text:
Talk:Solvent

Solvent table has another error?
Ethyl acetate in the none polars in the second, and the polar aprotics in the first —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.24.47.178 (talk) 10:10, 14 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 10:35, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Dipole moment of 1,4-dioxane in solvent table
In the solvent table, 1,4-dioxane is listed as having a nonzero dipole moment, but from the symmetry of the molecule one would expect a zero dipole moment. I realize this is may be a subtle question for flexible molecules like 1,4-dioxane that can have a nonzero dipole moment some conformations (in this case the less preferred chair conformation) but not others. The 1967 National Bureau of Standards tabulation (page 28) lists 1,4-dioxane as having no dipole moment because of symmetry, but on the same page the dipole moment of 2,3-butanedione is listed as zero but questionable, due to the possible effects of an unsymmetric gauche conformation. Pending further information, I have changed the dipole moment of 1,4-dioxane in the solvent table to zero. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CharlesHBennett (talk • contribs) 21:13, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

PS Another source gives the dipole moment as 0.45 Debye, the same as in the table, so I did not change the article after all. Perhaps the conformation-dependence of dipole moments should be discussed in the article on dipole moment or dielectric spectroscopy.CharlesHBennett (talk) 21:28, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Chlororform and Diethyl ether should not be in the non-polar solvents for teither the common table of solvents due to its dipole moments. Assuming the charges are evenly distributed and removes the dipole moment is dangerous. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.90.124.37 (talk) 17:46, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Solvent table has an error?
On the first one, it's listing DCM as a none polar, and the second lists it as a polar.
 * Thank you. Fixed (it is somewhat polar). Materialscientist (talk) 22:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Some Hansen data incorrect
Some of the Hansen solubility parameter data is not in agreement with original sources. The example with finding substitute mixtures for chloroform is not valid with the current values of the parameters of dioxane. Hansen's book has the values 19.0,1.8,7.4 for the three parameters D,P,H. A much better fit is with a mixture of toluene and tetrahydrofuran. Perhaps there was a mixup somewhere; this is important because there are good reasons for not using chloroform (for one thing, it spontaneously decomposes to form phosgene, a very poisonous material) In addition, both dioxane and tetrahydrafuran are problematic in that they form explosive peroxides on storage. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.113.108.124 (talk) 05:43, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

For solubility data, why is the temperature not given. Clearly, this affects solubility and therefore should be quoted. (question made by 80.5.160.8)

Actually, we don't have solubility data on this page :-) Cacycle 16:51, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I was wondering if NaCl would dissolve in Ethanol. Would a polar solute be dissolved in a non-polar solvent?

Solvent is a liquid?
Why are we saying "A solvent is a liquid" here? The solution page clearly states that gases may be dissolved in themselves, and why not gases, liquids and solids into solids?

I agree; f.x. you dissolve gases or liquids in polymer matrices or in liquid crystalline phases for that matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pwt dk (talk • contribs) 12:11, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

 * I also agree. In semicondutors, the dopant (or any metal nearby) will dissolve in the silicon, particularly as it warms up. Silver solder is also used in audio electronics to prevent silver being leached out of components by a tin/lead alloy. The majority of solvents are seen as liquids, but adding a note about this would be good.

"Natural" solvents?
I can't find information here on "natural" solvents like Pine-Sol or Goo Gone. Any idea what they are chemically and why they can dissolve things that usually require nasty nonpolar solvents? —BenFrantzDale 19:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

Merge
See Talk:Solution. --Unsigned comment added 22:45, 11 May 2006 by User:Black and White. Edited by User:Centrx on 24 May 2006.

Definition through itself
Isn't saying solvent dissolves defining it with the word itself. May-be merging with Solution will be a good idea, but if they don't get merged, I think the first sentence needs something else instead of dissolves.80.235.71.49 16:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

hey can a solvent dissolve a plasma? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thunder god 15 (talk • contribs) 09:24, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

"A solvent is a liquid or gas that dissolves a solid, liquid, or gaseous solute, resulting in a solution." The entire article has this character; there is no information about what a solvent actually is, from a Physics of even physical Chemistry analysis. The article is absurdly circular.

I tried to add some clarity to first few sentences, but this is still very circular. Really needs an explanation for dissolve, but I'm not confident enough to be chemically correct. Dragonbits (talk) 17:14, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Couple of points - Inert/recrystalisation
Although picky I think the following sentance needs re-wording

Solvents should therefore not react chemically with the dissolved compounds — they have to be inert. I can think of several instances in which solvents also act as reagents, most notably the birch reduction (both ammonia and ethanol), formation of nucleophiles such as alkoxides, to name but a few.

An important point which should also be noted (linked) is the process of recrystalisation.Dant1t 23:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)dant1t

No reference for peroxide formation
Please provide better mechanism including reference. Formation of peroxides is a critical safety issue. Specifically, your mechanism does not rationalize formation the peroxide. The oxygen radical needs to form a bond with the oxygen atom already present on THF, not on the carbon, right? How is the peroxide formed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.214.17.5 (talk) 20:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Polar in this case is not necessarily hydrophilic
Polarity scale also depends on the kind of chemistry being done. Dichlormethane, ethyl acetate, diethyl ether, chloroform and others are polar for uses in synthetic organic chemistry and do not dissolve in water. Your statement is an incorrect oversimplification. Polarity of solvents as you say later on the paragraph has to do with the dipole of the molecule and the solvent's ability to dissolve the solute in question and not if they dissolve in water. Lowry & Richardson, Mechanism and Theory in Organic Chemistry, 3rd Ed. Harper Collins Publishers (1987) p. 177 discusses and suggests nonpolar solvents have dielectric constant of less than approximately 15.

You really need references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.214.17.5 (talk) 20:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

Actually, DCM, EA, ether, chloroform are non-polar solvents. Polar solvents really, should start from acetone, dmso, ethanol, methanol onward. These are the solvents of polarity ~ 0.4 and above. And yes, I am a synthetic chemist. --Rifleman 82 (talk) 01:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Again, we need accepted peer reviewed references not the opinion of an annonymous editor purporting to be a chemist.

Plus, hey synthetic chemist, if you have time, could you provide the mechanism and reference for peroxide formation in THF. THanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.214.17.5 (talk) 21:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Under links, Link for table 1 is broken.

Error in the table: 1,4-dioxane a polar aprotic solvent? Isn't it a mistake to list 1,4-dioxane as a polar solvent? F.x. in view of the low dielectric constant and in comparison to diethyl ether listed in the non-polar catagory. Bold text —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pwt dk (talk • contribs) 12:17, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

DIOXANE: 1,4-dioxane is put under non-polar solvens, but in the 1,4-dioxane article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1,4-Dioxane) following is written: "It is a versatile polar aprotic solvent". So the question is, which is most true? I dont know if one should define it from dielectric const or solubility in water... is there some IUPAC (or alike) definition of when something is considered polar, and if so, could we include it? Aimdezilaere (talk) 09:31, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

elements as solvents?
Is there any Chemical element that is used as a solvent? I mean something like a particular substance dissolves in say Mercury (element)) and therefore Mercury is used as a solvent for commercial/research work. manya (talk) 04:39, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

 * Mercury solutions are called amalgams. Mercury is used to dissolve sodium (mercury cell process) and gold (an ancient gold refining method). --Vuo (talk) 17:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

food, cosmetic industry solvents
such as dimethyl isosorbide, dimethyl sulfoxide (dmso), glycofurol (glycofurol 75), ethyl lactate, solketal, n methyl pyrolidonone. Cinnamon colbert (talk) 14:12, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Fix the 2nd person?
We need to fix the 2nd person (you) tone found throughout. I don't have time. Earendil56 (talk) 22:20, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Organic solvent
Is an organic solvent just a solvent that is an organic compound? Do they tend to have any interesting properties that distinguish them from solvents in general -- for example, a relationship with polarity?

Perhaps the category is not very fundamental, but the collocation "organic solvent" is found often in the external world, and the term redirects here, so it would be nice to have a tiny section or definition devoted to organic solvents as such.

For example, if "most" solvents besides water are organic solvents, as I read on Yahoo, then perhaps this should be mentioned in the first paragraph of the article, before getting into the uses of organic solvents. I don't have the knowledge to assert this myself.

At the end of the article we find the following remark, added as a kind of afterthought:

Solvent systems exist outside the realm of ordinary organic solvents: Supercritical fluids, ionic liquids and deep eutectic solvents.

Again, this hints at something implicitly known to chemists but not set forth in the article: most solvents are organic. It also suggests that the article has not mentioned these kinds of solvents, or any solvents besides organic. This is disappointing to the reader, since the title of the article is "solvents", and also is not quite true. 84.227.242.182 (talk) 18:17, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

BRICs
"The dynamic economic development in emerging markets like China, India, Brazil, or Russia will especially continue to boost demand for solvents."

This reminds me of stock blog hype in the summer of 2008 -- isn't this a bit dated, or perhaps too specific in its reference to be on-topic here? 89.217.20.9 (talk) 21:41, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
 * A similar passage still existed until I removed it a minute ago. At most, only part of it was cited, and all of it appeared to be based on years-old publications making predictions that by now are either fulfilled or not. We definitely don't need marketting hype here. DMacks (talk) 15:52, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Assessment comment
Substituted at 06:29, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Solvent. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041113054037/http://www.usm.maine.edu/~newton/Chy251_253/Lectures/Solvents/Solvents.html to http://www.usm.maine.edu/~newton/Chy251_253/Lectures/Solvents/Solvents.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20041207190740/http://virtual.yosemite.cc.ca.us/smurov/orgsoltab.htm to http://virtual.yosemite.cc.ca.us/smurov/orgsoltab.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:47, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Solvent table circular definition
Solvents RE-2, RE-3, and RE-4 contain the (generic?) word "solvent" as the first ingredient. This is either ambiguous, circular, or undefined. 68.110.182.150 (talk) 14:03, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * That whole section is uncited, except for four specific entries. Going back to the [earliest form of this table, it has never had more cites, and these circular-definition words are already present (it's what google-translate does for [[:ru:Многокомпонентные_растворители]] that was cited as the antecedent). The stand-alone article was merged here per Articles for deletion/Multicomponent solvents. I would support removing the extensive table and merely a sentence or two of prose that some mixtures have trade-names, with cited examples. DMacks (talk) 16:12, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Starting from that ruwiki article, it looks like the substance is ru:Сольвент, which Google Translate says:
 * Solvent - a mixture of light hydrocarbons released from oil or coal raw materials, a flammable liquid. Density 867 kg / m ^ 3 at 20 ° C. Flash point 29°C (o.t.); ignition point 36 °C; self-ignition temperature 488 °C; lower conc. distribution limit sq. 1.0% (vol.); minimum ignition energy 0.45 mJ. Xylene volatility 1.01-1.08
 * The solvent is a mixture of aromatic hydrocarbons with a small content of naphthenes, paraffins and unsaturated cyclic hydrocarbons. The solvent consists of approximately 56% aromatic hydrocarbons, and the rest is unsaturated hydrocarbons
 * That doesn't exactly match petroleum ether or kerosene, but it's in the white spirit/naphtha family. DMacks (talk) 16:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:Solvent


text:
Talk:Triad (comics)

Previously redirected to: Talk:Luornu Durgo

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

title: Talk:Triad (comics)


text:
User talk:Jcbos

User talk:Jcbos/arc05-1

 * Tutorial
 * Help desk
 * Foundation issues
 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Neutral point of view
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Brilliant prose
 * Featured pictures
 * Boilerplate text
 * Current polls
 * Mailing lists
 * IRC channel

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Here are some links I thought useful:

 * Tutorial
 * Help desk
 * Foundation issues
 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Neutral point of view
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Brilliant prose
 * Featured pictures
 * Boilerplate text
 * Current polls
 * Mailing lists
 * IRC channel

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. About, Help desk, and Village pump are also a place to go for answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~.

Be Bold!

11:09, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Email
Johan,

Als je aan niemand vertelt dat je een RFC hebt aangemaakt wordt elke "revert" uitgelegd als een "revert". >3x betekent geblokkeerd worden, volgens de "three revert rule".

Je moet echt stoppen met dit gedonder. Een korte blik op je overlegpagina op de nl.wikipedia geeft duidelijk weer dat je hetzelfde spelletje op NL speelt.

Ik heb je block ongedaan gemaakt, omdat je technisch gesproken niet 4x een revert hebt uitgevoerd. Toch wil ik je dringend verzoeken om te stoppen met dat Bijbel-gedoe. Heb je echt niets beters te doen (bijvoorbeeld inhoud?) JFW | T@lk  00:51, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * OK, hopelijk kan je nu wel bewerken.
 * Hopelijk heb ik een verkeerd beeld van je bedoelingen. Ik zei dat ik een korte blik op je overlegpagina had geworpen :-). Mbt de Bijbel-kwestie is er hier concensus dat "Christian Bible" géén pleonasme is. Ik denk dat we nu het beste de resultaten van WP:RFC kunnen afwachten. JFW | T@lk  06:15, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

OK, de blok is dus ongedaan gemaakt. Ik kan me voorstellen dat er op NL minder snel geblokt wordt, maar op EN bestaat de 3-revert regel. Ik was onder de indruk dat je op Bijbel 4x je eigen versie had gemaakt, en dat is zonder meer een reden voor een blok. Later zag ik dat het niet strikt genomen "reverts" waren, en heb ik je blok ongedaan gemaakt. Dit is "normaal" gebruik van moderator-status en absoluut geen grond voor het wegnemen van privileges. JFW | T@lk  17:41, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Request for Support
I've filed a complaint against user Jayjg for abuse of Admin powers and Anti-Arab bias. The link [] will take you there. I see that you too have been subject to Jayjg's treatment, and I would appreciate any additional evidence you can provide.A.Khalil 02:46, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * To me he just showed troll-behaviour, he did not (yet) abuse his moderator privileges against me. Any user can revert someones edits. Jcbos 03:01, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Interlingua Wikipedia
Actually, I agree with many (not all!) blanking done by the user with the IP known as 24.70.95.206. Simple dictionary entries, original (religious) sources and other unencyclopedic entries have no place there. He's not always right though, so revert based on your own judgement. If you could even make the article encyclopedic, that would be even more great. -- Dissident (Talk) 04:15, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

On your new poll
Could you advertise it on the village pump and relevant contended pages areas? That'll help it have more validity. Thanks. --Improv 23:25, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

 * You cannot change the options once you've started the poll. Grouping the opinions can happen later. JFW | T@lk  12:09, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Answering annoying question
So I called him a troll. Big deal. It's not the most offensive word in the world. → Jarlaxle Artemis   02:00, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)
 * It's not normal to abuse other Wikipediae to call EN.users names. And than, it's not normal that firstly you just deleted my question. Jcbos 02:39, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * If it's not "normal" to "abuse" people by describing them as "trolls", why did you do so |right here on your Talk: page, just 10 days ago? Jayjg (talk) 15:14, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * I did not talk about abusing people, I talked about abusing IA.wikipedia for calling EN.users names. When someone shows troll-behaviour, there is nothing wrong to say that, but if you only say that hidden, then there is something wrong. Jcbos 21:34, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

You should be ashamed
It has come to my attention, that our sensei, Peter Lee, is a victim of vandalism and slander here at Wikipedia. I have removed those links, but to my surprise, I see that you have put this kind of links right back. May I ask why you would allow hosting of such slandering links?
 * Thank you Johan for undoing the vandalist actions by Peter Lee on my user page and some anonymous person who is even here afraid to tell his real name. There's of course NOTHING to be ashamed of! You did absolutely the right thing. There's a lot to do about this Peter Lee on Wikipedia. Not only on Wikipedia, also his own site is full of slander and lies about the true and original Genseiryu karate. Don't get too much involved though, 'cause it's very complex and it's for an outsider very difficult to separate the truth from the facts (almost like the Da Vinci Code! Just much more boring ;-) ). For insiders who do a little research, it becomes clear after a while that Peter Lee is the one who is really vandalizing and hanging up a bunch of lies to ground his reasons... For many years other people have become a victim of his slander, without any reaction from these people. Now that the truth is being told some people suddenly start wining about that... Don't pay any attention! Also I am not going to beg for help or anything, it would be unfair to drag you in this silly edit war. But it's totally up to you of course! So, thanks again and regards! -- Mario R 13:47, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Bot activity
I was going over the list of bots and noticed that has not edited in a very long time. Is this bot still active and if not, would you object to it being de-flagged? Please post your comments to Wikipedia_talk:Bots/Requests_for_approval since this is a rather widely-posted message.  MBisanz  talk 01:45, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

YL
Hoi JCB, ik zag je melding op wiki-nl. Vanwege de blokkade geef ik even hier een reactie. Ik heb van OTRS nooit een mail ontvangen dat ik aan het verkeerde adres was bij hun voor zover me bekend is. Wanneer is die mail verzonden? Met vriendelijke groet, 83.87.73.170 (talk) 09:49, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:57, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Jcbos


text:
NLRB election procedures

The National Labor Relations Board, an agency within the United States government, was created in 1935 as part of the National Labor Relations Act. Among the NLRB's chief responsibilities is the holding of elections to permit employees to vote whether they wish to be represented by a particular labor union. Congress amended the Act in 1947 through the Taft–Hartley Act to give workers the ability to decertify an already recognized or certified union as well. This article describes, in a very summary manner, the procedures that the NLRB uses to hold such elections, as well as the circumstances in which a union may obtain the right to represent a group of employees without an election.

Obtaining authorization cards
To obtain an NLRB-conducted election, the union must file a petition supported by a showing of interest from at least thirty percent of the employees in the group that the union seeks to represent, typically called the bargaining unit. Unions typically use authorization cards, individual forms in which a worker states that they wish to be represented by the union, as evidence of employee support. A card or petition that simply states that the signer wanted an election would not be valid. Similarly if an employee signed the card because the union had told him that the only reason to sign the card was to have an election, the Board will not count that card. The Board also treats cards as invalid if they were obtained with illegal assistance from the employer: for example, if the employer gave the petitioning union access to its facility that it did not permit other unions or other organizations to have, or if it made threats or promises that coerced employees into signing these cards. Cards collected with the help of low level supervisors may also be "tainted", even if the employer is opposed to the union, depending on what the supervisor said or did and the nature of the employer's response. Some union promises, such as a promise to waive union initiation fees for employees who sign a card before a certain date, may also make an authorization card invalid.

Petitioning for an election
When the union files its petition, the NLRB first checks the sufficiency of the union's showing of support. The Board will not show the cards to the employer, or release the names of the employees who have signed them, or indicate the number of cards submitted by the union.

The employer may, nonetheless, challenge this showing of interest by claiming that the signatures on the cards are not genuine, or that they have been tainted by supervisory involvement in the union's campaign, or that the union has understated the number of employees in the unit that it seeks to represent. Then the Board will conduct an administrative investigation into those allegations. If the Board finds that any of these cards are invalid for any reason it will typically allow the union a brief period of time to submit however many cards are necessary to meet its thirty percent standard.

Optionally, a union that has gained over 50% of employees petitioning for representation can form by card check election. An employer currently can refuse to accept the results of a card check election and require a secret ballot election. Under the proposed Employee Free Choice Act an employer challenging a card check election would be required to assert that employee signatures were gathered using illegal means, such as coercion. This would be a return to the NLRB's Joy Silk Doctrine, which was in effect from 1949 to 1966.

Processing the petition
If the union has made this threshold showing of support, then the Board will attempt to work out an agreement between the parties for the scheduling of an election. The employer can, however, insist on a hearing to challenge the appropriateness of the unit or to raise other issues.

The NLRB will only hold an election in a unit that it finds to be appropriate. This issue may arise in different forms: as an example, if a union seeks to represent workers at one facility out of several that an employer operates in a particular locale, the Board will have to determine whether the single facility unit is an appropriate one. The same issue might arise within a single site: the union may seek to represent only one group of employees, such as truck drivers, while the employer may claim that the only appropriate unit is a wider one, such as truck drivers, shipping and receiving employees, and warehouse employees.

While the NLRB has developed detailed rules governing what units are appropriate in health care institutions, it takes a more ad hoc approach in other cases, relying on a collection of factors that the Board labels its "community of interest" standard. The Board typically favors broader units over smaller ones, particularly if the union is seeking the broader unit. If a rival union is petitioning for a smaller unit contained within the larger one sought by the petitioning union, as for example in the case in which one union seeks to represent a "wall to wall" unit of all production and maintenance employees in a unit, while another seeks to represent only the skilled trades employees in the maintenance department, the Board may either direct a "Globe" election, in which the craft employees are allowed to vote for inclusion or exclusion as a group in the larger unit, then offered a choice of voting for or against union representation in whatever unit they have voted for.

The Board may also need to determine if a particular individual may be included in the unit. Some individuals, such as independent contractors, supervisors, and agricultural employees, are not "employees" for purposes of the NLRA and may not be included in any unit. Other employees, such as guards, as defined in the Act, may not be included in the same unit as the employees they watch over or represented by the same union that represents those rank and file employees; the Board takes a similar approach toward "confidential employees", who have special access to confidential employer information relating to the employer's labor relations policies. Other employees, such as professional employees, may only be included in the same unit as non-professional employees if they are allowed to vote as a separate group for or against inclusion.

The Board also excludes temporary employees and, unless both employers agree, the employees of subcontractors and temporary agencies who work alongside the employees of the primary employer.

The employer must ordinarily raise these issues before the election is scheduled; it cannot later refuse to bargain on the theory that the unit is inappropriate on grounds it did not make in a timely manner. That rule does not, on the other hand, bar the employer from later challenging an individual employee's ballot on the ground that he or she is not an employee within the meaning of the Act, as for example in the case of a supervisor.

The Board will also allow other unions that claim an interest in representing any or all of the employees in the unit to intervene at this time. If a union already represents any of these employees, then it will be made a party to the case without the need to make any showing of interest; in other cases the Board requires that an outside union produce at least a thirty percent showing of interest in order to argue for a different bargaining unit, a ten percent showing of interest to participate in any hearing, and a single authorization card if all the union seeks is to be included as a choice on the ballot.

The Board will not ordinarily hold an election if the employees in the unit are currently covered by a collective bargaining agreement. The Board will relax its "contract bar" rules, however, in those cases in which the agreement is for more than three years, in which case an election petition by an outside union filed after the third anniversary will be timely. The Board also permits petitions filed during a "window period", a one-month period beginning ninety days before the expiration of the old agreement and ending sixty days before expiration. The Board has developed a complex set of rules governing premature extensions of collective bargaining agreements to enforce its contract bar rule.

The Board is also barred by statute from holding an election in a unit if it has held a valid election in that unit in the last twelve months. This rule does not, however, prevent the Board from requiring a rerun election if it determines that the election was invalid, either because of the conduct of the parties or other reasons. The Board can also conduct an election in a larger unit than the earlier unit and allow employees who voted in the previous election to vote in the second one.

If the parties do not stipulate to an election, then the Regional Director of the NLRB will direct an election to be held. There is no automatic right to appeal from the Regional Director's decision, although an aggrieved party can request the NLRB to review the Regional Director's decision. Such requests for review are rarely granted; even when they are, the Board typically conducts the election as scheduled, impounding the ballots until the Board rules on the request for review.

The Board requires an employer to provide the petitioning union with an "Excelsior list," which should contain the names and addresses of all unit employees, within seven days of the direction of an election.

"Laboratory conditions"
The Board will suspend the processing of an election petition if a "blocking charge" is filed, that is an unfair labor practice charge that, on its face, alleges unlawful conduct that, if true, might interfere with employees' ability to make a free and uncoerced choice of representative, reflecting the fundamental rights defined in NLRA section 7. The Region investigates these charges on an expedited basis, the Regional Director may make a preliminary decision as to whether the charge has merit and, if it does, is likely to affect the election. The Regional Director's decision to block or not block an election is not appealable.

A party filing a charge that might otherwise constitute a blocking charge can formally request the Region to proceed with the petition, notwithstanding the charge, by filing a request to proceed. There is one exception to this rule: the Regional Director always suspends the processing of an election petition to investigate a charge that an employer has unlawfully supported or dominated a labor organization, in violation of NLRA section 8(a)(2) or USC section 158.

These issues may also arise after the election, when the losing party asks that the election be set aside by filing objections to conduct that may have affected the election. Just what sort of conduct may justify overturning an election result depends on the facts of each case and the membership of the NLRB itself at the time it decides the case; while the Board has established some principles that have remained valid for decades, in other areas it has changed its policies radically, often as a result in changes in the ideological makeup of the Board following changes in the party that holds the White House, in the sequence of holdings discussed below.

The employer has the right under the First Amendment to express its support for or opposition to unionization. The permissible expression must not threaten reprisals or promise employee benefits contingent on the outcome of the election. The NLRA states that such "views, arguments, or opinion[s]" do not rise to the level of an unfair labor practice in s.8(c). The line between mere expression of opinion and interference or threat is a difficult one to draw with any precision and has given rise to thousands of NLRB decisions on the subject. For example, a statement by an employer that, to an outsider, may sound like a simple factual prediction (regarding conditions that may occur if the union wins the election), may be taken as a threat when received by an employee whose livelihood depends upon his relationship to that employer.

The NLRB considers a number of factors in deciding whether a particular tactic by an employer or a union destroyed the "Laboratory Conditions" that it has tried to maintain in election campaigns of this sort. The Board will not consider events, no matter how serious, that occurred before the date that the union filed its petition nor, as a matter of common sense, events that occurred after the election. While conduct that violates the employees' s.7 rights, such as the discriminatory discharge of a union activist or threats to close the company if the union wins the election, will often be enough to require the holding of a second election, even the most egregious violations of the Act may not be enough to require a rerun election if they were so isolated that they did not have a perceptible impact on the outcome of the election.

On the other hand, conduct that does not violate the Act, but which may affect the atmosphere in which the election is held, such as campaigning in the polling area on the day of the election or holding "captive audience meetings" that employees are required to attend in the twenty-four hours before the election, had been determined to be sufficient basis to overturn the election. Similarly, misconduct by others, such as the NLRB personnel conducting the election or third parties, including local newspapers or chambers of commerce, have gone both ways: timing of distribution of an editorial that associated unions with racial-equality organizations in a local, small town, southern newspaper, when the union lost the election in pre-Civil Rights Georgia or when a Japanese businessman's editorial criticizing the American workforce (and the union won the election at a Japanese-owned company) have justified setting aside an election; but it has also been held that one incident is not sufficient for religious or racial hatred to violate the election standard.

Midland National Life Insurance Co. is a current holding that reflects the Board's oscillations along White House political lines. This case involved an employer distributing anti-union campaign literature to its employees with their paychecks. The literature included false impressions and other misleading information. The union learned of the document the next morning, 3½ hours before polling. In this 1982 case, the Board decided that the election standards were not lowered to a level that "...impaired the free and informed atmosphere requisite to an untrammeled expression of choice by the employees." (Midland, above.)

In the early 1950s the Board began considering whether employees were "deceived as to the source of the campaign propaganda by trickery or fraud, and that they could therefore neither recognize nor evaluate propaganda for what it was, the Board set aside the election (Midland, above). Later the Board "refined its standard" in Liberal Market refusing to consider the truth or falsity of campaign propaganda, but measured the degree to which employees' free choice was impacted by misleading information. For the next seven years, the Board held the "intent to mislead" as an element of the standard" for setting aside an election.

The next refinement of the standard occurred in 1962, when, in Hollywood Ceramics, the Board required the "misrepresentation or campaign trickery to involve (1) a substantial departure from the truth, (2)at a time which prevents the other party […] from making an effective reply, so that the misrepresentation, which (3) deliberate or not, may (4) reasonably be expected to have a (5) significant impact on the election." (Numbers added to emphasize elements to be evaluated.)

Fifteen years later, in Shopping Kart Food Market, Inc., a new administration brought in a board that effectively overruled Hollywood Ceramics, stating that it would "recognize and rely on the employees as mature individuals who are capable of recognizing campaign propaganda for what it is and discounting it" and effectively negating the possibility of policing campaigns. Thus, the Board would set aside an election tainted by misrepresentation only when forgery was involved.

When the Board changed under the next White House administration, the Board returned to its policy of insuring fair election under General Knit.

Another administrative change coincided with the holding in Midland (above) and the Board's requiring forgery to invoke the Board's oversight in a tainted election. However, through all these diametric holdings, the Board has never disowned its responsibility to maintain "Laboratory Conditions"; instead, it wavered on the degree to which those conditions will reflect the real world of heated employee representation elections.

 * "Laboratory Condition" Notes
 * 1) "Laboratory Conditions" "The Board has consistently stated that, during an election to determine representation, voting is to occur in a 'laboratory' in which an experiment may be conducted, under conditions as nearly ideal as possible, to determine the uninhibited desires of employees. In re General Shoe Corp., 77 N.L.R.B. 124, 127 (1948)." Cited by NLRB v. River City Elevator No. 01-2887 (2002).
 * 2) Sewell Mfg. Co., 138 NLRB 66 (1962). This pre-Civil Rights case stands for the premise that any party inciting racial or ethnic prejudice breaches "Laboratory Conditions."
 * 3) Midland National Life Insurance Co. v. Local 304A, United Food & Commercial Workers, 263 NLRB 127 (1982)
 * 4) Liberal Market, cited in Midland, above, and United Aircraft Corporation, 103 NLRB at 105.
 * 5) Hollywood Ceramics' rule permitted Board evaluation of both the substance and the manner of the campaign representations.
 * 6) Shopping Kart Food Markets, Inc., 228 NLRB 1311 (1977), cited in Midland, above.
 * 7) General Knit of California, Inc., 239 NLRB 619 (1978).

Conducting the election, counting the ballots and certifying the results
The NLRB usually conducts elections at the workplace, setting up a polling area where employees can cast ballots. Each party to the election is allowed a number of observers, depending on the size of the unit. The starting or ending times of the election will depend on the nature of the employer's business; if the employer operates more than two shifts the Board will typically schedule separate polling times to allow employees to vote as they arrive for and leave from work. The Board less often conducts elections by mail ballot, usually in cases in which workers are widely dispersed.

Observers may challenge the ballots of employees when one side or the other claims are not members of the bargaining unit or not eligible to vote for any other reason. The NLRB will challenge the ballot of any voter whose name does not appear on the list supplied by the employer. Those challenged ballots are held separately to be counted after a hearing officer determines, following a post-election hearing, that the individual's vote should be counted. Even then the Board may not make any determination on this issue or counted any challenged ballots if the number of such ballots is too small to affect the outcome of the election.

A party that wishes to protest the outcome of the election must file objections within seven days after the election. The Regional Director determines, after an investigation, whether any of the charges have enough merit to justify a hearing into them. The hearing officer conducting that hearing will also resolve any challenges to individual employees' ballots if they are sufficient to affect the outcome of the election. If a party has also filed unfair labor practice charges based on the conduct it claims made a fair election impossible, the hearing on its objections will be held before the Administrative Law Judge before him any such unfair labor practice charges are tried.

Legal challenges to the results
While the Board will hear a party's appeal from a decision rejecting its objections to an election, there is no right to judicial review of the NLRB's decision. The ostensible purpose of this denial of direct judicial review is to expedite the determination of questions concerning union representation.

In practice, however, the lack of judicial review often produces the opposite result. An employer that wants to challenge the Board's certification of a union in court must engage in what is referred to as a "technical refusal to bargain" in order to draw an unfair labor practice charge against it under Section 8(a)(5) of the Act. The General Counsel of the NLRB will typically file an unfair labor practice complaint against it for refusing to bargain, at which point the employer can then raise the same objections to the election that it raised earlier as a defense to the unfair labor practice charges against it. While the Board will almost always reject these objections on the ground that they have already been ruled upon, this enables the employer to raise these objections in the appellate court proceedings concerning the Board's decision in the unfair labor practice case.

The employer runs certain risks in engaging in a technical refusal to bargain; among other things, it may be liable to employees if it makes changes in their terms and conditions of employment without bargaining with the union. However, because the General Counsel of the NLRB rarely seeks injunctive relief in cases of this sort, an employer that wants to take the risk of liability and believes it can withstand a strike can delay bargaining with a union for years after it has won the election.

Unions can also seek judicial review of unfavorable election results by picketing for recognition in the hope of drawing a charge under Section 8(b)(7) of the Act.

There is a narrow exception to this general rule under which a party to a representation case can seek injunctive relief directly in the federal courts to prevent the NLRB from holding an election in defiance of an express statutory limitation, e.g., failing to hold a separate self-determination election for professional employees. These cases are exceptionally infrequent.

Bargaining orders
The NLRB also has the power to order an employer to bargain with the union, even though the union has not won an election, as a remedy for egregious unfair labor practices by the employer. Such orders, commonly known as "Gissel orders" after the United States Supreme Court case that authorized them, may only be issued if the union can show that it once had majority support and that the employer's unlawful conduct destroyed that support. The Board has identified a number of "hallmark" violations, such as threats to close the operation made by an authoritative member of management and disseminated widely through the workforce, that will support a Gissel order.

The appellate courts have been less receptive to these orders and have frequently refused to enforce them on a number of grounds, e.g., that employee turnover in the years while the charge was being litigated makes a bargaining order inappropriate.

Successorship
An employer may also be ordered to bargain with a union, even though the union has not been certified as the representative of any of its employees, if it is the successor to an employer that was obliged to bargain with the union. Successorship requires (1) that the new employer draw a majority of its workforce from the bargaining unit the union previously represented, (2) that the new employer be engaged in the same general line of business as its predecessor, and (3) that the bargaining unit has not been changed so drastically in the transfer of the business from the old to the new employer that it is no longer an appropriate one.

It is not necessary to show that the new employer bought the predecessor's business in order to prove successorship; an employer that does nothing more than buy the assets of another company, or a competitor that supplants another employer by underbidding it, can still be a successor if it draws most of its workforce from the old bargaining unit and remains in the same general line of business. In addition, an employer may be a successor, even if it does not hire any of its predecessor's employees, if it refused to hire them because of their union membership or activities.

Decertification elections
Employees represented by a union can also petition to decertify the union. They must also produce evidence that at least thirty percent of the unit supports decertification and are bound by the same "contract bar" rules as a unit, whether it is one created by the NLRB or one created or modified by the parties through collective bargaining. Decertification elections are also subject to the same rules concerning improper campaign conduct as elections initiated by a union.

Decertification can also occur if the employer received substantial evidence that the union no longer has the support of a majority of the bargaining unit. Typically, this is accomplished through giving a petition, signed by a majority of the bargaining unit, to a member of Management.

Decertification without elections
The Federal Labor Relations Authority may strip a union of its right to represent workers, as it happened in the 1981 air traffic controllers strike.

Voluntary recognition and accretion
It is lawful for an employer to recognize a union, without going through an NLRB-conducted election, so long as the union has proof of support from more than half of the employees in the bargaining unit. That proof may not be valid, however, if the employer has given unlawful assistance to the union in collecting authorization cards or if another union has filed a petition seeking to represent these employees before the employer grants recognition.

In addition, new employees may be added to an existing unit without the need for either an election or proof of majority support if they share such an overwhelming community of interest with the employees in the existing unit that they could not be represented separately. As an example, a new department in a factory in which a union represents all of the production and maintenance employees in a "wall to wall" unit is likely to be accreted to that unit. The NLRB will not accrete employees to an existing unit, however, if they have been historically excluded from the unit, no matter how strong the community of interest might be; in that case the union must obtain proof of majority support to add them to the unit.

Modifying the unit or amending the certification
The Board will also entertain petitions to resolve disputes whether individuals in a new classification should be added to or remain within the unit. The Board will not, on the other hand, modify the clear language of a collective bargaining agreement or the parties' established practice that either includes or excludes such employees.

The Board can also amend a certification. This is usually done for technical reasons: to reflect the change in name of either the union or the employer, or a union's affiliation with another union, or a change in location of the work covered by the certification.

title: NLRB election procedures


text:
User talk:Treanna~enwiki

Welcome to the Wikipedia
Here are some links I thought useful:

 * Tutorial
 * Help desk
 * Foundation issues
 * Policy Library
 * Utilities
 * Cite your sources
 * Verifiability
 * Wikiquette
 * Civility
 * Conflict resolution
 * Neutral point of view
 * Pages needing attention
 * Peer review
 * Bad jokes and other deleted nonsense
 * Brilliant prose
 * Featured pictures
 * Boilerplate text
 * Current polls
 * Mailing lists
 * IRC channel

Feel free to contact me personally with any questions you might have. About, Help desk, and Village pump are also a place to go for answers to general questions. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~.

Be Bold!

11:14, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I know wikipedia and its rules since more than one year, being contributor of the french one Treanna 10:55, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Account closed
This account is blocked as per Blocking policy =Nichalp   «Talk»=  16:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Your account will be renamed
Hello,

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

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

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

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Yours, Keegan Peterzell Community Liaison, Wikimedia Foundation 03:12, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Renamed
 This account has been renamed as part of single-user login finalisation. If you own this account you can |log in using your previous username and password for more information. If you do not like this account's new name, you can choose your own using this form after logging in: . -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:57, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

title: User talk:Treanna~enwiki


text:
Frank McGee (journalist)

Frank McGee (September 12, 1921 – April 17, 1974) was an American television journalist, best known for his work with NBC from the late 1950s into the early 1970s.

Early life and education
McGee was born in Monroe, Louisiana, and raised in Norman, Oklahoma. His father was an oil field worker.

In 1940, he joined the Oklahoma National Guard, and he served in the U.S. Army in World War II. After World War II, he attended the University of California and the University of Oklahoma.

Career
McGee began his broadcast news career at KGFF in Shawnee, Oklahoma, in 1946 then moved to WKY-TV, now KFOR-TV, in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, under the stage name Mack Rogers. In 1955, the owners of WKY purchased WSFA-TV in Montgomery, Alabama, and sent McGee there as news director. WSFA was an affiliate of NBC. As the civil rights movement gained national coverage, McGee's work came to the notice of NBC, which offered him a position with the network, based in New York City. He went on to become "one of television's most prominent newsmen".

McGee was a floor correspondent for the national conventions of both political parties in 1960, 1964, and 1968, one member of the so-called "Four Horsemen" that included NBC newsmen John Chancellor, Edwin Newman, and Sander Vanocur. In 1960, he moderated the second debate between presidential candidates John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon on October 7 in Washington, D.C. At that time, the debates were considered by the news media to have swung the election in favor of Kennedy among voters who watched them on television.

McGee had a great talent for descriptive language, often giving viewers a vivid word picture of the day's events. When NBC News colleague Chet Huntley broke the news of the assassination of John F. Kennedy on November 22, 1963, McGee appeared in the studio with Huntley and Bill Ryan. Correspondent Robert MacNeil reported by telephone from Dallas, but the flash studio in New York was not equipped to put telephone calls on the air. This was eventually accomplished, but for the first hour, MacNeil spoke to McGee over the telephone, and McGee then repeated MacNeil's report to the viewing audience. During MacNeil's report that the president had died, his comments were finally heard over the air, but McGee, unaware of the change, repeated them anyway. The veteran journalist remained on duty for 45 hours with little rest, reporting without a script. McGee was also on the air in 1968 when word came of the assassination of Robert F. Kennedy following the California primary, and he calmly anchored the network's breaking news coverage.

In the early 1960s, he also served as a news reporter and host (referred to as "communicators") on the NBC Radio weekend show Monitor. He is most noted for his interview on that program with Martin Luther King Jr. and for asking him how he felt about being targeted for assassination. King calmly told McGee he had given serious thought of the possibility. McGee also was a featured anchor during NBC's coverage of the early U.S. crewed space flights.

In 1967, McGee lived with members of the 101st Airborne Division in Vietnam for almost a month to report for Same Mud, Same Blood, a documentary about black soldiers in Vietnam. McGee was perhaps best known in the middle and late 1960s for hosting The Frank McGee Report, seen early Saturday and Sunday evenings. The half-hour program generally gave more attention to one or more topics than a regular newscast, sometimes employing a full documentary format. In 1969, NBC began a traditional Saturday evening newscast, and in 1970, a Sunday version, both of which replaced The Report. McGee, however, often anchored those weekend newscasts. For several months in 1970, McGee also anchored the New York City WNBC-TV local 6 p.m. newscast.

In 1970, after Huntley's retirement ended The Huntley-Brinkley Report, McGee became one of a platoon of three anchors on the newly renamed NBC Nightly News, along with Chancellor and David Brinkley. When the network settled on Chancellor as permanent anchor the next year, McGee moved to The Today Show in 1971, replacing Hugh Downs, who had hosted the program since 1962. McGee moved Today into a more serious news presentation, insisting on opening and closing the show by himself while sharing other duties with co-host Barbara Walters. He also insisted that he, and not Walters, ask guests the first three questions if both of them were doing an interview, according to Walters.

Personal life
McGee married Nialta Sue Beaird on January 25, 1941. They had a son and a daughter. In late 1973, McGee left his wife for a production assistant, Mamye Smith, although it does not appear that he and his wife ever divorced.

Death
McGee last appeared on Today on April 11, 1974, six days before his death at the age of 52 from complications from multiple myeloma, a type of bone cancer. Following that last show, he checked himself into Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York City; his immune system was weakened by chemotherapy and radiation treatment, and he died of an overwhelming pneumonia. He was succeeded by another Oklahoma native, Jim Hartz, who co-hosted the show with Walters until 1976, when Tom Brokaw and Jane Pauley arrived.

McGee and his wife Sue (1921–2002) are buried at Saint Paul's Episcopal Churchyard in Woodville, Virginia.

Video

 * YouTube – Frank McGee signing off for NBC News, on November 22, 1963

title: Frank McGee (journalist)


text:
Varendra Research Museum

Varendra Museum (বরেন্দ্র জাদুঘর) is a museum, research centre, and popular visitor attraction at the heart of Rajshahi and maintained by Rajshahi University in Bangladesh. It is considered the oldest museum in Bangladesh. It was the first museum to be established in East Bengal in 1910. The museum started out as the collection for Varendra Anushandan Samiti (or Varendra Investigation Society) and got its current name in 1919. The Rajahs of Rajshahi and Natore, notably prince Sharat Kumar Ray, donated their personal collections to Varendra Museum. Varendra refers to an ancient Janapada roughly corresponding to modern northern Bangladesh.

History
Varendra (or Barind) was a region of Bengal, now in Bangladesh. It included the Pundravardhana or Pundra Kingdom region. According to Cunningham the boundary of Varendra was the Ganges and the Mahananda on the west, the Karatoya on the east, the Padma on the south, and the land between Koochbihar and the Terai on the north. The Varendra Brahmins originated from this region.

The settlement of Varendra, spoken as Janakabhu (fatherland), was one of the most flourishing territories of the ancient Indian sub-continent. Literary and epigraphic evidence show that a separate school of artisans earned wide reputation here at the reign of Pala dynasty and the streams of art making were uninterrupted until the Sena dynasty.

Some of the leading and enlightened citizens of Rajshahi felt the necessity and justification of establishing such an institution that would explore the precious past of this region. Hence, 'The Varendra Research Society' was established in 1910. The founder of the society, Kumar Sarat Kumar Ray, the scion of the Dighapatiya Royal family accompanied by Aksaya Kumar Maitreya, a leading lawyer and renowned historian; Ramaprasad Chanda, a reputed scholar in history, art and archaeology; and others explored archaeological and historical artefacts excavated in villages of Rajshahi.

The conviction grew in Kumar's mind if a centre of archaeological research was to be established at Rajshahi, the finds should be preserved there as the nucleus of a local museum. Accordingly, to collect, preserve, study and research the history and culture of ancient and medieval Bangal in general, and of Varendra region in particular, three worthy sons of the soil mentioned above took the effort to establish a museum.

The Varendra Research Society and Museum was set up at Rajshahi in 1910. The role of the society concerning the museum was that of proprietor and caretaker. However, this was formally inaugurated on 27 September 1910 and was registered in 1914 in accordance with the Indian Society Act, 1860.

Varendra Museum was the first museum to be established in erstwhile East Bengal in 1910. It started as the collection for Varendra Anushandhan Samiti or Varendra Investigation Society and got its current name in 1919. The Rajahs of Rajshahi and Natore (notably Prince Sharat Kumar Ray) donated their personal collections to Varendra Museum. Varendra refers to an ancient Janapada roughly corresponding to modern northern Bangladesh.

Excavation at Sompur Bihara was started by the society along with the University of Calcutta in 1923. In 1964, the museum became a part of Rajshahi University.

Collection

 * Gallery One has collections from the Indus Valley civilization, and some of its 265 items from Sompur. It also contains old Sanskrit, Arabic and Persian scripts.
 * Gallery Two has Buddhist and Hindu stone sculptures and modern wood sculptures.
 * Galleries Three and Four display stone sculptures of Hindu gods and goddesses.
 * Gallery Five offers mostly Buddhist sculpture.
 * Gallery Six shows Arabic, Persian, Sanskrit and old Bengali stone inscriptions and sculptured stones of the Muslim period.
 * A gallery has been added displaying the indigenous and tribal culture of Rajshahi region.

Site surroundings
In the existing site, three main structures were found. The front part is the Varendra Research Museum and the structural system is load-bearing brick wall. The linear rectangular building has two major functions: Administration and the Library. There is a Residential Block for officers and staff with a limited number of curators and the director. These structures have been constructed with brick. There is a garden in front of the director's residence with large old trees scattered among the entire site.

Services: Gas, Water, Electricity is available with Internet, Postal, Cable and Phone Services.

Surrounding built form: North: Hatem Kha boro mosque. South: Chest disease hospital Jadhughor mor, Choto kutir, Boro kutir and Padma river East: Rajshahi Govt. Hospital, Shaheb bazar road and Rajshahi Railway Station West: Residential zone, shops.

Museum Extension
Varenda Research Museum was built in 1910 with the support of Maharaja of Dighapatia. The museum has historical significance and is also a heritage site of Bangladesh. The century-old museum demands restoration and the existing gallery space is not adequate to preserve and display all the artefacts. Also the Archaeological sites were found recently and the artefacts are increasing day by day. The restoration program of existing museum has already begun. With the rise in number of artefacts in its inventory throughout the recent years and its added functional demand, the extension of this project has become inevitable to protect the old museum and to preserve the artefacts that has helped us learn more about our very own past.

title: Varendra Research Museum


text:
Talk:Saturn Girl

Titan Girl
I corrected the error that Saturn Girl is from Saturn, in fact she is from Titan, Saturn's moon -Luornuviolet

Pics
This article needs pictures. Most of the other Legion characters have them, and she's one of the founders. Redxiv 04:55, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Consistency
It would be nice if someone could settle on a name for the third Legion continuity and make it consistent throughout all the Legion related pages. I was just browsing through a bunch of character pages and I've seen it referred to as "Threeboot", "2005 Reboot", and "2005 Reimagining". Haven't seen this one yet, but "Post-Infinite Crisis" would probably work to describe the reboot. Or something else, whatever floats your boat :). Dmwc 20:31, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Golden Age inspiration theory
The Golden Age inspiration for her (the "Saturnic girls" who invade Earth in Wonder Woman #10 and #22, one of whom forms Wonder Woman's villainous opponent league Villainy Incorporated) is put up front not because it's important or authoritative but because it's first in time - the 1940s. Putting that first in time also helps highlight the character's fictional status and separate talk about the creator's intent or inspiration from the in-universe commentary, which generally avoids that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Correctocratic (talk • contribs) 20:05, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

 * It does seem confusing and unhelpful to cut this section entirely, considering it both has scholasic authority among literary analysts of the character, and readers are refered here by several higher importance articles, such as Wonder Woman's creator and a score of articles more obviously related. Perhapse some fan knowledgeable concerning the character's history could write a section that actually cites said authority, to be placed in the article in it's own section, with brief mention in the preface (which wouldn't need citation, if it was provided in the appropate section, as per Wikipedia standards).
 * Wildly pruning article content of the information that people come to it seeking is counterproductive and counter indicated; so much more helpful to simply mark articles that need citation, as needing citation and to call for debates among those knowledgable concerning the subject if one questions the relevance of a section. Saturn Girl is probably both unquestionaably notable enough to warrant mention of popular scholarly theories concerning her inspiration and the most appropriate article to host discussions regarding inspiration and origin of the tropes she exemplifies.

71.235.31.212 (talk) 02:13, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Unnecessary tagging
I just removed about 75 unecessary tags from the article. Some sentences had three tags in them. The article was impossible to read. Lets keep the tagging to a minimum. Unless there is reason to think that a fact may be disputed, there is no reason to tag it. Too many tags makes the article impossible to read. Thank you and be well --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:04, 27 November 2012 (UTC)

title: Talk:Saturn Girl


text:
Broseley

Broseley is a market town in Shropshire, England, with a population of 4,929 at the 2011 Census and an estimate of 5,022 in 2019. The River Severn flows to its north and east. The first iron bridge in the world was built in 1779 across the Severn, linking Broseley with Coalbrookdale and Madeley. This contributed to the early industrial development in the Ironbridge Gorge, which is now part of a World Heritage Site.

History
There was a settlement existing in 1086, listed as Bosle in the Domesday Book of that year, when it lay in the Hundred of Alnodestreu. That jurisdiction was dismembered in the time of King Henry I, when Broseley and Willey were reassigned to the Munslow Hundred. Finally they were transferred to the Liberty of Wenlock on its creation in the time of King Richard I. The place name appears as Burewardeslega in 1177, and in similar variants thereafter, indicating that it had anciently been Burgheard's (or Burgweard's) clearing, or grove. In Broseley's manorial history, the medieval family of de Burwardesley was considered by the historian R.W. Eyton to have been a cadet branch of the family of Fulk I FitzWarin of Whittington, Shropshire and Alveston, Gloucestershire.

The town lies on the south bank of the Ironbridge Gorge and so shares much of its history with its better known, more recent neighbour, Ironbridge.

In 1600, the town of Broseley consisted of only 27 houses and was part of the Shirlett Royal Forest. The area was known for mining; some of the stone used to build Buildwas Abbey was taken from Broseley and there is evidence that wooden wagonways existed there in 1605, giving Broseley a serious claim to the oldest railways in Britain. The wagonways were almost certainly constructed for the transport of coal and clay and it was these resources that led to the huge expansion of the town during the Industrial Revolution.

Many of the developments celebrated by the Ironbridge Gorge Museum Trust's collection of preserved industrial heritage sites either started in Broseley or were connected with it. Broseley was a centre for iron-making, pottery and clay pipes; the earliest recorded pipe-maker was working there in 1590. The Broseley Pipeworks is one of the trust's ten museums, another being the Jackfield Tile Museum in Jackfield, just north-east of the town.

John Wilkinson constructed the world's first iron boat whilst living in the town. The plans for the Iron Bridge were drawn up in Broseley. Abraham Darby I, who developed the process of smelting iron using coking coal, is buried there.

The area suffered economic decline in the latter half of the 19th century, as industries moved elsewhere. This left a legacy of uncapped mine shafts, derelict buildings, abandoned quarries, spoil heaps and pit mounds.

In the last thirty years of the 20th century Broseley underwent a modern revival, with the development of Telford across the River Severn. New estates were built to the east of Broseley centre, whilst many older properties were developed or renovated. However, the town still has fewer inhabitants than it did 200 years ago, when population figures were over 5,000.

Environment
Broseley borders the Ironbridge Gorge World Heritage Site and evidence of involvement in the Industrial Revolution can be seen throughout the town, in the railways, mines, ironworks, brickworks, kilns, houses and fine buildings associated with the area's industrial past.

The jitties (lanes and paths) of Broseley Wood on the western boundary of Broseley are the remains of cottage settlements built for miners. At the other end of the social spectrum the town has many examples of Ironmaster houses, dating from the late 18th and early 19th centuries.

There are two wildlife areas maintained by local groups. The Hay Cop between Dark Lane and Ironbridge Road was the site of the town's water supply and was developed as a nature reserve in 2007. Penns Meadow on the border between Broseley and Benthall is a five-acre ancient meadow and is also being managed to protect and develop wildlife diversity. Both projects have been supported by the Broseley/Barrow Local Joint Committee, a Shropshire Council initiative to encourage devolution of decision-making to local people.

Culture
Broseley's amateur dramatics society, BroADS, puts on several plays a year. Every month, the Birchmeadow Centre is used by Broseley Cinema, to show well-rated films on its own large screen. There is a thriving arts and crafts community that forms a group known as the Broseley Artists.

Since 2009, the Birchmeadow Centre, owned by the Town Council, has hosted live music events, presenting an array of UK and foreign artists, mainly in the folk, blues and ballad genres. They have included such figures as Bill Caddick, Phil Beer, Brooks Williams, Tom Hingley and Steve Knightley. Across the town's pubs and clubs, too, the live music scene is slowly expanding.

Since 2015 residents have held an annual music festival in the town's High Street, usually over the second weekend in June. It features local bands and is supported solely by fundraising events held throughout the year.

The town has a number of historic pubs and eating places, most of them near the town centre. It also has a "Broadplace" facility, a small centre for community usage of laptop computers, help and guidance and free Internet access. Broseley Library, which also has computer access, is located to the south of the town centre, next door to the health centre.

Legacy
The type of bricks and tiles once produced in abundance in Broseley have become synonymous with any product of their type, regardless of where they were made. Broseley bricks are notable for their brown and red mottled nature, a sign of their cheap production, and Broseley tiles are of a strawberry red to light brown hue.

The pipeworks in Broseley were responsible for producing millions of clay pipes that were shipped worldwide. These are invaluable for dating archaeological sites, as they survive without decay and bear a maker's stamp that reveals their date of origin.

Works pioneered here and across the Ironbridge Gorge set the stage for mass production of iron products in the later Industrial Revolution that drove the expansion of the British Empire. This is due in part to the work of John Wilkinson and his construction of precision-engineered steam engines and weaponry.

Local government
Broseley is a civil parish with the status of a town and as such has a town council chaired by a town mayor. It is in the part of Shropshire administered by Shropshire Council, a unitary authority; prior to 2009 it formed part of the district of Bridgnorth.

Education
There are two primary schools: Broseley Church of England or Dark Lane School and John Wilkinson School, named after a noted ironmaster who lived nearby. For secondary education, most pupils travel to William Brookes School in Much Wenlock or to Abraham Darby Academy in Madeley and elsewhere.

Media
Local news and television programmes are provided by BBC West Midlands and ITV Central. Television signals are received from the nearby Wrekin TV transmitter. Local radio stations are BBC Radio Shropshire, Free Radio Black Country & Shropshire, Capital North West & Wales and Signal 107. The Shropshire Star is the town's local weekly newspaper.

Notable people
In birth order:
 * Thomas Rutter, (1654 or 1660-1730), Iron Master, Pennsylvania, USA
 * Abraham Darby I (1678–1717), industrialist and innovator, was buried here.
 * John Guest (1722–1785 or 1787) was a brewer, farmer and coal merchant here.
 * Peter Onions (1724–1798), ironmaster and inventor of an early puddling process to refine pig iron into wrought iron, was born here.
 * John Wilkinson (1728–1808) lived here at house called 'The Lawns', and devised a method of boring cannon of increased accuracy.
 * Jabez Carter Hornblower (1744–1814), pioneer of steam power, was born here.
 * William Reynolds (1758–1803), ironmaster and scientist, died in Broseley.
 * John Russell (1788–1873), industrialist and colliery owner in South Wales, was born here.
 * George Pearce Baldwin (1789–1840), iron founder at Stourport-on-Severn and grandfather of Stanley Baldwin, was born here.
 * John Pritchard (1797–1891), lawyer, banker and Conservative MP for Bridgnorth, was born here.
 * Charles Henry Hartshorne (1802–1865) an English cleric and antiquary, was born here.
 * Favell Lee Mortimer (1802–1878), religious and educational writer, lived at Broseley Hall before settling with her husband in Norfolk.
 * Osborne Gordon (1813–1883), Oxford college tutor and Church of England clergyman, was born here.
 * Rowland Hunt (1858–1943), Conservative MP for Ludlow, died at Lindley Green, Broseley.
 * Sir Thomas Salter Pyne CSI (1860–1921), an engineer based in Afghanistan, was born here.
 * William Whitehead Watts (1860–1947), geologist, was born here.
 * Hermione Baddeley (1906–1986), film and stage actress, was born here.
 * Leroy Watson (born 1966), archer and member of the 1988 Olympic bronze medallist team, was born here.
 * Shane Embury (born 1967), bass player in the grindcore band Napalm Death, was born here.
 * Sam Aiston (born 1976), former professional footballer, was head teacher at Broseley Church of England School in 2022.
 * Ben Simons (born 1986), Olympic bobsleigher, was born here.

Namesake
The town's name passed to Broseley, Missouri, US, founded in 1915 by William N. Barron and named in honour of his English wife's home town.

title: Broseley


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baka (Babylonian slave)

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. -- AllyUnion (talk) 12:47, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Baka (Babylonian slave)
Unreferenced and badly written, this appears to be a hoax. I haven't checked every possible reference work, but I have looked for it in some general handbooks on ancient Mesopotamia, and if it is so obscure that it is not mentioned there, anyone knowing about it wouldn't make the silly mistakes of chronology and geography present in this article ("from city Babylon 1000 years ago", "the neighboring India"). / up land 11:27, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * Delete. Joke by anon with no other contributions, added to the baka article and split off to its own article in good faith when this was made a disambiguation. It seems to be based on a folk etymology of the word honeymoon. No useful content. Andrewa 12:19, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Josh Cherry 15:47, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, amounts to a drinking joke, yawn, article provides no evidence of encyclopedic content. Wyss 21:36, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, article as it stands is un-encyclopaedic, possible hoax. Megan1967 03:00, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The person who created this article is baka. -- AllyUnion (talk) 05:32, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

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


text:
Cryptotis

The genus Cryptotis is a group of relatively small shrews with short ears, which are usually not visible, and short tails, commonly called small-eared shrews. They have 30 teeth and are members of the red-toothed shrew subfamily. Since 1992, Neal Woodman (in cooperation with Robert Timm) at the United States National Museum has been in the process of revising the genus. To date, this has resulted in an increase in the number of species from 12 to 30.

Members of the genus are found mainly in Central America; the North American least shrew, C. parva, is the only species found north of Mexico. The genus occurs as far south as northern Peru and as far east as western Venezuela in South America. It is the only soricomorph genus found south of Guatemala. The limited diversity and restricted northern distribution of shrews in South America implies that the group entered the continent relatively recently from Central America, where they are more diverse, presumably as part of the Great American Interchange. However, shrews have no fossil record in South America that would allow their arrival to be dated.

List of species

 * Genus Cryptotis
 * C. mexicana group
 * Mexican small-eared shrew (Cryptotis mexicana)
 * Nelson's small-eared shrew (Cryptotis nelsoni)
 * Grizzled small-eared shrew (Cryptotis obscura)
 * Phillips's small-eared shrew (Cryptotis phillipsii)
 * C. goldmani group
 * Central Mexican broad-clawed shrew (Cryptotis alticola)
 * Goldman's broad-clawed shrew (Cryptotis goldmani)
 * Goodwin's broad-clawed shrew (Cryptotis goodwini)
 * Guatemalan broad-clawed shrew (Cryptotis griseoventris)
 * Cryptotis lacertosus
 * Cryptotis mam
 * Yalijux shrew (Cryptotis oreoryctes)
 * Oaxacan broad-clawed shrew (Cryptotis peregrina)
 * C. nigrescens group
 * Eastern Cordillera small-footed shrew (Cryptotis brachyonyx)
 * Colombian small-eared shrew (Cryptotis colombiana)
 * Honduran small-eared shrew (Cryptotis hondurensis)
 * Yucatan small-eared shrew (Cryptotis mayensis)
 * Darién small-eared shrew (Cryptotis mera)
 * Merriam's small-eared shrew (Cryptotis merriami)
 * Blackish small-eared shrew (Cryptotis nigrescens)
 * C. thomasi group
 * Southern Colombian small-eared shrew (Cryptotis andinus)
 * Cryptotis aroensis
 * Ecuadorean small-eared shrew (Cryptotis equatoris)
 * Rainer's small-eared shrew (Cryptotis huttereri)
 * Medellín small-eared shrew (Cryptotis medellinia)
 * Merida small-eared shrew (Cryptotis meridensis)
 * Wandering small-eared shrew (Cryptotis montivaga)
 * Peruvian small-eared shrew (Cryptotis peruviensis)
 * Scaly-footed small-eared shrew (Cryptotis squamipes)
 * Tamá small-eared shrew (Cryptotis tamensis)
 * Thomas's small-eared shrew (Cryptotis thomasi)
 * C. parva group
 * Central American least shrew (Cryptotis orophila)
 * North American least shrew (Cryptotis parva)
 * Tropical small-eared shrew (Cryptotis tropicalis)
 * ungrouped/relict
 * Enders's small-eared shrew (Cryptotis endersi)
 * Talamancan small-eared shrew (Cryptotis gracilis)
 * Big Mexican small-eared shrew (Cryptotis magna)

title: Cryptotis


text: User talk:213.100.53.30

title: User talk:213.100.53.30


text:
Lewis Wade Jones

Lewis Wade Jones (March 13, 1910 – September 1979) was a sociologist and teacher.

He was born in Cuero, Texas, the son of Wade E. and Lucynthia McDade Jones. A member of the Omega Psi Phi fraternity, he received his AB degree from Fisk University in 1931, and followed it with postgraduate study as a Social Science Research Council Fellow at the University of Chicago in 1931–1932.

Jones returned to Fisk, where he continued to work closely with Charles S. Johnson, as a research assistant, supervisor of field studies, and instructor in the Department of Social Sciences from 1932 to 1942. In 1949 the two co-wrote A Statistical Analysis of Southern Counties; Shifts in the Negro Population of Alabama.

Jones was a Julius Rosenwald Foundation Fund Fellow at Columbia University, where he was awarded an MA degree in 1939 with the thesis "Occupational Stratification Among Rural and Small Town Negroes before the Civil War and Today." He earned his PhD in 1955.

Before the recording project at Fort Valley, where he was a member of the summer faculty, Jones, along with Johnson and John Wesley Work III collaborated with the Archive of American Folk Song on the Library of Congress/Fisk University Mississippi Delta Collection (AFC 1941/002). This project was a two-year joint field study conducted by the Library of Congress and Fisk University during the summers of 1941 and 1942. The goal of the partnership was to carry out an intensive field study documenting the folk culture of a specific community of African Americans in the Mississippi Delta region. The rapidly urbanizing commercial area of Coahoma County, Mississippi, with its county seat in Clarksdale, became the geographical focus of the study.

Almost immediately following Jones's March 1943 recordings at Fort Valley, he served for three years in the United States Army, and became a reports analyst for the domestic branch of the Bureau of Special Services, Office of War Information. He was associate editor of the Negro Yearbook in 1952 and contributed articles to journals.

Jones spent much of the remainder of his career at Tuskegee Institute School of Education, as assistant professor of sociology, director of research for the Rural Life Council, research coordinator, and professor. He was a consultant to a variety of organizations, including the Opportunities Industrialization Centers, the Bureau of Social Science Research, and the U.S. Department of Labor.

On August 13, 1966, he married Queen E. Shootes, a home economist.

At the time of his death, Lewis Jones was a professor of sociology and director of the Tuskegee Institute Rural Development Center.

title: Lewis Wade Jones


text:
Hunter Army Airfield

Hunter Army Airfield, located in Savannah, Georgia, United States, is a military airfield and subordinate installation to Fort Stewart located in Hinesville, Georgia.

Hunter features a runway that is 11,375 feet (3,468 m) long and an aircraft parking area that is more than 350 acres (1.4 km2). The runway and apron, combined with the 72,000 sq ft (6,689 m2) Arrival/Departure Airfield Control Group (A/DACG) Facility and nearby railhead, allow the 3rd Infantry Division from nearby Fort Stewart to efficiently deploy soldiers and cargo worldwide. NASA identified Hunter as an alternate landing site for the Space Shuttle orbiters.

Tenants
Currently, Hunter Army Airfield has approximately 5,500 soldiers, airmen, coast guardsmen and Marines on station. It is home of the aviation units of the 3rd Infantry Division (Mechanized) headquartered at Fort Stewart. There are also a number of non-divisional units assigned to Hunter as well.
 * U.S. Army
 * US_Army_1st_Ranger_BN_CSIB.png1_Bn_75_Ranger_Regiment_Beret_Flash.svg75th_Ranger_Regiment_Distinctive_Unit_Insignia.svg Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment (United States)
 * U.S._Army_Special_Operations_Aviation_Command_CSIB.pngUS_Army_3rd_BN-160th_SOAR.svg160th_SOAR_emblem.svg Battalion, 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (United States)
 * 3rd_Infantry_Division_CSIB.png 3rd Infantry Division
 * Combat Aviation Brigade (CAB) "Falcon"
 * 3 Avn Rgt DUI.png CAB's HHC "Talons"
 * 3 Avn Rgt DUI.png 2nd Battalion (General Support), 3rd Aviation Regiment (UH-60A/UH-60L/CH-47) "Knighthawk"
 * 3 Avn Rgt DUI.png 4th Battalion (Assault), 3rd Aviation Regiment (UH-60M) "Brawler"
 * 17thCavRegtDUI.gif 3rd Squadron, 17th Cavalry Regiment (AH-64D/AH-64DW) "Lighthorse"
 * US 603rd ASB insignia.png 603rd Aviation Support Battalion (ASB) "Work Horse"
 * US_Army_224th_MI_Bn-DUI.png 224th Military Intelligence Battalion (Aerial Exploitation)
 * 260th Quartermaster Battalion
 * 3rd MP Group (CID), United States Army Criminal Investigation Command
 * 308_MI_Bn_DUI.png Savannah Field Office (Counterintelligence), 308th Military Intelligence Battalion
 * U.S. Air Force
 * 18CWS PATCH.jpgting Location-A, Detachment 3, 18th Weather Squadron (USAF)
 * 15th_Air_Support_Operations_Squadron.PNG Air Support Operations Squadron (USAF)
 * 117th_Air_Control.jpg Air Control Squadron (USAF / Georgia Air National Guard)
 * U.S. Marine Corps
 * Landing Support Company, Combat Logistics Regiment 45 USMC

Coast Guard Air Station Savannah
Coast Guard Air Station Savannah is also located on Hunter Army Airfield. Equipped with MH-65 Dolphin helicopters, Air Station Savannah provides the Savannah area, Coastal Georgia and South Carolina with round-the-clock search and rescue coverage of the area, to include both inland waters and off shore areas. They also provide security to the shores and borders with specialized Coast Guard sniper units.

Origins
In 1929, the General Aviation Committee of the Savannah City Council recommended that the 730 acre (3 km2) Belmont Tract, belonging to J. C. Lewis, be accepted by the Council as the future site of the Savannah Municipal Airport. The cost of the land was $35,000. By September 1929, the runway and several buildings were ready and the city officially opened the new facility, known as Savannah Municipal Airport.

The airport became a part of Eastern Air Transport Incorporated air route on 2 December 1931, when Ida Hoynes, daughter of the Mayor, Thomas M. Hoynes, broke a bottle of Savannah River water on a propeller blade of an 18-passenger Curtiss Condor II during the christening ceremony.

The airport was named Hunter Municipal Airfield during Savannah Aviation Week in May 1940, in honor of Lieutenant Colonel (Lt. Col.) Frank O'Driscoll Hunter, a native of Savannah and a World War I flying ace. Lt. Col. Hunter was not scheduled to appear in Savannah that week; However, he paid a surprise visit to the field on the first day of Aviation Week while en route to France to serve as a United States Military Air Attaché.

Savannah Army Air Base
On 30 August 1940, the United States Army Air Corps received approval to build a base at Hunter Municipal Airfield. Official dedication of the airfield as Savannah Army Air Base took place 19 February 1941. The Army Air Corps assigned Savannah AAB initially to the Southeast Air District (later Third Air Force), III Air Support Command.

The 27th Bombardment Group, equipped with Douglas B-18 Bolo medium bombers was the first assigned unit to the new airfield. The 27th was reassigned to the field from Barksdale Field, Louisiana. The group consisted of the 15th, 16th and 17th Bombardment Squadrons. In 1941, the group was reequipped with Douglas A-24 Banshee Dive Bombers, and on 21 October 1941 the group was ordered to the Philippine Islands in response to the growing crisis in the Pacific. The 27th returned to Hunter, without personnel or equipment on 4 May 1942 after being severely depleted in strength during the Battle of the Philippines (1942), and subsequent combat in the Dutch East Indies and New Guinea Campaigns (1942). The unit was reequipped with A-20 Havocs, remanned and retrained at Hunter. It was then deployed for combat with Twelfth Air Force in North Africa in July 1942.

During early 1942 after the Pearl Harbor Attack, Savannah AAB became a base for several Antisubmarine groups and squadrons of I Bomber Command and later Army Air Forces Antisubmarine Command with a mission to patrol the Atlantic coast, locate and attack German U-boats.

Throughout 1942, light bomber and dive bomber groups received combat training at Savannah AAB before being deployed to the combat zones overseas. These groups included the:
 * 85th Bombardment Group (Light), 9 June – 15 August 1942
 * 86th Bombardment Group (Light), 20 June – 7 August 1942
 * 311th Bombardment Group (Light), 4 July – 22 October 1942
 * 339th Bombardment Group (Dive), 10 August 1942 – 6 February 1943

With the U-boat mission taken over by the Navy after mid-1943, Savannah AAB became a training base for Martin B-26 Marauder medium bomber crews. Marauder groups which received final combat training were:

 * 344th Bombardment Group (Medium), 19 December 1943 – 26 January 1944
 * 397th Bombardment Group (Medium), 1 November 1943 – 13 March 1944

At the end of the war, Savannah AAB was used as a Separation Center for the discharge and furlough of service members returning from Europe. In June 1946, the airfield was returned to the City of Savannah.

From 1946 to 1949, many of its buildings were leased to industrial plants. Some of the buildings were used as apartment houses, and an orphanage was located in the former commanding officer's quarters. The University of Georgia established an extension campus on part of the old base, as well.

United States Air Force
On 1 March 1949, Chatham Air Force Base, located eight miles (13 km) northwest of Savannah, was reopened by the United States Air Force Strategic Air Command. The 2d Bombardment Group was reassigned from Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona to Chatham, with the B-50 Superfortress. The limited facilities at Chatham made the base unfit for permanent use. Plans were made to close the base and move the B-50s to more suitable facilities. Rather than see the Air Force move elsewhere, Savannah offered to exchange airfields with the federal government along with 3,500 acres (14 km2) of additional land around Hunter for future base expansions. This arrangement was agreed upon and on 29 September 1950, the 2d Bomb Group moved to the base, reopened as Hunter Air Force Base and Chatham was turned over to the City of Savannah. At the time, Hunter AFB became the only U.S. military installation named for a living American, Major General (Retired) Frank Hunter.

Strategic Air Command
Hunter AFB was assigned to the Strategic Air Command's (SAC) Second Air Force. Two major SAC medium bombardment wings were assigned to Hunter during the 1950s. Both came under the 38th Air Division which was also headquartered at Hunter.

 * 2nd Bombardment Wing, 22 September 1950 – 1 April 1963
 * The 2d Bomb Wing was the host unit at Hunter from the time the base reopened in 1950 until SAC left in 1963. It was initially equipped with B-50 Superfortress heavy bombers, being replaced by the B-47 Stratojet in 1953. From Hunter, the 2d Bomb Wing frequently deployed to SAC bases, primarily in the United Kingdom on REFLEX Deployments where it came under control of the 7th Air Division. The limited range of the B-47 made it critical to locate it close to bases near Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union in case of war. With the phaseout of the B-47 beginning in the early 1960s, the Wing moved to Barksdale AFB, Louisiana in 1963 where it was reequipped with B-52s and remains to this day.

 * 308th Bombardment Wing, 17 April 1952 – 15 July 1959
 * The 308th Bomb Wing was a second B-47 Wing assigned to Hunter. The 308th deployed primarily to SAC bases in Morocco on REFLEX Deployments where it came under the control of the 5th Air Division. The closing of USAF bases in Morocco in 1959 led to the wing being reassigned to Plattsburgh AFB, New York as a KC-97 Stratofreighter wing, and later as a Titan II Strategic Missile Wing at Little Rock AFB, Arkansas in 1962.

On 11 March 1958, a B-47E which departed Hunter on a simulated combat mission accidentally dropped a Mark 6 fission bomb minus its nuclear component near Florence, South Carolina. A home was destroyed and several people were injured. The aircraft was taking part in Operation Snow Flurry at the time of the incident.

Military Air Transport Service
The phaseout of SAC Medium Bomber (B-47 Wings) in the early 1960s resulted in SAC leaving Hunter in 1963. The base was reassigned to the Military Air Transport Service (MATS). The MATS Eastern Transport Air Force 63d Troop Carrier Wing, Heavy was assigned to Hunter from Donaldson AFB, South Carolina which was closing. From Hunter, the 63d flew the C-124 Globemaster II intercontinental cargo aircraft to points around the world.

Air Defense Command
Beginning in 1955 Air Defense Command designated Hunter AFB as part of a planned deployment of forty-four Phase I Mobile Radar stations. It was one of twenty-nine stations which were sited around the perimeter of the country to support the permanent ADC network of seventy-five stations. The ADC radar site at Hunter was given designation M-112.

On 1 March 1955 the 702d Aircraft Control and Warning Squadron began operating AN/MPS-7, AN/TPS-10D, and AN/MPS-14 radars at Hunter, and initially the station functioned as a Ground-Control Intercept (GCI) and warning station. As a GCI station, the squadron's role was to guide interceptor aircraft toward unidentified intruders picked up on the unit's radar scopes. From 1956 to 1958, an AN/GPS-3 also saw service. By 1959 only AN/FPS-20A and AN/MPS-14 sets were operating. Circa 1961 Hunter received an AN/FPS-26 height-finder radar.

During late 1961 Hunter AFB joined the Semi Automatic Ground Environment (SAGE) system, feeding data to DC-09 at Gunter AFB, Alabama. After joining, the squadron was re-designated as the 702d Radar Squadron (SAGE) on 1 February 1962. The radar squadron provided information 24/7 the SAGE Direction Center where it was analyzed to determine range, direction altitude speed and whether or not aircraft were friendly or hostile. Later that year, the AN/FPS-20A was upgraded to become an AN/FPS-67, and on 31 July 1963, the site was redesignated as NORAD ID Z-112. The AN/FPS-67 was upgraded to an AN/FPS-67B in 1966, and the AN/MPS-14 was removed in 1968.

In addition to the main facility, Air Defense Command at Hunter operated three unmanned AN/FPS-18 Gap Filler sites:
 * MCAS Parris Island, SC (M-112A): 32.32833°N, -80.70583°W
 * Alma, GA (M-112C): 31.60833°N, -82.54667°W
 * Jeffersonville, GA (M-112E): 32.5625°N, -83.39222°W

When Hunter AFB was transferred to the US Army in 1967 becoming Hunter Army Airfield, the radar site was renamed Savannah Air Force Station (AFS). The 702nd Radar Squadron continued routine operations for many years, and, the equipment at the station was upgraded or modified to improve the efficiency and accuracy of the information gathered by the radars.

The station was deactivated on 5 June 1979.

United States Army Airfield
In 1964, the Department of Defense announced that the base would be closed, along with 94 other military installations. The Air Force was given a period of three years to phase out operations.

In December 1966, at the height of the Vietnam War, the Department of the Army announced that the Secretary of Defense had approved an increase in the number of Army helicopter pilots to be trained. At the time, the United States Army Aviation School at Fort Rucker, Alabama was operating at capacity and additional facilities were needed. Hunter Air Force Base was turned over to the Army and operated in conjunction with Fort Stewart, located 45 mi southwest of Hunter.

Brigadier General Frank Meszar, Commanding General of Fort Stewart, formally accepted the base from Colonel James A. Evans Jr., Commander of Hunter AFB, in a formal change of command and service ceremony on 1 April 1967, at which point the facility was renamed Hunter Army Air Field (Hunter AAF). The headquarters of the Army Aviation School Element moved to Hunter from Fort Stewart, where it had been established during the summer of 1966. The element's mission was to coordinate the training of fixed-wing and rotary-wing aviators as an extension of the Army's training programs at Fort Rucker and Fort Wolters, Texas.

On 28 July 1967, the combined facilities of Fort Stewart and Hunter Army Airfield were re-designated the United States Army Flight Training Center. Included was the Attack Helicopter Training Department ("Cobra Hall"), the Army's first attack helicopter school whose purpose was to train pilots in the AH-1G Cobra, the world's first purpose-built attack helicopter. The first class of Republic of Vietnam Air Force students began Advanced helicopter training at Hunter on 13 March 1969. As the number of Vietnamese flight students increased, flight training for U.S. Army officers and warrant officers at Hunter was gradually phased out, ending on 16 June 1970.

In 1973, Hunter AAF was deactivated, but it was later reopened in 1975, serving as a support facility for the 24th Infantry Division (Mechanized), at Fort Stewart. The 24th Infantry Division, or Victory Division, became part of the nation's Rapid Deployment Force on 1 October 1980. The Victory Division's ability to deploy on short notice was enhanced by its large runway (the Army's longest runway east of the Mississippi River), Savannah's deep-water port facility and excellent rail and road networks.

Military jet and turboprop aircraft based at Moody AFB, Robins AFB, Dobbins ARB and Savannah ANGB in Georgia; NAS Jacksonville and Jacksonville ANGB in Florida; and MCAS Beaufort, Charleston AFB and Shaw AFB in South Carolina also continue to make regular use of Hunter AAF's long runway for local training, to include practice approaches and landings.

title: Hunter Army Airfield


text:
Category:Basque musicians

You can help: Some of the articles in this category may belong in the sub-category, Category:Basque classical musicians.

title: Category:Basque musicians