickenham, the Octagon room, c.1716–21
 * Alexander Pope's villa, Twickenham, additions, 1719–20, demolished 1807–08
 * Wimpole Hall, remodelling, including the Chapel 1722–27, new library and main staircase 1732
 * Fairlawne, Shipbourne, extension, c.1723
 * Hartwell House, Buckinghamshire, remodelling of interiors 1723–25
 * Wentworth Castle, designed the wainscoting in the gallery 1724–25
 * Compton Verney House, stables, 1740
 * Hackwood Park, Hampshire, new portico, 1740
 * Badminton House, further remodelling of north front already remodelled by William Kent, 1745
 * Ragley Hall, interiors of the house, original architect Robert Hooke had left unfinished, 1751–c.1760

title: James Gibbs


text: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2005 February 12


text: Category:Croatian cuisine

title: Category:Croatian cuisine


text:
Southwest Miramichi River

The Southwest Miramichi River is a river in New Brunswick, Canada.

The river has its origin in Carleton County, at Miramichi Lake in the Miramichi Highlands (a part of the Appalachian Mountains). Its two branches join near the hamlet of Juniper, Carleton County. Flowing initially southeast through heavy forests and large hills, the Southwest Miramichi River enters Northumberland County, is joined by the Taxis River at Boiestown then the larger volume flows northeast. The river is tidal below Renous-Quarryville. The Southwest Miramichi River joins the Northwest Miramichi River at Newcastle to form the Miramichi River.

The river is noted for Atlantic Salmon fishing. It is navigable by canoe throughout much of its length. Nearly every bend in the river, for example Push and Be Damned Rapids, has a distinctive name reflecting the importance of the river to fishermen, canoeists, and lumbermen.

It is sometimes referred to as the "Main Southwest Miramichi River" to distinguish it from the Little Southwest Miramichi River, a smaller, more northerly branch of the Miramichi River system. The Mi'kmaq referred to the river as Lustagoocheech, meaning "good little river" for canoeing.

Tributaries

 * North Branch Southwest Miramichi River
 * South Branch Southwest Miramichi River
 * Taxis River
 * Cains River
 * Bartholomew River
 * Renous River
 * Barnaby River

title: Southwest Miramichi River


text:
Talk:St Lawrence College, Ramsgate

Untitled
The school was relatively anti-technology when I was there in the mid-80s. The fact they have internet access in several houses now seems to indicate things are starting to change. I see the food hasn't changed tho :-) Is it still fish fingers and baked beans for breakfast?

Keep the info coming, much appreciated!

Joe Bloggs or John Doe or whatever
Dear 139.165.200.114: I removed the section about the former pupils the link that was provided for a Joe Bloggs does not lead to an actual person. If there really was a former pupil named Joe Bloggs, and he really was the Prime Minister, please feel free to reinclude that section and provide a real link. My intend was not vandalism, as you might have noticed that the article was actually improved by what I added (complete list of houses from the official webpage, a complete sentence for the introduction instead of just "..."). If you want an empty section for former pupils, fine, I don't object. If the only entry in there is bogus (or at least it seems like that to me and probably everybody else clicking on the name that used to be there), I don't think it justifies a whole section. If that Joe Bloggs was only an entry to show what it should be like, please specify that inside the section, so people are not misleaded. Together with the whole section about the "nasty food" most of what was on that page seemed like vandalism to me. Again, my intend was not vandalism. I have quite a few edits in Wikipedia, and this time is the first time someone seemed to object to my edits. BigBen212 00:58, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Dear BigBen212: Most of your edit was removal. Unless you are adding better information I don't you are justified to remove (unless of course the information is indisputably wrong or offensive). I think the information about the school's IT infrastructure you removed doesn't fall into the latter category.

 * It's not what was written about the internet, but how it was written that led me to believe it's bogus. If that was your edit and you felt that I was reverting it for no good reason, do me a favor, revert my edit and I'm going to drop this page from my watchlist and not care anymore. Don't be surprised, though, if others edit in the same way that I did, because: "but unluckly, you can't download anything in the school network, many web page were banned without good reason MSN, ICQ were banned." would not be considered NPOV. I'd suggest you read that page before you continue editing. Further, if you still think that my edit was uncalled for, please don't hesitate contacting one of the administrators, drop them a line in their talk page and complain about me and explain your reasons. BigBen212 17:06, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * BigBen212, it's not my contribution that you deleted and I have no idea who the contributor is. I'm just a former pupil of this school, that's why I started the entry.  If you think the other contributor's input isn't neutral (and I would agree with you) then by all means edit it to make it more balanced.  Other people will pass after you and question your neutrality and make further changes.  But I have made it pretty clear that I'm not questioning your neutrality.  I'm saying that content shouldn't be deleted simply because it doesn't suit your point of view!  If you go round wikipedia deleting text that doesn't suit you, then yes I think administrators should be contacted.

 * Dear 139.165.200.114: Does this meet your expectations? BigBen212 04:00, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Possible vandalism?
At 00:42, 9 Apr 2005, user 207.218.152.146 changed "Tower and Lodge were created in 1989" to "Tower and Lodge were created in 1889". This could be vandalism, keeping in mind that 207.218.152.146 has vandalised pages before (but may be a dynamically assigned IP). Could someone please validate this statement and fix it if it is indeed sneaky vandalism.

Someone42 10:49, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Seems to be a valid change. Lodge (http://www.slcuk.com/seniorschool/houses/lodge.html) has been named this in 1929, but it has been a house before then. I can't seem to find that kind of information for Tower (http://www.slcuk.com/seniorschool/houses/tower.html). 1989 seems unlikely anyway, since that school is a lot older than that. BigBen212 16:00, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Removed reference to one "Legendary" former pupil
Hello, I removed the reference to the former pupil that had recently been added. If this person is worthy of addition then please add the information again and justify the notability of this information.I also removed the word Legendary from the title of the section. Politepunk 10:23, 9 March 2006 (UTC) can somebody help by explaining to me why the OL web page is so complicated i can never login. why can it not be simple like the Sutton Valanec web page. skombayi@yahoo.co.uk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.2.64.46 (talk) 16:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Category:Old Lawrentians renaming
At present there is a discussion relating to the renaming of this category. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at this discussion page. Please note that the discussion is not a majority vote so contributions should be based on Wikipedia policies and independent sources. Cjc13 (talk) 13:37, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:St Lawrence College, Ramsgate