text:
Talk:Audio Stream Input/Output

ASIO list archive link doesn't work anymore. I'll remove it there are no objections. Shinobu 15:10, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

History of the ASIO Standard
There is nothing on the history of the standard. It would be helpful if we had some info on the begining and major milestones. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.71.108 (talk) 02:26, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

ASIO4ALL
Should we include a more detailed section on ASIO4ALL? Also, I have redirected ASIO4ALL to come to this article. Ishmael Rufus (talk) 17:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Cleanup
Don't clutter the article with discussion about the article. That's what this page is for. Removed the controversial statement and a following confusing sentence ("They were then bought by Yamaha in late 2004 after years of joint development.") Also corrected the stub; this has nothing to do with networking. Also, is the comment abuot DirectSound entirely accurate? Sony ACID and SoundForge seem to use it just fine, and from my limited experience programming against it, even in a .NET environment, it seems more than capable of low-latency I/O. DCrazy

I noticed this article seems to favor American spellings. cf. synchronization. Just taking note in case someone decides it should be ise instead Sumergocognito 06:42, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

SDK links
The link to the Pinnacle FTP site for SDK download requires a password ... if the password cannot be released, the link should be removed. Also, the link to the Steinberg site is to the home page ... I'll see if I can find a direct link.

wrong name
As in the german version of the article, the name is wrong. As it is in the specification, the name of the ASIO protocoll is Audio Streaming Input Output

I think a key sentence in this entry might be mistakenly inverted
Sorry, but can't help thinking that the second part of the second sentence of the item might be a mistake. It says:

"ASIO allows musicians and sound engineers to process their audio via Windows computer software instead of external hardware."

Is this not the exact opposite of the situation? I thought I understood that the point of ASIO (also kernel streaming, which I think may be essentially the same thing) is to allow you to output a bit-perfect data stream from your computer to an external digital/analogue converter (or high-performance internal soundcard), including via USB in the case of an external device.

I suggest the sentence should read: "ASIO allows musicians and sound engineers to process their audio via external hardware instead of Windows computer software."

A simple error, I expect, but with a profound impact on the credibility of the item. Perhaps it could be corrected?

Dc23 (talk) 01:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't we mean sound/audio instead of video?

 * ASIO bypasses the normal audio path from the user application through layers of intermediary Windows operating system software, so that the application connects directly to the videocard hardware. Each layer that is bypassed means a reduction in latency, the delay between an application sending video information and it being reproduced by the videocard, or input signals from the videocard being available to the application. In this way ASIO offers a relatively simple way of accessing multiple audio inputs and outputs independently.
 * Shouldn't this read connects directly to the audio card? Geocrash (talk) 14:40, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I've let this comment sit for 3 days now with no responses. Because ASIO has nothing at all to do with my video card, I am going to make the changes in the article. Geocrash (talk) 10:55, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I see that User:Dhethic already took care of it. Cheers, Geocrash (talk) 10:57, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Operating Systems section
To me it's not entirely clear what the function of this section is. In the introduction if the article it's already clear that ASIO is a Windows driver protocol, so a section on operating systems comes somewhat as a surprise. The section itself seems to be more about the (in itself relevant) question why ASIO is needed (and some less relevant boasting about other OSs that presumably don't need such a driver) than about Operating Systems. Moreover I think the sentence "WaveRT cannot provide synchronized audio to multiple devices and does not support external clocks." should be removed as it does in no way make clear why this information is relavant (do other OSs have these features? is this a problem? does ASIO solve this problem?) Elmarj (talk) 22:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Linkfarm
I have removed the "External links" section. It was an indiscriminate collection of non-notable products. The sole criterion for inclusion in this section was: Someone added it. Of all the links included, the best description, IMO, was "yet another independent universal ASIO driver for Windows. Project appears to have been abandoned". External links should be reliable sources that provide additional information on the subject of the article, not links to various projects and products connected to the subject. - Sum mer PhD  (talk) 15:40, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

False Claims about DirectSound
The article claims that DirectSound would not permit direct hardware access. In fact, the opposite is the case: DirectSound offers the programmer to install callbacks that are called straight from the hardware driver. It's even possible to have a callback called N samples before a waveform finishes playing. 93.228.40.213 (talk) 01:41, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Windows Core Audio not mentioned
The article fails to compare ASIO to Windows Core Audio, which is the "new" audio interface that was introduced with Windows Vista. 93.228.40.213 (talk) 01:43, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Audio Stream Input/Output


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Toney K. Lakufash

 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. — Xezbeth  19:33, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

Toney K. Lakufash
NN, vanity. 0 (in words: zero) Google hits for the family name of this legend. Rl 15:10, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete this is a little sticky because many hits would likely be in Greek or Hebrew. But a family that owns lots of "properties in Europe and the Middle East" would almost certainly come up in English now and then. I also don't see a anything in ten years of financial news articles on LexisNexis for "lakufash" or "la kufash". CDC   (talk)  16:30, 11 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.

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


text:
Edwin A. Goodman

Edwin A. Goodman, (1918 – August 23, 2006) was a Canadian lawyer and political figure.

Goodman graduated from Toronto's Osgoode Hall Law School in 1947 and was one of the founding partners of Goodmans LLP, a Toronto law firm as well as a life bencher of the Law Society of Upper Canada. He is best known, however, for his political work as an advisor and fundraiser for both the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada and particularly the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario, having been a friend and advisor to both Premier John Robarts and Premier Bill Davis. He has served as the national chair of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada and as vice-president of both the Ontario and federal Progressive Conservative Party.

Goodman was also active in charity work as honorary president of Scouts Canada and as a director for various bodies such as the Baycrest Centre for Geriatric Care and Princess Margaret Hospital. He was also chairman of the Royal Ontario Museum for six years.

He was considered a Red Tory and was part of the circle known as the Big Blue Machine that helped keep the Ontario Tories in power under Robarts and Davis.

He once ran for public office losing to Communist J.B. Salsberg of the Labor-Progressive Party after World War II.

In April 1975 his daughter Joanne Goodman was killed in a highway accident. He named a lecture series at the University of Western Ontario which every year invites a history to give a series of lectures to the University community

In 1992, Goodman was named to the Security Intelligence Review Committee and was appointed to the Queen's Privy Council for Canada.

His autobiography, The Life of the Party, was published in 1988. He is also an Officer of the Order of Canada.

Goodman died following a heart attack.

title: Edwin A. Goodman


text:
User talk:Computerdude33

Welcome!

'''Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my New-Users' Talk Page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language

Happy editing! Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 15:11, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Sumltronicon.png
Thanks for uploading Image:Sumltronicon.png. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 08:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Smultron
Another editor has added the " " template to the article Smultron, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the editor doesn't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and has explained why in the article (see also What Wikipedia is not and Notability). Please either work to improve the article if the topic is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia or discuss the relevant issues at its talk page. If you remove the  template, the article will not be deleted, but note that it may still be sent to Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. BJBot (talk) 20:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

title: User talk:Computerdude33


text:
Deewaar (disambiguation)

Deewaar is a 1975 Indian film.

Deewaar or Deewar may also refer to:

 * Deewaar: Let's Bring Our Heroes Home, a 2004 Indian film
 * Deewar (TV series), an Indian television show on TV Asia

title: Deewaar (disambiguation)


text:
Talk:Moisturizer

Questionable Claim: Mineral Oils replacing Vegetable Oils
The "Kinds" section includes the following paragraph:

"Mineral oils and waxes are insensitive to oxidation or rancidity.[12] For this reason, they have essentially replaced vegetable oils in emollients and topical medication."

The claim that mineral oils have "essentially replaced vegetable oils in emollients" seems incorrect. There are plenty of moisturizers on the market that are made with vegetable oils rather than mineral oils. Therefore, the second sentence of this paragraph should be removed. 74.70.85.94 (talk) 21:03, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Adding content
I used this article for a school project. I added content to the lead section "Moisturizers are products used to add hydration to the skin. I Aldo added to the mechanisms in action section. I added information about parabens as well as lipidization. To the Kinds section I added different vitamins that should be used in your products. these consisted of Vitamins D, C, E, and K. I also added to this section that having an SPF 15 included in your moisturizer is beneficial. Adding to the over moituriztion section I added information relating to if you over moisturize your skin will not have a better a ppearnce but is more damaging and harmful to your skin then it does any good. In this section I also added that you should apply moisturizer in a thin layer so that your skin is still able to breathe.Kayap1 (talk) 02:26, 2 April 2022 (UTC)

sourcing
I was actually in the process of undoing my last edit, but is questionable but at least better than the other unreliable, spam source. PRAXIDICAE🌈 00:26, 8 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Cool. I'm fine with using a different source. It references a newer study with more information, so that works out. Sorry about the confrontation. ImmunoFrontiers didn't strike me as an unreliable source at first glance... the information was verifiably accurate and it didn't seem like a puff piece. But after a closer examination, they don't have a lot of information about who writes the articles and their credentials. My goal just was to use a secondary source that refs a primary research paper on the topic, but avoid any direct citations to primary research papers. --Elephanthunter (talk) 01:05, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Humectant-moisturizer source
I made this edit, stating that the source is outdated and needs a review in its place. This 2001 primary research in guinea pigs is the source in question. It is 23 years out of date, with no confirmatory review since, and was a study of moisturizing in the presence of an oil - a further complicating factor for the content of the questionable sentence.

WP:BURDEN states that the editor wishing to add or defend content needs to provide an appropriate source, WP:MEDANIMAL, preferably a reputable review. We do not have such a source. Zefr (talk) 02:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Moisturizer


text:
Sir Aldingar

Sir Aldingar is Child ballad 59. Francis James Child collected three variants, two fragmentary, in The English and Scottish Popular Ballads. All three recount the tale where a rebuffed Sir Aldingar slanders his mistress, Queen Eleanor, and a miraculous champion saves her.

Various forms of the legend it recounts have been recorded in many ballads, romances, and sagas. Although many have been recounted as historical accurate, no evidence supports any such claims.

Synopsis
Sir Aldingar is King Henry II's steward. He tries to seduce Queen Eleanor. When he fails, he puts a leper in her bed and goes to the king, saying the queen has taken a lover, and worse, a leper as that lover. The king goes to see and find the leper there.

Accused, Queen Eleanor notes that Sir Aldingar is false, and that her belief that dreams were false is disproved, because she dreamed of a beast that had stolen her crown and headdress, and would have carried her off if a merlin had not stopped it. She demands trial by combat. The king gives her forty days to find a champion. The queen's messenger is unable to find anyone for a long time, until he finds a child not four years old who will. The messenger is shocked, but the child bids him remind the queen of her dream.

Sir Aldingar does not want to fight a child, but the child insists and defeats him. Mortally wounded, the knight calls for a priest for Confession and admits to framing the queen.

The leper is turned into a healthy man and becomes a steward to the king.

Variants
The Scandavian ballad Ravengaard og Memering closely parallels this one. The heroine Gunhilda is said to have been the daughter of Canute the Great and Emma. She married in 1036 King Henry, afterwards the emperor Henry III; a century later, William of Malmesbury gave this legend as authentic history of her life, though there is no evidence for it. It was retold in the Spanish romance Olivia, the chanson de geste Doon l'Alemanz, as part of the English romance Sir Triamour, and in the legend of Genevieve of Brabant. In the Erl of Toulouse, the hero is merely a disinterested champion, a knight, but the plot is nevertheless recognizably the same as Sir Aldingar.

title: Sir Aldingar


text:
User talk:Richardwooding

Welcome!

'''Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my New-Users' Talk Page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language

Happy editing! Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 15:12, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

za list.
Feel free to ad your name to the list of South African Wikipedians. — Jeandré, 2005-07-07t17:44z

Please unblock me
The reason I was blocked was provided as follows:

"Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Netsnipe for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "Adriaan 1". The reason given for Adriaan 1's block is: "Use of 72.232.98.64 to vandalise userpages.".

Your IP address is 198.54.202.254. "

I am sure that the IP address blocked is an IP address belonging to an upstream service provider (please note that South Africa at the moment has a Telekom monopoly), if this is the case it is likely that a very large amount of users have been blocked, I do not know and am not associated with "Adriaan 1".

Richardwooding 14:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 23:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Adoption
Howdy! I noticed that you have a request for adoption on your page. While I don't consider myself anything special, I have been told that I am an experienced editor, and if you would so wish, I would like to adopt you! :) Drop me a line on my talk page! GofG undefinedundefinedundefined  Contribs 23:14, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Cool! I've never done this, so um... if you need help with anything, drop me a line at my talk page! I noticed you have been editing Methamphetamine. Is this because of an interest in medicine, or maybe atomic physics? If so, there are some Wikiprojects you might want to join, to put you with like-minded editors editing articles under a range of different topics. Just a suggestion! :) GofG undefinedundefinedundefined  Contribs 02:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Ah, you live in South Africa? Perhaps you should become involved in the article on South Africa, or on some of the specific towns and cities in South Africa. Most of the English wikipedia is based in western countries, and as such I'm sure any expertise on those articles would be appreciated. If you're bored, of course, there is always antivandalism work to do. Try out User:Lupin/Anti-vandal_tool if you want to do some antivandalism work; it is an awesome tool. GofG undefinedundefinedundefined  Contribs 03:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Hehe by Western, i kinda actually meant... Well, the West of the world. West Europe and USA, etc. Like, while there are countries in other places that are considered Western, the English wikipedia doesn't have many editors from them, because they oftentimes don't speak English. GofG undefinedundefinedundefined  Contribs 14:51, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

 * Ah yeah, well, when you hit "Show details" you can look at teh diff. If you believe the diff to be vandalism, you can hit "Rollback" and revert it. Then, hit "warn" to warn the editor with one of the standard warnings: through . After test four, if they continue to vandalise, you can report them to WP:AIV and they will be blocked. Hope that helps :)  GofG undefinedundefinedundefined  Contribs 18:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
 * About the language, I never knew that! Hehe I guess I need to read up on South Africa :). GofG undefinedundefinedundefined  Contribs 20:57, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Wikimania 2008 in Cape Town
Hi. Would you be interested in helping to ensure Wikimania 2008 is held in Cape Town? If so, please go to the Cape Town bid page, and sign up on the discussion page. Feel free to dive right in with adding suggestions, or fleshing out the bid! I'd greatly appreciate any help, no matter how small. Greenman 23:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Chris Beasley
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Chris Beasley, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Chris Beasley. Wizardman 14:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Richardwooding! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 1 of the articles that you created  is an  Unreferenced Biography of a Living Person. Please note that all biographies of living persons must be sourced. If you were to add reliable, secondary sources to this article, it would greatly help us with the current Category:All_unreferenced_BLPs article backlog. Once the article is adequately referenced, please remove the unreferencedBLP tag. Here is the article:

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 19:23, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Kevin Smith (South African actor) -

Call for Wikipedians in Residence in Africa
Hello,

I hope you are well and thriving!! WikiAfrica has just put out a call for two Wikipedians in Residence. One in Cape Town at WikiAfrica, at the Africa Centre; and the other for WikiAfrica Cameroon in Douala, at doual’art. If you are interested, please contact either Marilyn [marilyn.doualabell@undefineddoualart.org] for the WikiAfrica Cameroon call or Isla [islahf@undefinedafricacentre.net] for the WikiAfrica position in Cape Town.

If you are not interested in applying, I would be very grateful if you could spread this call far and wide among your networks to ensure that both projects get excellent candidates. Here is the link for the information page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/two-wikipedians-in-residence-for-africa/

Best regards, Islahaddow

(This message was sent using Lucia Bot at 22:31, 16 November 2012 (UTC))

title: User talk:Richardwooding


text:
User talk:Res-Q

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Deb 15:13, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

title: User talk:Res-Q


text:
Talk:Metanoeite

This text should be integrated into Repentance - that's the same Biblical word. --Irmgard 15:13, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

title: Talk:Metanoeite


text:
User talk:Oliver Chettle

This user has also edited as, , and earlier as. He has stated that he doesn't intend to use any of those accounts again. ALoan (Talk) 09:31, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Chatsworth House
Hi Oliver. I noticed your request for pictures at Talk:Chatsworth House. I have 21 pictures (of varying quality) at. I'll upload them to the Commons eventually, but if there are any that catch your fancy, let me know which and I'll put them up immediately. dbenbenn | talk 4 July 2005 21:45 (UTC)

Template:Expansion
Could you please take a look at the above template, it is currently the subject of a revert war where both sides are at the 3RR limit. 13:13, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

Sources for Drawing room
Hello, good work on Drawing room, and thanks for the contribution. However, you did not any references to the article. Keeping Wikipedia accurate and verifiable is very important, and as you might be aware there is currently a push to encourage editors to cite the sources they used when adding content. From what websites, books, or other places did you learn the information that you added to Drawing room? Would it be possible for you to mention them in the article? You can simply add links, or see WP:CITET if you wish to review some of the different citation methods. Thanks! Lupin|talk|popups 23:02, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Arts and entertainment cats
I'm adding a message here to let you know about a vote on Categories for Deletion to rename all the UK "Arts and entertainment in X" categories to "Culture in X". It appears you created many of these under various usernames. I'm opposed to this rename proposal as I consider that "culture" is a vague term and encompasses many more things than the more specific "Arts and entertainment" title. Currently, however, the vote - which closes on December 11 - is weighed heavily in favour of a rename. If you want to demonstrate there is not a consensus for this name change (or indeed if you want to support it), please go to Categories for deletion and vote. Thanks. Valiantis 21:45, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Chew Valley Lake FAC
Hi, I've resubmitted Chew Valley Lake as a featured article candidate, because it didn't receive enough support last time.

As you have edited this page in the past I wondered if you would be willing to visit and comment/support on the nomination? Rod 20:29, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Irish History
You seem like you have a lot a knowledge with respect Irish history so maybe you would like to comment on the historic basis of this term here Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-12-02 IRA 'Volunteer' usage —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DownDaRoad (talk • contribs) 00:44, 8 December 2006 (UTC).

Restaurant (magazine)
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Restaurant (magazine), suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of Restaurant (magazine). Brianyoumans (talk) 17:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:Apsley house on an 1869 Ordnance Survey Map.JPG
File:Apsley house on an 1869 Ordnance Survey Map.JPG is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Apsley house on an 1869 Ordnance Survey Map.JPG. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Frost Fair of 1683.JPG is now available as Commons:File:Frost Fair of 1683.JPG. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 02:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:00, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

File:Horham Hall from The Growth of the English House by J. Alfred Gotch.jpg listed for discussion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Horham Hall from The Growth of the English House by J. Alfred Gotch.jpg, has been listed at Files for discussion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 18:34, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Horham Hall from The Growth of the English House by J. Alfred Gotch.jpg

The file File:Horham Hall from The Growth of the English House by J. Alfred Gotch.jpg has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern: "Orphaned graph/chart/diagram."

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ~ Rob 13 Talk 17:36, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

title: User talk:Oliver Chettle


text:
Talk:The Better Life

Fair use rationale for Image:3DDthebetterlife.jpg
Image:3DDthebetterlife.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 05:22, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:The Better Life 3DD.JPG
Image:The Better Life 3DD.JPG is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 04:27, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned references in The Better Life
I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of The Better Life's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "RIAA": From Hard rock:  From 3 Doors Down discography:

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 20:25, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on The Better Life. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080913221244/http://www.3doorsdown.com:80/bio.aspx to http://www.3doorsdown.com/bio.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:24, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Better Life


text:
Dismal Swamp Canal

The Dismal Swamp Canal is a canal located along the eastern edge of the Great Dismal Swamp in Virginia and North Carolina in the United States. Opened in 1805, it is the oldest continually operating man-made canal in the United States. It is part of the Intracoastal Waterway.

History
In the Colonial period, water transportation was the lifeblood of the North Carolina sounds region and the Tidewater areas of Virginia. The landlocked sounds were entirely dependent upon poor overland tracks or shipment along the treacherous Carolina coast to reach further markets through Norfolk, Virginia. In May 1763, George Washington made his first visit to the Great Dismal Swamp and suggested draining it and digging a north–south canal through it to connect the waters of the Chesapeake Bay in Virginia and Albemarle Sound in North Carolina. As the first president, Washington agreed with Virginia Governor Patrick Henry that canals were the easiest answer for an efficient means of internal transportation and urged their creation and improvement.

In 1784, the Dismal Swamp Canal Company was created. Work was started in 1793. The canal was dug completely by hand; most of the labor was done by slaves rented from nearby landowners. It took approximately 12 years of construction under highly unfavorable conditions to complete the 22-mile long waterway, which opened in 1805. At about the time the canal opened, the Dismal Swamp Hotel was built astride the state line on the west bank. It was a popular spot for lover's trysts as well as duels; the winner was rarely arrested as the dead man, as well as the crime, were in another state. As the state line split the main salon, the hotel was quite popular with gamblers who would simply move the game to the opposite side of the room with the arrival of the sheriff from the other jurisdiction. No trace of the hotel can be found today.

Tolls were charged for maintenance and improvements. In 1829, the channel was deepened. The waterway was an important route of commerce in the era before railroads, such as the Petersburg Railroad, and highways became major transportation modes.

American Civil War
During the American Civil War (1861–1865) the canal was in an important strategic position for Union and Confederate forces. In April, 1862, upon learning of rumors that the canal would be used to help the Confederate ironclad escape from Hampton Roads to the Albemarle Sound in North Carolina, Union General Ambrose E. Burnside sent General Jesse L. Reno from Roanoke Island to destroy the Culpepper Locks near South Mills on the Dismal Swamp Canal. Reno's 3,000 troops disembarked from their transports near Elizabeth City on April 18.

The Union troops advanced the following morning on an exhausting march toward South Mills where Confederate Colonel Ambrose R. Wright posted his 900 men to command the road to the town. Reno encountered Wright's position at noon. The Confederates' determined fighting continued for four hours until their artillery commander, Captain W. W. McComas, was killed. To avoid being flanked, Wright retired behind Joy's Creek, two miles away. General Reno did not pursue them because of his losses and his troops' exhaustion. That evening he heard a rumor that Confederate reinforcements were arriving from Norfolk and ordered a silent march back to the transports near Elizabeth City. The losses were estimated at 114 Union and 25 Confederate soldiers.

The Battle of South Mills was the only battle action near the canal. However, wartime activity left the canal in a terrible state of repair. The repairs and maintenance needed by the canal made travel difficult.

Post-war, 20th century
In 1892, Lake Drummond Canal and Water Company launched rehabilitation efforts and once again, a steady stream of vessels carrying lumber, shingles, farm products, and passengers made the canal a bustling interstate thoroughfare.

By the 1920s, improvements in other modes of transportation meant another downturn for the canal, and commercial traffic had subsided except for passenger vessels. In 1929 it was sold to the federal government for $500,000 (~$ in ). As recreational boating became popular in the mid-20th century, the canal became an important link to provide shelter from the brutal forces of the treacherous Atlantic Coast line off the Carolinas and the Virginia capes.

Current use
In modern times, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers operates and maintains the canal. The Dismal Swamp Canal is one of two inland routes connecting the Chesapeake Bay and the Albemarle Sound. About 2,000 recreational boaters transit the canal each year as they pass through the Intracoastal Waterway.

The canal was closed to boating traffic in October 2016 after Hurricane Matthew caused a flash flood in Chesapeake, Virginia. The runoff from this storm filled the canal with silt and sand, making it impassable. The necessary dredging for navigation on the canal was completed November 2017 to a depth of approximately five feet, and reopened for a short time before closing again, due to being inundated with duckweed. The duckweed clogs the intakes on power boats, quickly causing them to overheat. The Elizabeth River runs almost parallel to the canal, and was not affected by the 2016 flash flood, being much wider and much deeper than the canal. As of March 2018, the canal has been reopened by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. The ICW has remained open during all of this via the Elizabeth River and the North Landing River.

The Virginia portion of the canal was located in Norfolk County, which today is the city of Chesapeake, where the northern portion of the canal at Deep Creek connects with the Southern Branch Elizabeth River.

The southern end of the canal leads to the Albemarle Sound. The Dismal Swamp Canal Visitor Center is the only visitor center in the continental U. S. greeting visitors by both a major highway and a historic waterway. It is located in Camden County, North Carolina, on scenic U.S. Highway 17 three miles south of the Virginia/North Carolina border.

The canal is listed on the National Register of Historic Places and has been designated a National Historic Civil Engineering Landmark. The historic canal is now recognized as part of the Underground Railroad and along with the Great Dismal Swamp, is noted as a former sanctuary for runaway slaves seeking freedom.

The East Coast Greenway, a 3,000-mile long system of trails connecting Maine to Florida, runs along part of the Dismal Swamp Canal Trail.

Boaters visiting the swamp in the Fall need to be very conscious of the level of duckweed clogging the waterway, which can clog water intakes on power boat engines and systems.

title: Dismal Swamp Canal


text:
1933 Banking Act

The Banking Act of 1933 was a statute enacted by the United States Congress that established the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and imposed various other banking reforms. The entire law is often referred to as the Glass–Steagall Act, after its Congressional sponsors, Senator Carter Glass (D) of Virginia, and Representative Henry B. Steagall (D) of Alabama. The term "Glass–Steagall Act", however, is most often used to refer to four provisions of the Banking Act of 1933 that limited commercial bank securities activities and affiliations between commercial banks and securities firms. That limited meaning of the term is described in the article on Glass–Steagall Legislation.

The Banking Act of 1933 (the 1933 Banking Act) joined two long-standing Congressional projects: Although the 1933 Banking Act thus fulfilled Congressional designs and, at least in its deposit insurance provisions, was resisted by the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Administration, it later became considered part of the New Deal. The deposit insurance and many other provisions of the Act were criticized during Congressional consideration. The entire Act was long-criticized for limiting competition and thereby encouraging an inefficient banking industry. Supporters of the Act cite it as a central cause for an unprecedented period of stability in the U.S. banking system during the ensuing four or, in some accounts, five decades following 1933.
 * 1) A federal system of bank deposit insurance championed by Representative Steagall
 * 2) The regulation (or prohibition) of the combination of commercial and investment banking and other restrictions on "speculative" bank activities championed by Senator Glass as part of a general desire to "restore" commercial banking to the purposes envisioned by the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

Creation of FDIC and federal deposit insurance
The 1933 Banking Act established (1) the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC); (2) temporary FDIC deposit insurance limited to $2,500 per accountholder starting January 1934 through June 30, 1934; and (3) permanent FDIC deposit insurance starting July 1, 1934, fully insuring $5,000 per accountholder. 1934 legislation delayed the effectiveness of the permanent insurance system. The Banking Act of 1935 repealed the permanent system and replaced it with a system that fully insured balances up to $5,000 and provided no insurance for balances above that amount. Over the years, the limit has been raised which reached up to its current limit of $250,000.

The 1933 Banking Act required all FDIC-insured banks to be, or to apply to become, members of the Federal Reserve System by July 1, 1934. The Banking Act of 1935 extended that deadline to July 1, 1936. State banks were not eligible to be members of the Federal Reserve System until they became stockholders of the FDIC, and thereby became an insured institution. 1939 legislation repealed the requirement that FDIC-insured banks join the Federal Reserve System.

Before 1950, the laws establishing the FDIC and FDIC insurance were part of the Federal Reserve Act. 1950 legislation created the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (FDIA).

Separation of commercial and investment banking
Over time, the term Glass–Steagall Act came to be used most often to refer to four provisions of the 1933 Banking Act that separated commercial banking from investment banking. Congressional efforts to "repeal the Glass–Steagall Act" referred to those four provisions (and then usually to only the two provisions that restricted affiliations between commercial banks and securities firms). Those efforts culminated in the 1999 Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), which repealed the two provisions restricting affiliations between banks and securities firms. The 1933 Banking Act's separation of investment and commercial banking is described in the article on the Glass–Steagall Act. Institutions were given one year to decide whether they wanted to specialize in commercial or investment banking.

Creation of the Federal Open Market Committee
The act had a large impact on the Federal Reserve. Notable provisions included the creation of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) under Section 8. However, the 1933 FOMC did not include voting rights for the Federal Reserve Board, which was revised by the Banking Act of 1935 and amended again in 1942 to closely resemble the modern FOMC.

Regulation Q
To decrease competition between commercial banks and discourage risky investment strategies, the Banking Act of 1933 outlawed the payment of interest on checking accounts and also placed ceilings on the amount of interest that could be paid on other deposits.

Regulation of "speculation"
Several provisions of the 1933 Banking Act sought to restrict "speculative" uses of bank credit. Section 3(a) required each Federal Reserve Bank to monitor local member bank lending and investment to ensure there was not "undue use" of bank credit for "speculative trading or carrying" of securities, commodities or real estate. Section 7 limited the total amount of loans a member bank could make secured by stocks or bonds and permitted the Federal Reserve Board to impose tighter restrictions and to not limit the total amount of such loans that could be made by member banks in any Federal Reserve district. Section 11(a) prohibited Federal Reserve member banks from acting as agents for nonbanks in placing loans to brokers or dealers. Glass also hoped to put "speculative" credit into more productive sectors of the U.S. economy.

Other provisions still in effect
Other provisions of the 1933 Banking Act that remain in effect include (1) Sections 5(c) and 27, which required state member banks to provide its district's Federal Reserve Bank and the Federal Reserve Board and national banks to provide the Comptroller of the Currency a minimum of three reports on their affiliates; (2) Section 13, which (as Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act) regulated transactions between Federal Reserve member banks and their nonbank affiliates; (3) Sections 19 and 30, which established criminal penalties for misconduct by officers or directors of Federal Reserve System member banks and authorized the Federal Reserve to remove such officers or directors; (4) Section 22, which eliminated personal liability ("double liability") for new shareholders of national banks; and (5) Section 23, which gave national banks the same ability to establish branches in their "home state" as state chartered banks in that state.

The 1933 Banking Act gave tighter regulation of national banks to the Federal Reserve which required state member banks and holding companies to make three reports annually. The reports were to be given to their Federal Reserve Board and Federal Reserve Bank.

Other provisions repealed or replaced
Provisions of the 1933 Banking Act that were later repealed or replaced include (1) Sections 5(c) and 19, which required an owner of more than 50% of a Federal Reserve System member bank's stock to receive a permit from (and submit to inspection by) the Federal Reserve Board to vote that stock (replaced by the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956); (2) Section 8, which established the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) made up of representatives from each of the 12 Federal Reserve Banks (revised by the Federal Reserve Board-dominated FOMC established by the Banking Act of 1935 and later amended in 1942); (3) Section 11(b), which prohibited interest payments on demand deposits (repealed by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 and allowing interest-bearing demand accounts beginning July 21, 2011) and authorized the Federal Reserve Board to limit interest rates on time deposits (phased out by the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980 by 1986), both of which interest limitations were incorporated into Regulation Q, and (4) Section 12, which prohibited Federal Reserve System member bank loans to their executive officers and required the repayment of outstanding loans (replaced by the 1935 Banking Act's regulation of such loans and modified by later legislation).

1930–1932 Glass bills; Glass Senate subcommittee
Between 1930 and 1932 Senator Glass introduced several versions of a bill (known in each version as the Glass bill) to separate commercial and investment banking and to establish other reforms (except deposit insurance) similar to the final provisions of the 1933 Banking Act. Glass had been the House sponsor of the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 (the Glass-Owen Act) and considered himself "the father of the Federal Reserve System". The various versions of his Glass bill consistently sought to (1) expand branch banking and bring more banks and activities under Federal Reserve supervision and (2) separate (or regulate the mix of) commercial and investment banking.

Glass sought to "correct" what he considered to be the "errors" the Federal Reserve System had made in not controlling what he considered "speculative credit" during the 1920s. The Glass bills also sought to avoid deposit insurance by providing for a "Liquidation Corporation", a federal authority to purchase assets of a closed bank based on "an approximately correct valuation of its assets". Glass's idea was for a federal corporation to assume ownership of the assets of failed banks and sell them over time as the market could absorb them, rather than dump assets onto markets with little demand. The bills provided that such payments would be used to make immediate payments to depositors to the extent of the bank's "bona fide assets".

Glass introduced the first Glass bill on June 17, 1930. The bill's language indicated that it was intended as a "tentative measure to serve as a guide" for a subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Banking and Currency (the Glass Subcommittee) chaired by Glass that was authorized to investigate the operations of the National and Federal Reserve banking systems.

On January 25, 1933, during the lame duck session of Congress following the 1932 elections, the Senate passed a version of the Glass bill.

Commercial banking theory; unit banks
Senator Glass supported a commercial banking theory (associated with the real bills doctrine) that commercial banks should no longer be allowed to underwrite or deal in securities. This theory, defended by Senator Glass's longtime advisor Henry Parker Willis, had served as a foundation for the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and earlier US banking law. Glass and Willis argued the failure of banks to follow, and of the Federal Reserve to enforce, this theory had resulted in the "excesses" that inevitably led to the Wall Street Crash of 1929 and the Great Depression.

Before and after the Wall Street Crash of 1929 Senator Glass used this commercial banking theory to criticize banks for their involvement in securities markets. Glass condemned banks for lending to stock market "speculators" and for underwriting "risky" or "utterly worthless" securities, particularly foreign securities, that were sold to unsophisticated bank depositors and small "correspondent banks".

Glass opposed direct bank involvement in these activities and indirect involvement through "securities affiliates". Such affiliates were typically owned by the same shareholders as the bank, with the affiliate's shares held in a "voting trust" or other device that ensured bank management controlled the affiliate. Glass and Willis viewed such affiliates as artificial devices to evade limits on bank activities. Large banks such as National City Bank (predecessor to Citibank) and Chase National Bank typically used such securities affiliates to underwrite securities.

Glass and Willis criticized all forms of "illiquid loans" including bank real estate lending. They were, however, especially critical of bank securities activities. Willis identified bank investments in, and loans to finance purchases of, government securities during World War I as the beginning of the corruption of commercial banking that culminated in the "speculative excesses" of the 1920s.

Glass and Willis also identified the "unit banking" system of small, single office banks as a basic weakness of U.S. banking. The Glass bills tried to limit banks to their "proper" commercial banking activities and to permit banks to expand their geographic operations through greater permission for branch banking.

Additionally, many small banks were not able to profit in the securities business, leading many small banks to push for deposit insurance. However, many large banks opposed deposit insurance because "they expected deposits running off from small, weak country banks to come to them". Overall, most banks opposed deposit insurance, small banks and large banks, and public opinion was the main factor pushing for the policy.

Unit banks, Federal Reserve System, and deposit insurance
Following his defeat in the 1932 presidential election, President Herbert Hoover supported the Glass bill. In 1932 Hoover had delayed Congressional action on the Glass bill by requesting further hearings and (according to Willis) by working to delay Senate consideration of revised versions of the Glass bill introduced after those hearings.

In the 1933 "lame duck" session of the 72nd United States Congress, the final obstacle to Senate passage came from supporters of small "unit banks" (i.e., single office banks). They opposed the Glass bill's permission for national banks to branch throughout their "home state" and into neighboring states as far as a 50-mile "area of trade".

Even in the extended period of economic prosperity in the 1920s, a large number of "unit banks" in agricultural areas failed as agricultural prices declined. During the Great Depression unit bank failures grew. Willis and others noted that there were no significant bank failures in Canada, despite similar bad economic conditions. Canada permitted branch banking (which had led to a system of large, nationwide banks), but otherwise shared the U.S. system of "commercial banking" distinct from the "universal banks" common in Europe and elsewhere in the world. Glass stated he had originally supported the "little bank" but as so many unit banks failed, he concluded they were a "menace" to "sound banking" and a "curse" to their depositors.

Glass also wanted Federal Reserve supervision of all banks under a "unified banking system". Glass stated "the curse of the banking system for this country is the dual system" under which states could charter banks that were supervised by state officials outside the Federal Reserve System. Under the Federal Reserve Act, all national banks were required to be members of the Federal Reserve System, but state chartered banks could choose whether to join. Glass and others concluded that this had led to a "competition in laxity" between regulators of member and non-member banks.

In opposition to the Glass bill's branch banking provisions, Senator Huey Long (D-LA) filibustered the Glass bill until Glass revised his bill to limit national bank branching rights to states that permitted their own banks to branch. Glass also revised his bill to extend the deadline for banks to dispose of securities affiliates from three to five years. With those changes, the Glass bill passed the Senate in an overwhelming 54–9 vote on January 25, 1933.

In the House of Representatives, Representative Steagall opposed even the revised Glass bill with its limited permission for branch banking. Steagall wanted to protect unit banks, and bank depositors, by establishing federal deposit insurance, thereby eliminating the advantage larger, more financially secure banks had in attracting deposits.

150 separate bills providing some form of federal deposit insurance had been introduced in the United States Congress since 1886. The House had passed a federal deposit insurance bill on May 27, 1932, that was awaiting Senate action during the 1933 "lame duck" session.

After several states had closed their banks in what became the banking crisis of 1933, President Hoover issued a February 20, 1933, plea to the House of Representatives to pass the Glass bill as the "first constructive step to remedy the prime weakness of our whole economic life". On March 4, 1933, however, the lame duck session of the 72nd Congress adjourned without either the Glass bill or the House deposit insurance bill becoming law. On the same day, the Senate reconvened in a special session called by President Hoover and Franklin Delano Roosevelt was inaugurated as the new president.

Glass bills
President Roosevelt called both Houses of Congress into "extraordinary session" on March 9, 1933, to enact the Emergency Banking Act that ratified Roosevelt's emergency closing of all banks on March 6, 1933. On March 11, 1933, Senator Glass reintroduced (as S. 245) his Glass bill revised to require banks to eliminate securities affiliates within 2 years rather than the 5 years permitted by the compromised version of the Glass bill the Senate had passed in January. Roosevelt told Glass he approved most of the bill, including the separation of commercial and investment banking, that he shared Glass's desire for a "unified banking system" with state and national banks regulated by a single authority, but that he only approved countywide, not statewide, branch banking, and that he opposed deposit insurance.

On March 7, 1933, National City Bank (predecessor to Citibank) had announced it would liquidate its security affiliate. The next day, Winthrop Aldrich, the newly named chairman and president of Chase National Bank, announced Chase would do the same and that Chase supported prohibiting banks from having securities affiliates. Aldrich also called for prohibiting securities firms from taking deposits. According to Aldrich and his biographer, Aldrich (a lawyer) drafted new language for Glass's bill that became Section 21 of the Glass–Steagall Act. Contemporary observers suggested Aldrich's proposal was aimed at J.P. Morgan & Co. A later Glass–Steagall critic cited Aldrich's involvement as evidence the Rockefellers (who controlled Chase) had used Section 21 to keep J.P. Morgan & Co. (a deposit taking private partnership best known for underwriting securities) from competing with Chase in the commercial banking business.

After Glass introduced S. 245, he chaired a subcommittee that considered the bill and prepared a revised version while negotiating at length with the Roosevelt Administration to gain its support for the bill. By April 13, 1933, the subcommittee had prepared a revised Glass bill, but delayed submitting the bill to the full Senate Committee on Banking and Currency to continue negotiations with the Roosevelt Administration. President Roosevelt had declared on March 8, 1933, in his first press conference, that he opposed a guarantee of bank deposits for making the government responsible for the "mistakes and errors of individual banks" and for putting "a premium on unsound banking". Glass had reluctantly accepted that no banking reform bill would pass Congress without deposit insurance, but President Roosevelt and Treasury Secretary William Woodin continued to resist such insurance during their negotiations with the Senate subcommittee.

On April 25, 1933, Roosevelt asked for two weeks to consider the deposit insurance issue. In early May, Roosevelt announced with Glass and Steagall that they had agreed "in principle" on a bill.

On May 10, 1933, Glass introduced his revised bill (S. 1631) in the Senate. The most important change was a new provision for deposit insurance. Glass had opposed deposit insurance throughout his career in Congress. As Roosevelt demanded, deposit insurance was based on a sliding scale. Deposit balances above $10,000 would only be partially insured. As Roosevelt had suggested, deposit insurance would not begin for one year. Glass limited the deposit insurance to Federal Reserve System member banks in the hope this would indirectly lead to a "unified banking system" as the attraction of deposit insurance would lead banks to become Federal Reserve members.

Aside from the new federal deposit insurance system, S. 1631 added provisions based on earlier versions of the Glass bill that became Sections 21 (prohibiting securities firms from taking deposits) and 32 (prohibiting common directors or employees for securities firms and banks) of the Glass–Steagall Act.

Steagall bill
On May 16, 1933, Representative Steagall introduced H.R. 5661, which became the vehicle through which the 1933 Banking Act became law. This bill largely adopted provisions of the new Glass bill. Reflecting Steagall's support for the "dual banking system", however, H.R. 5661 permitted state-chartered banks to receive federal deposit insurance without joining the Federal Reserve System.

On May 23, 1933, the House passed H.R. 5661 in a 262–19 vote. On May 25, 1933, the Senate approved H.R. 5661 (in a voice vote) after substituting the language of S. 1631 (amended to shorten to one year the time within which banks needed to eliminate securities affiliates) and requested a House and Senate conference to reconcile differences between the two versions of H.R. 5661.

Banking Act of 1933
The final Senate version of H.R. 5661 included Senator Arthur Vandenberg's (R-MI) amendment providing for an immediate temporary fund to insure fully deposits up to $2,500 before the FDIC began operating on July 1, 1934. The "Vandenberg Amendment" was added to the Senate bill through a procedural maneuver supported by Vice President John Nance Garner, who was over the Senate in a judicial impeachment proceeding. This highlighted the differences between Garner and Roosevelt on the controversial issue of deposit insurance.

Roosevelt threatened to veto any bill that included the Vandenberg Amendment's provision for immediate deposit insurance. On June 7, however, Roosevelt indicated to Glass he would accept a compromise in which permanent FDIC insurance would not begin until July 1934, the limited temporary plan would begin on January 1, 1934, and state banks could be insured so long as they joined the Federal Reserve System by 1936. Roosevelt, like Glass, saw redeeming value in deposit insurance if its requirement for Federal Reserve System membership led to "unifying the banking system".

The Roosevelt Administration had wanted Congress to adjourn its "extraordinary session" on June 10, 1933, but the Senate blocked the planned adjournment. This provided more time for the House and Senate Conference Committee to reconcile differences between the two versions of H.R. 5661. In the House, nearly one-third of the Representatives signed a pledge not to adjourn without passing a bill providing federal deposit insurance.

After Steagall and other House members met with Roosevelt on June 12, 1933, the Conference Committee filed its final report for H.R. 5661. Closely tracking the principles Roosevelt had described to Glass on June 7, the Conference Report provided that permanent deposit insurance would begin July 1, 1934, temporary insurance would begin January 1, 1934, unless the President proclaimed an earlier start date, and state non-member banks could be insured, but after July 1, 1936, would only remain insured if they had applied for Federal Reserve System membership

Although opponents of H.R. 5661 hoped Roosevelt would veto the final bill, he called Senator Glass with congratulations after the Senate passed the bill. Roosevelt signed H.R. 5661 into law on June 16, 1933, as the Banking Act of 1933. Roosevelt called the new law "the most important" banking legislation since the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.

Roosevelt's role in 1933 Banking Act
Time Magazine reported the 1933 Banking Act passed by "accident because a Presidential blunder kept Congress in session four days longer than expected." H. Parker Willis described Roosevelt as treating the final bill with "indifference" but not "hostility".

In his account of the "First New Deal" Raymond Moley stated Roosevelt was "sympathetic" to the 1933 Banking Act "but had no active part in pressing for its passage". Moley also wrote that most of "the people who were close to the White House were so busy with their own legislative programs that Glass was left to his own devices."

Adolf A. Berle, like Moley a member of Roosevelt's First New Deal Brain Trust, was "disappointed" by the 1933 Banking Act. He wished the more extensive branch banking permission in earlier Glass bills had been adopted. Berle concluded that limited branch banking with deposit insurance would preserve small banks certain to fail in an economic downturn, as they had consistently in the past. While Berle shared Glass's hope that the new law's deposit insurance provisions would force all banks into the Federal Reserve System, he correctly feared that future Congresses would remove this requirement.

According to Carter Golembe, the Banking Act of 1933 was the "only important piece of legislation during the New Deal's famous "one hundred days" which was neither requested nor supported by the new administration." In their books on banking events in 1933, Susan Eastabrook Kennedy and Helen Burns concluded that, although the 1933 Banking Act was not part of the New Deal, Roosevelt ultimately preferred it to no banking reform bill even though it did not provide the more "far reaching" reforms (Kennedy ) or "fuller solution" (Burns ) he sought. Both present Roosevelt as being influenced by the strong public demand for deposit insurance in accepting the final bill. Both also describe the Banking Act of 1935 as being more significant than the 1933 Banking Act.

Kennedy notes that after the 1933 Banking Act became law Roosevelt "claimed full credit, to the amusement or outrage of contemporary and hindsighted observers".

Roosevelt's concerns with the 1933 Banking Act were not tied to what later became known as the "Glass–Steagall" separation of investment and commercial banking. The 1932 Democratic Party platform provisions on banking (drafted by Senator Glass) called for that separation. In a campaign speech Roosevelt specifically endorsed such separation. In 1935 President Roosevelt opposed Glass's effort to restore national bank powers to underwrite corporate securities. Roosevelt confirmed to Glass in March 1933, that he supported the separation of commercial and investment banking, although Treasury Secretary Woodin feared that prohibiting bank underwriting of securities would "dampen recovery".

Accounts describing 1933 Banking Act as New Deal legislation
Despite the Congressional origins of, and President Roosevelt's lack of support for, the 1933 Banking Act, many descriptions of the New Deal or of the 1933 Banking Act refer to the Act as New Deal legislation.

In the prologue to his classic account of the New Deal, Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr. suggests Felix Frankfurter and his colleagues were the source for the 1933 Banking Act (along with the Securities Act of 1933) in the tradition of "trust-busting liberalism". In that book's later brief description of the 1933 Banking Act, however, Schlesinger does not mention Frankfurter and focuses on the role of the Pecora Investigation and opposition to deposit insurance, including from Roosevelt, in the debate over the legislation.

The Commerce Clearing House explanation of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act quoted Roosevelt as calling the 1933 Banking Act "the most important and far-reaching legislation ever enacted by the American Congress." Roosevelt made that statement about the National Industrial Recovery Act on the same day he signed the 1933 Banking Act.

Glass–Steagall provisions and the Pecora Investigation
Many descriptions of the 1933 Banking Act emphasize the role of the Pecora Investigation in creating a public demand for the separation of commercial and investment banking. Some accounts even suggest those Glass–Steagall provisions were created in response to the Pecora Investigation.

National City Bank (predecessor to Citibank) was the only commercial bank examined by Ferdinand Pecora before the 1933 Banking Act became law in June 1933. After the National City hearings ended on March 2, 1933, the Pecora Investigation resumed in May 1933, with the examination of "private bankers", covering J.P. Morgan & Co., Kuhn, Loeb & Co., and Dillon, Read & Co., before returning to a commercial bank with the examination of Chase National Bank beginning in late October 1933. Although those hearings, therefore, took place after the 1933 Banking Act became law, testimony from the lengthy Chase hearings is often cited as evidence for the need to separate commercial and investment banking.

Pecora was appointed counsel for what became known as the Pecora Investigation on January 22, 1933, and conducted his first hearing on February 15, 1933. Earlier, on January 27, 1933, the Senate overwhelmingly passed a Glass bill separating commercial and investment banking. Even earlier, at Glass's instigation, the 1932 Democratic Party platform had called for such separation. During the 1932 Presidential campaign then President Hoover supported the regulation of investment banking, particularly securities affiliates of commercial banks, and Roosevelt supported the separation of commercial and investment banking.

The dramatic "ten days" of National City hearings in February 1933, however, were a high point of publicity for the Pecora Investigation. They led to Charles Mitchell's resignation as Chairman of National City Bank. Days later, both National City and Chase announced they would eliminate their securities affiliates. Chase also announced it supported a legislative separation of commercial and investment banking.

H. Parker Willis and others have written that the Pecora Investigation hearings concerning J. P. Morgan & Co., which began on May 23, 1933, gave the "final impetus" to the 1933 Banking Act. Those hearings did not deal with commercial bank securities activities. Their revelations were that several J. P. Morgan partners had not paid income taxes in one or more years from 1930 to 1932 and that the firm had provided exclusive investment opportunities to prominent business and political leaders.

During the J. P. Morgan hearings Senator Glass dismissed the Pecora Investigation as a "circus". "Bored by Senatorial exhibitionism" Glass had not attended the earlier National City hearings.

While the Pecora Investigation made dramatic headlines and generated public outrage, critics at the time and since attacked the hearings for creating misleading or inaccurate accounts of the investigated transactions. Glass–Steagall critics have argued that the evidence from the Pecora Investigation did not support the separation of commercial and investment banking.

H. Parker Willis and Carter Glass on Banking Act of 1933
In 1935, H. Parker Willis wrote that the 1933 Banking Act was "already outdated" when it became law. He wrote that earlier Glass bills could have "made a difference" if they had become law in 1932.

Carter Glass became dissatisfied with the 1933 Banking Act's separation of commercial and investment banking. In 1935 he sponsored a bill passed by the Senate that would have permitted national banks to underwrite corporate bonds.

Conservative nature of Banking Act of 1933
Carter Golembe (addressing the FDIC insurance provisions) and Helen Garten (addressing the Glass–Steagall separation of investment and commercial banking and the FDIC insurance provisions) describe the 1933 Banking Act as legislation intended to protect the existing banking system dominated by small "unit banks". Garten labels this a "conservative" action at a time when there was serious consideration of nationalizing banks or of permitting a consolidated banking system through nationwide branch banking. Golembe saw deposit insurance as a compromise between forces that sought to stop the destruction of the "circulating medium" (i.e., bank deposits, particularly checking accounts) and forces that wanted to preserve the existing bank structure made up of a large number of geographically isolated banks.

After the closing of banks nationwide in early March 1933, press reports and public statements by Congressional leaders suggested banks might be nationalized or the existing system of "dual banking" might be eliminated through federal legislation, or even a Constitutional amendment, to prohibit state chartering of banks. Others proposed requiring all banks to join the Federal Reserve System. None of these proposals was contained in the 1933 Banking Act, although the Act's FDIC insurance provisions would have required banks to join the Federal Reserve System to retain deposit insurance.

According to Helen Burns "Roosevelt met with severe criticism from the liberals and the progressives for not nationalizing the banks during the period of crisis." She states, "there seems little doubt that he could have done this" but she also concludes Roosevelt "did not believe in a government-owned and-operated bank" and was ultimately pragmatic or even conservative in his approach to banking legislation.

As described above, Adolf Berle, the 1933 Roosevelt Brain Trust's leading authority on banking law, was "disappointed" by the 1933 Banking Act. He wished it had not been so heavily compromised to satisfy Representative Steagall (a "half portion" of what the Glass bill originally sought). Berle argued the United States needed a "unified banking system" (most likely through the Federal Reserve System) that would perform more like the nationwide branch bank systems in Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom (which otherwise all shared the U.S. "commercial banking" tradition). Berle supported separating commercial banking from other activities, but disagreed with the Winthrop Aldrich position, contained in Glass–Steagall's Section 21, that this should also apply to "private bankers". Berle suggested that required a "separate study".

Fate of 1933 Banking Act as "traditional bank regulation"
Helen Garten describes the 1933 Banking Act as exemplifying the form and function of "traditional bank regulation" based on limiting bank activities and protecting banks from competition. The Act established the traditional bank regulation of separating commercial from investment banking, limiting deposit interest rate competition through rate limitations, and restricting competition for deposits based on financial strength by insuring depositors. It also ratified the existing policy of limited branch banking, thereby limiting competition among banks geographically. The resulting "government-enforced cartel in banking" allowed commercial banks to earn "high profits and avoid undue risk" until nonbanking companies found ways to offer substitutes for bank loans and deposits.

Supporters of this traditional banking regulation argue that the 1933 Banking Act (and other restrictive banking legislation) produced a period of unparalleled financial stability. David Moss argues this stability may have induced a false belief in the inherent stability of the financial system. Moss argues this false belief encouraged legislative and regulatory relaxations of traditional restrictions and that this led to financial instability.

Earlier critics of the 1933 Banking Act, and of other restrictive banking regulation, argued it has not prevented the return of financial instability beginning in the mid-1960s. Hyman Minsky, a supporter of traditional banking regulation, described the 1966 return of financial instability (and its increasingly intense return in 1970, 1974, and 1980) as the inevitable result of private financial markets, previously repressed by memories of the Great Depression. Minsky proposed further controls of finance to limit the creation of "liquidity" and to "promote smaller and simpler organizations weighted more toward direct financing".

Commentators argued traditional banking regulation contained the "seeds of its own destruction" by "distorting competition" and "creating gaps between cost and price". In particular, by establishing "cartel profits" traditional bank regulation led nonbank competitors to develop products that could compete with bank deposits and loans to gain part of such profits. Instead of financial stability inducing deregulation and financial instability after 1980, as later suggested by David Moss and Elizabeth Warren, Thomas Huertas and other critics of traditional bank regulation argued Regulation Q limits on interest rates (mandated by the 1933 Banking Act) created the "disintermediation" that began in the 1960s, led to the phase-out of Regulation Q through the Depository Institutions Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980, and opened banking to greater competition.

Jan Kregel accepts that "supporters of free-market liberalism" were correct in describing "competitive innovations" of nonbanks as breaking down the "inefficiencies of a de facto cartel" established by the 1933 Banking Act but argues the "disintegration of the protection" provided banks was "as much due to the conscious decisions of regulators and legislators to weaken and suspend the protections of the Act."

title: 1933 Banking Act


text:
Alev Alatlı

Alev Alatlı (16 September 1944 – 2 February 2024) was a Turkish columnist, bestselling novelist, academician and economist.

Early years
Alev Alatlı was born on 16 September 1944 in the town of Menemen, İzmir to an officer's family. She spent her childhood in Japan, where her father was appointed as the Military attaché in the Embassy of Turkey and also as the Liaison officer of the Turkish Brigade in Korea to the United Nations.

Alatlı attended the American School in Japan in Nakameguro, Tokyo. After finishing high school there, her family returned to Turkey, and Alev studied economics at the Middle East Technical University in Ankara, from where she graduated in 1963 with a Bachelor of Science degree.

Following graduation, she married her classmate Alper Orhon, a Turkish Cypriot. She was granted a Fulbright Scholarship and her husband a scholarship from the Ford Foundation to conduct postgraduate study in the USA. Educated at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee, she earned a Master of Arts in Development Economics and Econometrics.

By this time, she had started to think about the importance of formulas and figures in explaining the world, and decided to pursue studies in philosophy. Although she enrolled at Dartmouth College in New Hampshire for doctoral studies on philosophy of religion and philosophy of history she didn't have a Ph.D. degree.

In 1974, Alatlı returned to Turkey. She worked for a while as a lecturer at Istanbul University and later at the State Planning Organization (DPT) in Ankara in her capacity as an economist.

In the next five years after her return from the US, Alev Alatlı spent her time mainly in studying Islam. She was also involved in a psycholinguistic project of the University of California, Berkeley on language learning patterns of Turkish children. She published a magazine titled "Bizim İngilizce" Our English Language) in co-operation with the newspaper Cumhuriyet for Turks based on native tongue and culture.

Career
In 1982, Alatlı quit her other activities to stay at home and to devote herself to writing. Her first book titled "Aydın Despotizmi..." (Despotism of the Intellectuals...) was a philosophical study.

Alatlı's next work and first novel "Yaseminler Tüter mi Hala?" (Are Jasmines Still Smoking?) appeared in 1985. It was inspired by the true story of a Greek Cypriot woman. Born and christened at the Apostolos Andreas Monastery on the Karpas Peninsula of Cyprus, she dies in a tragic manner at 32 in Piraeus, Greece, after two marriages – one with a Muslim Turkish Cypriot, the other with an Orthodox Greek – and five children.

Alatlı's next works were two translations into Turkish of books by Edward Said titled "Covering Islam" (Haberlerin Ağında Islam) and "The Question of Palestine" (Filistin’in Sorunu), for which she was awarded with an honorary medal by Yaser Arafat.

Her novella "İşkenceci" (The Torturer), published in 1987, served as a prelude to her next four novels ''Viva la Muerte! - Yaşasın Ölüm! in 1992, ’Nuke’ Türkiye! (Nuke Turkey) in 1993, Valla, Kurda Yedirdin Beni! (You Sure Made Me Prey to the Wolves) in 1993 and O.K. Musti! Türkiye Tamamdır. (OK Mustafa, Turkey's Done!'') in 1994.

The highly realistic novel "Kadere Karşı Koy A.Ş." (Format Your Fate Formidably, Inc.), another bestseller by Alatlı, followed in 1995.

Alatlı's first poetry book "Eylül '98" (September 1998) came out in 1999.

Alatlı wrote two futuristic books, "Kabus" (The Nightmare) in 1999 and "Rüya" (The Dream) in 2000 comprising "Schrodinger's Cat".

Alatlı's next novels "Grace over Enlightenment", "World Sentry" and "Eyy Uhnem! Eyy Uhnem!" are the first three books of a four-volume work on Russia called "Gogol'un İzinde" (In Gogol's Footsteps). In 2006, she was awarded the "Mikhail Aleksandrovich Sholokhov 100th Anniversary Novel Award" for her third novel in the series.

From 2002, she wrote bi-weekly a column in the right-wing Gülenist newspaper Zaman. In February 2008, an article of her on the women's Islamic headgear turban was not allowed to be published by the newspaper's editor-in-chief with the argument "our readers are not ready for that". A book published in 2003 under the title "Şimdi Değilse, Ne Zaman?" (If not now, when?) brought out a collection of her articles that had appeared in the newspaper Zaman.

Death
Alatlı died in Istanbul on 2 February 2024, at the age of 79. She was buried at the Mihrişah Sultan Complex following the religious service held at Eyüp Sultan Mosque attended by high-ranked politicians.

Novels

 * Aydın Despotizmi..., Alfa Basım Yayım Dağıtım (1982)
 * Yaseminler Tüter mi Hala?, Everest Yayınları (1985)
 * İşkenceci (1987)
 * Viva la Muerte! - Yaşasın Ölüm! - Or'da Kimse Var mı? 1. Kitap, Everest Yayınları (1992)
 * ’Nuke’ Türkiye!- Or'da Kimse Var mı? 2. Kitap, Everest Yayınları (1993)
 * Valla, Kurda Yedirdin Beni! - Or'da Kimse Var mı? 3. Kitap, Everest Yayınları (1993)
 * O.K. Musti! Türkiye Tamamdır. - Or'da Kimse Var mı? 4. Kitap, Alfa Basım Yayım Dağıtım (1994)
 * Kabus - Schrödinger'in Kedisi 1. Kitap, Everest Yayınları (1999)
 * Rüya - Schrödinger'in Kedisi 2. Kitap, Everest Yayınları (2000)
 * Aydınlanma Değil, Merhamet! - Gogol'ün İzinde 1. Kitap, Everest Yayınları (2004)
 * Dünya Nöbeti - Gogol'ün İzinde 2. Kitap, Everest Yayınları (2005)
 * Eyy Uhnem! Eyy Uhnem! - Gogol'ün İzinde 3. Kitap, Everest Yayınları (2006)
 * Hollywood'u Kapattığım Gün, Everest Yayınları (2009) 360 pp., ISBN 978-975-289-600-0
 * Aklın Yolu da Bir Değildir... , Destek Yayınları (2009) 176 pp., ISBN 978-9944-2-9831-5
 * Beyaz Türkler Küstüler - Or'da Hâlâ Kimse Var mı? 5. Kitap, Everest Yayınları (2013) 460 pp., ISBN 9786051416366

Non-fiction

 * Şimdi Değilse, Ne zaman?, Zaman Kitap (2003) 268 pp., ISBN 975-8578-23-5
 * 'Hayır!' Diyebilmeli İnsan, Zaman Kitap (2005) 182 pp., ISBN 975-8578-71-5

Poems

 * Eylül '98 (September 1998)

Translations

 * Haberlerin Ağında İslam (1985)
 * Filistin’in Sorunu (1986)
 * En Emin Yol "Akvem ül-Mesalik’li Marifat Ahval el-Memalik" Tunuslu Hayreddin Paşa (1986)

Theater plays
Kadere Karşı Koy A.Ş. (2002)

title: Alev Alatlı


text:
Georgii Nadson

Georgii Adamovich Nadson (June 4 1867, Kiev – April 15, 1939) was a Soviet biologist, "one of the pioneers of radioecology in Russia" He became professor at St. Petersburg University in 1900. In 1930, he founded the Laboratory of Microbiology of the Russian Academy of Sciences (which in 1934 was transferred from Leningrad to Moscow and later transformed into the Institute of Microbiology). He was director of the institute until 1937, when he was "falsely accused of participating in so-called anti-Soviet sabotage and terrorism and arrested" On April 14, 1939, he was found guilty of participation in a terrorist organization, and on the next day he was shot and buried at the Kommunarka shooting ground. The real reason for his execution was his opposition to Lysenkoism.

Ulvella nadsonii, a species of algae, is named for him.

title: Georgii Nadson


text:
Silvestro Aldobrandini

Silvestro Aldobrandini (1500–1558) was a Florentine jurisconsult and the father of Pope Clement VIII.

Silvestro Aldobrandini is depicted in a chapel named after Sixtus V in the church of Santa Maria Maggiore in Rome.

title: Silvestro Aldobrandini


text: User talk:81.154.93.100

title: User talk:81.154.93.100


text: User talk:68.235.158.12

title: User talk:68.235.158.12


text: User talk:65.185.27.80

title: User talk:65.185.27.80


text:
Talk:Marcy Playground (album)

I like this album a lot. Is there any information available that could be used to flesh out the article a little bit, maybe from the Marcy Playground band article? Or is that unnecessary/bad form?

Genre
How can the album be both Grunge and Post-grunge? Am I missing something here? Skinsmoke (talk) 00:24, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

They can't... I'm removing grunge since its definitely post-grunge. Mrmoustache14 (talk) 02:44, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Marcy Playground (album). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090123034335/http://marcyplayground.com/ to http://www.marcyplayground.com/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 03:06, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

title: Talk:Marcy Playground (album)


text:
Huron Islands

The Huron Islands are a group of eight small, rocky islands in Lake Superior, located about 3 mi off the mouth of the Huron River in northwestern Marquette County, Michigan, United States. Together they comprise the Huron National Wildlife Refuge, which was established by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1905. The refuge is also known as the Huron Islands Wilderness and is a unit of the Seney National Wildlife Refuge. The underwater area around the islands is part of the Huron Islands unit of the Marquette Underwater Preserve and several shipwrecks can be visited by divers.

Only one of the islands, known as Lighthouse Island or West Huron Island, is open to the public, and is accessible only by private boat for day use. This island is the site of the historic Huron Island Light, built in 1868. The lighthouse still operates, but is now fully automated.

There is a walking path from the boat landing site on the south end of the island to the lighthouse. The path continues beyond the lighthouse to the structures and cliffs on the far north end of the island. The entire path is just over 1/2 mi long. The path from the lighthouse to the north end of the island is quite rustic and is often overgrown with brush.

The larger islands are sparsely forested with pine and birch. The smaller islands are bare granite outcroppings, and home to a large colony of herring gulls. Bald eagles also nest here.

title: Huron Islands


text:
Tafelmusik

Tafelmusik (German: literally, "table-music") is a term used since the mid-16th century for music played at feasts and banquets. Table music could be either instrumental, vocal, or both. As might be expected, it was often of a somewhat lighter character than music for other occasions. In solemn banquets, starting with wedding dinners, the presence of singers and instrumentalists is customary and almost obligatory.

Origin
The custom of accompanying banquets and symposia with music has been attested by ancient Egyptian, Hebrew, Greek and the Romans in Roman temples.

The term was often used as a title for collections of music, some of which were intended to be used at banquets as a musical background, or during outdoor events. The tradition lasts in the Middle Ages and takes on new vigor in the 15th century. The short compositions of Gioachino Rossini, a composer who also gained fame as a gourmet, titled "antipasto" and "dessert" are recognized as related to "table music".

Practice
At solemn meals, beginning with wedding banquets, the presence of singers and musicians was common and almost obligatory: the same happened at the official banquets of the court and municipal magistracies. During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, especially in Germany and France, the style seduced composers until it was characterized as a true musical genre, in the form of a dance suite. For example, the lutenist and harpist of the Palatine Concert in Bologna is assigned the “task of charming, with delicate instrumental dances, the ears of illustrious guests during lunch” and dinner.

Table music was displaced in the late 18th century by the divertimento, and its importance soon diminished, but it was revived and partially restored in the vocal genre of the Liedertafel by Carl Friedrich Zelter beginning in 1809, and male-voice choral societies describing themselves by this name continued the practice until the mid-20th century.

Composers
Some of the most significant composers of table music included Johann Hermann Schein, whose Banchetto musicale of 1617 acquired considerable fame, and Michael Praetorius, who wrote about the phenomenon of Tafelmusik in his Syntagma musicum of 1619. Music from Schein's collection is still performed by early music ensembles with some regularity.

The Tafelmusik or Musique de Table by Georg Philipp Telemann is among his celebrated music collections.

title: Tafelmusik


text: User talk:81.178.237.28

title: User talk:81.178.237.28


text:
Baljit Singh Chadha

Baljit Singh Chadha (Hon) (born 1951) is a Canadian businessman based in Montreal, Quebec, who is the president and founder of Balcorp Limited which he started in 1976.The company has offices in Montreal, New Delhi and Mumbai. He is a leader of the Sikh community in Canada. Chadha immigrated to Canada in 1973 from India.

His international trading company has also varied interests that include agricultural food products, processed foods, forestry products, and minerals such as asbestos.

Professional life
The Honourable Baljit S. Chadha, P.C. The Honourable Baljit Singh Chadha is a highly respected and successful entrepreneur, philanthropist and engaged citizen. Born in Bombay (Mumbai) in 1951, Mr. Chadha obtained his undergraduate science degree (B.Sc.) at the University of Bombay before immigrating to Canada. He obtained a Diploma in Business Administration (DBA) at the Richard Ivey School of Business at the University of Western Ontario and a Master of Business Administration (MBA) from Concordia University in Montreal. He also holds corporate director certification (ICD.D) from the Institute of Corporate Directors. Beginning with just a rented desk and 100% borrowed capital, Mr. Chadha founded his own business, Balcorp Limited, in Montreal in 1976, later opening offices in Bombay and New Delhi. Balcorp is now an international marketer of a broad range of products and services. Mr. Chadha is known for his depth of knowledge and expertise in international trade and strategic planning, both within his own company and across the breadth of his growing global business interests. In 2003, the Right Honourable Jean Chrétien, Prime Minister of Canada, named Mr. Chadha to the Security Intelligence Review Committee, as well as to the Queen’s Privy Council of Canada.

Personal life
He is married to Roshi Chadha. The couple lives in Montreal.

She was a member-at-large on McGill University's Board of Governors (BoG) and she also served on the governing body of the Canadian Red Cross

Security Intelligence Review Committee Tenure
In 2003 Chadha was appointed by then-prime minister Jean Chrétien for a five-year term position at the Security Intelligence Review Committee, the body that oversees CSIS, Canada's spy agency, in Ottawa and was, as a condition for his participation in the Committee, also appointed to the Queen's Privy Council for Canada.

He sat on the Security Intelligence Review Committee from 2003 to 2008.

Baljit S. Chadha was one of the members of the spy agency watchdog on September 18, 2006, the Commission of Inquiry into the Actions of Canadian Officials in Relation to Maher Arar led by Justice Dennis O'Connor released its report.

The Committee was chaired by Gary Filmon, P.C., O.M., who had been appointed Chair on June 24, 2005. The other Members were Raymond Speaker, P.C., O.C., Baljit S. Chadha, P.C., Roy Romanow, P.C., O.C., Q.C. and Aldéa Landry, P.C., C.M., Q.C..

title: Baljit Singh Chadha


text:
User talk:Lothartklein

Welcome!

Hello,, Welcome  to Wikipedia! '''I hope you like working here and want to continue. If you need help on how to name new articles, look at Naming Conventions, and for help on formatting the pages visit the Manual of Style. If you need general help, look at Help and the FAQ, and if you can't find your answer there, check the Village pump (for Wikipedia related questions) or the Reference Desk (for general questions). There's still more help at the Tutorial and the Policy Library. Also, don't forget to visit the Community Portal — and if you have any more questions after that, feel free to post them on my New-Users' Talk Page.'''

Additional tips:
 * Here are some extra tips to help you get around Wikipedia:
 * If you want to play around with your new Wiki skills, try the Sandbox.
 * Click on the Edit button on a page, and look at how other editors did what they did.
 * You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too. Always sign comments on Talk pages, never sign Articles.
 * You might want to add yourself to the New User Log
 * If your first language isn't English, try Contributing to articles outside your native language

Happy editing! This is very late, I'm afraid, and you'll already know all the above — still, better a late welcome than none at all. Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 15:22, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

ISO 10303-11
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as ISO 10303-11, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a direct copy from http://www.lksoft.com/index.php?id=282, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), you can comment to that effect on Talk:ISO 10303-11. Then you should do one of the following:
 * Make a note on the original website that re-use is permitted under the GFDL and state at Talk:ISO 10303-11 where we can find that note; or
 * Send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:ISO 10303-11.

It is also important that the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and that it follows Wikipedia article layout. For more information, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! (Sorry I didn't get this up earlier.) --Kyra~(talk) 21:26, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

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

title: User talk:Lothartklein


text: User talk:81.153.146.129

title: User talk:81.153.146.129