text:
Talk:Death tax

--I've reverted most of the changes made by User:Feco. My biggest problem with them came from the media section. I looked in Lexis-Nexis and the vast preponderance of U.S. papers only reported it in the context of a quote, or put up scare quotes; even the Washington Times did this (obviously excluding editorials). In addition, I think it's fair to refer to death tax as a political slogan; it's only used by people on one side of a debate. Finally, there's no need to remove the "conservative", IMO--it's a fairly accurate descriptor for the overwhelming majority of those who seek to remove the tax. I've split the difference, calling them "conservative opponents of the estate tax". Hope these changes are satisfactory. Best, Meelar (talk) 06:18, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Political Slogan?
I dropped the label political slogan lower down in the article because it seems that the term is no longer used solely as a slogan. I pulled "Two Americas" from the List of political slogans page as a rough equivalent to "Death Tax"... neither conveys a specific action/result/change. Both are short. A Google News search for the former indicates that almost all usage in print media is qualified with "Edwards' speech..." or something similar. A Google News search for the latter indicates that there isn't a similar level of qualification. I think there's no question that the term originated as a slogan, but I don't think it's still used as one. If you ask the guy in line at the store to do word association, "Two Americas" is a lot more likely to produce Democrat/Kerry/Edwards than "Death Tax" is like to produce GOP/Republican/Bush. Feco 06:25, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Well, I agree it doesn't fall within the strict definition of a slogan; but we need to make clear that it's a phrase designed to shape the debate and convince people, rather than simply terminology. Maybe we could call it a soundbite, although that's not right either. Perhaps a meme? Meelar (talk) 07:10, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * How about:
 * "The term death tax is used by those opposed to the legal concept of an estate or inheritance tax, which is a tax on the value of a deceased individual's assets before they are passed on to heirs."
 * That wording expresses the usage of "death tax" as a tool to shape debate. Feco 07:31, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I think that's a very good wording--thanks. I'll make that change now. Meelar (talk) 07:56, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

Journalism Treatment
I do think the article should mention non-print journalism. Obviously, it's harder to document specific usages, but I sometimes hear the qualifier "so-called", sometimes not. Also, Google News (relevance rank) shows about 50:50 between quotes/no in newspaper headlines. Since the AP style book doesn't address the issue, by definition there's no journalism consensus. I think the ambiguity of the situation should be documented. I do not think specific publications should be listed in quote/no format... just too much potential for unneeded expansion. Feco 06:33, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I could agree with removing the specific mention of the Seattle paper, but I must disagree with the rest of what you say. If you do a google news search but toss out editorials and press releases from interested groups, quotation marks clearly win out, backing up the Lexis-Nexis data. And the papers with the largest circulation that I have access to (USA Today, NY Times, Washington Post, Washington Times, LA Times) all use quotation marks--those that don't tend to be smaller [caveat: I have no access to the Wall Street Journal]. I think it's pretty clear that quotation marks are by far the more common usage in mainstream news. Meelar (talk) 07:06, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * did more searching... the usage style is ambiguous enough that I'm happy with the descritpion in the article.. it does seem that the major wires all use quotes. Feco 02:02, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Conservative or no
I don't like the use of broad political labels on specific issues in general... especially here. Some who support the estate tax do it on principle, others do it out of fiscal concern. Some who oppose it do so on principle, others do so due to their economic analysis. The for/against column is too muddled to easily split into the GOP/conservative Democratic/liberal grouping. Feco 06:37, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I have to disagree on purely empirical grounds, and I kind of think the burden of proof is on you here. Could you name some non-conservative (and preferably semi-prominent) users of the slogan/phrase? Best, Meelar (talk) 07:00, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

 * Just to make clear, I'm have no problem with the current presentation ("it is used mainly...") Feco 01:59, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I'm do having apparently very un-good grammar lately. ("I'm have no problem..." what the heck is that?) Feco 16:41, 12 Jun 2005 (UTC)

POV fork?
This looks like something close to a POV fork of Estate tax in the United States. Famspear (talk) 17:13, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

title: Talk:Death tax


text:
Jason Dearborn

Jason Dearborn was a Saskatchewan Party MLA of the Saskatchewan Legislature.

Early life
Attended St. Michaels University School in Victoria, B.C. Dearborn graduated from the University of Trinity College in the University of Toronto with a BA in 1994. He later returned to the same institution to graduate with an M.Div. in 1996. He earned a Masters of Business Administration from the University of Regina in 2007.

Saskatchewan Party MLA
He was elected in the riding of Kindersley in a by-election in 2002 and re-elected in the Saskatchewan General Election of 2003.

Prior to the 2007 general election, Dearborn announced he would not be seeking re-election. Bill Boyd, a founding member of the Saskatchewan Party and the constituency's previous MLA, was nominated by party members and won that election again for MLA in the constituency of Kindersley.

Private Sector
In 2007 Dearborn founded Brecknock Brewing Co. which produced beer for sale in Alberta and Saskatchewan. In 2010 Brecknock was rolled into a small public entity, with full shareholders approval.

Since that time Dearborn has been International Territory Manager with Brandt Agricultural and Chief Operating Officer with Maxcrop Farm Canada Inc.

In 2012 he was accepted for a diploma program in Global Strategic Strategy at the Said School of Business at Oxford University, UK.

On 10 December 2014, Dearborn, in his capacity as Chairman of the Dominion Bitcoin Mining Company, appeared before the Senate Standing Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce for their Study on the use of digital currency.

Return to Politics
In 2016 Dearborn announced he would once again be running in Kindersley in the general election of that year. This time he would be running as an independent candidate against Saskatchewan Party incumbent Bill Boyd. Dearborn stated that his motivation for running was Boyd's involvement in a controversial land deal west of Regina at the provincial government's Global Transportation Hub.

Incidents
Dearborn gained notoriety for an incident at a public meeting in February 2005. In jest, Dearborn "nominated" Lorne Calvert—at that time the Premier of Saskatchewan—to be shot for implementing a controversial plan for restructuring school divisions. Dearborn apologized for his remarks, and was stripped of his critic responsibilities for a period of time. Later he was returned to the Saskatchewan Party's shadow cabinet.

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

title: Jason Dearborn


text:
Yavuz Sultan Selim

Yavuz Sultan Selim may refer to:
 * Selim I (1465–1520)
 * SMS Goeben, a German battlecruiser renamed Yavuz Selim after she was transferred to the Ottoman Empire, and later simply as Yavuz
 * Yavuz Sultan Selim Bridge, the "Third Bosphorus Bridge" in Istanbul, Turkey
 * Yavuz Selim Mosque in Istanbul
 * Yavuz Sultan Selim Mosque in Germany

title: Yavuz Sultan Selim


text: Category:Muddy Waters songs

title: Category:Muddy Waters songs


text:
User:Wuerfel~enwiki

Hello!

title: User:Wuerfel~enwiki


text:
Charlestown, New South Wales

Charlestown is a suburb of the City of Lake Macquarie, New South Wales, Australia, and the largest suburb in Lake Macquarie and in the Greater Newcastle area. It is approximately 10 km west-south-west of the central business district of Newcastle.

History
The Aboriginal people in this area, the Awabakal, were the first people of this land.

Originally granted to the Waratah Coal Company, the area was the site of the company's first shaft, sunk in 1873. Officially called South Waratah Colliery (later just Waratah Colliery), the pit was variously known as Charles' Pit, Raspberry Gully or The Gully Pit. These names all applied to Charlestown in its early days and the surviving name seem to have been derived from that of Charles Smith, the company's manager. The first settlers were miners from the pit. The colliery closed in 1961.

The company had the area surveyed on 29 April 1876; the first subdivision later became Ida Street, Pearson Street, Milson Street and Frederick Street. Harry Wright bought the first lot when it was auctioned later in 1876.

The town had its first water main in 1927 and was connected to civic sewage in 1959.

Commercial area
The commercial area of Charlestown is situated around the Pacific Highway. Charlestown Square is a large shopping centre located just off the Pacific Highway. There are also two smaller shopping centres including Hiltop Plaza and The Forum Centre, an office and retail centre located on Pacific Highway featuring a Hoyts Cinema. Charlestown features clusters of shops along Pacific Highway as well as in surrounding streets.

The suburb has a police station and a fire station. New South Wales Ambulance has its Northern Communications Centre in the suburb, off Dudley Road.

Schools
The suburb contains four primary schools; the State schools of Charlestown Public, Charlestown South Public and Charlestown East Public, and the Catholic diocese's St Joseph's Primary School. The state primary schools feed into nearby Whitebridge High School, while the catholic primary school feeds into nearby St Mary's Catholic College at Gateshead and St Pius X High School at Adamstown.

Population
According to the 2016 census of Population, there were 12,912 people in Charlestown.
 * Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people made up 2.3% of the population.
 * 83.8% of people were born in Australia. The next most common countries of birth were England 2.2%, New Zealand 0.9% and India 0.8%.
 * 88.1% of people spoke only English at home. Other languages spoken at home included Macedonian at 0.9%.
 * The most common responses for religion were No Religion 30.4%, Catholic 23.3% and Anglican 17.4%.

title: Charlestown, New South Wales


text:
Talk:Cherie Blair

As a QC, she has been going by her maiden name since '95?
That's what the article states, but not why, though I'm sure it would be of interest for many readers. Normally you'd think she'd go by Cherie Blair QC, not "Booth" which is (obviously) her maiden name. Plus, another thing: she was christened Theresa Cara Booth? So why isn't that her birth name as well, then? -andy 77.191.216.249 (talk) 00:01, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

 * Sorry, I would answer that but I can't follow it because I speak American and not British. :-) 2602:306:BDA0:97A0:466D:57FF:FE90:AC45 (talk) 00:14, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

 * She was born Cherie Booth, all this Theresa Cara nonsense is "self-invention" or lying as it's more usually called. You can see her birth record here http://www.freebmd.org.uk/cgi/information.pl?cite=kw3zaejBlrxSPtghi%2Fwfag&scan=1. Her mother Gale Howard's real name was Joyce Smith. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMathemagician (talk • contribs) 13:10, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

Further proving her actual birth name is 'Cherie' rather than 'Theresa Cara' is her marriage record of March 1980, which has 'Anthony C L Blair' marrying 'Cherie Booth'. She was 'merely' baptised 'Theresa Cara' in deference to her Catholic grandmother's wishes, and apparently no-one went about making it her legal name- or they DID, and she subsequently changed her legal name to 'Cherie' (reflecting her original birth record). Both my grandfather and an elder brother (Church of England, as it happens) had two middle names at baptism that they weren't given when their births were recorded. They were very glad to never, ever use these middle names, and they didn't appear on one single document relating to either of them over the course of their whole lives. This seems much the same situation! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.109.194.250 (talk) 20:52, 12 May 2018 (UTC)

Photo
It strikes me as incorrect to have the photo including me in this article. A friend of mine really liked it, comparing it to Alfred Hitchcock's famous cameo appearances and suggested there should be more random pictures of me with article subjects. :-) But obviously, that's just silly.  Anyway, the photo is illustrating the section on "philanthropy" and although Wikipedia is a charity, there's no real connection to Cherie Blair (she hasn't served on the board or been an advisor or donated money as far as I know).  I'd remove it myself but I'm sure someone would come up with some kind of bizarre conflict of interest theory, so I'll just raise the issue here for discussion.Jimbo Wales (talk) 13:06, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

 * I can't see any obvious reason for its inclusion - and the caption seems more concerned with publicising the photographer than explaining its relevance. Unless someone can come up with such an explanation, I'll remove it. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:38, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It doesn't seem to add significant information (she looks about the same age as she does in the infobox picture), and it has sheer levels of Jimbo that go well beyond the exposure limits set in the UN Rights Of Prisoners guidelines. So yes, dump it. --15:44, 28 August 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by NatGertler (talk • contribs)
 * I agree with the grumpy guy above...the image seems to be unhelpful overall.--MONGO 15:46, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree with the above comments and have removed the image.--ukexpat (talk) 16:05, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Take a look at this bizarre commment on my talk page. I was the one who went through Allan warren's photographs on the Commons and added them to articles years ago. The comment is so pathetic that it's somewhat... cute. Surtsicna (talk) 21:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Why is the Queen listed under spouses of prime ministers
This seems rather odd, maybe someone thought the prime ministers wife was in a line of succession? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panpaniscus (talk • contribs) 23:06, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

She was secretly married to Ted Heath

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Cherie Blair. 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/20060210002406/http://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/AreasOfPractice.aspx to http://www.matrixlaw.co.uk/AreasOfPractice.aspx
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120120104023/http://www.cini.org.uk/about.html to http://www.cini.org.uk/about.html
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/article6832096.ece

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) 06:27, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Is she dyslexic?
This is a most interesting edit because it is purportedly her ("i am wonrgly manes as Theresa Cara Clair that is not the name on my birth cetrtificate"), hence the question. On another note, in Italian, cara means "dear", "darling" (feminine form), which is to say, exactly the same thing as chérie in French. Are we really sure her birth certificate is lying? --Edelseider (talk) 18:34, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Cherie Blair. 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 tag to http://www.judicialcomplaints.gov.uk/docs/Recorder_Cherie_Booth_QC_-_OJC_Investigation_Statement_-_0210.pdf
 * Added tag to http://www.judicialcomplaints.gov.uk/docs/Recorder_Cherie_Booth_QC_-_OJC_Investigation_Statement_-_1010.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304115120/http://win.scienze-politiche.org/ENG/htnl/rass.html to http://win.scienze-politiche.org/ENG/htnl/rass.html

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) 22:17, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

Is it relevant?
Tony Blair, her husband (as of Jan 2018) is widely rumored to have had numerous extra-marital affairs. For instance, his widely reported affair with the then wife of Rupert Murdoch reportedly led to the two men's estrangement and Rupert's divorce. Just seems to me that this is relevant, but how you would go about verifying/validating the information is beyond my ken.98.21.64.251 (talk) 11:34, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Defined by her spouse?
Why is it relevant to put who she is married to in the introductory paragraph? She is not defined by him. she is her own person

88.109.140.227 (talk) 18:51, 8 March 2022 (UTC)

It is relevant because Lady Blair is known for her marriage to a former Prime Minister. All other Prime Ministers’ spouses, including Denis Thatcher, has their spouse mentioned in their introductory paragraphs. It would be a waste to not mention their connection. Also, please quit with the vandalism. AKTC3 (talk) 20:24, 19 March 2022 (UTC)

Block vandal
Is it possible to have 2A00:23EE:1300:FD4F:ADB9:BEC9:FF88:955D blocked? They have been relentlessly vandalizing and edit-warring this article. AKTC3 (talk) 05:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Cherie Blair


text:
Kotara

Kotara is a suburb of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia, located 9 km from Newcastle's central business district. It is split between the City of Newcastle and City of Lake Macquarie local government areas. Kotara is known as one of Newcastle's largest retail destinations and is characterised by its family centred culture.

History
The Aboriginal people, in this area, the Awabakal, were the first people of this land.

In the late 19th century the Australasia Coal Company operated a mine near Kotara, in the valley below the present-day northern entrance to Tickhole Tunnel. A private railway connected the screens with the Government line near the present-day triangle junctions north of Broadmeadow. Surveying for the line commenced in 1875 and the line was completed in April 1877. However, only a total of 9,052 tons was ever produced and the company went into liquidation in June 1879.

It was originally designed to create a 'garden suburb' with high quality and quickly grew in population after 1947.

Population
In the 2016 Census, there were 3,929 people in Kotara. 87.4% of people were born in Australia and 90.9% of people spoke only English at home. The most common responses for religion were No Religion 33.2%, Catholic 23.7%, Anglican 18.0% and Uniting Church 5.8%.

Commercial area
Kotara is a large retail centre of Newcastle.

Westfield Kotara (previously known as Garden City and Kotara Fair) is a large shopping centre on Northcott Drive. Across the road from Westfield is the Kotara Home Centre, consisting of big box department stores and food outlets.

Education
Kotara is home to Kotara South Public School on Rodway Parade and the local Catholic School St James Primary School, located on Vista Parade.

title: Kotara


text:
Gutmann method

The Gutmann method is an algorithm for securely erasing the contents of computer hard disk drives, such as files. Devised by Peter Gutmann and Colin Plumb and presented in the paper Secure Deletion of Data from Magnetic and Solid-State Memory in July 1996, it involved writing a series of 35 patterns over the region to be erased.

The selection of patterns assumes that the user does not know the encoding mechanism used by the drive, so it includes patterns designed specifically for three types of drives. A user who knows which type of encoding the drive uses can choose only those patterns intended for their drive. A drive with a different encoding mechanism would need different patterns.

Most of the patterns in the Gutmann method were designed for older MFM/RLL encoded disks. Gutmann himself has noted that more modern drives no longer use these older encoding techniques, making parts of the method irrelevant. He said "In the time since this paper was published, some people have treated the 35-pass overwrite technique described in it more as a kind of voodoo incantation to banish evil spirits than the result of a technical analysis of drive encoding techniques".

Since about 2001, some ATA IDE and SATA hard drive manufacturer designs include support for the ATA Secure Erase standard, obviating the need to apply the Gutmann method when erasing an entire drive. The Gutmann method does not apply to USB sticks: an 2011 study reports that 71.7% of data remained available. On solid state drives it resulted in 0.8 - 4.3% recovery.

Background
The delete function in most operating systems simply marks the space occupied by the file as reusable (removes the pointer to the file) without immediately removing any of its contents. At this point the file can be fairly easily recovered by numerous recovery applications. However, once the space is overwritten with other data, there is no known way to use software to recover it. It cannot be done with software alone since the storage device only returns its current contents via its normal interface. Gutmann claims that intelligence agencies have sophisticated tools, including magnetic force microscopes, which together with image analysis, can detect the previous values of bits on the affected area of the media (for example hard disk). This claim however seems to be invalid based on the thesis "Data Reconstruction from a Hard Disk Drive using Magnetic Force Microscopy".

Method
An overwrite session consists of a lead-in of four random write patterns, followed by patterns 5 to 31 (see rows of table below), executed in a random order, and a lead-out of four more random patterns.

Each of patterns 5 to 31 was designed with a specific magnetic media encoding scheme in mind, which each pattern targets. The drive is written to for all the passes even though the table below only shows the bit patterns for the passes that are specifically targeted at each encoding scheme. The end result should obscure any data on the drive so that only the most advanced physical scanning (e.g., using a magnetic force microscope) of the drive is likely to be able to recover any data.

The series of patterns is as follows: Encoded bits shown in bold are what should be present in the ideal pattern, although due to the encoding the complementary bit is actually present at the start of the track.

Criticism
Daniel Feenberg of the National Bureau of Economic Research, an American private nonprofit research organization, criticized Gutmann's claim that intelligence agencies are likely to be able to read overwritten data, citing a lack of evidence for such claims. He finds that Gutmann cites one non-existent source and sources that do not actually demonstrate recovery, only partially-successful observations. The definition of "random" is also quite different from the usual one used: Gutmann expects the use of pseudorandom data with sequences known to the recovering side, not an unpredictable one such as a cryptographically secure pseudorandom number generator.

Nevertheless, some published government security procedures consider a disk overwritten once to still be sensitive.

Gutmann himself has responded to some of these criticisms and also criticized how his algorithm has been abused in an epilogue to his original paper, in which he states:

title: Gutmann method


text:
User:Ashkyd

Hey, I'm Ash.
 * 🌏 Web
 * ash.ms

 * 🐦 Twitter
 * @ashkyd

title: User:Ashkyd


text:
The Grenadiers

The Grenadiers is an infantry regiment of the Indian Army, formerly part of the Bombay Army and later the pre-independence British Indian Army, when the regiment was known as the 4th Bombay Grenadiers. It has distinguished itself during the two world wars and also since the Independence of India. The regiment has won many battle honours and gallantry awards, and is considered to be one of India's most decorated regiments with three Param Vir Chakra awardees in three different conflicts.

Early history
The oldest grenadier regiment of the armies in the Commonwealth belongs to the Indian Army. The concept of 'Grenadiers' evolved from the practice of selecting the bravest and strongest men for the most dangerous tasks in combat. The Grenadiers have the longest unbroken record of existence in the Indian Army.

The history of the Indian Grenadiers is linked to the troops recruited for the army of the Bombay Presidency. The first mention of a grenadier company hails back to 1684, when a little army of English troops, which had taken possession of the island of Bombay and comprising three companies of Europeans and local Christians, had a grenadier company, but nothing was heard about this unit subsequently. In 1710, the Bombay Army consisted of five companies of "Europeans, topasses (Indian Christians), and coffrees (Kaffirs)" of which the first company was a European grenadier company. This company was merged into the Bombay European Regiment, which was later disbanded. In 1757, Robert Clive had raised the 1st Regiment of the Bengal Native Infantry of which two companies were grenadier companies, however, no regiments of grenadiers were formed from the Bengal Army until a battalion was formed in 1779.

In 1759, as a response to French maneuvering in South India, the strength of the Bombay Army was enhanced, and the first company of sepoy grenadiers was raised with the best of Bombay sepoys "paying a regard to those having families on the island". It had only native officers and all sepoys wore red coats faced with blue. Later on, an adjutant was appointed to the corps.

Later the Bombay Army comprised a number of sepoy battalions, each having one or two grenadier companies. These were clubbed together as a composite battalion comprising the grenadier companies of the Bombay sepoy battalions, and they won the famous battle of Talegaon in 1778. So impressive was the performance of this composite battalion that the Bombay Presidency ordered the permanent raising of a grenadier battalion which duly took place on 12 March 1779, thirty-six years before the first time that a British battalion was given the honour of calling itself "grenadiers". The Governor General of Bombay made an Order dated 12 November 1779, according to which the grenadier companies of the following regiments combined to form the first Grenadier Regiment in the world, namely "The Grenadier Battalion, First Regiment of Infantry":
 * 1st Sepoy Battalion
 * 2nd Sepoy Battalion
 * 3rd Sepoy Battalion
 * 4th Sepoy Battalion
 * 5th Sepoy Battalion
 * 6th Sepoy Battalion
 * Marine Battalion (two companies of grenadiers)

4th Bombay Grenadiers
The 4th Bombay Grenadiers were an infantry regiment of the pre-independence Indian Army, formed on 1 March 1922 as part of the reforms of the Indian Army that took place after the end of the First World War. Following this, the Regiment spent the next fifteen years serving in the British Somaliland protectorate in present-day Somaliland, as well as in China and on the North-West Frontier. The 3rd, 4th and 5th Battalions were all disbanded and the 10th Battalion amalgamated with the 10th Battalion, Jat Regiment to form a Combined Training Centre at Bareilly. Following the Second World War they were one of the regiments allocated to the new Indian Army and renamed The Grenadiers

The regiment consisted of six battalions, all former regiments themselves. These were:

 * 1st Battalion - Formerly the 101st Grenadiers.
 * 2nd Battalion - Formerly the 102nd King Edward's Own Grenadiers
 * 3rd Battalion - Formerly the 108th Infantry
 * 4th Battalion - Formerly the 109th Infantry
 * 5th Battalion - Formerly the 112th Infantry
 * 10th (Training) Battalion - Formerly the 113th Infantry

Second World War

At the beginning of the Second World War there were only two battalions of the Regiment, the 1st and 2nd. This was soon changed, though, as a number of battalions were raised for wartime service, including: 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th, 14th, 25th, 26th and 27th Battalions. The 10th (Training Battalion) was also de-linked from the Jat Regiment. Some of these battalions were to be garrison or rear area troops only, while others went on to serve with distinction in a number of theatres during the war including the Middle East and Burma, notably during the Arakan campaigns and at Kohima.

The 4th Grenadiers formed the motorised infantry element of the Indian Armoured and Tank brigades, distinguishing themselves as 'tank escort' infantry protecting tanks against sniper attack in jungle conditions:

 * 1/4th Battalion, 252nd Indian Armoured Brigade, 31st Indian Armoured Division
 * 2/4th Battalion, 50th Indian Tank Brigade
 * 3/4th Battalion, 254th Indian Tank Brigade
 * 4/4th Battalion, 255th Indian Tank Brigade

Partition
In October 1945, the Indian infantry regiments lost their numerical designation and the regiment was re-designated as the Indian Grenadiers, thus severing its last link with the erstwhile Bombay Army (Special Indian Army Order 132/S/45). Following the partition of India, the regiment was allotted to India. The active units at that time were the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 25th. The Muslim troops in the regiment were allotted to Pakistan. Dogras from 5 Baluch joined the 1st battalion, The Frontier Force Rifles to 2nd battalion, and from 1/16 Punjab to the 4th battalion.

Regimental battalions

The Grenadiers consists of 23 battalions, four Rashtriya Rifles battalions and two Territorial Army battalions -

§ indicates former units.

Affiliations
The Grenadiers has been affiliated with The Armoured Corps and with the Indian Navy.

 * 51 Armoured Regiment has been affiliated with The Grenadiers.
 * INS Beas (F37) has also been affiliated with The Grenadiers.

Class composition

 * 1923 - Rajputana Mussalmans, Rajputana Jats, Mahrattas, Mers and Merats
 * 1946 - Jats from the Punjab, United Provinces, Rajputana and Central India states, Hindustani Mussalmans from Ambala Civil Division, Rajputana, United Provinces, Central India states and the Deccan.
 * Present - Rajputs, Ahirs, Kaimkhanis, Hindustani Mussalmans, Dogras, Gujjar, Meena, Gujratis, Jats.

Battle Honours (Pre-Independence)
Prior to Indian independence, the Regiment had won many battle honours as part of the British Indian Army. These battle honour include:

Pre-World War I

 * Mangalore – 1784
 * Mysore – 1786
 * Srirangapatnam – 1799
 * Egypt – 1802
 * Koregaon – 1818
 * Beni Boo Alli – 1821
 * Kirkee – 1827
 * Hyderabad – 1831–43
 * Multan
 * Meeane – 1843
 * Punjab – 1848
 * Central India – 1858
 * Abyssinia – 1868
 * Kandahar 1880
 * Afghanistan 1878–80
 * Burma 1885–87
 * Somaliland (Dharatol) – 1901–04
 * Afghanistan 1919

World War I

 * East Africa 1914–16
 * Egypt – 1916–17
 * Baghdad – 1917
 * Kut-Al-Amara – 1917
 * Gaza – 1917
 * Battle of Sharqat – 1918
 * Megiddo
 * Nablus – 1918
 * Palestine 1917–18
 * Mesopotamia – 1915–18
 * Aden – 1914–19
 * Afghanistan 1919
 * Tigris – 1919

World War II

 * Kohima – 1944
 * Kalewa – 1944
 * Naga Village – 1944
 * Fort Dufferin, Mandalay – 1945
 * Pwabwe – 1945
 * Capture of Meiktila – 1945
 * Defense of Meiktila – 1945
 * Pegu – 1945
 * Taungtha – 1945

Battle Honours (Post-Independence)
Since 1947, the Regiment has won the following battle honours as part of the Indian Army:

 * Gurais – 1948
 * Asal Uttar – 1965
 * Jarpal – 1971
 * Chakra – 1971
 * Tololing & Tiger Hill (Kargil War) – 1999

Decorations
The Grenadiers have the unique and distinct honour of having the most number of Param Vir Chakras, India's highest medal for gallantry, among all the Indian Army's Infantry Regiments. Of note also, is the fact that prior to independence, British officers serving with The Grenadiers won four Victoria Crosses. Members of the Regiment have also received a number of other decorations prior to independence.

Pre independence
Victoria Cross
 * Captain George Murray Rolland, 22 April 1903, Daratoleh, Somaliland

 * 1914-1921

Military Cross
 * Jemadar Pola Khan, 101st Grenadiers, Egypt
 * Subedar Jiwan Khan, 101st Grenadiers, Egypt and Aden (twice)
 * Subedar Kasianth Mane, 101st Grenadiers, Egypt

Order of British India
 * Subedar Major Martand Rao Mohite, 101st Grenadiers, Egypt
 * Subedar Agdi Singh, 102nd Grenadiers, Mesopotamia

Indian Order of Merit
 * Sepoy Fazil Khan, 101st Grenadiers, East Africa
 * Sepoy Sowaz Khan, 101st Grenadiers, East Africa
 * Subedar Rahim Khan, 101st Grenadiers, Egypt
 * Subedar Ahmed Din, 101st Grenadiers, Egypt
 * Colour Havildar Shah Muhammad, 101st Grenadiers, Egypt
 * Subedar Jafar Ali, 102nd Grenadiers, Muscat
 * Sepoy Nand Ram, 102nd Grenadiers, Muscat
 * Subedar Ganga Ram Singh, 102nd Grenadiers, Mesopotamia
 * Subedar Muhammad Ali, 102nd Grenadiers, Mesopotamia
 * Jemadar Ganga Ram, 102nd Grenadiers, Mesopotamia
 * Havildar Jaffar Ali, 102nd Grenadiers, Waziristan
 * Naik Shivlal Dalal (1933)

Indian Distinguished Service Medal Indian Meritorious Service Medal
 * Lance Naik Abdul Sattar Khan, Temporary Lance Naik Muhammad Khan, 101st Grenadiers, Egypt
 * Havildar Karan Singh, Havildar Ganga Ram, Private Sultan Ahmad, Havildar Tula Ram, Havildar Tula Ram, Havildar Mansare Ali, Private Sheo Ram, Havildar Sanwal Ram, Private Shedu Ram, Private Sirdara Ram, Private Surja Ram, Jemadar Khan Muhammad, Sepoy Ahmad Khan, Sepoy Girdhari Ram, Sepoy Tulsi Ram, Private Feroz Khan, Havildar Ram Diyal Singh, Naik Niyamat Khan (all in Mesopotamia), Private Karam Dad Khan (Muscat), Lance Naik Hoti Singh (Baluchistan), Subedar Mansar Ali (Pishin Moveable Column) 102nd Grenadiers
 * 84 medals - 101st Grenadiers, Egypt, Aden, Somaliland, India
 * 12 medals - 102nd Grenadiers, Mesopotamia, India, Baluchistan

Member of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire (MBE)
 * World War II
 * Subedar Major Shamshad Khan, 4th Bombay Grenadiers

Mentioned in dispatches
 * Major T H Waumsley, 4th Bombay Grenadiers
 * Major E R S Dods, 4th Bombay Grenadiers

Post independence
Param Vir Chakra
 * Company Quarter Master Havildar Abdul Hamid, 4th Grenadiers, 1965.
 * Major Hoshiar Singh, 3rd Grenadiers, 1971.
 * Grenadier Yogendra Singh Yadav, 18th Grenadiers, 1999.

Ashok Chakra
 * Second Lieutenant Rakesh Singh, 22nd Grenadiers, 1993
 * Major Rajiv Kumar Joon, 22nd Grenadiers, 1995

Maha Vir Chakra
 * 2nd Lieutenant Gopala Krishna Venkatesa Prasanna Rao, (Posthumous), 4th Grenadiers, Sino-Indian War, 1962
 * Brigadier Rai Singh Yadav, 2nd Grenadiers, Nathu La and Cho La clashes 1967.
 * Lieutenant General Ved Prakash Airy, 3rd Grenadiers, Indo-Pak War of 1971 (Battle of Basantar).
 * Major Dharam Vir Singh, 8th Grenadiers, Indo-Pak War of 1971.
 * Major General Antony Harold Edward Michigan, Indo-Pak War of 1971.
 * Major Rajesh Singh Adhikari, (Posthumous), 18th Grenadiers, Kargil War (Operation Vijay) 1999.
 * Colonel Balwan Singh, 18th Grenadiers, Kargil War (Operation Vijay) 1999.

Kirti Chakra
 * Grenadier Daryao Singh, 1948
 * Grenadier Gopal Singh (Posthumous), 1981
 * Grenadier Bajrang Singh (Posthumous), 1981
 * Naik Prakash Chand, 1990
 * Lieutenant Ravinder Chikara (Posthumous), 2001
 * Grenadier Anil Kumar (Posthumous), 2003
 * Colonel Gurbir Singh Sarna (Posthumous), 2006
 * Major Rajinder Kumar Sharma, 2008
 * Grenadier Pawan Kumar (Posthumous), 2024

Notable General Officers

 * Vice Chief of the Army Staff - Lieutenant General Stanley Leslie Menezes, PVSM, SC
 * Army Commanders (GOC-in-C) - Lieutenant General Y. N. Sharma (Central Command)
 * Corps Commanders (GOC) - Lieutenant Generals Y.S. Tomar, Sanjay Mitra (I Corps); Rajeev Sirohi (III Corps); Stanley Leslie Menezes, Shakti Gurung, Gurpal Singh Sangha (all IV Corps); Y.N. Sharma (XII Corps); Sarabjit Singh Dhillon (XV Corps); Lalit Kumar Pandey (XVII Corps).

title: The Grenadiers


text:
Calaveras Lake

Calaveras Lake can refer to the following bodies of water:

 * Calaveras Reservoir (California)
 * Calaveras Lake (Texas)

title: Calaveras Lake


text:
Wikipedia talk:Cite sources/Appropriate sources

 * Moved from Wikipedia talk:Cite sources.

"Reputable" vs. "Appropriate" sources
The tricky thing about a requirement of "reputable" sources is that the appropriateness of a source really depends on what the source is being used for, and in some cases a very un-reputable source may be entirely appropriate. For example, you would never cite a transcript of a Hitler speech for any purpose other than to indicate what Hitler said, but for that purpose it would be the most appropriate source. To take a less extreme example, I would not quote an arts review in a minor newspaper to sum up the work of a major figure, but I would not hesitate to quote it to show critical opinion from a particular place and time. We went through an interesting round of this at Republican/Democrat In Name Only, having to come up with a standard for what would count as appropriate citation of someone being called a RINO or DINO. Maybe "appropriate" is a more operative word than "reputable"? -- Jmabel | Talk 06:48, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree with this. Might it be appropriate to explain the difference between using a source as a primary source, and as a secondary one? To quote Stormfront in an article about them is to use them as a primary source, and is entirely appropriate. To use them to discuss Martin Luther King in an article about him, is to use them as a secondary source, and is entirely inappropriate. Also, just thinking out loud here, could we adapt the term "good enough" that is used in psychoanalysis to describe the "good-enough" parent? Not perfect, but appropriate, adequate, and fulfulling basic requirements? We'd still have to come up with a description of "good enough," however. I have no problem with the word "appropriate." Whatever term we choose, we can define it using ostensive definition i.e. by giving examples, rather than trying to pin down a hard-and-fast definition. SlimVirgin 06:58, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

Types of sources

 * I like Rbellin's suggestion: "Try to cite sources that are widely available, relevant, and as credible as possible." Maurreen 07:17, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * I also like Rbellin's phrasing. While "credibility" may still be somewhat debatable--it narrows the debate somewhat and strikes me as considerably less subjective and POV-laden than either "reputable" or "appropriate". older ≠ wiser 16:28, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

 * Rbellin's phrasing is fine with me, too. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:13, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)
 * I have no problem with using "credibility". I'd like to create a subpage and start doing an edit of the current version, then show it to you, but I'm tied up today and won't be able to start it straightaway, just in case anyone's wondering why I mentioned it earlier but then didn't press on. There's an interesting discussion going on on the mailing list about the authority of sources, and the importance of distinguishing between primary and secondary, and when to use one or the other. Check out the archives here. . There were quite a few threads and the headers kept changing so you may have to scout around a bit, but most posts were in the last three to five days. SlimVirgin 19:58, Jan 24, 2005 (UTC)

Uh, I am not sure these terms are being used here appropriately. I don't think there ever is such a thing as an ""appropriate" source as such, because it is appropriate only in relation to the context in which it is used. Indeed, ratehr than having a guideline that says "use appropriate sources" we should say "use sources appropriately" -- then the guideline is for the editor, not the source.  In contrast, I do think there are sources that are reputable or disreputable.  I think this is based in part on how transparent the author of the source (or, in the case of primary sources, the creator of the source) is about his or her methods and biases.  It is also based on public opinion.  Both of these can be hard to ascertain, but I think in fact most people in any given field have a pretty good idea of what is reputable in their field.  In any case, the measure of a works reputation has something to do with the quality of the work itself; whether it is being used appropriately or not is entirely dependent on the specific situation in which it is being used. Slrubenstein 22:35, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes, fine, whatever, I think you are quibbling. Obviously "appropriate" means "appropriate to the siutation". My problem was with the word "reputable" which would be an inherent property of the sources. Appropriateness always involves a context. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:21, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

In choosing our vocabulary, it might be helpful to list the things we're trying to achieve. As I see it, the consensus on this page and on the mailing list is:
 * (1) we don't want to discourage new or inexperienced editors from contributing;
 * (2) we don't want to erect a scholarly standard so intimidating that editors without an academic background will feel unable to contribute;
 * (3) we want to discourage (strongly discourage or prohibit?) editors using dodgy websites with strong POVs as secondary sources, but not as primary sources; that is, the Stormfront website may be used for an article about Stormfront, but it may not be used as a secondary source on Martin Luther King. Question: how to define "dodgy?" Answer: ostensive definition - give examples - we all know what we mean, more or less, and so will other editors;
 * (4) we want to create a non-intimidating research culture, in which, as editors become more experienced, they will learn how to use reputable sources in an appropriate manner, how to cite accurately, when to spot that there's something wrong with a source, where to find good sources;
 * (5) we want to create a great encyclopedia that will earn the trust of people all over the world, so we want editors to use sources compatible with that goal.

Probably the best way to achieve this is to describe what we're trying to achieve on the page, using all the words we've talked about: reputable, authoritative, credible, appropriate, qualifying each word as we use it, and giving examples of what we mean.

By the way, Zero posted something to the mailing list on sources today that we might want to incorporate in some form onto the page. See here. SlimVirgin 00:00, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

 * Zero's stuff is good, with maybe one reservation: sometimes "just a random web page" is obviously well researched even if it lacks citation apparatus. I wouldn't consider something like that a good reference, but it's often better than nothing. I'm not sure what our citation policy should be on those. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:00, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

 * I think any guidelines about evaluating sources, or which sources to use, should probably go on a different page. Maurreen 07:05, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * As I posted on the mailing list earlier today, there are two different things being talked about here, I think: quality of citations, and quality of sources. Quality of citation is about accurately documenting a source; identifying it, identifying how to find the referenced information, and characterising the source's content accurately.  Quality of sources is about how accurate and reliable the source is for that particular use.  It might work better to talk about the first here (how to cite sources correctly) and leave the other one for another page.

 * One sometimes has to use bad sources (sometimes there are no good sources, or one hasn't been found yet) but one should always do good cites, even of bad sources. —Morven 07:24, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

 * Excellent point Morven. I mean seriously, people can spend years in graduate school and still struggle with evaluating the quality of source material, so I don't think it is realistic to expect a short Wikipedia article to even begin to address the problems involved. Of course we must still attempt to address it, but we need to be realistic with our expectations. I agree that the first step is encouaging and facilitating people to provide a citation for sources used in an article. Evaluating the credibility (or appropriateness) of sources can then get thrashed out as needed. older ≠ wiser 13:00, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

I agree to with Morven. I think it was in the same spirit that I made the point about appropriate verus reputable -- I don't think I am quibbling, Maureen -- I think we do not want to confuse newbies. I want to add one point to SlimVirgin's comments, all of which I agree with. I think the single biggest turn-off to newbies is not complex policy pages (and yes, I still agree that policy pages should not be too complex); the biggest turn off is when they soon find themselves in edit wars they do not understand. So my main criteria for developing policy pages is, we want to help them avoid getting into edit conflicts early on that would turn them off. Since a new editor can be criticized byothers for using non-reputable sources or for failing to use sources appropriately, we need to distinguish between the two (as Morven distinguishes between quality of sources and quality of citations) and explain them as simply and clearly as we can. But "reputable sources" is crucial, because many edit-wars are triggered over what constitutes a reputable sourc. Slrubenstein 17:28, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * Just for clarification, Slrubenstein, I think you have me confused with someone else. I haven't said anything about quibbling. Maurreen 17:44, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Damn -- I am very sorry, Maurreen. I meant Jmabel. Slrubenstein 19:05, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * No problem, not to worry. Maurreen 05:04, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Interpretation and original research in Wikipedia
Every text in Wikipedia that is not a direct quote is an interpretation of another text. Even a summary is an interpretation of the original text. Furthermore, deciding which arguments to present for and against a theory in an article is interpretation and original research. So all articles in Wikipedia contain some degree of interpretation and original research. Therefore the guidelines cannot just decide which information to allow or not to allow. It must also be guidelines for this discussion and interpretation.

A rough draft may be that all facts should be supported from outside sources, if demanded. The only theories in Wikipedia should be those held by "many" people or an authority. One guideline regarding the discussion of a theory and selection of arguments might be that one cannot argue against "stronger" arguments. A hierarchy might be

1. Peer-reviewed studies or government statistics 2. Academic press 3. Opinion held by an authority 4. Opinion held by many people who are not authorities (5. Opinion held by only one or a few people)

For example, it should not be allowed to argue against peer-reviewed studies by refering to common opinion. In the more controversial topics in Wikipedia this hierarchy for discussion is already in place by itself. Look for example at capitalism or race and intelligence. Ultramarine 12:59, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * This makes a lot of sense to me. Maurreen 14:50, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

 * One example giving rise to a problem with Ultramarine's heirarchy is David Irving. His early material was not peer-reviewed in the sense of being published in academic journals, but it was hailed by certain British academic historians who weren't specialists in Holocaust studies. Yet journalists who evidently knew more than the historians criticized it. We would want to be allowed to quote those journalists even in the absence of specialist criticism. SlimVirgin 02:40, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

 * If the historians were not specialists then they were not authorities. Thus, if David Irving has not published in peer-reviewed journals or academic press then I think one can certainly quote journalists with good historic knowledge.

 * Today an authority might be someone who has published academic material in this area previously. Authorities earlier in history might be those today recognized as such by current authorities.

 * I hope that you agree that some kind of guidelines are needed? Otherwise anyone can quote an opinion from a newspaper as evidence against peer-reviewd studies. Ultramarine 14:23, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

There are three issues here. First, what do we mean by "interpretation." Fr the purposes of Wikipedia policy (as opposed to, say, a book on literary theory or hrmeneutics) I strongly disagree with Ultramarine's claim that everything is interpretion. I think what we mean here is an account of a text or event that makes claims about what it means that are not obvious -- meaning, that are not widely shared by others. Summaries of a text or event that claim to provide the "plain" meaning -- meaning, what most others would consider obvious -- are not for our purposes, interpretations.

Second, what is a high-quality source. I still believe that it is impossible to operationalize this in a way everyone here would find acceptable -- and I believe just as strongly that this is an ideal to which we should aspire. I think Ultramarine's list of sources could serve as examples but not as rules.

Third, what we can operationalize is the distinction between controversial and non-controversial sources. We need to make clear that the controversies surrounding controversial sources must be explained; that the NPOV rule applies and we should make sure other views are represented; that articles should try to use as many non-controversial sources as possible. Slrubenstein 16:24, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * I agree that is is impossible to exactly operationalize what is a high-quality source. I also think my list or similar list might be useful as examples but probably not as exact rules. I do think that Wikipedia should allow sources with lower quality if there are no high quality sources available. For example, I think Wikipedia should briefly describe conspiracy theories popular among many people even if these are completely ignored in academic research.\

Great! Do you think the policy makes this clear? Slrubenstein 17:56, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

 * I am more pessimistic about whether Wikipedia can be free from interpretations. If a particular summary of another text provides the "plain" meaning obvious to most people is always open to debate. Furthermore, the selection of sources and the decision which are of higher quality is also interpretation. Ultramarine 17:43, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I am not questioning whether Wikipedia can be free of interpretations; I do not think anyone here believes this. I am, however, questioning your definition of the word "interpretation." Slrubenstein 17:56, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Authoritativeness and Relevance of sources
Every text in Wikipedia that is not a direct quote is a interpretation of another text. Even a summary is an interpretation of the original text. Furthermore, deciding which arguments to present for and against a theory in an article is interpretation and original research. So all articles in Wikipedia contain some degree of interpretation and original research. Therefore the guidelines cannot just decide which information to allow or not to allow. It must also be guidelines for this discussion and interpretation. In the more controversial topics in Wikipedia informal rules for this discussion is already in place by itself. Look for example at capitalism or race and intelligence.

A rough draft might be that all facts should be supported from outside sources, if demanded. The only theories in Wikipedia should be those held by "many" people or an authority.

Regarding sources in the discussion of a theory, one important factor is the authoritativeness of the source. One guideline might be to avoid arguing against more authoritative arguments with less authoritative. For example, to avoid arguing against peer-reviewed studies by referring to common opinion. Although common opinion could certainly be mentioned, especially in areas where there are no academic research as in many conspiracy theories. An example of the hierarchy of authoritativeness might be:

1. Peer-reviewed studies or government statistics 2. Academic press 3. Opinion held by an authority. That might be a person who has previously done academic research in discussed area. Or dead persons considered authorities by authorities today. 4. Opinion held by many people who are not authorities (5. Opinion held by only one or a few people who are not authorities).

Another factor is the relevance of the source for the theory. A source with very little relevance for the theory should be avoided. An example of the hierarchy of relevance might be:

1. Discusses the theory directly. 2. Discusses general principle important for the theory. For example, a page about peak oil might reference an article that discusses solar power in general without mentioning peak oil. 3. Statistic that if generalized affects the theory. For example, a page about capitalism or Marxism might reference US government statistics about growing differences in income. (4. Anecdotal evidence for the theory. For example, a page about poverty in the third world might reference the income of a particular person.) Ultramarine

 * I mostly agree; one demurral: the priority of peer-reviewed studies varies with subject matter. For example, a peer reviewed academic paper on punk rock would probably be authoritative on dates and names, but wouldn't necessarily carry any more weight than a review in Maximum Rock'n'Roll for its judgement of a band. There are simply fields where the real experts aren't in academia. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:53, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC)

I think we need to be careful about this heirarchy of relevance as it could be used by some to introduce their own synthesis of published material i.e. their own arguments. While others have made the point that we don't want to stifle creativity, and I agree with that, we also don't want people using Wikipedia as a platform to publish their own essays. Dipping into a variety of sources for a paragraph here and there that supports an argument is personal essay-writing. Ultramarine's example about a page about Marxism referencing U.S. government statistics about differences in income is an example of what editors ought not to do, in my view. Perhaps that's what you meant too, Ultramarine. I'm all for giving examples within a "heirarchy of relevance," but I'd like to see a cut-off point where we say: "And these examples would count as original research." SlimVirgin 22:39, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Quoting of unknown pressure groups
Lately, I have come across a number of edits which included quotations (sometimes unattributed) from various groups which had a very specific point of view on a question. Of course, articles must represent all points of views, and I do not dispute that.

However, it appears to me that the value of a reference should be assessed on four aspects:
 * 1) Quality of the analysis: are there any glaring factual errors? (e.g. a study placing Italy in Africa should probably not be cited as reference)
 * 2) Expertise: is the author a recognizable institution working in the field? (e.g. a study by an obscure self-employed physicist, not published in a peer-reviewed journal, does not have the same value as a study by researcher in an internationally known institution publishing in a first-class scientific journal, even though the latter may contain mistakes)
 * 3) Identifiability: is the source traced to a clearly identifiable person, institution, publication, or group? Nowadays, anybody can start a "group" or "institute" and have Web pages, so an "institute" may actually be a handful of persons. That is why I much prefer it when the source has its own well-documented page on Wikipedia. Surely, it matters a lot, when reading the opinion of a source, to know whether the source is a reputed human rights organization, a personal project, or an institute affiliated with or funded by a political party or religious organization.
 * 4) Representativity: does the group represent a sizeable part of public opinion?  To me, it seems that quotes from mostly unknown pressure groups are a subtle workaround of the policy on weasel words, the policy of citing sources, and the policy against citing one's personal opinion.

It seems to me that these aspects are too often ignored, and that some contributors push too much irrelevant opinion quotes in the guise of NPOV. To draw a parallel, the article on George W. Bush does not, and should not, contain opinion pieces from every left-wing group on Earth saying that Bush is stupid and that his policies are a disaster; I do not see why this should be different for other articles.

In addition, I think that, all too often, sources are improperly attributed. For instance, the opinion of a single judge in a lower court in a country is not the opinion of the government of that country. The opinion of some people invited at a conference organized by institution X is not the official point of view of association X. Etc.

I think that all this should be reflected in official Wikipedia policy. David.Monniaux 11:14, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * You make very good points and I agree with substantially all of it. But I welcome this kind of debate as being on an entirely higher level of argument than arguing whether we should have sources and properly cited facts at all. I think your criteria above for deciding on the quality of a source is very good, and one that meets more of those criteria should be preferred over one that meets less. Maybe others will have some idea on improving the criteria, and maybe we can even create a separate page for references criteria, start with the above and build a consensus for ways to distinguish between more respected sources and less.  It will of course nevr be perfect, but you have made a great start. - Taxman 13:55, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)

See above. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:23, Feb 11, 2005 (UTC)


text: User:Johnmarkham

title: User:Johnmarkham


text:
Riviera (hotel and casino)

The Riviera (colloquially, "the Riv") was a hotel and casino on the northern Las Vegas Strip in Winchester, Nevada. It opened on April 20, 1955, and included a nine-story hotel featuring 291 rooms. The Riviera was the first skyscraper in the Las Vegas Valley, and was the area's tallest building until 1956. Various hotel additions would be made in later years, including a 12-story tower in 1966, a 17-story tower in 1975, and a 24-story tower in 1988. By the time of its closure in 2015, the resort included a 103800 sqft casino and 2,075 rooms.

In 1973, the Riviera was sold to businessman Meshulam Riklis, who owned it for the next two decades. The Riviera filed for bankruptcy in 1983, and targeted a middle-class demographic from that point on, which helped the property thrive. Changes included the addition of a Burger King in 1984, making the Riviera the first Strip property to feature a fast-food restaurant.

The Riviera emerged from bankruptcy in 1985, but filed again in 1991, amid an expansion project which went over budget. The property emerged in 1993, under the new ownership of Riviera Holdings Corporation. The property's convention space was expanded in the late 1990s, which helped keep the resort profitable. The Riviera was also host to a variety of live entertainment, including female impersonator Frank Marino (1985–2009) and a topless revue known as Crazy Girls (1987–2015).

In February 2015, the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority (LVCVA) purchased the 26 acre Riviera, at a cost of $191 million. The agency had plans to demolish the resort for a major expansion of its nearby Las Vegas Convention Center. The Riviera closed on May 4, 2015, and demolition was underway a year later. The 24-story tower was imploded on June 14, 2016, followed by the 12- and 17-story towers on August 16, 2016. The LVCVA's plans for the property changed after it acquired other nearby acreage. The new convention space was built on the Riviera's eastern portion, while 10 acres along the Strip were put up for sale in 2019.

Development
The Riviera was originally known as the Casa Blanca prior to the start of construction. It was proposed by a group of businessmen, mostly from Miami Beach, who applied for a gaming license in December 1952. Among the group members was William "Lefty Clark" Bischoff, who previously ran casino operations in Detroit. Bischoff was to hold a 40-percent interest in the Casa Blanca. However, he had been identified a few years earlier, during the Kefauver Committee hearings, as having ties to organized crime. He subsequently withdrew his name from the group's license application.

Two other investors, Miami contractor Julius Gaines and Hollywood producer Lewis Merman, also withdrew because of concern over their affiliation with Charles Tourine, who had a criminal record. Samuel Cohen, a Miami businessman, joined the Casa Blanca project in early 1953 as a financier. He was later identified as a member of Miami's S & G gambling syndicate and would be removed from the project as well, although rumors persisted that he secretly maintained an involvement.

A new list of prospective owners, eliminating all but two of the original investors, was submitted to the Nevada Tax Commission in July 1953. The group, at that time, consisted of eight partners. Among them were brothers David and Myer Gensburg, and brothers Harpo and Gummo Marx. The group was granted a gaming license in September 1953.

The Riviera was built along the northern Las Vegas Strip, at a cost of $8.5 million. Construction began in May 1954. The project was designed by Roy France and Son, an architecture firm based in Miami Beach, with J. Maher Weller as associate architect. The general contractor was Taylor Construction Company, also of Miami.

Early years
The Riviera opened on April 20, 1955, and included a nine-story hotel tower. Its debut coincided with that of two other Strip resorts, the Dunes and the Royal Nevada, prompting concerns that Las Vegas had been overbuilt with hotels. Mob fixer Sidney Korshak played a major role in the property's management. Law enforcement agencies suspected that he represented the Chicago Outfit's interest in the Riviera, and was responsible for skimming the casino's revenue and delivering the proceeds to Chicago. This, combined with poor management by the inexperienced Miami group, resulted in significant financial losses for the Riviera.

A group of former Flamingo Hotel managers, led by Gus Greenbaum, soon took over operation of the Riviera, leasing it from the ownership group. Greenbaum had recently retired, and it was widely suspected that he was coerced to return to work by threats from Chicago mob boss Tony Accardo. Among Greenbaum's staff was entertainment director William Nelson, who was soon discovered to be mob informer Willie Bioff, leading to his murder in November 1955.

Greenbaum's drug and gambling addictions led to his embezzling from the casino. In December 1958, he and his wife were murdered in their Phoenix, Arizona home, reportedly on the orders of either Meyer Lansky or Accardo. Ben Goffstein took Greenbaum's place as president. In 1960, the Riviera purchased a 15-percent interest held by the estate of Greenbaum, which retained a 17-percent stake after the sale. The estate's remaining interest was bought a year later. Sid Wyman, a Las Vegas casino executive, also decided to sell his interest back to the Riviera.

Expansion and owner changes
Several hotel expansions would take place, including the addition of a 12-story tower in 1966. Two years later, the Riviera was purchased by a new group, which included bankers E. Parry Thomas and Jerome Mack. The group also consisted of investors tied to the Parvin-Dohrmann Corp., which owned the Aladdin, Stardust, and Fremont casinos. In 1969, a deal was made to sell the Riviera to Parvin-Dohrmann, but the sale was blocked by the Nevada Gaming Control Board, due to the company's previous failure to report a change of ownership.

Edward Torres was among the new ownership group and managed resort operations. Dean Martin was hired in 1969 to perform in the casino's showroom, and was given a 10% interest in the Riviera. Martin left in 1972, after Torres refused his request to cut his performance schedule from two nightly shows to one; the Riviera bought back his shares.

In 1973, the Riviera was purchased for $60 million by AITS Inc., a Boston-based travel company controlled by Meshulam Riklis and Isidore Becker. Riklis was majority owner, while Becker would later serve as president of the property. A 17-story tower was added in 1975.

The Riviera eventually suffered financial problems in part because of the early 1980s recession, and also due to competition from new casinos in Atlantic City, where gambling had been legalized. The property filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 1983. Riklis pledged money to keep the Riviera in operation, and replaced Becker with Jeffrey Silver to turn the business around. Silver began shifting the Riviera's marketing focus away from high rollers, and towards middle- and working-class gamblers. The property emerged from bankruptcy in 1985.

The Riviera underwent an expansion from 1988 to 1990, which included a neon billboard facade along the Strip. The resort was evacuated when a three-alarm fire occurred during 1989, in a new casino area that was under construction. Lumber had ignited due to sparks from a welder's torch, and the fire caused $3.5 million in damage. It was confined to the new addition, although smoke blackened the property's original hotel tower.

Aside from the new casino space, the expansion project also added a 24-story tower. There were plans to eventually add a 43-story tower and an indoor amusement park, although these never materialized; the prior expansion work had gone significantly over budget, leading the parent company to file again for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in 1991. The business emerged in 1993 as Riviera Holdings Corporation, owned by the previous secured creditors. Riklis was no longer involved with the property.

In 1997, businessman Allen Paulson agreed to acquire the Riviera, but backed out of the deal a year later, stating that adequate financial information had not been disclosed. Riviera Holdings sued him in response, and the case was settled in 1999.

Final years
Despite its age and financial problems, the Riviera would remain popular as a middle-class property through the 2000s, especially in contrast to newer megaresorts being built on the Strip. Riviera Holdings opened a Colorado location, the Riviera Black Hawk, in 2000, owning it for more than a decade. The company considered expanding the brand elsewhere as well.

Prospective buyers for the Las Vegas location became more frequent in the 2000s, as development of the nearby Wynn resort was expected to help revitalize the northern Strip. In 2003, Italian investor Fabrizio Boccardi made an offer for Riviera Holdings, which rejected his bid. By that time, businessman Donald Trump had bought a 10-percent stake in the company, prompting speculation that he would take over the resort. However, Trump simply viewed the property as an investment, and bought into the company only to acquire a Nevada gaming license for potential projects in the future. He sold his shares in 2004. The company D. E. Shaw, one of the largest shareholders in Riviera Holdings, made a buyout offer later that year, but was also rejected. A group of businessmen, including Barry Sternlicht and Neil Bluhm, agreed to buy into the company in 2005, with plans to renovate the Riviera. The buyout ultimately failed, as D. E. Shaw opposed the group's $426 million offer, finding it too low.

In 2005, the Riviera celebrated its 50th anniversary, a rare milestone for Strip properties. According to Michael Green, a professor at the College of Southern Nevada, the Riviera's "survival is one of the most interesting parts of its story, just because 50 years later it's still there and geographically it's on a part of the Strip that hasn't done as well as the part south of The Mirage." Hal Rothman, a history professor at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, said of the Riviera: "It never quite had the pizzazz of the Sands with the Rat Pack. There was never a moment when it was a signature property. It was a good, solid hotel, but it was never the leader of the pack."

The Riviera began targeting customers disappointed by the closure of nearby casinos, such as the Westward Ho in 2005, and the Stardust in 2006. However, the closure of these properties, and that of the New Frontier in 2007, further reduced visitation to the northern Strip. The Riviera was expected to benefit from two nearby projects, Echelon Place and Fontainebleau Las Vegas, but construction on both had been suspended by the end of 2009, due to the Great Recession. Visitation to the area was further reduced a few years later, following the temporary closure of the Sahara.

Riviera Holdings filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2010, and emerged the following year through a deal with Sternlicht and other investors. His company, Starwood Capital Group, gained a 75-percent interest in Riviera Holdings, while local casino owner Derek Stevens owned 21 percent. Following Starwood's takeover, prospective buyers continued to look at the Riviera, but were turned off by the amount of money needed to renovate it in line with modern resorts. David A. Siegel was among those who considered a purchase, but found the property to be "a dump," instead buying the nearby LVH resort. Various renovations were launched across the property and underway by 2012. Amid continued financial losses, Paragon Gaming was hired to take over casino operations in 2013, while Riviera Holdings remained as owner.

Closure and demolition
In February 2013, the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority (LVCVA) announced plans for a major expansion of its nearby Las Vegas Convention Center. On February 20, 2015, the LVCVA voted to purchase the resort from Riviera Holdings for $191 million, taking ownership immediately. The agency planned to demolish the resort to help make way for the new convention space. In the meantime, the Riviera was leased back to Paragon Gaming for the remainder of its operational history. The sale came less than two weeks after rumors emerged about the LVCVA acquiring the Riviera. The resort had 1,000 employees.

The Riviera closed shortly after 12:00 p.m. on May 4, 2015, two weeks following its 60th anniversary. An on-site liquidation sale began later that month, with more than 1 million items available for purchase. Some of the Riviera's slot machines were sold to Stevens, who placed them in his two downtown properties: The D and the Golden Gate.

Petitions to save the Riviera were launched via Change.org and with the county, although these efforts were ultimately unsuccessful. Architecture critic Alan Hess was among those in favor of preservation, suggesting that portions of the resort be incorporated into the redevelopment project. Kristen Peterson of Las Vegas Weekly lamented the Riviera's closure, noting its historic status and design features such as "tiered chandeliers, excessive mirror-paneling and a carpet pattern that could only be the direct kin of '70s television."

John L. Smith of the Las Vegas Review-Journal opined that the Riviera "generated a certain kind of history that ought to be remembered, but I'm not sure its notorious tenure qualifies it for a spot on the National Register of Historic Places." Singer Pia Zadora, who was married to Riklis during his ownership of the Riviera, said of the property: "At the risk of sounding crass, everyone is so upset and distraught about it being torn down, but I think it should have been imploded awhile ago. Either imploded or refurbished. This is not to negate all the memories and all the wonderful stuff that was there, but it just lived too long in a way." Jim Murren, the CEO of MGM Resorts, said that "the days of (the Riviera's) benefit to Las Vegas are long gone," stating that expansion of the convention center "would be very beneficial to the neighborhood."

In response to the petition efforts, the LVCVA noted an economic impact analysis which found that a failure to demolish the Riviera would cost the local economy $15 billion over a 30-year period. The LVCVA had initially hoped to have the Riviera demolished during 2015, although time had to be spent testing for hazardous construction materials such as asbestos. The demolition process began on April 18, 2016, with the removal of hazardous materials. This was followed by demolition of various low-rise structures, which required the use of excavators. Consideration had been given to retaining the Riviera's parking garages, but it was later determined that keeping them would not be beneficial, due to their locations on the site. After demolition started, contaminated soil was discovered on the property's north side, near four underground diesel fuel storage tanks. Nearly 10,000 tons of contaminated soil had to be removed.

By the time of its closure, the Riviera had multiple hotel structures, including several ranging from 12 to 24 stories. Due to the sprawling layout of the Riviera's buildings, a two-phase implosion was scheduled months apart for several of the hotel towers. The implosion work was conducted by Controlled Demolition, Inc., which handled previous implosions in Las Vegas.

The 24-story Monaco Tower was imploded on June 14, 2016, at 2:37 a.m. Implosions have been popular events in Las Vegas since the 1990s, and the Monaco Tower marked the first resort implosion to occur on the Strip since the New Frontier in 2007. Dignitaries and many spectators came to view the implosion, which was preceded by a fireworks show.

After the implosion, excavators were used to demolish the casino floor and the earliest hotel towers; the 1955 building was the oldest resort structure on the Strip.

The second implosion covered several structures: the 17-story Monte Carlo Tower, the 12-story Mediterranean South tower, and the billboard facade. Asbestos had been discovered in the Monte Carlo Tower, which made its demolition more difficult than that of the Monaco Tower. Before being imploded, the building had to be wrapped in plastic, allowing workers to safely chisel away its stucco exterior without spreading the asbestos. The tower's interior also needed to be cleared of asbestos. This removal process increased demolition costs by $5 million, putting the total at more than $40 million.

The second implosion took place on August 16, 2016, at 2:30 a.m. It was a low-key event, conducted with no fanfare and attracting a few hundred spectators.

Redevelopment
In its final years, the Riviera occupied 26 acre, extending east from Las Vegas Boulevard to Paradise Road. By November 2016, the site had been paved over with a convention center parking lot, which also served as outdoor exhibition space. The convention center expansion, known as the West Hall, began construction in January 2018, occupying the eastern portion of the former Riviera land. Later that year, the LVCVA acquired other nearby acreage which would be used for parking and outdoor exhibits moving forward. As a result, the agency put 10 acres of the Riviera site up for sale in 2019. The land is located along the Strip, at the southeast corner of Elvis Presley Boulevard.

In 2021, an agreement was reached to sell the property to Claudio Fischer, a Chilean real estate developer who had built several casino resorts in South America. Fischer would purchase the site for $120 million, and intended to build a casino resort with a 50-story hotel tower. However, he backed out of the deal in 2023, citing the continual rise of interest rates in the U.S. Later that year, a deal was announced to sell the property to Brett Torino and Paul Kanavos for $125 million. The two had previously developed retail projects along the Strip such as 63, and were also part of the group that sought to buy Riviera Holdings in 2006.

Fontainebleau Las Vegas, which had recently opened just north of the Riviera site, announced in June 2024 that it would purchase 5 of the 10 acres, with Torino and Kanavos retaining the western half that fronts the Strip. Fontainebleau would pay $112.5 million for the east half, to be used for future development. On their portion of the land, Torino and Kanavos have considered a retail and entertainment complex, possibly with a non-gaming hotel. The LVCVA's sale of both parcels is expected to close by November 2024.

Features
The property and several of its facilities, such as the Monaco tower, were named in reference to the French Riviera, but the theme did not extend to the resort's architectural design.

Hotel
The Riviera originally opened with a nine-story hotel tower, and a connected two-story structure which extended south of it, for a total of 291 rooms. It was the first skyscraper in the Las Vegas Valley, and was the area's tallest building until the opening of the Fremont Hotel and Casino in 1956.

Several hotel expansions would take place in the decades to come. The first expansion was announced in 1959. Designed by Los Angeles architect Welton Beckett, the project included 114 new rooms, added through a six-story addition built atop the two-story structure. It was finished in 1960. These towers were extended further south with a 12-story addition, completed in 1966. The $6 million tower was designed by Harold W. Levitt with Ernest W. Le Duc and William H. Farwell as consulting architects. It added 220 rooms. The original tower and the two newer additions would become known, respectively, as the Mediterranean North and Mediterranean South towers.

The $20 million East Tower, with 300 rooms, was added in 1975. The 17-story project was designed by architect Martin Stern Jr., with interior work by Yates and Silverman of Los Angeles. This addition later became known as the Monte Carlo Tower.

Low-rise additions, known as the Lanai rooms, had been completed in 1962. These were designed by Julius Gabriele, and would later be replaced by two new towers. The six-story San Remo Tower was constructed in 1977, by the Del E. Webb Corporation. The 24-story Monaco Tower opened in 1988, and featured 1,000 rooms. By the time of its closure, the Riviera had 2,075 rooms.

Casino
The Riviera's casino originally opened with 116 slot machines. In 1990, it was expanded to the sidewalk along the Strip with a 70000 sqft addition, opened on the former parking lot. The property's gaming space was increased to approximately 125000 sqft, reputedly making it the largest casino in the world, although this figure was disputed by the new Trump Taj Mahal in Atlantic City, which claimed to be the largest with 120000 sqft.

In continued efforts to attract a budget-conscious demographic, a casino addition known as Nickel Town was added to the Riviera in 1997. The 10000 sqft area had more than 300 slots, most of them nickel machines.

The sportsbook was remodeled in 2011, and included the addition of a walk-up betting window along the Strip. The casino also added bingo to set it apart from other resorts on the Strip, an area where the game had been absent since 2007. New slot machines were also added, and the poker room was updated as well. In its final years, the total gaming space measured 103800 sqft, including the 12000 sqft sportsbook. The casino had nearly 1,000 slot machines during that time.

Restaurants
The Riviera featured various dining options, including the Ristorante Italiano, added in 1977. Another restaurant, Kady's Coffee Shop, was named after Riklis' daughter and opened in 1986. While Silver was serving as chief executive in 1984, he added a Burger King franchise inside the Riviera, making it the first Strip resort to feature a fast food chain outlet; this move inspired the phrase "Burger King Revolution" to refer to the broader trend of Las Vegas casinos catering to middle-class customers. Other fast-food options were added in a food court addition, opened in 1990. The resort also had a low-priced buffet, which closed after many years in 2013, unable to compete with its upscale competitors. It was the cheapest buffet on the Strip at the time of its closure, charging less than $15 a person.

Neon signage
Upon opening, the Riviera featured a simple roadside sign along the Strip, replaced by a larger sign two years later. In 1966, a taller sign was added along the Strip. By 1990, it had been moved to the rear of the property along Paradise Road, making way for the casino expansion.

The circular billboard was added in 1989, and was accompanied by a block-long facade. Both of these faced the Strip, and consisted of mirrored panels and neon signage for various property features, such as restaurants and entertainment. The facade work was designed by Nikita Zukov, along with Marge Williams of Federal Sign.

A steel sculpture was added to the Riviera's northwest corner in the late 1990s, as part of the Nickel Town addition. The sculpture featured three steel poles pointed outward, resembling fountain water. The poles were covered in neon lighting and had an advertising screen wrapped around them.

The sign along Paradise Road was removed in 2016, following the Riviera's closure. Neon letters from the billboard facade, spelling out "Riviera", were acquired by Will Durham, a Reno collector of neon signs. Other signage from the facade, as well as another "Riviera" sign from the property's east entrance, were donated to the city's Neon Museum.

Other features
A convention center was added in 1968, and a major expansion began 30 years later. This helped the Riviera stay competitive in the 2000s, with the property hosting numerous groups and events each year.

In 1984, the Riviera set up a walk of fame on its sidewalk along the Strip. It consisted of concrete slabs featuring handprints from celebrities, including boxer Sugar Ray Leonard, and singers Dolly Parton and Michael Jackson. The walk of fame was short-lived and eventually removed. Jackson's slab and others were stored in the Riviera basement for the next two decades, before being raffled off to gamblers. In 2012, Jackson's slab was placed at Grauman's Chinese Theatre in Hollywood.

Tennis courts were added near the pool area in 1972. A second pool had been added to the rooftop of the 1990 casino expansion, but it was soon drained and left abandoned after it began leaking onto the gaming floor.

Live entertainment
Liberace provided the Riviera's opening-night entertainment, while actress Joan Crawford mingled with guests. Liberace was paid $50,000 a week to perform at the Riviera, a record salary for Las Vegas entertainers at the time. The resort included a dinner theatre known as the Clover Room, seating 550 people. It was renamed the Versailles Theatre in 1960. The property also included the Starlight Lounge.

Several entertainers made their Las Vegas debut at the Riviera, including Orson Welles in 1956, Barbra Streisand (as opening act for Liberace) in 1963, and Engelbert Humperdinck in 1969. Other notable entertainers throughout the Riviera's history included Ed Sullivan, Red Skelton, Tony Bennett, Louis Armstrong, Eddie Fisher, Debbie Reynolds, Tony Orlando, Bobby Vinton, Charo, Harry Belafonte, Liza Minnelli, Ricci Martin, and Shecky Greene.

In 1967, singer Ann-Margret signed an entertainment contract with the Riviera, and also married Roger Smith there. Five years later, actress Olivia Hussey and Dean Paul Martin (son of Dean Martin) would also hold their wedding at the resort.

Sam Distefano was the resort's head of entertainment during the 1980s, and eventually teamed up comedians Bob Hope and George Burns for their first performance together. Future actor Steve Schirripa worked as entertainment director during the 1990s.

Singer Frank Sinatra performed at the Riviera several times in the early 1990s. After his performances, he would stay in a high roller suite in the Monte Carlo Tower, which was redesigned to his liking. Following his death in 1998, the hotel dedicated the room in his honor, renaming it the Frank Sinatra Suite.

Primary shows
The Riviera debuted several long-running shows in the 1980s, while under the ownership of Riklis. Among them was Splash, which debuted in June 1985. It was directed, produced and choreographed by Jeff Kutash. The show included dancers, motorcycle stunts, and a 20,000-gallon tank for swimming performances. For the sake of variety, the show's entertainment lineup was subject to frequent changes.

Splash underwent a $5 million revamp in 1995, and was rebranded as Splash II, a name it would retain for several years. Kutash departed the production in 1996, and Riklis would later become its owner and producer. The tank was removed in 1999, replaced with a surface for ice-skating performances. Kutash returned in 2005 and revamped the show once more, in honor of its 20th anniversary. Splash ended its run in September 2006.

Another show, titled An Evening at La Cage, debuted in September 1985. It featured a cast of female impersonators who portrayed various celebrities, such as Cher and Diana Ross. Frank Marino starred as the show's headliner with his impersonation of Joan Rivers. The show was produced by Norbert Aleman, and ran until February 2009.

Aleman also produced another Riviera show, a topless revue known as Crazy Girls, which debuted in September 1987. One of its early performers was transgender showgirl Jahna Steele. A prominent advertising photo of the dancers was shot in 1994. It featured the dancers dressed in G-strings and lined up with their backs to the camera, bearing their buttocks. The photo was used on billboards and taxicabs, despite objections from some elected officials who found the image too risqué.

In 1997, a bronze sculpture of the dancers was unveiled at the Riviera's entrance along the Strip, commemorating the show's 10th anniversary. It was created by sculptor Michael Conine over the course of nearly a year. The National Organization for Women objected to the sculpture, deeming it sexually explicit. In response, Conine said, "Nudity has been in art since the beginning. Using the female nude in art is nothing new." The sculpture became a popular tourist attraction, with visitors often rubbing the buttocks for good luck, wearing them down to a shine. Crazy Girls closed along with the Riviera in May 2015. The show and its sculpture were relocated to the Planet Hollywood resort on the Strip, where they remained until 2021.

New venues and final years
Budd Friedman opened a comedy club at the Riviera in 1986, part of his Improv chain. After a nine-year run, the venue was rebranded as the Riviera Comedy Club. It continued to operate until the property's closure, becoming one of the longest-operating comedy venues in Las Vegas. Other venues would be added to the Riviera over the years, such as the 3,500-seat Royale Pavilion, opened in 1999 as part of the convention space expansion.

Le Bistro Theatre opened in 2002; it was previously a lounge which offered free entertainment. In its early years as a paid venue, it was leased to singer Marlene Ricci, a protege of Sinatra. Aside from performing there, Ricci also subleased the space to other productions. Among these were tribute shows to Sinatra and Neil Diamond, the latter starring impersonator Jay White. Another tribute show was Barbra & Frank: The Concert That Never Was, dedicated to Streisand and Sinatra. It opened at the Le Bistro Theatre in 2005, and ran for several years.

Ice: Direct From Russia opened in the Versailles Theatre in 2007, replacing Splash. The show primarily featured ice-skaters, in addition to acrobats and clowns. It ran until 2009. In need of repairs, the Versailles Theatre also closed that year and never reopened. Plans to renovate the venue were announced at the end of 2014, but were soon scrapped after the Riviera was sold to the LVCVA.

Pat DiNizio, founding member of the band The Smithereens, opened his show Confessions of a Rock Star in 2011. Magician Jan Rouven opened the following year, in the Starlight Theater. In 2013, Red Mercury Entertainment was hired to manage several venues at the Riviera. Within a year, the company launched a male revue known as Men: The Experience, as well as shows dedicated to the doo-wop and Motown genres. Pawn Shop Live! also debuted in 2014, as a spoof of the locally based television program Pawn Stars, with input from the cast. Shortly after debuting, the show was revamped to scale back on the spoof aspect. Despite the changes, the show proved to be short-lived, closing four months after its initial opening.

George Bugatti and Denise Rose were the last singers to perform at the Riviera, doing so on April 25, 2015. Crazy Girls ended its run on May 1, 2015, and the comedy club closed the night before the rest of the property.

In popular culture
The Riviera was often chosen as a shooting location due to its history and recognition as a landmark. It was a major location for the 1995 film Casino, standing in as the fictional Tangiers. Because the film is set in the 1970s and 1980s, the filmmakers needed a property with an appearance matching the time period. The Riviera fulfilled this requirement, and filming took place throughout the resort, most prominently on the casino floor.

After its closure, the Riviera was lit up again in February 2016 and used for the film Jason Bourne, released later that year. Because the Riviera was already set for demolition, the filmmakers were allowed to shoot a scene in which a SWAT truck crashes through its front entrance. Producer Frank Marshall said, "I have always wanted to take a building that was going to be demolished and use that in the movie. So we helped destroy the Riviera." A portion of the interior was decorated to make it appear as a functioning casino floor, based on photos taken prior to the closure. Jason Bourne would be the last film shot at the Riviera.

Other films had also used the resort as a shooting location:

 * Ocean's 11 (1960)
 * Bob & Carol & Ted & Alice (1969)
 * Diamonds Are Forever (1971)
 *  Fake-Out (1982)
 * Showgirls (1995)
 * Austin Powers: International Man of Mystery (1997)
 * Vegas Vacation (1997)
 * Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998)
 * 3000 Miles to Graceland (2001)
 * Crazy Girls Undercover (2008)
 * 21 (2008)
 * The Hangover (2009)
 * The Trust (2016)
 * Who's Driving Doug (2016)

The Riviera also made television appearances. The game show Hollywood Squares taped its final syndicated season there, from 1980 to 1981. Gorgeous Ladies of Wrestling (1986–1990) also shot at the resort. In addition, the Riviera appeared in a 1998 episode of Chicago Hope, and episodes of Ghost Adventures in 2012 and 2016.

Sports
The Riviera occasionally hosted boxing matches in the 1980s, such as the first match between Larry Holmes and Michael Spinks on September 21, 1985. Spinks won in an upset on a unanimous decision, winning Holmes's International Boxing Federation heavyweight championship, and preventing Holmes from tying Rocky Marciano's undefeated 49–0 record.

In 1994, the Riviera was the host of the practice field for the short lived Las Vegas Posse of the Canadian Football League during the league's brief U.S. expansion. Built on a former parking lot on Riviera property, the Posse practiced on a smaller-than-regulation field (only 70 yards long) where a sign read "Field of ImPOSSEable Dreams." The team folded after the 1994 season.

From the 1990s onward, the Riviera also hosted many pool (pocket billiards) tournaments, from organizations such as the Valley National 8-Ball Association,   the Billiard Congress of America, and the American Cuesports Alliance. The American Poolplayers Association held annual events at the resort from 1993 until its closure. The 2015 APA National Singles Championships were the last event to ever be held at the Riviera.

title: Riviera (hotel and casino)


text:
Talk:Crossbuck safety

Example P - proposed

The picture shows a American-Australian style crossbuck with its background colour changed from white to yellow, and its words changed to symbols.

The yellow background makes the sign closer to the European style crossbuck.

The yellow arguably makes the sign easier to sign. Indeed all other hazard signs contain some red or yellow or both.

Since the crossbuck shape is unique and incorporates a "cross", the symbols for road and rail might be omitted some of the time.

Words on Signs
The "Stop" sign is the only octagonal (eight sided) sign, and once you know the meaning of one sign you know them all.

If a country has several languages, there would be insufficiant room to label all stop signs with all languges, but it would be all right to pick two out of say three for any signs. That way road user become familiar with all languages.

GiveWay Signs

title: Talk:Crossbuck safety


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Slivkin

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. Postdlf 02:26, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Greg Slivkin

 * 0 Google [] Lotsofissues 06:32, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Appears to be a very poorly made vanity page. Mo0 [ talk ] 06:35, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, possible vanity. Megan1967 12:07, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually Delete ---FoodMarket   talk!  15:38, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.


title: User:Ottawa99


text: User:Karl dietz

title: User:Karl dietz


text: User:Flabergasted

title: User:Flabergasted


text: User:JohnMarkham

title: User:JohnMarkham


text:
Congregation Tiferes Yisroel

Congregation Tiferes Yisroel – Beis Dovid (תפארת ישראל בית דוד), also known as Rabbi Goldberger's Shul, is an Orthodox Jewish congregation and synagogue located at 6201 Park Heights Avenue, Baltimore, Maryland, in the United States. The congregation rabbi is Rabbi Menachem Goldberger.

History
Congregation Tiferes Yisroel was founded in 1986 by twelve families and individuals in Baltimore, who invited Rabbi Menachem Goldberger, a native of Denver, to be their rabbi. The congregation initially met in a private home, hosting 126 people at their first Rosh Hashanah services; after about nine months, when membership had increased to over 70 families, the congregation purchased what had been the B'nai Akiva building in Baltimore. In 1993 the synagogue bought its present home on Park Heights Avenue, into which it moved in 1994. As of its 25th anniversary in 2011, the congregation numbered 140 families.

The congregation is not affiliated with any of the various umbrella Orthodox organizations, but is a Hasidic shtiebel with Haredi leanings. Prayer services are conducted in Nusach Sefard. Goldberger draws his inspiration as a Hasidic rabbi from the teachings of Rabbi Shlomo Twerski, of whom he was a close student. The congregation emphasizes music and singing as a vehicle for religious worship. Goldberger has released a compilation of his own, original religious compositions, called L'cha Dodi.

Other areas of specific emphasis are the importance of family, the Land of Israel, and the lifelong goal of Torah study. The congregation welcomes all Jews, especially those who were not raised in the Orthodox Jewish tradition, such as Baalei teshuva or converts to Judaism.

In conjunction with the synagogue's 25th anniversary in 2011, the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore proclaimed March 13, 2011 as "Rabbi Menachem Goldberger Day".

Bitcoin
In May 2013 Tiferes Yisroel became the only American religious institution to accept bitcoin for dues, donations, and other payments. Over a period of nine months, the synagogue collected 1.98 bitcoins, worth approximately $1,253. The congregation stopped accepting bitcoin in March 2014 following the collapse of the Mt. Gox bitcoin exchange.

title: Congregation Tiferes Yisroel


text: Template:User ar

title: Template:User ar


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/How to breed Siamese Fighting Fish

 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, which will be implemented as soon as block-compression errors are resolved. Postdlf 02:31, 2 May 2005 (UTC) (Isn't it cute how I said that kind of like I knew what I was talking about?)

How to breed Siamese Fighting Fish
Discussed here before, consensus was to move to Wikibooks. This is now done. (Imho plain delete would be better, this is from an anon, and the hopes of additional content is nil). -- Egil 06:35, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * I've noted some details of the transwiki process that have been skipped over, at User talk:Egil. On solely procedural grounds, my vote is keep until those are sorted out, at which point it becomes delete, in agreement with the prior VFD discussion (Talk:How to breed Siamese Fighting Fish). Uncle G 13:04, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)
 * Delete as above. --InShaneee 19:12, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not encyclopaedic. Megan1967 06:03, 24 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.