text:
Talk:Rapid application development

Isn't there also an Interface Builder for Mac OS X?

Rapid application
'''

== Advantages and disadvantages == == =='''

jh

 * Rapid Application Development has two primary advantages: increased speed of development and increased quality. The speed increases are due to the use of CASE tools, the goal of which is to capture requirements and turn them into usable code as quickly as possible. Quality, as defined by RAD, is both the degree to which a delivered application meets the needs of users as well as the degree to which a delivered system has low maintenance costs. RAD increases quality {| class="wikitable"

through the involvement of the user in the analylsis and design stages
 * }.

 * RAD has two primary disadvantages: reduced Scalability, and reduced features. Reduced scalability occurs because a RAD developed application starts as a prototype and evolves into a finished application. Reduced features occur due to time boxing, where features are pushed to later versions in order to finish a release in a short amount of time.

Compared to what ? To the waterfall model ? Is there anything that woueld suggest the waterfall is any more scalable or results in programs that have more features ? Taw 21:09, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

 * Compared to the Waterfall model but more directly to traditional non-agile methodologies like SSADM (Structured Software Analysis and Design Model). As far as I understand, RAD (being a methodology) isn't really comparable to the Waterfall model (which is more of a software development life-cycle), the article should probably be changed to reflect this. Although I'm not totally sure so I'll leave the change for someone who has finished their Computer Science Degree :)

 * The waterfall model / SSADM is more scalable because 1) RAD isn't suited for very small projects, but mainly 2) It requires an unnecessary large amount of overhead for extremely large projects where the requirements are well defined with little ambiguity. RAD also can theoretically mean a product with less features 1) because the increase in managerial overhead may mean less time to spend implementing new features and 2) because features are more likely to be dropped from RAD due to it's emphasis on time boxing and avoiding project duration over-runs (so it's arguable the additional features would only be implemented in SSADM because the project is forced to run over-time to implement those features wheras in RAD, the customer would have the ability to drop the features to avoid the time over-run). Canderra 04:49, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

An what about "Pro: Decreased end-user functionality" ? I'd say that's a definate CON .. not a pro —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.178.96.70 (talk) 06:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand this Con. _What data?
 * 1) The data needed should already exist  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.128.81.206 (talk) 15:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

RAD is scalable and reduced features...TRUE ANYMORE!
Modern RAD tools now has the richest features and the most scalable.

RicoWiki 01:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC) rap model is

Stub status
I think this article isn't really a stub anymore?

Jaapvstr 10:11, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't know, that's such a subjective thing... — Frecklefoot | Talk 15:23, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

 * Is subjective, but.... few would disagree that it is nolonger a stub now. Mathmo Talk 23:41, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

First language?
What was the first langauge to employ RAD techniques? Mathmo Talk 23:40, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

What the hell is it?
The more webpages I find talking about RAD, the more it sounds like a buzzword (just like Web 2.0). Here I see pros and cons, history, more on why it's useful... but not what it is. What, a programmer is supposed to buy a book to know "how to program using RAD"??

RAD is not a way of programming (it's not like OO or procedural). It's a way of making software. Before RAD, requirements were analysed, alternative designs were considered, a detailed specification was implemented, then tested then it usually went back to an earlier stage and worked its way back up towards a finished solution. Since RAD, the implementation (programming) begins earlier in small chunks (usually forms, but could be modules or libraries or components). A RAD tool like VB or Delphi allows you to create a screen with functionality quickly (hence "rapid"). Most screens don't really need a detailed specification and having an analyst write a spec for a programmer to type into the IDE is over-kill. RAD is a methodology (fancy word meaning "way") to create software quickly. It favours programmers who can analyse, design and implement at the same time (in the full knowledge that the initial version won't be perfect and won't be released). Rather than spending months writing a massive spec (that is hardly ever perfect anyway), just start coding and use your stumbling blocks as opportunities to re-examine your design, then recode. For example, using older methodologies a particular project might take 3 months to produce a spec, then 2 months of coding, 1 month of testing (only to find out it's not good enough) then it will go back to the specification for another month then coding for another month then more testing for another month (total of 9 months). With RAD, you could produce a basic spec in 1 month, code for about 2 months, discover that something isn't quite right yourself (you test your own code as you write it and others can review your work regularly), code for another month then pass it on to formal testing (by someone else) and let's say it comes back to you for another month of re-coding then another month of formal testing (project complete in 7 months and you didn't need the services of a glorified cut&paste specialist - that's the over-paid analyst who's lost their techncal skills because technology has moved on and they couldn't keep up). RAD saves time and money and requires programmers who are "software engineers" rather than specification translators and syntax experts! I hate working on specs that have been produced by people with lower technical aptitude, it's called the analysis phase but really it is just trying to stop me from doing my own analysis which I must do in my head while I'm programming anyway because the spec is never adequate (and if it was, I'd be just a typist).58.105.242.113 (talk) 04:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

 * You open up a number of interesting topics. Let's begin with a couple of definitions:
 * Developer
 * A professional who can analyse a problem and design a solution as well as programming software
 * Analyst
 * A professional who can communicate with senior stakeholders as well as technical colleagues, who can look at the underlying issues behind a problem and seek to address those with the business before tying up the precious developer resources

 * If you are working with analysts who are nothing more than glorified requirements secretaries, then I can understand your frustration, however a fully competent analyst will be able to do so much more, supporting and facilitating the work of the developer.

 * Secondly, RAD is on a continuum from the original structured waterfall approaches to the more recent iterative, extreme programming, and scrum approaches. RAD is not a silver bullet. If the developer does analysis in their head without proper consultation with the business, you may get quality software, but will it resolve what the business needs? This can result in gold-plating, a common risk in projects where developers work without oversight for long periods of time. Which brings me to ...

 * Lastly, these days, what business can afford to wait 7 months for the first working version of a system to be delivered? It's much more about releasing working software, frequently, in small increments (typically 4-6 weeks), working directly with the product owner and other delivery colleagues.

 * Postscript: Good analysts can come from a busines or a technical background, and make the decision consciously to work in this space. It's not second best if we cannot hack the code any more. I choose to earn my living primarily by working with business leaders to help them realise their objectives through effective strategies and use of systems. It's what I get a buzz from. I was an analyst/programmer (the original name for developers), which is where I earned my nickname (grey skinned boy) and from time-to-time, I still develop in .NET, PHP, ASP, etc. If I didn't value intrapersonal communication, business improvement, and running training courses so much, I would probably still be coding. Greyskinnedboy (talk) 01:05, 26 May 2009 (UTC)

Plenty of projects take 6 months, 12 months, 18 months... 4-6 weeks (what are you talking about - a modification to an existing system or just a website?). I used to work at a large bank where analysts went on business lunches to discuss "requirements" then a couple of months later they gave us (the programmers) a word document that didn't relieve me of having to do significant analysis myself. And then when I did it and the project went ahead and it was implemented with minimal fuss, those same analysts got together for a nice lunch to celebrate their cut-and-paste skills. Analysts are threatened by RAD, and business clients keep falling for the hype of IT-literate analysts with the gift-of-the-gab (plus exceptional Ctrl-C Ctrl-V skills) - who will ever forget what the analysts said would happen because of Y2K? That's OK, two can play that game, maybe even three. (evil laugh).58.105.242.113 (talk) 04:54, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

More Pro and Con commentary
On 5 February 2008 Gingerbits (talk) added this Pro:

 * End Users relate better to something tangible: as opposed to a written specification. Early visibility of even a mock up application can highlight differences between what End Users thought they wanted. or were going to get, and the reality being developed. Gingerbits (talk) 17:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

and these commentaries on the following Cons:

 * Reduced features occur due to time boxing when features are pushed to later versions in order to finish a release in a short amount of time
 * This is not always a Con (see 2. above). Time Boxing causes End Users to concentrate on what they need the most. Without this focus 'nice to have's' can creep into the solution and then are often never used. Gingerbits (talk) 17:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

 * The data needed should already exist.
 * This is not a prerequisite but does represent an issue. More problematic is complex data structures or high transaction volumes. In these both of these cases the database design needs to be fine tuned which means A. The prototype application has to be changed to work with the new schema and B. efficient database design takes time - negating some of the value of a RAD approach. Gingerbits (talk) 17:40, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Seeing as he signed the edits I've assumed they're opinion (even though I agree with them) and undone the edits in the article. Mark Hurd (talk) 08:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

The statement: "Agile methods produce very little written documentation and require a significant amount of post project documentation." seems to me controversial. The idea is surely to avoid unnecessary documentation, not to deliver a system which lacks documentation which is necessary, requiring post-project work. Dominic Cronin (talk) 09:20, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Methodology?
Is this really just only a methodology? It's a life cycle model... Todadot (talk • contribs) 15:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

"Relative effectiveness" table
These are views that I've seen advanced, but they're far from the only ones on certain of those types. Wouldn't this be solved better by prose than a seemingly-authoritative table that's referenced to nothing? Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:39, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

Criticisms: Programmers GUI driven?
It would be nice to see some references for these claims cited. In my experience, programmers are generally terrible with GUIs, or UIs in general. More commonly when my colleagues or I see a terrible UI, we always comment that a programmer probably designed it. And I say this as someone who can program.

Whether anyone agrees with this or not, it would still be nice to see some references in that section if people are going to make claims about phenomenons in programming. Rohaq (talk) 01:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

This article is simply and totally wrong!
For the very simple reason that RAD is just not what is said in this article.

There is in fact in the literature (since the late 80's at least) a prototype-based software process, where the prototype is meant to facilitate the requirements definition, then it gets discarded to start building the real product now with all the good practices in place. On the other hand, RAD is just something else: it is a sequential process model with a very short cycle, namely a "quick waterfall", and not only it can only work when there is a good base of reusable components, it also has all the problems (and, should I say, the very well known problems) of tools-based development, i.e. as a long-term development strategy it is a sure technical suicide.

This article should be completely rewritten by someone who knows what s/he is talking about and who has nothing to sell. Otherwise better just delete it, which I will definitely do in a week from now, unless some discussion starts and someone commits to rewriting something decent enough.

LudovicoVan (talk) 21:22, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

 * There is no justification for deleting this article. --Boson (talk) 09:22, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Agree absolutely there is no way this article should have been considered for deletion, at most it could have been reverted to a stub. I've essentially rewritten the article since wrote that comment about how bad the article was (I agree it was bad). Of course I think I know what I'm talking about but we'll see what others think ;-) --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:52, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I am sorry but I find the article totally off mark (and I can guess you start from given references, but I am trying to tell what it actually is): it conflates RAD with process models, while the two are orthogonal: RAD is rather about "getting to market as fast as possible with disregard for all established principles and recommended practices", and the place as well as the limitations of it should then be obvious, it's at best good for quick prototyping. Indeed, on the other hand, the evolutionary aka "spiral" model is the most complex process model that there is, so plain apples and oranges. -- LudovicoVan (talk) 23:10, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

What Happened to the Original Meaning of the Term RAD?
In the early 90s the term Rapid Application Development was most often used to refer to semi-automated software development processes where the developer would essentially create the application by selecting options offered by an expert system. One such system shipped with at least one of the DOS versions of Borland's Paradox (RDBMS system), and similar solutions were offered by other RDBMS vendors at the time. This method at least deserved to be called "rapid". Surely there should be mention of this or perhaps it should have its own entry? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.89.33.37 (talk) 01:23, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't agree that this was the "original" meaning of RAD. I was using the term RAD before the Borland system you mentioned was built. In fact we always said that we practiced RAD when we built any expert system. I worked for a big 5 consulting firm and was always getting pressure to use the official waterfall methodology which I hated with a passion. It's an unfortunate fact of the IT world that various vendors (Borland, IBM/Martin) try to "own" words like RAD. I agree though that more information on tools like the Borland product would be valuable, I think it would make a good addition to the current article and encourage you to add it. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:48, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * "pressure to use the official waterfall methodology"? Really? I've never met consulting companies that actually heard about about developing methology, I think. :) --93.198.77.122 (talk) 11:10, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Ever hear of Accenture? They are the largest IT Consulting Company in the world. That was the company I was referring to. They were Andersen Consulting when I worked for them in the 80's and early 90's (and were the largest consulting firm at that time as well). In the 80's all sorts of new technologies such as client/server, OOP, and expert systems were coming along that facilitated RAD but there was all sorts of pressure to use Method/1 (that was the name of their methodology). Here is one article that confirms it, but you could find countless articles in the IT press of the time about how much money Andersen invested in Method/1 and how much "when you have a hammer (especially one you built yourself at considerable expense) all the problems look like nails". And since Andersen was the leader all the smaller major consulting firms like E&Y, PWC, and Deloitte also created their own methodologies and encouraged their staff to use them. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:02, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Rapid development vs. RAD
Since more and more places are using the term "rapid development" and it has no definition (other than a pointer to RAD), I suggest creating an article on Rapid development and separating out James Martin's RAD as the historical background (and more of a life-cycle model than a methodology). Rapid development can be seen as a methodology... but very loosely defined. I think it should be inclusive of other methodologies such as XP.

For instance, List of graphical user interface builders and rapid application development tools has a whole bunch of frameworks that never mention RAD, but simply "rapid development".

Benjamin Bach (talk) 12:48, 17 June 2013 (UTC)
 * You can really tell a person's IT background by how they use terminology like this. People steeped in Mainframes and COBOL tend to have read a lot of Martin and by RAD mean Martin's RAD. People like me who don't have a very high opinion of Martin and who worked more in the Unix, OO, and AI worlds use the term RAD and are surprised when people think we are talking about James Martin. Sorry, that was a bit of a tangent, back to the point I agree with your criticism but I felt that there wasn't enough well sourced material in the article at this point to justify splitting off two articles, one for RAD in general and one for Martin but what I tried to do in my recent changes was be very clear when the article was talking about RAD in general and when it referred to Martin's approach. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:42, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Jepoy ??
What does RAD Jepoy mean ?Kesstrelle (talk) 19:21, 29 November 2013 (UTC)

Removing Table in Pros and Cons section
There is currently a table in the pros and cons section of the article. The table has no references and it is confused and wrong in some places. For example, it talks about Agile and Extreme Programming as if they are two different things when in reality they are simply two different words for the same approach. It lists "Scrum" as another alternative methodology. While there are some things on the Internet that bolsTer this, I see some people talk about the Scrum approach, in the Agile community a scrum is one of many techniques used in Agile, not an alternative to Agile. As an example of something that is just plain wrong the table says this: "Short iteration may add too little functionality, leading to significant delays in final iterations. Since Agile emphasizes real-time communication (preferably face-to-face), using it is problematic for large multi-team distributed system development." Large multi-team systems are difficult to develop with any methodology but Agile can be used for such projects. I've seen it used for them several times and there are plenty of documented cases. Since the table has no references at all and is so confused I think it's best to just remove it rather than try to tweak it which is what I'm going to do now. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:22, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ --MadScientistX11 (talk) 16:27, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Four Phases of RAD: Reference?
Currently there is a section titled "Four Phases of RAD". There are no references for this section. I think we need to distinguish better between Rapid Application Development (RAD) as a general approach vs. RAD as the name of the Martin methodology. In this comment I'll call RAD as a general term RAD1 and the Martin method RAD2. I'm very familiar with RAD1 but not so much with RAD2. I think it's wrong to list four phases (regardless of what name one picks for the phases) as THE phases for RAD1. RAD1 can be Agile, it can be spiral model, it can be RUP, etc. The phases for RAD1 will depend on which version of RAD1 one picks and in some Agile versions the whole notion of lifecycle phases is downplayed or eliminated all together. I'm assuming that the four phases here are the main phases of RAD2? I'm going to do a bit more research to see if I can verify that. I'm tempted to just remove this whole section since there are no references. Anyone have an opinion? --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:17, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I found this paper: http://www.casemaker.com/download/products/totem/rad_wp.pdf It lists the phases of RAD2 and they are not the same as in the article. I'm just going to remove that section. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:21, 23 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I got hold of the James Martin book and now I see where those phases came from. I put them back in and documented the appropriate pages in Martin's book. I added a sentence to make it clear that these are not by any means the only ways to do RAD in general but rather the names for the phases in Martin's approach. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:14, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:36, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

History of RAD
Currently this section says: "Rapid Application Development (RAD) is a term originally used for describing a software development process first developed and successfully deployed during the mid-1970s by D.Dinadasa at New York Telephone Co's Systems Development Center under the direction of Dan Gielan. Following a series of remarkably successful implementations of this process, Gielan lectured extensively in various forums on the methodology, practice, and benefits of this process.[citation needed]" Does anyone have a reference for this? So far all I can find is this link: http://helpdesksurvival.com/rapid-application-development-history.html Which confirms the info but there are no references on that page. I plan to remove this if no one can provide a good reference. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:18, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ --MadScientistX11 (talk) 16:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Remove it already. We can't google anything on 'Dan Gielan' — Preceding unsigned comment added by 36.84.235.233 (talk) 06:43, 4 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, it was removed around July 1 2014. That's what the check mark means. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:58, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

Relative Effectiveness
I plan to completely rework this section but I wanted to document some of the things wrong with the current text in case anyone wants to defend it. To begin with the first sentence: "The shift from traditional session-based client/server development to open sessionless and collaborative development like Web 2.0 has increased the need for faster iterations through the phases of the software development process." Gives the wrong idea. RAD in the generic non-Martin sense is not at all restricted to UI driven systems (not to mention RAD was around way before Web 1.0 let alone later versions). One of the first examples of RAD was Barry Boehm's work which was on real time systems to control satellites. And there are plenty of documented cases of using Agile for systems where the UI was not the main driver. Then consider this sentence: "This, ... has, for many developers, rekindled interest in finding a silver bullet RAD methodology." First of all saying "searching for a silver bullet solution" is very much a POV statement. No one who has read and understood the Brooks paper where he coined the term silver bullet would say "I'm looking for the silver bullet" the whole point was that there is no one single magic solution to software productivity. Then there is this: "Rapid Application Development (RAD) can be considered as a type of Agile technique or vice versa" Now if we mean RAD in the generic sense then yes I agree but if it means (as I think was the intention as written) the James Martin approach absolutely that is false, RAD is nothing like Agile. I think I've said enough, if anyone wants to defend this section as written please speak up. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 23:45, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I've rewritten everything except the last three sections at this point. All three of them essentially seem like they could be merged into one section, pros and cons or costs and benefits, something like that. I want to read through what's there and do a bit more research before tackling them but right now my plan is to just merge those three sections. BTW, I disagree with the statement in one section that most big products at IBM and elsewhere are still developed using a waterfall with "some spirals". First of all if there are spirals at all it's not waterfall and second that reference is old and out of date. IMO the vast majority of products these days are developed using some kind of RAD (not the Martin method but some form of rapid or agile development) methodology with prototyping. I'll see what kind of refs I can find. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 16:26, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ --MadScientistX11 (talk) 18:30, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

RAD Frameworks
Kku you recently reverted my revert of your unsourced change to this page. The proper response in such a situation is to take to the talk page and discuss it, not to just undo the revert. I think adding a section on RAD Frameworks is a good idea but to do that you need wp:sources You have none. The Wikipedia policy here is unambiguous and I'm deleting your unsourced addition. Also, assuming at some point you have good references, I think the new section needs some text not just a list. I think that’s always a good idea but on this page its especially important. Something we had to grapple with is that RAD means very different things to different IT audiences. The distinction between the James Martin definition and the definition that comes out of the iterative development approaches that led to Agile methods. If we add specific frameworks we need to make clear which approach the framework supports. If you disagree please discuss here, don't start wp:edit warring. Thanks. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 21:06, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Why I reverted Recent Changes to Intro
I reverted some changes to the introduction by Volunteer1234. First of all the revised text was ungrammatical. The new intro sentence was "Rapid application development (RAD) is an approach to software development put less emphasis on planning and more emphasis on process. RAD includes..." Besides being ungrammatical it's not clear what that sentence really means. I agree that RAD puts less emphasis on planning but how does it "put more emphasis on process"? If anything, many RAD methodologies such as Agile put very little emphasis on specific life-cycle stages, phases, etc. Also, a key point in the article is that RAD is both a generic term and a term for James Martin's methodology. The new version of the intro reads as if Martin's term and RAD are the same thing which they absolutely are not. People like Barry Boehm were using the term RAD years before Martin developed his methodology. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 00:15, 25 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I also reverted a more recent change to the intro. The intro as written was: "Rapid application development' (RAD) is both a general term used to refer to alternatives to the conventional waterfall model of software development as well as the name for James Martin's approach to rapid development.". The change was to remove the words "a general term". I think those words are useful. Without them it sounds as if the two things being contrasted were potentially completely different. They aren't. Both are about Rapid Application Development but one refers to the term in general (i.e., a general term) and the other refers to Martin's branding of the term. It was written that way on purpose and removing those words makes it less not more clear. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 04:06, 25 July 2017 (UTC)

 * Rapid application development (RAD) is an approach to software development [that] puts less emphasis on planning and more emphasis on process. That is basically the second sentence that is still there after your revert. "more emphasis on process" is still there! It would be nice if the article had a concise definition for the first sentence, instead of this ugly "both a general term" thing with its wp:refers problem and multiple topic problem. If there are two topics, perhaps the article should be split. Volunteer1234 (talk) 16:53, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I think we need the "general term" distinction. Martin had a specific and notable methodology under this title. Mid-'90s Microserfs also followed Steve McConnell's book Rapid Development which was a survey of the best but-still-vague RAD methodologies of the day (Incremental, Spiral etc. There was too a generic notion for "Rapid Application Development" (usually followed terribly badly by idiot managers as simply "Do no planning at all, but run around faster"). Andy Dingley (talk) 20:27, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * If you look at the history of this page the original article was a mess (people even suggested deleting it, this is all documented above) and one of the main reasons is that you had two kinds of people editing the article as it existed before. One group who thought that RAD was synonymous with James Martin and another group who knew that the term RAD went back much longer. So the article was extremely confusing because we didn't make that distinction clear. Look at the talk page, it's obvious that is something we grappled with quite a lot and that is why the current article is the way it is. Just saying that you think some sentence is ugly is not a justification for changing it. I don't think it's ugly at all and more importantly it sets up the whole article, it does what a good introduction sentence is supposed to do which is provide a summary of what the article is about so that a new reader will understand the main point right from the beginning. Regarding that second sentence, I'm fine with removing it, I think it's vague and doesn't really add much to the article. Regarding splitting off into two articles, if someone wants to do it, and do it right, have at it. What I suggest is if someone wants to do that create two drafts of what the new articles would be in your user pages and let others take a look as you do it and if there is consensus we can do a split. I've done things like that before but I'm too busy right now. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:08, 27 July 2017 (UTC)

RAD is not software
I just reverted a change that added this sentence: "In simple words RAD is a special software which aims at building programs vastly through the use of tools and wizards." RAD is a software process not a software tool. It's an approach to building software. Yes, there are various tools and technologies (GUI builders, OO IDE's, rule based systems) that are commonly used for RAD but the initial RAD: Barry Boehm's spiral model was done using very traditional software that didn't even HAVE a GUI, Boehm's spiral model was first used to develop the software that goes into sattelites. --MadScientistX11 (talk) 18:11, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

Boehm and Sir Drake
An unidentified user (different IP addresses), has twice introduced Sir Drake as a close associate of Boehm and an influence on the early stages of RAD. However, no references have been cited. The only connection between those two names I can find on Google (admittedly not the fount of all knowledge) is that in 1883 a sculptor called Joseph Edgar Boehm created a statue of Sir Francis Drake in the town centre of Tavistock, Devon, UK. The second change has been reverted with a request to discuss the changes here and to provide cited references. Davidjcmorris  Talk  23:39, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

title: Talk:Rapid application development


text:
Doleham railway station

Doleham railway station is a small, single-platform wayside halt in Doleham, East Sussex, England. It is on the Marshlink line, and train services are provided by Southern. The station is very isolated and serves only a handful of houses in the immediate area. There is an approximate daily figure of 8 passengers a day pre-covid.

History
The station opened as Guestling Halt on 1 July 1907 after the South Eastern and Chatham Railway had introduced a steam railcar service on the line in order to improve traffic. It was one of the few places along the line between Hastings and Winchelsea that could access the railway by a public road. The station was renamed Doleham Halt in 1909 as Guestling was more conveniently accessed from the previous station, Three Oaks.

By 1913, the station was being served by ten rail cars a day. This dropped to about seven per day in the inter-war period.

The "halt" suffix was dropped on 5 May 1969. The station had two platforms until 1979 when the line through the station was singled; as a result, all trains now use the former "up" (Ashford-bound) platform.

In 2011, a local newspaper observed that because of the inconvenient stops and lack of access, Doleham could be technically interpreted as the most crime-ridden station in Sussex as there was one reported crime for every 473 passengers. By comparison, the more likely candidate, Gatwick Airport, only recorded one crime per 43,873 passengers.

Services
Owing to low patronage, the station is only served by a handful of trains each way, with no services at all during the off-peak period. It is the least used station in East Sussex and all of Sussex.

In the morning, there are three southbound trains to Eastbourne, and one northbound train to Ashford International. There is one train to Ashford International and one train to Eastbourne during the afternoon peak, and one train to Ashford International and one train to Hastings in the late evening. This gives a total of three daily services northbound and five services southbound on a weekday.

At weekends, the service pattern is reduced to just two trains per day in each direction: only the first and the last train on the line call at the station.

Service history
Until 2005 the station was served by hourly services each way between Ashford International and Hastings. However, in the 2005 timetable change, trains on the line were extended to run to/from Brighton (via Eastbourne and Lewes) and operated as express services; as a result, service frequency at Doleham (as well as neighbouring Three Oaks and Winchelsea) was greatly reduced, to just 3 trains per day each way.

This led to the creation of a campaign the by Three Oaks and Winchelsea Action for Rail Transport (THWART) and the Marshlink Line Action Group (MLAG), which aimed to restore regular services from these stations. In the end, only Winchelsea and Three Oaks have benefited from this campaign (with two-hourly services at those stations commencing in December 2010, and hourly services restored in May 2023); Doleham's limited service frequency has remained almost unchanged.

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

title: Doleham railway station


text:
Talk:Acrobat (disambiguation)

Re: deleting "wrongly" in "Sometimes the term 'Acrobat file' is wrongly used to mean a PDF file". I put this in because this is sometimes used, and it is certainly wrong. Adobe define PDF, Portable Document Format; they don't call it an Acrobat file anywhere in the 1000 pages of the specification. Acrobat is a trademark too; if someone is innocently beguiled into using "Acrobat file" for PDFs not made with Acrobat, they could find themselves in hot water. If this is thought to be too prescriptive, the whole sentence should be removed, otherwise it is encouraging this incorrect use. Notinasnaid 10:09, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Requested move 7 September 2017

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved — Amakuru (talk) 16:45, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Acrobat → Acrobat (disambiguation) – Move to make way to redirect this title to Acrobatics, the longstanding primary topic by historical significance, comparable to Apple for the fruit (the word "acrobat", with this meaning, traces back to ancient Greece). Everything else called "Acrobat" is named after the practitioner of acrobatics. bd2412 T 23:11, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Support, although BD2412 is working without a safety net on this one, I'd jump through hoops to see this nom pass. Oh, and per nom and primary. Randy Kryn (talk) 02:31, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Support and good analogy with the more famous Apple problem In ictu oculi (talk) 08:53, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Support there's no way that Adobe Acrobat is the primary topic at this time. Power~enwiki (talk) 06:19, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I would, in fact, compare this to Microsoft Office versus Office. bd2412  T 00:17, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Support. The only other potential use is Adobe Acrobat, and it should not really require explanation why Acrobatics is more significant.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 23:57, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Support. Clear primary topic, even with Adobe Acrobat. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:36, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

title: Talk:Acrobat (disambiguation)


text:
Reed bed

A reedbed or reed bed is a natural habitat found in floodplains, waterlogged depressions and estuaries. Reedbeds are part of a succession from young reeds colonising open water or wet ground through a gradation of increasingly dry ground. As reedbeds age, they build up a considerable litter layer that eventually rises above the water level and that ultimately provides opportunities in the form of new areas for larger terrestrial plants such as shrubs and trees to colonise.

Artificial reedbeds are used to remove pollutants from greywater, and are also called constructed wetlands.

Types
Reedbeds vary in the species that they can support, depending upon water levels within the wetland system, climate, seasonal variations, and the nutrient status and salinity of the water. Reed swamps have 20 cm or more of surface water during the summer and often have high invertebrate and bird species use. Reed fens have water levels at or below the surface during the summer and are often more botanically complex. Reeds and similar plants do not generally grow in very acidic water. In these situations, reedbeds are replaced by bogs and vegetation such as poor fen.

Although common reeds are characteristic of reedbeds, not all vegetation dominated by this species is characteristic of reedbeds. It also commonly occurs in unmanaged, damp grassland and as an understorey in certain types of damp woodland.

Wildlife
Most European reedbeds mainly comprise common reed (Phragmites australis) but also include many other tall monocotyledons adapted to growing in wet conditions – other grasses such as reed sweet-grass (Glyceria maxima), Canary reed-grass (Phalaris arundinacea) and small-reed (Calamagrostis species), large sedges (species of Carex, Scirpus, Schoenoplectus, Cladium and related genera), yellow flag iris (Iris pseudacorus), reed-mace ("bulrush" – Typha species), water-plantains (Alisma species), and flowering rush (Butomus umbellatus). Many dicotyledons also occur, such as water mint (Mentha aquatica), gipsywort (Lycopus europaeus), skull-cap (Scutellaria species), touch-me-not balsam (Impatiens noli-tangere), brooklime (Veronica beccabunga) and water forget-me-nots (Myosotis species).

Many animals are adapted to living in and around reedbeds. These include mammals such as Eurasian otter, European beaver, water vole, Eurasian harvest mouse and water shrew, and birds such as great bittern, purple heron, European spoonbill, water rail (and other rails), purple gallinule, marsh harrier, various warblers (reed warbler, sedge warbler etc.), bearded reedling and reed bunting.

Constructed wetlands
Constructed wetlands are artificial swamps (sometimes called reed fields) using reed or other marshland plants to form part of small-scale sewage treatment systems. Water trickling through the reedbed is cleaned by microorganisms living on the root system and in the litter. These organisms utilize the sewage for growth nutrients, resulting in a clean effluent. The process is very similar to aerobic conventional sewage treatment, as the same organisms are used, except that conventional treatment systems require artificial aeration.

Treatment ponds

Treatment ponds are small versions of constructed wetlands which uses reedbeds or other marshland plants to form an even smaller water treatment system. Similar to constructed wetlands, water trickling through the reedbed is cleaned by microorganisms living on the root system and in the litter. Treatment ponds are used for the water treatment of a single house or a small neighbourhood.

title: Reed bed


text: Category:Senegalese film directors

title: Category:Senegalese film directors


text:
Winchelsea railway station

Winchelsea railway station is a railway station in East Sussex, England. It is about 1 km from Winchelsea and is actually in the neighbouring parish of Udimore. It is on the Marshlink line 15 km north east of Hastings, and train services are provided by Southern. The station originally had two platforms, but in 1979, the line was singled and only the up platform is now in use. The former down platform and station building are now converted to a private house.

Location

The station is in an isolated location. It is not a convenient way of getting to or from Winchelsea, especially outside daylight hours. The route from the station to the town involves walking down an unlit and winding country lane, then walking along the A259 trunk road before climbing a steep hill to reach the town. The journey takes about 20 minutes on foot. However, local people may book a free lift to and from the station via a voluntary scheme run through Winchelsea Farm Kitchen.

As an alternative to trains, Stagecoach runs bus route 100 between Hastings and Rye, which stops in the town.

Despite its isolation, the station is used by walkers visiting the Brede Valley.

Facilities
The buildings have been sold into private ownership and so this station is unstaffed. There is a ticket machine at the station.

Free parking facilities are available at the station.

History
The station was opened by the South Eastern Railway (SER) on 13 February 1851 as one of the first stations on the line from Ashford to Hastings, along with Ham Street, Appledore and Rye. The station, like several others on the line, was built with staggered platforms on the belief that it would be safer for passengers to cross the railway behind a departing train.

Traffic was very sparse and the station closed on 1 September, in part because it was impossible to access the town without crossing private land. The Mayor of Winchelsea campaigned for reopening and negotiating access with the respective landowner, and the SER agreed to open the station on 4 December. A resignalling programme took place in the early 1890s.

The station gradually reduced its facilities. In 1961, the station building was sold off, and has since been in private hands. By 1969, the signal box and goods siding had been removed, and by the early 1970s the shelter canopy was removed and the post of crossing keeper was discontinued. On 1 October 1979, the line was reduced to single track to reduce operational costs. The down platform (to Hastings) was removed; since then all trains have stopped at the one remaining platform. A 20 mph speed limit was imposed on the line approaching Winchelsea. The wooden shelter on the remaining (up) platform was replaced by a conventional modern shelter in 1984.

Services
The typical off-peak service at Winchelsea is one train per hour each way between Eastbourne (via Hastings) and Ashford International. All services are operated by Southern using DMUs.

Service history
Until 2005 the station was served by hourly services each way between Ashford International and Hastings. However, in the 2005 timetable change, trains on the line were extended to run to/from Brighton (via Eastbourne and Lewes) and operated as express services; as a result, service frequency at Winchelsea (as well as neighbouring Doleham and Three Oaks) was greatly reduced, to just 3 trains per day each way. This led to the creation of a campaign the by Three Oaks and Winchelsea Action for Rail Transport (THWART) and the Marshlink Line Action Group (MLAG), which aimed to restore regular services from these stations.

This campaign was successful, and from December 2010 the weekday and Saturday service frequency at Winchelsea and Three Oaks was increased to 1 train every 2 hours each way (with services calling alternately at each station), plus a few additional stopping services during the peaks. The Sunday frequency has also been two-hourly each way since December 2015. In May 2018, the Brighton express services were replaced by stopping services to/from Eastbourne.

The May 2023 timetable change saw hourly services fully restored, with all trains now calling at both Winchelsea and Three Oaks 7 days a week.

title: Winchelsea railway station


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yashar Keramati

 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. Postdlf 02:21, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Yashar Keramati
Unencyclopedic, two google matches. Delete. --SPUI (talk) 10:13, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, 2 Google matches from the same website - not notable, possible vanity. Megan1967 12:35, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Lack of Google hits do not appear to corroborate claims of 'leading' the protesters, and announcements of joining the UN after getting his law degree are premature, as from DOB he is currently 19. Average Earthman 12:38, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. And at the age of 15 I became president of MENSA. *rolls eyes* Mo0 [ talk ] 17:33, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Jayjg (talk) 06:12, 22 Apr 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:
Thomas J. Murphy Jr.

Thomas J. Murphy Jr. (born August 15, 1944) is an American former politician and city management consultant from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. He served in state government in two capacities, from 1979 to 1982 representing the 17th district, and from 1983 to 1993 representing the 20th district. From January 1994 until January 2006 he served as mayor of Pittsburgh. Murphy is also a former senior resident fellow for urban development at the Urban Land Institute. Murphy is now a principal with Urban Development Advisors LLC, providing expert advice to communities to help them understand what drives real estate investment, sustainable land use practices, economic development and ensures long-lasting community commitment.

Early life
The son of a steel worker, his education includes graduation from John Carroll University in Cleveland in 1967 and receiving a graduate degree from Hunter College in urban studies in 1973. From 1970 to 1972, Murphy and his wife, Mona, were in the Peace Corps in rural Paraguay, constructing sanitation facilities and an elementary school. After the Peace Corps, the Murphys returned to Pittsburgh and he became a neighborhood organizer for the North Side before entering local politics.

Early political career
Murphy served as a state representative from the 17th district from January 2, 1979 until November 30, 1982. He also served in the same capacity representing Pittsburgh's North Side 20th Legislative District from January 4, 1983 to December 15, 1993.

In 1989 he was an unsuccessful candidate for the Democratic primary nomination for mayor of Pittsburgh, losing to Sophie Masloff (who ran unopposed in the November general election later that year).

In 1991 he and two other state legislators spearheaded reforms at the regional Pittsburgh industrial corporation, stressing that the agency needed more minority and female representation in its leadership, that the agency was not focusing on urban redevelopment so much as suburban properties, and that it was awarding grants to financial institutions instead of for industrial concerns.

As mayor
Murphy was elected the mayor of Pittsburgh in November 1993 and was sworn-in in January 1994. He used his educational background in urban management and administration, to function more like a city manager than a politician. He initiated a public-partnership strategy that leveraged approximately $4.5 billion in economic development in Pittsburgh. Against public opposition,   he secured $1 billion (along with Allegheny County Commissioners Bob Cranmer and Mike Dawida) in funding for the development of Heinz Field, PNC Park, and a new David L. Lawrence Convention Center that in 2003 would become the largest certified "green" building in the United States.

The combined leadership of Commissioners Cranmer and Dawida with Mayor Murphy led to a building boom in Pittsburgh dubbed "Renaissance III" that was a catalyst for how the city would be viewed a decade later, when it was selected to host the 2009 G-20 summit, led by President Barack Obama. The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette commented in 1998 that "Allegheny County Commissioners Bob Cranmer and Mike Dawida understand the importance of a strong urban core and, through their partnership, have helped the mayor find ways to do what lesser leadership would considerable unthinkable... It is a meeting of such focused minds and willing spirits that stands to take Pittsburgh into a new era. Call it Renaissance III or call it just a better place to live, this is the blueprint of a renewable city that more people will be proud to call home."

As mayor, he oversaw the transformation of more than 1,000 acres (4 km²) of blighted, abandoned industrial land into new commercial, residential, retail, and public uses. He also lured, using public subsidies, both Lazarus and Lord & Taylor department stores to the city's downtown core. Both stores eventually failed, however, each closing within a decade. The idea of big box retail along the city's downtown core of Fifth and Forbes Avenue actually goes back two administrations to the Caliguri mayoralship in 1987.

Murphy also led the development of more than 25 miles of new riverfront trails and urban green space. "Big idea" initiatives such as these, combined with the commonwealth-imposed century-old restrictions on annexing any suburbs or consolidating with the county for a "regional" or "metropolitan" tax base to equitably spread costs to commuters and urban dwellers alike and drove the city to the brink of bankruptcy. Several initiatives to modernize the state-controlled regional tax and government structure to reflect the rapid growth of nonprofit universities, hospitals, churches, and parks within the city limits with the rapid population migration out of the city to formerly rural suburbs and counties all failed to be approved by the state.

The city eventually was declared financially "distressed" by the state after blocking all annexations, county-consolidations, nonprofit hospital or university tax levees, and commuter or suburban tax balances. To help recoup some of the city's losses during this period and to highlight the state's refusal to allow the city to grow geographically as the region's population had, with annexing or consolidating modern suburbs, Murphy was forced into the controversial 2003 decision to lay off a number of city employees, including Pittsburgh Police officers. Some of these jobs were later saved by dramatically increasing the city's parking tax as one of the few "commuter"-"suburban" taxes within the city's power to levy without state power to block, making it the largest such tax in the country. While at the time, the parking tax was met with ridicule and contempt, it has presently been analyzed as one of the key factors in rejuvenating the downtown core, while encouraging the growth of rapid transit, bike lanes and trails, and "green alternatives", and while providing a fiscal foundation for the city for decades to come. In light of the comparable city of Detroit's devolution into bankruptcy, Murphy's parking tax and its effects on both the fiscal health and downtown vitality in business and mass transit has become a case study in effective core city management.

Murphy's dealings with the city firefighters union also has been questioned. Prior to the 2001 mayoral election, Murphy allegedly signed the firefighters to a new contract worth $10–12 million with a no-layoff clause in exchange for their vote. He would go on to narrowly defeat then City Council President Bob O'Connor (who later would become mayor).

In 2004, Murphy announced that he would not run for re-election. In June 2006, Murphy entered into an agreement with federal government to avoid prosecution from his involvement with the firefighters union.

While being considered a man with big ideas, Murphy's political skills were questioned later in his tenure as some of his policies slowly wore out relationships with the Pittsburgh City Council and the increasingly Republican and rural-focused commonwealth legislature. Impatience in working with the opposition-held Pennsylvania General Assembly late in his career, harmed the city's image in some state political circles.

Praised as a visionary, but not as a politician, his tough choices after the city's budget crisis in 2003 resulted in a citizen group unsuccessfully proposing his impeachment.

In 1999, Murphy served on the selection committee for the Rudy Bruner Award for Urban Excellence.

Murphy was one of Pennsylvania's presidential electors in 2000, casting his vote in favor of Al Gore.

Murphy's mayoral election history

 * 1993 race results
 * Tom Murphy (D), 66%
 * Kathy Matta (R), 14%
 * 1997 race results
 * Tom Murphy (D), 77%
 * Harry Frost (R), 21%
 * 2001 race results
 * Tom Murphy (D), 74%
 * James Carmine (R), 23%

Post-political life
Since leaving City Hall, Murphy and his wife continue to live in their self-restored, 150-year-old farmhouse in North Side of Pittsburgh, where they raised their two daughters, Shannon and Molly, and their son, T.J. He has one grandson, Wyatt Murphy.

From 2006 to 2023 Murphy served as the Senior Resident Fellow for Urban Development at the Urban Land Institute (ULI). He particiapted and chaired more that 60 Advisory Services panels in locations as diverse as Singapore, Ireland, Germany, China, the Philippines and more than 50 cities and communities around the United States. Murphy is now a principal with Urban Development Advisors LLC, providing expert advice to communities to help them understand what drives real estate investment, sustainable land use practices, economic development and ensures long-lasting community commitment.

title: Thomas J. Murphy Jr.


text:
Illuminations

Illuminations may refer to:

Shows and festivals

 * IllumiNations: Reflections of Earth, a nightly fireworks show currently at Epcot at Walt Disney World Resort
 * IllumiNations, original nightly firework show at Epcot at Walt Disney World Resort before Reflections of Earth was created
 * Illuminations (festival), a secular autumn festival of electric lights held in several English cities
 * Blackpool Illuminations, an annual lights festival in the British seaside resort of Blackpool
 * Disney Illuminations, a nightly firework show at Disneyland Paris

Music and video

 * Illuminations (Alice Coltrane and Carlos Santana album) or the title song, 1974
 * Illuminations (Buffy Sainte-Marie album), 1969
 * Illuminations (Erik Friedlander album), 2015
 * Illuminations (Josh Groban album), 2010
 * Illuminations (McCoy Tyner album) or the title song, 2004
 * Illuminations (Wishbone Ash album), 1996
 * Illuminations (EP), by Little Boots, 2009
 * Illuminations (video), by the Tea Party, 2001
 * Les Illuminations (Britten), a 1940 song cycle by Benjamin Britten setting texts by Rimbaud
 * Illuminations, a 1950 ballet by Sir Frederick Ashton to Britten's Les Illuminations

Other uses

 * Illuminations (film), a 1976 Australian film
 * Illuminations (poetry collection), an 1886 book by Arthur Rimbaud
 * Illuminations (novel), a 2012 fictionalized biography of Hildegard of Bingen by Mary Sharrat
 * Illuminations: Stories, 2022 short story collection by Alan Moore

title: Illuminations


text:
Intermembrane space

The intermembrane space (IMS) is the space occurring between or involving two or more membranes. In cell biology, it is most commonly described as the region between the inner membrane and the outer membrane of a mitochondrion or a chloroplast. It also refers to the space between the inner and outer nuclear membranes of the nuclear envelope, but is often called the perinuclear space. The IMS of mitochondria plays a crucial role in coordinating a variety of cellular activities, such as regulation of respiration and metabolic functions. Unlike the IMS of the mitochondria, the IMS of the chloroplast does not seem to have any obvious function.

Intermembrane space of mitochondria
Mitochondria are surrounded by two membranes; the inner and outer mitochondrial membranes. These two membranes allow the formation of two aqueous compartments, which are the intermembrane space (IMS) and the matrix. Channel proteins called porins in the outer membrane allow free diffusion of ions and small proteins about 5000 daltons or less into the IMS. This makes the IMS chemically equivalent to the cytosol regarding the small molecules it contains. By contrast, specific transport proteins are required to transport ions and other small molecules across the inner mitochondrial membrane into the matrix due to its impermeability. The IMS also contains many enzymes that use the ATP moving out of the matrix to phosphorylate other nucleotides and proteins that initiate apoptosis.

Translocation
Most of proteins destined for the mitochondrial matrix are synthesized as precursors in the cytosol and are imported into the mitochondria by the translocase of the outer membrane (TOM) and the translocase of the inner membrane (TIM). The IMS is involved in the mitochondrial protein translocation. The precursor proteins called small TIM chaperones which are hexameric complexes are located in the IMS and they bind hydrophobic precursor proteins and delivery the precursors to the TIM.

Oxidative phosphorylation
The pyruvate generated by glycolysis and the fatty acids produced by breakdown of fats enter the mitochondrial IMS through the porins in the outer mitochondrial membrane. Then they are transported across the inner mitochondrial membrane into the matrix and converted into the acetyl CoA to enter the citric acid cycle.

The respiratory chain in the inner mitochondrial membrane carries out oxidative phosphorylation. Three enzyme complexes are responsible for the electron transport: NADH-ubiquinone oxidoreductase complex (complex I), ubiquinone-cytochrome c oxidoreductase complex (complex III), and cytochrome c oxidase (complex IV). The protons are pumped from the mitochondrial matrix to the IMS by these respiratory complexes. As a result, an electrochemical gradient is generated, which is combined by forces due to a H+ gradient (pH gradient) and a voltage gradient (membrane potential). The pH in the IMS is about 0.7 unit lower than the one in the matrix and the membrane potential of the IMS side becomes more positively charged than the matrix side. This electrochemical gradient from the IMS to the matrix is used to drive the synthesis of ATP in the mitochondria.

Apoptosis
Releasing of cytochrome c from the IMS to the cytosol activates procaspases and triggers a caspase cascade leading to apoptosis.

Intermembrane space of chloroplasts
The intermembrane space (IMS) of the chloroplast is exceedingly small, from 10 to 20 nm thick. Unlike the IMS of the mitochondria, the IMS of the chloroplast does not seem to have any obvious function. The translocase of the outer membrane (TOC) and the translocase of the inner membrane (TIC) mainly assist the translocation of chloroplast precursor proteins Chaperone involvement in the IMS has been proposed but still remains uncertain. The eukaryotic Hsp70, which is the heat shock protein of 70 kDa, typically localized in the cytoplasm is also found in the IMS of chloroplasts. The resulting hypothesis states that co-localization of Hsp70 is important for efficient translocation of protein precursors into and across the IMS of chloroplasts.

Intermembrane space of nuclear envelopes

The nuclear envelope is composed of two lipid bilayer membranes that are penetrated by nuclear pores and separated by a small intermembrane space, which is often called the perinuclear space. The perinuclear space is usually about 20-40 nm wide. The perinuclear translocation of certain proteins and enzymes were studied and results showed that perinuclear space was important for genome integrity and gene regulation.

title: Intermembrane space


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yamada Takayuki

 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 keep as redirect. sjorford →•← 08:52, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yamada Takayuki
This is the same as Takayuki Yamada.Qazzx 10:18, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * . I've created the redirect; this does not require a deletion vote. Radiant_* 10:41, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep as redirect. Good catch Radiant. Megan1967 12:37, 21 Apr 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.


title: File:Passengersost1.jpg


text:
Talk:Worker-communist Party of Iraq

Untitled
With the expansion of the Worker Communist Party of Iraq’s activity in the center and south of Iraq, the emergence of the Party as an influential and radical Marxist force in Iraqi political life, and our ability to attract the attention of wide sections of the Iraqi masses and other Arab countries and Arab media to our policies and views, a question stands out: What are the differences between the Worker Communist Party of Iraq and the Iraqi Communist Party? Here, I will focus on the more essential differences. To answer this question, I must say in advance that these two parties are different in everything. However, in this article, I will only mention the main aspects of differences, some political, historical, and practical examples on the role and the activities of the two parties. Nevertheless, the differences are much more extensive and cannot all be mentioned in this article.

Two different movements

The most substantial difference between these two parties is that they belong to two different movements. The Iraqi Communist Party (ICP) is the party of the reformist-nationalist movement (nationalism here is used as a broad term or in the way nationalism is used in English and not in the way it is used in the Arab political literature). The ICP, like any other nationalist party, as its main motto (Free Nation and Happy People) focuses on liberating the nation. The Iraqi Communist Party, in its program and literature, clarifies that by “people’s happiness,” it means developing the national industry and economy and prescribing state capitalism as an economic alternative. According to the ICP’s point of view, the people consisting of the oppressing capitalist class and the oppressed working class and deprived people will live happily in a liberated nation with a developed capitalist economy. The ICP was established in the early 30s of the last century to achieve this objective following the bourgeois model, which prevailed in the Soviet Union after the failure of the October Revolution in the late 20s of the last century. In other words, the Iraqi Communist Party is one of the parties of the bourgeois Communist currents, and it was established to achieve a bourgeois objective in a certain period of time, using the prestige of Marxism.

On the other hand, the Worker Communist Party of Iraq is part of the working class’s socialist movement against the capitalist system. This movement struggles for a world free of oppression, class division, deprivation and hardships, which accompany the capitalist system. This objective is one of the principles of the Worker Communist Party of Iraq. This party was established on July 21, 1993, based on Marx’s teachings. It is a Marxist current whose theoretical and political principles were outlined by Mansoor Hekmat. It is the continuation of the traditions of the Paris Commune and the October Revolution. Before the establishment of the WCPI, the Worker Communist movement appeared for the first time as a socially distinctive movement in Iraqi Kurdistan in the context of the councils’ movement of March 1991. From then until the establishment of the party, Worker Communism was represented by a few political organisations and groups, which led the struggle of the workers and other deprived people in the society. Mansoor Hekmat, the leader of the Worker Communist movement, who analyzed today’s world from Marxism’s point of view and wrote the program for workers’ revolution and organizing a socialist society, emphasized that he uses Worker Communism, in the same way Marx used the word Communism, to differentiate this movement from the prevalent bourgeois Communisms.

The objective that the WCPI struggles for will only come true through a socialist revolution by the working class, overthrowing the capitalist system, abolishing private property and waged-labour and building a society based on the basis of common ownership. It will come true through building a society where there will be no classes and where people will work not to for making a living, but rather for society’s prosperity as all the needs of the people will be secured by society.

Two different accounts for freedom and socialism

The Iraqi Communist party, like any other nationalist party, believes that freedom means liberating the nation from the forces that (according to ICP) occupy it and that people’s happiness will be achieved by achieving this goal. We believe that this view is very naïve, as many nations have gotten rid of all kinds of foreign occupation and still the vast majority of their citizens are deprived of freedom and happiness and suffer from many forms of oppression, and exploitation. The Worker Communist Party of Iraq’s view of freedom is quit different from this one. According to WCPI, freedom means emancipation from the reign of capital and waged labour relations in our society, from suppression, and from all forms of discrimination including religious, ethnic and sexual discrimination. This freedom cannot be achieved without abolishing private ownership and waged labour.

For the Iraqi Communist Party, like other bourgeois parties, socialism, regardless of what it means to them, is utopian or it is something which will happen spontaneously with time in the process of society’s development. They use socialism only to spread illusion among the oppressed classes. The real goal of the Iraqi Communist Party or more precisely, its socialism, in the model mentioned in its program and media, is in reality an advanced capitalist society, where a patriotic bourgeois democratic state is the superstructure.

However, socialism in WCPI’s view point is a real and crucial objective and thus can be and must be achieved today in current society, as all the objective requirements for building such a society are available. Achieving this objective relies on the current will and practice of human beings. If the working class and the deprived and equality seeking masses are able to organize themselves around their vanguard party, and come to the fore today, they will be able to achieve this historical task and thus will be able to achieve happiness and prosperity for all members of society.

The advance in industry and productive capacities, which is the result of human beings’ efforts, has reached a level that achieving socialism, i.e. a society free of exploitation, class division, and waged labour, is possible in the most backward countries in the world. It is possible to build a society based on the principle that, “from everyone according to their ability, to everyone according to their needs.” The political power of this system is a workers’ government i.e. a socialist republic. In other wards, it is a state based on councils or Soviets.

Two different views of reform

The reforms that the Iraqi Communist Party asks for are very limited and trivial. It seeks to make some inadequate improvements in the living standards of the masses. On the other hand, the Worker Communist Party of Iraq struggles to organize a socialist revolution and in the meantime, it struggles for the most profound and far-reaching economic, political, social and cultural reforms in the lives of all citizens. The WCPI believes that as long as capitalism prevails, achieving these reforms will help the workers to organize their revolution and build a socialist society.

The reforms that the Iraqi Communist Party has asked for have always been groundless; therefore it has not been able to realize them practically during its entire life and thus has failed to make the slightest improvement in the society. We say groundless, because in a country like Iraq, as one of the so-called Third World countries, there is no ground for achieving such bourgeois reforms. The reason is simple; in these countries, the bourgeois rule, in accordance with the capitalist economy, has to be dictatorial and oppressive, and this contradicts bourgeois reformism. This makes the possibility of finding grounds to implement bourgeois reforms, similar to those in Europe, very unlikely. The only reforms that have real grounds are those which are imposed on the bourgeoisie by the society’s left and by the workers’ movement.

Therefore, we say that the struggle of Worker Communism for reform and improving living conditions has a real basis, because the Worker Communist Party of Iraq strives to impose them on the bourgeoisie by intensifying the political and social pressure of the working class, the deprived masses and the left in general.

Different Political and Practical Traditions and Norms

The Iraqi Communist Party strives to achieve its bourgeois goals by formation of various coalitions and alliances. For this purpose, the ICP does not refrain from making alliances with all the most reactionary bourgeois forces and enemies of freedom. After the collapse of the Monarchy, when the working class in Iraq was well organized and had huge potentials, and while the ICP enjoyed a huge influence and was able to seize power, it simply rallied behind the bourgeois rule of Abdul Karim Qasim and thus prevented the workers from seizing power.

After the Baath’s coup in 1963, the bloody regime launched a fierce attack on the workers and the left movement; killing hundreds of them, including members of the ICP itself. Instead of standing by the workers and the left against these attacks, the ICP struggled to justify them with various excuses. Later on, the ICP joined in a long-term alliance with the Baathists and portrayed their bloody regime as a fighting force for socialism and in so doing, contributed to stabilizing their regime.

When the Baath regime started cracking down on the ICP and tightened its grip around their neck, the ICP escaped to Kurdistan and started making alliances with the Kurdish ethnocentric parties against which it had fought while in alliance with Baath regime. During the last 12 years, all the bourgeois forces tried to get power by aligning themselves with the USA and supporting its inhumane policies. The Iraqi Communist Party worked with all these forces, including the ethnocentric parties and Islamic gangs. It joined in alliances with them and attended congresses and meetings organized by the US state department and its espionage agencies.

In Kurdistan, the ICP participated in the authority of the armed militia of the Kurdish ethnocentric-tribal parties in order to gain some privileges. It continues to support their rule, which lacks any legitimacy. In the course of its blind support for the reactionary policies of these parties, the ICP has turned its back to the wishes, demands and protests of the various social movements, which have emerged against these parties and their inhuman and oppressive practices. In this way, the ICP has participated in the hardships, destruction and calamities brought about by these parties against the people in Kurdistan. Moreover, it joined in alliance with the reactionary and terrorist Islamic forces. In order to prepare the grounds for such alliances, ICP not only did not expose the policies and behavior of the reactionary bourgeois forces, but also was ready to cover the reactionary political and class essence of their crimes.

However, the WCPI has always insisted on independence of the ranks of workers and toilers and struggled to separate their ranks on political and organizational fronts from the bourgeois forces and to organize them around communist politics and independent class goals. It has always criticized the policies and practices of all bourgeois forces and exposed their reactionary and inhumane essence by raising the awareness among workers and toilers. It has struggled to prevent these forces from implementing their policies. Moreover, the WCPI has been in continuous confrontation with these forces on the rights and demands of the workers and the deprived people, and it has sacrificed and faced many hardships on this path.

The Iraqi Communist party is an opportunistic party. It is secular when with seculars, democratic when with democrats, nationalist when with nationalists and even Islamic when with Islamists. According to its program, the ICP is secular, however on a political and practical level, it does not represent secular forces in any way. It conceals information from the masses. It observes the reactionary religious traditions and norms and defends them.

In sharp contrast with Marx who said religion was the peoples’ opium, the ICP declares that Islam is a revolutionary and liberation religion, and it portrays the oppressive leaders of the Islamic movements as egalitarian freedom –lovers. It uses silly excuses like respecting “people’s taboos” to justify its enthusiastic participation in religious ceremonies.

In sharp contrast to Marx who said workers have no nation, the Iraqi Communist Party calls on workers to sacrifice for the sake of the nation’s soil. It glorifies the false national entity, and thus it turns workers and toilers into a reserve army for the nationalist movement. It supports the concept of class forgiveness between workers and the bourgeoisie, and therefore it asks workers to compromise and give up their interests for the sake of their fellow citizens, the bourgeoisie, and to fight against the workers from other nationalities and forget the common class interests of the workers of all nationalities.

On the other hand, based on Marx’s teachings, WCPI is the party of the extreme left {maximalist) and extremely radical. It criticizes religion and stands strongly against racism, and patriarchy. It is an extremist party in its humanism and egalitarianism. It confronts bravely all kinds of reactions, and inequality. It reveals all information to the masses and frankly announces the position of Communism on religion.  It exposes religious superstition as a tool for deception, dividing people and imposing deprivation and inequality on the society. It opposes dividing human beings on the basis of nationality, religion, sex, and race. All these characteristics are not only political stands for the WCPI but also organizing principles around which they struggle on a daily basis.

Two different social trends “the Right and the Left”

The Iraqi Communist Party, which once claimed to be a left force and had associated itself in a way with Communism, now stands unequivocally on the right of the society and has given up these former claims. It changed its entire political program in the late 80s and early 90s when huge international events took place. As mentioned before, this party was a reformist-nationalist party belonging to one of the blocs of the bi-polar world. When state-capitalism reached a deadlock and with the collapse of the Soviet camp, the ICP, as with all other similar parties in Eastern Europe and third world counties, reached a deadlock. Many of these parties have either dissolved themselves or changed their names and followed the wave of “democracy”. The ICP had to follow the same path and it did so, but in a different way. In 1991 the ICP attached itself to the US policies and its plans in Iraq. The ICP was given an abject position in the periphery of the US plans for Iraq and in its conflict with then the ruling Baath regime. Therefore, the ICP no longer has the slightest relation with the workers, the left or Communism even if it raises thousands of banners decorated with hammer and sickle. The ICP lacks the basic leftist characteristics and is entrenched in the Right’s front.

In reality, the patriotism of the ICP party is totally groundless and poor and therefore its nationalist and patriotic policies are contradictory and dominated by hypocrisy and evasiveness. On the one hand, it shares a position with Arab-nationalism and had for a while joined in coalitions with the most extremely chauvinist Arab nationalist parties. On the other hand, it shares positions with the Kurdish nationalist movement and joins coalitions with its tribal parties. This happens while these two movements (the Arab and the Kurdish nationalist movements) have been in continuous fight against each other in last several decades. Therefore, the ICP has failed to secure a unique foothold for itself even in these equations, and it has lost even the weak influence it once had.

In contrast, the Worker Communist Party of Iraq represents the left trend in the society in all fronts. It holds the banner of the Left, workers and Communism and it created a brave and ambitious radical Marxist pole (Maximalist) in the society. It leads the left on theoretical, political, and practical domains. Vis-à-Vis the Right pole, the WCPI defends the Left and its demands.

Some Examples of the Two Parties’ Political and Practical Positions.

The above mentioned are the main social and political differentiating characteristics of the two parties. On the basis of these fundamental differences, each of the two parties took different stands on different issues and events. I will mention some of them here.

·      The ICP, as with other bourgeois parties, supported the second Gulf War (the first US war on Iraq) by the US, in order to impose its hegemony on the world under the excuse of bringing back the Kuwaiti sheiks to power. It supported the war, which resulted in a massacre against the people of Iraq and asserting the US arrogance on the world. On the other hand the Worker Communist movement stood with all its force against this war. While the Worker Communism was struggling to overthrow the Baath regime, it emphasized that the liberation of the Iraqi society cannot be an outcome of the US bloody war.

·      The ICP openly and from the beginning, supported the inhumane policy of the economic embargo against the Iraqi masses, once again under the excuse that this policy, which resulted in genocide and starvation for the masses of Iraqis, would weaken the regime. However with the increasing pressure of public opinion against the consequences of the economic sanctions, the ICP made a limited retreat and took an opportunistic central position by demanding a conditional lift of the economic sanctions. It demanded, “lifting the sanctions on the Iraqi people and increasing the pressure on the dictatorship.” On the one hand this demand reflected a hope that the US would weaken the regime and it would eventually establish a democratic regime and on the other hand in practical terms, this demand did not mean anything.

·        In a third step, when the deadly consequences of the economic sanctions became clear and after the US and its western allies come under the huge pressure of the international public opinion, the ICP made a another opportunistic change in its position and demanded unconditional lifting of the economic sanctions on the “ Iraqi people”. The right-wing opposition including the ICP claimed that the resolution 986 lifted the sanctions on the “Iraqi people” and kept it on the regime. The ICP claimed that its stand was in support of the masses, but in reality it was an evasive and deceitful stand, which avoided taking a clear stand toward a specific issue, the economic sanction, imposed on Iraq.

·        On the other hand, {the Worker Communism and} the Worker Communist party of Iraq condemned that policy from the very first day as an inhumane policy and firmly stood against it. Over 12 years the Worker Communist Party of Iraq struggled on different domains world-wide to mobilize the international public opinion to lift the sanctions.

·      While the US was preparing to launch the third Gulf War on Iraq, the Iraqi Communist Party, again took an opportunistic stand. It stood beside the other bourgeois parties, which supported the US policy and prepared very well to reap the fruits of this war. At the same time, the ICP announced for the Iraqi public opinion that it was against the war. Abroad, it tried to pretend that it was with the anti-war movement and stood against the war, but practically it had done nothing against it. At the same time, the Kurdistan branch of the ICP participated through its leadership, including its secretary, in the London congress of the so-called Iraqi opposition forces. In this congress, ethnocentric groups, Islamic forces, and the mercenaries of the CIA joined together with the US defense and state departments and UK government. The ICP signed the concluding statement of this congress. This extremely reactionary (religious, nationalist, tribal and patriarchal) statement is a document of the support of these nationalist and Islamic forces for the US war.

On the other hand, the WCPI strongly condemned the USA warmongering policies and its war and stood against it. The Worker Communist party of Iraq was the only Iraqi force, which stood against the war and was active among the masses inside Iraq. It was also an effective force in the Anti-War Movement abroad.

·      After the collapse of the Baath regime and the start of the US and UK occupation of Iraq, the Iraqi Communist party, like other bourgeois parties, supported the US occupation of the “nation” under the pretext of overthrowing the Baath regime. Now, it supports the idea that the US forces remain in Iraq. In regard to the nature of the political regime in Iraq, it seeks to secure a post in the US “democratic” administration. The ICP has joined other reactionary Islamic, ethnocentric, and tribal parties, and supports their plan to establish an ethnic federation and introduce a constitution based on religion, ethnicity and tribalism.

The WCPI on the other hand struggles for the immediate withdrawal of the US and UK forces and establishing a direct regime of the masses. It struggles for establishing a non-religious, non- nationalist but rather a civil and civilized authority, which treats all citizens equally regardless of their nationality, religion, sex or race and is able to provide food, security and freedom for all. The best government, which can secure all these demands, is the socialist republic, which also can end all the obstacles, which face humanity and end all kinds of oppression and exploitation.

It is clear from the above-mentioned differences and the political stands taken by the two parties, that there is no similarity or any relation between them. Moreover, there is a large similarity politically and practical between the ICP and other bourgeois parties.

Therefore instead of asking us; what are your differences with the ICP? The question should be directed to the ICP; what are your differences with the other bourgeois parties, which support the US and UK troops in Iraq, the federal provisional government and integration of religion with the state and education?

Conclusions:

Finally, I would like to say to the Left in the society that Iraq has entered a new stage and that the Iraqi political arena is open before all social movements including of course, the Communist, worker and Left movement. In this new stage, the ICP has taken its clear and overt position alongside the Right forces in the society, beside the US and the Islamic and ethnocentric forces. It has no leftist or communist features.

The Worker Communist Party of Iraq currently holds the banner of the Left and Communism. This party leads the struggle for workers’ revolution, freedom, equality and realistic reformism.

Ten years ago this party shaped its political and social principles and formulated all the objectives and aspirations of the left in its written program and policies. With an organised rank, WCPI stands firmly committed to its program vis-à-vis the right-wing forces. Therefore, it is necessary for all those who regard themselves as part of the Left, who share the objectives of the working class and their hope to see a better world, to rethink about the current situation of the ICP. They need to reexamine its social and political position, regardless of their historic relationships with this party, and to leave its ranks and join the WCPI as many communist and leftist activists have done during last 10 years.

During this period many of those who regard themselves as part of the society’s Left came to us driven by humanist and egalitarian objectives and joined the WCPI and thus started a new history for themselves. Comrade Hekmat Kotani, the well-known figure of the Iraqi worker and Communist movement was an example of this trend, and very quickly he took a leading position in our party.

In current atmosphere in Iraq, the position that one takes is obvious for all. The ICP is part of the Right and the front for the USA and other reactionary forces, even though it was able to pose as a left force or relate itself to the Left and Communism up until 1991. The ICP is not the continuation of its past history because it has lost all leftist characteristics and has become part of the Right. It is now revolving within the USA orbit and has assumed right-wing policies in all fields. The leftists and communists have their own leadership now, and therefore they no longer need to resort to the ICP. The special importance of the WCPI is that it has differentiated and separated the ranks of the left from the right-wing forces. This party is part of the egalitarian and workers’ front; it is leading the struggle for a better world and a socialist society.

I call on all communist and leftists to join this party and use it as a tool to struggle and to strengthen the movement toward victory. The victory of workers, left communism and human aspirations, rely on the victory of this party.

title: Talk:Worker-communist Party of Iraq


text:
Talk:Piedmontese

Moved from Piemontese language to simply Piedmontese so we avoid flames on dialect vs. language. --Orzetto 10:20, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Piedmontese


text:
Rye railway station (East Sussex)

Rye railway station is a Grade II listed station, serving Rye, East Sussex, England. It is on the Marshlink line between Hastings and Ashford International and is the principal station between those two terminals. The station is a passing place between two single-track sections. Services are provided by Southern, usually between Eastbourne and Ashford.

A station at Rye was first planned in the early 1840s, though on a different route to what was opened. It was built by the South Eastern Railway as the central station on the line from Hastings to Ashford, opening in 1851. Despite recommendation for closure in the 1963 Beeching Report, it has remained open because of poor quality road connections. The station building was designed by William Tress; it was Grade II listed in 1980, while an 1894 signal box was listed in 2013.

Location
The station is on Cinque Ports Street to the north of the town centre, between two level crossings to the west and east. There are two platforms, one for trains to Ashford and the other for Hastings. The line is double track through the station providing a passing loop for trains on the Marshlink line, which is single-track between Ore and Appledore. The staggered platforms are linked by a footbridge. There is a waiting room on Platform 2 (Hastings bound).

Stagecoach South East bus routes 70, 100, 101, 102, 292, 293, 312, 313, 326, 342 and 553 serve the station.

Background
A station at Rye was proposed in April 1840, when the Tenterden, Rye & Hastings Branch Railway planned a line from the South Eastern Main Line near Smarden to Hastings via Tenterden and Rye. At the time, harbour duties were not charged at Rye, making it a suitable port for goods traffic. The following year, it was estimated that a single-track line from the South Eastern Main Line to Hastings via Rye could be built for £250,000 (£ in ). The company attempted to negotiate construction with the South Eastern Railway (SER), who thought the route was a poor choice and preferred to reach Hastings from Tunbridge Wells via Penshurst.

In 1844, the SER became concerned that the Brighton, Lewes & Hastings Railway (BLHR) would extend its line beyond Hastings to Rye and Ashford. A compromise was reached whereby the BLHR was granted permission to build the line with an option for the SER to take over if necessary. The River Rother to the east of Rye was still navigable and required a moveable crossing. Peter W. Barlow designed a swing-bridge to carry the line over the river. Both this bridge and the one over the River Tillingham to the west required approach ramps on an otherwise flat stretch of railway.

The SER's contract stipulated that the company should contribute £10,000 (£ as of ) towards improving Rye Harbour, and Robert Stephenson recommended a branch line for goods traffic. This was constructed west of the station and the River Tillingham, running to the harbour pier on the opposite side of the river to the town. The branch line never carried passengers and has been demolished.

Opening
The first train to Rye ran on 28 October 1850, before the line had been fully completed. The Mayor of London travelled from London Bridge to Rye via Ashford and gave a short speech at the station. It opened on 13 February 1851, along with stations at Ham Street, Appledore and Winchelsea. A coal stage opened in 1854, and new goods sidings were added in 1874.

In 1859, a proposal was made to link Rye with Folkestone via Lydd and Dymchurch. The SER declined to finance the line. In 1864, the Weald of Kent Railway proposed building a line from Paddock Wood to Appledore (and hence to Rye) via Tenterden. The scheme was cancelled two years later.

Post-opening
The swing bridge to the east of the station over the River Rother was replaced by a fixed bridge in 1903. A footbridge was installed across the staggered platforms at the station in 1960, in preparation for the Kent electrification scheme Phase 2 of the British Railways Modernisation Plan, which provisionally included the line through Rye.

The line was recommended to be closed in the 1963 Beeching Report, but because of poor road connections, it remained open along with its stations. The prolonged threat of closure left the station unmodernised and gaslit well into the 1970s. On 1 October 1979, the Marshlink line either side of Rye was reduced to a single track, leaving a passing loop at the station. Though done for economic reasons, it created bottlenecks, and invited criticism.

The station was Grade II listed in April 1980 owing to its "special architectural or historic interest". The goods shed, which was closed in 1963, was demolished in 1984.

In November 2023, the station was closed for safety reasons while a bonfire event in the town took place.

Buildings
Construction of the station building began in 1847. It was designed by William Tress in symmetric Italianate style of two storeys with an attic in red brick with a slate roof and set of gateless gate pillars. As Rye was planned to be a more significant stop than Appledore or Winchelsea, it was designed to be bigger than those. Tress also designed a goods shed in a similar style, sited alongside the main station building.

Several SER stations were retrofitted with signals on the line in the early 1890s. The box at Rye was built in 1894 using a Saxby & Farmer Type 12 design. It retains its original 1888 pattern Duplex frame, though the original 30-lever manual signals were replaced by coloured lights on 1 October 1979. The ground floor is constructed of Flemish bond brown brick, the first floor is made of timber with weatherboard cladding, and the building is covered by a slate roof. The signal box was Grade II listed in 2013 as it is one of only two of its type still standing in good condition. In 2019, it was repainted and refurbished.

Services
All services at Rye are operated by Southern using diesel multiple units.

The typical off-peak service in trains per hour is:
 * 1 tph to Eastbourne via Hastings
 * 1 tph to Ashford International

Late at night, services only run to Ashford and Hastings.

Previously, westbound trains ran as an express service to Brighton although this was changed to a stopping service to Eastbourne in the May 2018 timetable change.

Until 2020, shuttle trains ran between Rye and Ashford during peak hours. These were withdrawn as part of the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, but briefly reappeared in June 2023. As of late 2023, there are no peak shuttle services.

There have been several proposals to integrate the Marshlink line with High Speed 1 at Ashford, which would allow a direct connection between Rye and St Pancras, with estimated times of less than an hour (down from 85 minutes). In 2018, Network Rail announced a fast service from St Pancras to Hastings would stop at Rye, and could be implemented by 2024. However, the date remains uncertain despite support from Amber Rudd, a former Member of Parliament for Hastings and Rye.

title: Rye railway station (East Sussex)


text:
Rahn

Rahn may refer to:

People

 * Helmut Rahn (1929–2003), German footballer
 * Johann Rahn (1622–1676), Swiss mathematician
 * Matthias Rahn (born 1990), German footballer
 * Muriel Rahn (1911–1961), American singer and actress
 * Otto Rahn (1904–1939), German medievalist and an Obersturmführer of the SS
 * Richard W. Rahn (born 1942), American economist
 * Uwe Rahn (born 1962), German footballer
 * Werner Rahn (born 1939), German historian and former naval officer

Places

 * Rahn, Iran
 * Rahn, Oman
 * Rahn Township, Pennsylvania, U.S.

title: Rahn