text:
Military history of the Netherlands during World War II

The Netherlands entered World War II on May 10, 1940, when invading German forces quickly overran the country. On December 7, 1941, after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Netherlands government in exile also declared war on Japan. Operation Market Garden, which started in 1944, liberated the southern and eastern parts of the country, but full liberation did not come until the surrender of Germany on May 5, 1945.

Prelude
When World War II erupted in September 1939, most in the Netherlands believed that the country could remain neutral, as it had in World War I. The months of "Phoney War" following the German invasion of Poland seemed to justify this attitude. The Royal Netherlands Army did immediately mobilize in 1939, but was not in full strength until April 1940.

Warning signs to the contrary went unheeded. Among them were some incidents, most notably the Venlo incident in which members of the German Abwehr operating in the Netherlands abducted two members of the British SIS and killed one Dutch intelligence officer. More direct were worrying signals from Berlin received by the government beginning in the first months of 1940. The Dutch military attaché there, Major Bert Sas, had established good relations with Colonel Hans Oster, who occupied a high position in the Abwehr. Oster warned Sas about German plans for an offensive against the Netherlands, Belgium and France, and Sas passed the warnings on. The government in the Netherlands, however, did not take them seriously, as the offensive was postponed several times, even though Oster did eventually offer the correct date of May 10, 1940.

Dutch defensive works
The Dutch army was not considered adequate even at the end of World War I, and it did not improve much during the interwar years. By the time of the German invasion in 1940, only about 166 battalions were operational for the defense of the Netherlands, and most were poorly prepared for combat. Only a few had modern weapons; the majority of soldiers carried carbines of 19th-century vintage, and most artillery was similarly outdated. The Dutch army also had little armor, and its air arm, the Luchtvaartafdeeling, had but a handful of reasonably modern aircraft, most notably the Fokker G.1 twin-engine fighter-bomber and the fixed-undercarriage Fokker D.XXI single-seat fighter, with which to face the Luftwaffe.

Reasons cited for the weakness of the Netherlands military include decay during the long lapse of time since its last active participation in a war, the 1873–1903 Aceh War; the effects of widespread pacifism during the 1920s and 1930s; budget cuts, particularly during the Great Depression; and the unrealistic belief by Dutch politicians that the League of Nations would offer sufficient protection from aggression. Certainly, the Dutch military faced an unfavorable political climate between the wars. For example, in 1925, when rebuilding the Dutch army into a modern fighting force would have required increased funding of 350 million guilders, the government instead cut the army's budget by 100 million guilders. A committee tasked with finding further cuts concluded that the army was already so weak that any reductions would endanger its sustainability; the government thereupon disbanded the committee and appointed a new, more aggressive one, which recommended cutting another 160 million guilders. Meanwhile, potential human capital was allowed to dissipate; compulsory service was cut back from 24 months to six, barely enough for the most basic of training.

Not until 1936 did the Dutch government recognize the growing threat of Nazi Germany, but the resultant budget increases were too small and too late to establish an effective defense of the country. One factor was decisive: by that time, many European countries were rearming and had already placed orders taxing the available capacity of munitions plants, hindering Dutch efforts at procurement. A second factor was continued economic pressure, as Defense Minister Adriaan Dijxhoorn refused to authorize funds for modernizing both main Dutch lines of defense against attack from the east, the Waterline and the Grebbe line. The failure of General Izaak H. Reijnders, leader of the Dutch General Staff, to obtain more funding for these lines led to his replacement on 6 February 1940, by General Henri Winkelman, who opted to concentrate on modernizing the Grebbeline, with its largely wooden bunkers, because German artillery brought up as deep within the country as the Waterline would be within range of Amsterdam. Modernization of the Grebbeline, however, would not be complete or effective by the time of the invasion, in part because the government balked at the expense of clearing forests and houses blocking lines of sight from many of the fortifications.

German preparations
For Germany, the Netherlands was only of secondary importance in the attack on France. Germany's main worry was the route through Limburg, to eliminate the delay caused by the Liege corridor, that had hindered German forces during World War I.

The aim of the German attack plan was to eliminate the country as soon as possible. The 18th Army and the 9th Panzer Division were allotted for this task.

The 18th Army was to attack the Netherlands above Roermond, most notably breaking through the eastern defences of Fortress Holland (after having foreced the Grebbeline) and crossing the Afsluitdijk. The 9th Panzer Division was to move through the southern part of the Netherlands and attack the Moerdijk Bridge.

Furthermore, the 22nd Air Landing Division and the 7th Fliegerdivision were to land around The Hague, in order to capture Queen Wilhelmina, the Dutch government and the General Staff. They also were to capture the Moerdijk Bridge and the bridges over the Maas in Rotterdam so that the 9th Panzer Division could easily cross these.

In preparation for their attack, German officers had conducted extensive espionage research. The Dutch did not hinder them in this – indeed, a watchtower near the Grebbe Line was not closed because, as Prime Minister Dirk Jan de Geer said, "it would harm the Dutch economy." Although after mobilization the lines would be closed to the public, a lot of high-ranking officers from the German army, including a few colonels, were able to see the Dutch lines and write down where the bunkers were, so artillery could destroy them.

Based on these observations, the Germans thought they could capture the Netherlands in one to two days.

Campaign
In the first days of May 1940, the Dutch government received several indications of German activity near the border, and on May 7 all leave was cancelled and the army was put on alert. Finally, on May 10, 3:55, the German army invaded the Netherlands.

The rivers IJssel and Maas, running through the Netherlands from south to north, were the first obstacles that the Germans encountered. They had created special units to capture the bridges over these rivers (sometimes even clad in Dutch uniforms), but in all but a few places the Dutch defenders were able to demolish the bridges. The German advance was further hindered by a line of pillboxes along both rivers, but despite heavy resistance they succeeded in crossing both IJssel and Maas by midday.

In the meantime, the airborne forces had taken the Dutch by surprise. German paratroopers succeeded in taking the Moerdijk bridges, the traffic bridge near Dordrecht and partially the traffic bridge in Rotterdam. They also captured the airfields of Waalhaven (near Rotterdam), and Ypenburg, Ockenburg and Valkenburg (around The Hague). However, Dutch resistance was again heavier than expected and the Dutch succeeded in keeping the paratroopers out of The Hague itself. Indeed, by the evening, all three airfields around The Hague had been recaptured by the Dutch.

The next day, the attack on the Grebbe Line started. The Germans attacked its most southern point, the Grebbeberg, where there were no inundations. Instead, there was a front line of outposts, a main defense line and finally a stop line, from which possible breaches in the main line could be contained and repaired. After an artillery barrage, the SS regiment "Der Führer" attacked the outposts. Once again, despite stiff resistance, the Germans succeeded in capturing the northern part of the outpost line, after which they could easily outflank the southern part. However, it took them until 16:00 to capture all outposts.

By now, French reinforcements had started to arrive from the south. Because of miscommunications between the Dutch and the French, and also because the Moerdijk Bridge, the only link between the eastern and southern parts of the Netherlands, was still in German hands, their effectiveness was limited.

On May 12, the German 1st Cavalry Division tried to cross the Afsluitdijk. However, at Kornwerderzand, the Dutch had built modern concrete fortifications to protect the dam. Moreover, the dam offered no cover whatsoever and the attack was easily repulsed (with the help of a Dutch gunboat). The Germans would try again on May 13, but with no success. The Kornwerderzand fortification would hold out until the Dutch surrender.

On the same day, the Germans attacked the main defense line of the Grebbe Line. Sometimes using Dutch POWs as a shield (a war crime), by the end of the day they had captured this line as well. The Dutch tried to organize a counter-attack during the night, as they thought there were only some hundred German troops opposing them (the real number was probably somewhere around two thousand), but this met with little success. In places, they were even fired upon by other Dutch troops who had not been notified of the counter-attack.

Finally, on May 13, the 9th Panzer Division evaded the French and joined up with the paratroopers. However, they met with heavy resistance in Rotterdam, where their advance was stopped.

On the same day, the Germans mounted their final attack against the Grebbe Line. The stop line, the last resort of the Dutch defenders, collapsed and the Germans broke through. Isolated pockets of Dutch troops continued to resist, but a night attack to dislodge the Germans failed. As there were no reserve troops, it was clear that defeat was imminent: there was nothing between the Germans and the North Sea but the famous Waterlinie (Water Line) was only very sketchily prepared.

On May 14, the Dutch commander at Rotterdam, Colonel Scharroo, received an ultimatum: if he did not surrender, the town would be bombed. As the ultimatum was not signed, Scharroo sent it back. A few hours later, he received another ultimatum, this time duly signed by General Schmidt, the German commander at Rotterdam. Schmidt did not know that a squadron of bombers was already on its way to bomb Rotterdam. The Germans tried to warn the bomber crews by shooting red flares, but only half of the squadron noticed this; the other half continued on their mission and dropped their bombs on the city (see the Rotterdam Blitz).

Under the threat that other major cities like Amsterdam and Utrecht would share the fate of Rotterdam in which over 900 civilians were killed, the Dutch decided to surrender in the midday of 14 May. On May 15, in Rijsoord, General Winkelman signed the formal capitulation of the Netherlands, with the exception of the province of Zeeland, where the French still operated (Zeeland held out until 19 May, after the city of Middelburg was devasted by artillery). The Dutch colonies also continued the battle.

Casualties were high in the five day campaign: over 10,000 Dutch soldiers were killed, injured or declared missing.

Fighting on
Though the Netherlands was occupied, by no means was all lost. The colonies (most notably the Dutch East Indies) were still free, and Queen Wilhelmina and the Dutch government had left the Netherlands for London.

The Royal Netherlands Navy, which had not capitulated as such, had managed to get most of its ships to England (one, the light cruiser Jacob van Heemskerk was towed since its construction was incomplete). Also, the Netherlands had a large merchant marine, which would contribute greatly to the Allied war effort during the rest of the war.

A few Dutch pilots also had escaped and joined the RAF to fight in the Battle of Britain. In July 1940, two all-Dutch squadrons were formed with personnel and Fokker seaplanes from the Dutch naval air force: 320 Squadron and 321 Squadron (which afterwards moved to Ceylon). The Royal Netherlands Military Flying School was re-established at Hawkins Field, Jackson, Mississippi. In 1943, an all-Dutch fighter squadron was formed in the UK, 322 Squadron.

In 1942, an all-Dutch brigade was formed, the Princess Irene Brigade. This brigade would go on to participate in Operation Overlord in 1944.

Inside the Netherlands, both passive and active resistance was widespread throughout the country, with the first Dutch Resistance organisation, the Communist Party of the Netherlands, holding their first meeting the day after the Dutch capitulation.

The Allied Special Forces also recruited and trained a number of Dutch officers for Operation Jedburgh teams and for the Anglo Dutch Country Section of Force 136.

East Indies
After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the Dutch government declared war on Japan. Like the defense of its mother country, the defense of the Netherlands East Indies (NEI) had been hopelessly neglected; the strongest naval units available were three light cruisers (De Ruyter, Java and Tromp), though they were supported by a relatively large submarine force.

The Dutch participated in the ABDACOM, a joint-command for all American, British, Dutch and Australian units in the area to defend Southeast Asia against the Japanese advance. The Dutch military hastily scrambled its forces to provide an adequate defense. By the time of the Japanese invasion, the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army ("KNIL") numbered about 85,000 troops while the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army Air Force ("ML-KNIL") had 389 planes at its disposal. Nevertheless, despite these efforts, in the three months following Pearl Harbor the Dutch East Indies (along with the rest of Southeast Asia) were overrun by the Japanese. After the Battle of the Java Sea, most naval assets were lost and the Dutch East Indies surrendered on March 8, 1942.

However, some personnel, especially aviators, managed to reach Australia. Later, three joint Australian-NEI squadrons were formed. The first of these, No. 18 (NEI) Squadron RAAF, was formed in April 1942 as a medium bomber squadron equipped with B-25 Mitchell aircraft. The second joint Australian-NEI squadron, No. 119 (NEI) Squadron RAAF, was also to be a medium bomber squadron. No. 119 NEI Squadron was only active between September and December 1943 when it was disbanded to form No. 120 (NEI) Squadron RAAF which was a fighter squadron, equipped with P-40 Kittyhawks. Both No. 18 and No. 120 Squadrons saw action against the Japanese (and against Indonesian nationalists during the Indonesian National Revolution, before being disbanded in 1950).

Some Dutch ships were also based in Australia and Ceylon, and continued to operate in the Indian and Pacific oceans. Due to the high number of submarines present in the Netherlands East Indies (the major part of the defensive plans of the Dutch government), the Dutch were called, in the Asian Campaign, the Fourth Ally. The total number of submarines operating in the Eastern Theater was seventeen.

During the Borneo campaign of 1945, some Dutch army units — including some from the Dutch West Indies and Dutch Guyana — were attached to Australian Army units operating in the Dutch portion of Borneo.

West Indies
The Netherlands' colonial possessions in the Caribbean comprised the islands of Aruba, Bonaire, Curaçao, Saba, Sint Eustatius and Sint Maarten, and these together with Surinam, made up the Netherlands West Indies.

Aruba was of significant strategic importance as it housed the largest oil terminal in the Caribbean, from which much of Britain's oil was shipped. Oil from Venezuela was taken by coastal tankers to Aruba where it was stored in large tanks awaiting transshipment to oceangoing vessels. These facilities were vulnerable to German attack but as the UK could spare no resources to help protect them, their defense fell to the Netherlands West Indies Defense Force. This Territorial force possessed only small arms, a handful of obsolete 8 cm. naval guns and a few small coastal patrol boats. In the summer of 1940 it was felt that the U-boat threat to the oil terminal and shipping lanes necessitated air cover and so an air support unit was created using a Fokker F.XVIII converted for maritime patrol duties.

In fact, the only military action in the area occurred in February 1942 when the Defense Force's Fokker together with a US aircraft attacked two U-boats off Aruba which had sunk a number of allied oilers. From the summer of 1942 onwards, air cover for the area was provided by US aircraft.

Liberation
The first Allied troops entered the Netherlands on September 9, 1944, on a reconnaissance patrol; on September 12, 1944, a small part of Limburg was liberated by the US 30th Infantry Division. During Operation Market Garden, the Americans and British established a corridor to Nijmegen, but they failed to secure a Rhine crossing at Arnhem.

During the rest of 1944, the Canadian First Army liberated Zeeland in the Schelde Campaign, in order to free access to the harbour of Antwerp. By 1945, the entire southern part of the Netherlands (up to the Waal and Maas rivers) had been liberated.

After Operation Veritable, the Allied advance from the Germany–Netherlands border into the Rhineland, and the crossing of the Rhine at Wesel and Rees in Operation Plunder, the Canadian First Army liberated the eastern and northern parts of the Netherlands, resulting in fights such as the battle of Groningen and the battle of Otterlo. However, they did not attack the German forces in the western part (ironically, they stopped at about where the Grebbe Line was in 1940), for fear of massive civilian casualties: the western part of the Netherlands (also called the Randstad) is one of the most densely populated areas in the world. The civilian population there, still suffering from the effects of the Hongerwinter ('Hungerwinter'), was now cut off from food that was available in the rest of the Netherlands. However, the Germans, having agreed to a truce, did allow the staging of an Allied relief effort, Operations Manna (RAF) and Chowhound (USAAF). The German forces in the Netherlands finally surrendered in Wageningen, on May 5, 1945. The acts of Canadian soldiers toward the civilian population during this period would be a major point of endearment and friendship in Canada–Netherlands relations, among other acts throughout the war, for many years afterward.


text: User talk:71.105.75.81

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

title: User talk:71.105.75.81


text:
Hugo Egmont Hørring

Hugo Egmont Hørring (17 August 1842 – 13 February 1909) was a Danish politician, a member of the Højre political party. He was Council President of Denmark from 1897 to 1900 as the leader of the Cabinet of Hørring.

Biography
Hørring was born in Copenhagen, Denmark. He became a student in 1860 at Borgerdydskolen in Christianshavn and received a cand.jur. degree  from the University of Copenhagen in 1868. He held various positions in the Ministry of the Interior and in 1882 became director of the Royal Greenland Trading Department (Den Kongelige Grønlandske Handel).

Hørring retired from  government  service in April 1900. He was a Grand Cross Knight of the Order of the Dannebrog and Dannebrogsman. Hørring died in Copenhagen during 1909 and was buried in Garrison Cemetery.

title: Hugo Egmont Hørring


text:
User talk:194.209.66.41

Speedy deletion nomination of Comadur

A tag has been placed on Comadur requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization that does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

title: User talk:194.209.66.41


text:
Joe B. Mauldin

Joseph Benson Mauldin, Jr. (July 8, 1940 – February 7, 2015) was an American bassist, songwriter, and audio engineer who was best known as the bassist for the early rock and roll group the Crickets. Mauldin initially played a double (standup) bass, then switched to a Fender Precision Bass guitar. After several years with the Crickets, he became a recording engineer at Gold Star Studios, the Los Angeles studio which became the "hit factory" for Phil Spector, Brian Wilson, and other major 1960s rock performers.

Biography
Mauldin was born in Lubbock, Texas. When he was four, his parents divorced. During his time at Lubbock Junior High, he learned piano, trumpet and steel guitar. He was one of the founding members of the Crickets, the others being Buddy Holly, drummer Jerry Allison, and guitarist Niki Sullivan. The first rock band he played in, starting in 1955, was a Lubbock group named the Four Teens. He appears to have recorded with this band (which included recording artist Terry Noland) in Dallas, prior to his recording with Buddy Holly in Clovis, New Mexico. After Holly's death in 1959, Mauldin played on and off as an original Cricket with J.I. Allison, Sonny Curtis, Glen D. Hardin, and occasionally Niki Sullivan.

Mauldin was inducted into the West Texas Walk of Fame in Lubbock and the Musicians Hall of Fame and Museum in Nashville, Tennessee, as an original Cricket. In 2012, he was inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame as a member of the Crickets by a special committee which corrected the mistake of not including the Crickets with Buddy Holly when he was first inducted in 1986.

Mauldin died of cancer in Nashville, Tennessee, on February 7, 2015, aged 74.

title: Joe B. Mauldin


text:
File:Dillon logo.jpg

Licensing
Dillon Dam Brewery logo, from Dillon Dam Brewery

title: File:Dillon logo.jpg


text:
Tepukei

A tepukei, tepuke or TePuke is a Polynesian boat type, characterized by its elaborate decking, its submerged hulls and symmetrical "crab claw" sail slender foil or radically extended tips claw sail (Te Laa). Tepukei boats are produced primarily by the Polynesian-speaking inhabitants of Taumako (Duff Islands), and have been occasionally borrowed by other Polynesian and Melanesian societies.

Name
The word comes from the phrase te puke in Vaeakau-Taumako and other Polynesian languages. Removing the noun article te, the original meaning of puke, as reconstructed for the ancestor Proto-Polynesian is “bow and stern decking on a canoe”. By metonymy, the name of that deck has become used for the ship as a whole. (The Proto-Polynesian root for “boat” or “canoe” is *waka.)

History
The tepukei was first reported in print by Spanish explorer Álvaro de Mendaña in 1595, on his visit to the Santa Cruz Islands.

"In the Solomons the canoes are plank-built, but here they are 'dugouts' with an outrigger attached, as is the case in Southern Melanesia. [...] The body of the canoe is a log hollowed out with a shell adze: to this an outrigger is attached to steady it, and on this the goods are placed. The outrigger is always on the lee side. [...] The Tepukei is made upon the same principle as the small canoe, but the hollow log is caulked and acts as a float to support the big stage or deck — on the stage is a hut in which the voyagers can take refuge from the heat of the sun. The wind is caught by means of a lofty and strikingly shaped sail, which is plaited by the women (the Papuans use two similar sails for their big canoes), and the steersman uses a long paddle. Voyages are made as far as Vanikolo, and Tepukeis have been even known to make their way to the Solomon Islands. At night they steer by the stars. [...] When beached, the Tepukei is carefully covered with coconut mats (a small canoe is turned upside down). To pull a Tepukei up a steep beach is a laborious task and requires many hands; like our own deep-sea sailors, they sing as they pull. [...] The following account of the building of a canoe was given by a Cruzian — 'Only some men may dig out canoes — those whose ancestors dug them out. When a father is near death, that father takes water and washes his son's hands, and they think that the father is giving to his son understanding and wisdom to make canoes, and he signifies it through water. When a man has finished a canoe he takes it down to the sea and paddles very far, and makes it roll on the surf, and thus he thinks that he drives away the ghost from the adze with which he dug out the canoe, and the ghost of the spot where he cut down the wood for the canoe.'"

A tepukei looks like an outrigger canoe with a crab claw sail, and is a very sophisticated ocean-going sailing ship, belonging to the proa type (a main hulls and a massive, buoyant outrigger). Contrary to what Mendana wrote, the outrigger is always kept to windward. Its main differences from other proas are:

 * The main hull (vaka) has an almost circular section whose submerged profile remains constant despite heeling, and has less almost no dry surface when trimmed for sailing. The design is meant to carry heavy loads.
 * The vaka's top is very close to the flotation line, so it is closed with planks (tetau) and the accommodations for the crew are on an elevated platform over the Lakauhalava (the crossbeams connecting the main hull and the smaller, windward outrigger)
 * The radical claw sail.

In common with a typical proa, it uses a radically long-armed form of crab claw sail. However, its particular variant, when a small, stiff model was evaluated in modern wind tunnel tests, shows superior performance over two of three points of sail.

W. C. O'Ferrall, an Anglican missionary to Melanesia between 1897 and 1904, described the tepukei as a "sailing canoe". He described it as consisting of a dugout log equipped with a deck upon which a small hut was built, powered by a "lofty and strikingly shaped sail", and steered with a long paddle. He reported that men from Santa Cruz used the boat to travel as far away as the Solomon Islands.

The Maunga Nefe, which may be the only te alolili that was built prior to 1970, is in the Ethnological Museum of Berlin. People of Outer Reef Islands (Vaeakau people) call them "Puki" making no distinction between tealolili and tepukei designs. It was brought by Dr. Gerd Koch from the Santa Cruz Islands in 1967.

In recent years, tepukei have been experiencing a renaissance. The Vaka Taumako Project has helped support the construction of these boats, and some vessels inspired by ancient designs are even being built in San Francisco.

title: Tepukei


text: User talk:72.1.206.104

title: User talk:72.1.206.104


text:
Emergy

Emergy is the amount of energy consumed in direct and indirect transformations to make a product or service. Emergy is a measure of quality differences between different forms of energy. Emergy is an expression of all the energy used in the work processes that generate a product or service in units of one type of energy. Emergy is measured in units of emjoules, a unit referring to the available energy consumed in transformations. Emergy accounts for different forms of energy and resources (e.g. sunlight, water, fossil fuels, minerals, etc.) Each form is generated by transformation processes in nature and each has a different ability to support work in natural and in human systems. The recognition of these quality differences is a key concept.

History
The theoretical and conceptual basis for the emergy methodology is grounded in thermodynamics, general system theory and systems ecology. Evolution of the theory by Howard T. Odum over the first thirty years is reviewed in Environmental Accounting and in the volume edited by C. A. S. Hall titled Maximum Power.

Background
Beginning in the 1950s, Odum analyzed energy flow in ecosystems (e.g. Silver Springs, Florida; Enewetak atoll in the south Pacific; Galveston Bay, Texas and Puerto Rican rainforests, amongst others) where energies in various forms at various scales were observed. His analysis of energy flow in ecosystems, and the differences in the potential energy of sunlight, fresh water currents, wind and ocean currents led him to make the suggestion that when two or more different energy sources drive a system, they cannot be added without first converting them to a common measure that accounts for their differences in energy quality. This led him to introduce the concept of "energy of one kind" as a common denominator with the name "energy cost". He then expanded the analysis to model food production in the 1960s, and in the 1970s to fossil fuels.

Odum's first formal statement of what would later be termed emergy was in 1973: "Energy is measured by calories, btu's, kilowatthours, and other intraconvertable units, but energy has a scale of quality which is not indicated by these measures. The ability to do work for man depends on the energy quality and quantity and this is measurable by the amount of energy of a lower quality grade required to develop the higher grade. The scale of energy goes from dilute sunlight up to plant matter, to coal, from coal to oil, to electricity and up to the high quality efforts of computer and human information processing."

In 1975, he introduced a table of "Energy Quality Factors", kilocalories of sunlight energy required to make a kilocalorie of a higher quality energy, the first mention of the energy hierarchy principle which states that "energy quality is measured by the energy used in the transformations" from one type of energy to the next.

These energy quality factors, were placed on a fossil-fuel basis and called "Fossil Fuel Work Equivalents" (FFWE), and the quality of energies were measured based on a fossil fuel standard with rough equivalents of 1 kilocalorie of fossil fuel equal to 2000 kilocalories of sunlight. "Energy quality ratios" were computed by evaluating the quantity of energy in a transformation process to make a new form and were then used to convert different forms of energy to a common form, in this case fossil fuel equivalents. FFWE's were replaced with coal equivalents (CE) and by 1977, the system of evaluating quality was placed on a solar basis and termed solar equivalents (SE).

Embodied energy
The term "embodied energy" was used for a time in the early 1980s to refer to energy quality differences in terms of their costs of generation, and a ratio called a "quality factor" for the calories (or joules) of one kind of energy required to make those of another. However, since the term embodied energy was used by other groups who were evaluating the fossil fuel energy required to generate products and were not including all energies or using the concept to imply quality, embodied energy was dropped in favor of "embodied solar calories", and the quality factors became known as "transformation ratios".

Introduction of the term "emergy"
Use of the term "embodied energy" for this concept was modified in 1986 when David Scienceman, a visiting scholar at the University of Florida from Australia, suggested the term "emergy" and "emjoule" or "emcalorie" as the unit of measure to distinguish emergy units from units of available energy. The term transformation ratio was shortened to transformity in about the same time. It is important to note that throughout these twenty years, the baseline or the basis for evaluating forms of energy and resources shifted from organic matter to fossil fuels and finally to solar energy.

After 1986, the emergy methodology continued to develop as the community of scientists expanded and as new applied research into combined systems of humans and nature presented new conceptual and theoretical questions. The maturing of the emergy methodology resulted in more rigorous definitions of terms and nomenclature and refinement of the methods of calculating transformities. The International Society for the Advancement of Emergy Research and a biennial International Conference at the University of Florida support this research.

Definitions and examples
Emergy— amount of energy of one form that is used in transformations directly and indirectly to make a product or service. The unit of emergy is the emjoule or emergy joule. Using emergy, sunlight, fuel, electricity, and human service can be put on a common basis by expressing each of them in the emjoules of solar energy that is required to produce them. If solar emergy is the baseline, then the results are solar emjoules (abbreviated seJ). Although other baselines have been used, such as coal emjoules or electrical emjoules, in most cases emergy data are given in solar emjoules.

Unit Emergy Values (UEVs) — the emergy required to generate one unit of output. Types of UEVs:
 * Transformity — emergy input per unit of available energy output. For example, if 10,000 solar emjoules are required to generate a joule of wood, then the solar transformity of that wood is 10,000 solar emjoules per joule (abbreviated seJ/J). The solar transformity of the sunlight absorbed by the earth is 1.0 by definition.

 * Specific emergy — emergy per unit mass output. Specific emergy is usually expressed as solar emergy per gram (seJ/g). Because energy is required to concentrate materials, the unit emergy value of any substance increases with concentration. Elements and compounds not abundant in nature therefore have higher emergy/mass ratios when found in concentrated form since more environmental work is required to concentrate them, both spatially and chemically.

 * Emergy per unit money — the emergy supporting the generation of one unit of economic product (expressed in monetary terms). It is used to convert money into emergy units. Since money is paid for goods and services, but not to the environment, the contribution to a process represented by monetary payments is the emergy that money purchases. The amount of resources that money buys depends on the amount of emergy supporting the economy and the amount of money circulating. An average emergy/money ratio in solar emjoules/$ can be calculated by dividing the total emergy use of a state or nation by its gross economic product. It varies by country and has been shown to decrease each year, which is one index of inflation. This emergy/money ratio is useful for evaluating service inputs given in money units where an average wage rate is appropriate.

 * Emergy per unit labor — the emergy supporting one unit of direct labor applied to a process. Workers apply their efforts to a process and in so doing they indirectly invest in it the emergy that made their labor possible (food, training, transport, etc). This emergy intensity is generally expressed as emergy per time (seJ/yr; seJ/hr), but emergy per money earned (seJ/$) is also used. Indirect labor required to make and supply the inputs to a process is generally measured with the dollar cost of services, so that its emergy intensity is calculated as seJ/$.

 * Empower — a flow of emergy (i.e., emergy per unit time).

Accounting method
Emergy accounting converts the thermodynamic basis of all forms of energy, resources and human services into equivalents of a single form of energy, usually solar. To evaluate a system, a system diagram organizes the evaluation and account for energy inputs and outflows. A table of the flows of resources, labor and energy is constructed from the diagram and all flows are evaluated. The final step involves interpreting the results.

Purpose
In some cases, an evaluation is done to determine the fit of a development proposal within its environment. It also allows comparison of alternatives. Another purpose is to seek the best use of resources to maximize economic vitality.

Systems diagram
System diagrams show the inputs that are evaluated and summed to obtain the emergy of a flow. A diagram of a city and its regional support area is shown in Figure 1.

Evaluation table
A table (see example below) of resource flows, labor and energy is constructed from the diagram. Raw data on inflows that cross the boundary are converted into emergy units, and then summed to obtain total emergy supporting the system. Energy flows per unit time (usually per year) are presented in the table as separate line items.

 * {| class="wikitable"

! Note !! Item (name) !! Data (flow/time) !! Units !! UEV (seJ/unit) !! Solar Emergy (seJ/time)
 * +Table 3. Example emergy evaluation table
 * 1. || First item || xxx.x || J/yr || xxx.x || Em1
 * 2. || Second item || xxx.x || g/yr || xxx.x || Em2
 * n. || nth item || xxx.x || J/yr|| xxx.x || Emn
 * O. || Output || xxx.x || J/yr or g/yr || xxx.x || $$\sum_{n}^1Em_i$$
 * }
 * Legend
 * Column #1 is the line item number, which is also the number of the footnote found below the table where raw data sources are cited and calculations are shown.
 * Column # 2 is the name of the item, which is also shown on the aggregated diagram.
 * Column # 3 is the raw data in joules, grams, dollars or other units.
 * Column # 4 shows the units for each raw data item.
 * Column # 5 is the unit emergy value, expressed in solar emergy joules per unit. Sometimes, inputs are expressed in grams, hours, or dollars, therefore an appropriate UEV is used (sej/hr; sej/g; sej/$).
 * Column # 6 is the solar emergy of a given flow, calculated as the raw input times the UEV (Column 3 times Column 5).
 * Column #1 is the line item number, which is also the number of the footnote found below the table where raw data sources are cited and calculations are shown.
 * Column # 2 is the name of the item, which is also shown on the aggregated diagram.
 * Column # 3 is the raw data in joules, grams, dollars or other units.
 * Column # 4 shows the units for each raw data item.
 * Column # 5 is the unit emergy value, expressed in solar emergy joules per unit. Sometimes, inputs are expressed in grams, hours, or dollars, therefore an appropriate UEV is used (sej/hr; sej/g; sej/$).
 * Column # 6 is the solar emergy of a given flow, calculated as the raw input times the UEV (Column 3 times Column 5).

All tables are followed by footnotes that show citations for data and calculations.

Calculating unit values
The table allows a unit emergy value to be calculated. The final, output row (row “O” in the example table above) is evaluated first in units of energy or mass. Then the input emergy is summed and the unit emergy value is calculated by dividing the emergy by the units of the output.

Performance indicators
Figure 2 shows non-renewable environmental contributions (N) as an emergy storage of materials, renewable environmental inputs (R), and inputs from the economy as purchased (F) goods and services. Purchased inputs are needed for the process to take place and include human service and purchased non-renewable energy and material brought in from elsewhere (fuels, minerals, electricity, machinery, fertilizer, etc.). Several ratios, or indices are given in Figure 2 that assess the global performance of a process.
 * Emergy Yield Ratio (EYR) — Emergy released (used up) per unit invested. The ratio is a measure of how much an investment enables a process to exploit local resources.
 * Environmental Loading Ratio (ELR) — The ratio of nonrenewable and imported emergy use to renewable emergy use. It is an indicator of the pressure a transformation process exerts on the environment and can be considered a measure of ecosystem stress due to a production (transformation activity).
 * Emergy Sustainability Index (ESI) — The ratio of EYR to ELR. It measures the contribution of a resource or process to the economy per unit of environmental loading.
 * Areal Empower Intensity — The ratio of emergy use in the economy of a region to its area. Renewable and nonrenewable emergy density are calculated separately by dividing the total renewable emergy by area and the total nonrenewable emergy by area, respectively.

Other ratios are useful depending on the type and scale of the system under evaluation.
 * Percent Renewable Emergy (%Ren) — The ratio of renewable emergy to total emergy use. In the long run, only processes with high %Ren are sustainable.
 * Emprice. The emprice of a commodity is the emergy one receives for the money spent in sej/$.
 * Emergy Exchange Ratio (EER) — The ratio of emergy exchanged in a trade or purchase (what is received to what is given). The ratio is always expressed relative to a trading partner and is a measure of the relative trade advantage of one partner over the other.
 * Emergy per capita — The ratio of emergy use of a region or nation to the population. Emergy per capita can be used as a measure of potential, average standard of living of the population.
 * Emergy-based energy return on investment was introduced as a way to bridge and improve the concept of Energy returned on energy invested to also include environmental impacts.

Uses
The recognition of the relevance of energy to the growth and dynamics of complex systems has resulted in increased emphasis on environmental evaluation methods that can account for and interpret the effects of matter and energy flows at all scales in systems of humanity and nature. The following table lists some general areas in which the emergy methodology has been employed.

 * {| class="wikitable" Width="75%"

 * +Table 4. Fields of Study
 * Emergy and ecosystems
 * Self-organization ( Odum, 1986; Odum, 1988)
 * Aquatic and marine ecosystems (Odum et al., 1978a; Odum and Arding, 1991; Brandt-Williams, 1999)
 * Food webs and hierarchies (Odum et al. 1999; Brown and Bardi, 2001)
 * Ecosystem health (Brown and Ulgiati, 2004)
 * Forest ecosystems ( Doherty et al., 1995; Lu et al. 2006)
 * Complexity (Odum, 1987a; Odum, 1994; Brown and Cohen, 2008)
 * Biodiversity (Brown et al. 2006)
 * Biodiversity (Brown et al. 2006)

 * Emergy and Information
 * Diversity and information (Keitt, 1991; Odum, 1996, Jorgensen et al., 2004)
 * Culture, Education, University (Odum and Odum, 1980; Odum et al., 1995; Odum et al., 1978b)
 * Culture, Education, University (Odum and Odum, 1980; Odum et al., 1995; Odum et al., 1978b)

 * Emergy and Agriculture
 * Food production, agriculture (Odum, 1984; Ulgiati et al. 1993; Martin et al. 2006; Cuadra and Rydberg, 2006; de Barros et al. 2009; Cavalett and Ortega, 2009)
 * Livestock production (Rótolo et al.2007)
 * Agriculture and society (Rydberg and Haden, 2006; Cuadra and Björklund, 2007; Lu, and Campbell, 2009)
 * Soil erosion (Lefroy and Rydberg, 2003; Cohen et al. 2006)
 * Soil erosion (Lefroy and Rydberg, 2003; Cohen et al. 2006)

 * Emergy and energy sources and carriers
 * Fossil fuels ( Odum et a.l 1976; Brown et al., 1993; Odum, 1996; Bargigli et al., 2004; Bastianoni et al. 2005; Bastianoni et al. 2009)
 * Renewable and nonrenewable electricity (Odum et al. 1983; Brown and Ulgiati, 2001; Ulgiati and Brown, 2001; Peng et al. 2008)
 * Hydroelectric dams (Brown and McClanahan, 1992)
 * Biofuels (Odum, 1980a; Odum and Odum, 1984; Carraretto et al., 2004; Dong et al. 2008; Felix and Tilley, 2009; Franzese et al., 2009)
 * Hydrogen (Barbir, 1992)
 * Hydrogen (Barbir, 1992)

 * Emergy and the Economy
 * National and international analyses ( Odum, 1987b; Brown, 2003; Cialani et al. 2003; Ferreyra and Brown. 2007; Lomas et al., 2008; Jiang et al., 2008)
 * National Environmental Accounting Database https://www.emergy-nead.com/ and https://nead.um01.cn/home  (Liu et al., 2017)
 * Trade (Odum, 1984a; Brown, 2003)
 * Environmental accounting (Odum, 1996)
 * Development policies (Odum, 1980b)
 * Sustainability (Odum, 1973; Odum, 1976a; Brown and Ulgiati, 1999; Odum and Odum, 2002; Brown et al. 2009)
 * Tourism ( Lei and Wang, 2008a; Lei et al., 2011; Vassallo et al., 2009)
 * Gambling industry ( Lei et al., 2011)
 * Gambling industry ( Lei et al., 2011)

 * Emergy and cities
 * Spatial organization and urban development (Odum et al., 1995b; Huang, 1998; Huang and Chen, 2005; Lei et al., 2008; Ascione, et al. 2009)
 * Urban metabolism (Huang et al., 2006; Zhang et al., 2009)
 * Transportation modes (Federici, et al. 2003; Federici et al., 2008; Federici et al., 2009; Almeida et al., 2010 )
 * Transportation modes (Federici, et al. 2003; Federici et al., 2008; Federici et al., 2009; Almeida et al., 2010 )

 * Emergy and landscapes
 * Spatial empower, Land development indicators (Brown and Vivas, 2004; Reiss and Brown, 2007)
 * Emergy in landforms (Kangas, 2002)
 * Watersheds (Agostinho et al., 2010)
 * Watersheds (Agostinho et al., 2010)

 * Emergy and ecological engineering
 * Restoration models (Prado-Jartar and Brown, 1996)
 * Reclamation projects (Brown, 2005; Lei and Wang, 2008b; Lu et al., 2009 )
 * Artificial Ecosystems: wetlands, pond (Odum, 1985)
 * Waste treatment (Kent et al. 2000; Grönlund, et al. 2004; Giberna et al. 2004; Lei and Wang, 2008c)
 * Waste treatment (Kent et al. 2000; Grönlund, et al. 2004; Giberna et al. 2004; Lei and Wang, 2008c)

 * Emergy, material flows and recycling
 * Mining and minerals processing (Odum, 1996; Pulselli et al.2008)
 * Industrial production, ecodesign (Zhang et al. 2009; Almeida et al., 2009)
 * Recycling pattern in human-dominated ecosystems (Brown and Buranakarn, 2003)
 * Emergy-based energy return on investment method for evaluating energy exploitation (Chen et al, 2003)
 * Emergy-based energy return on investment method for evaluating energy exploitation (Chen et al, 2003)

 * Emergy and thermodynamics
 * Efficiency and Power (O dum and Pinkerton, 1955; Odum, 1995)
 * Maximum Empower Principle (Odum, 1975; Odum, 1983; Cai e al., 2004)
 * Pulsing paradigm (Odum, 1982; Odum, W.P. et al., 1995)
 * Thermodynamic principles (Giannantoni, 2002, 2003)
 * Thermodynamic principles (Giannantoni, 2002, 2003)

 * Emergy and systems modeling
 * Energy systems language and modeling (Odum, 1971; Odum, 1972)
 * National sustainability (Brown et al. 2009; Lei and Zhou, 2012)
 * Sensitivity analysis, uncertainty ( Laganis and Debeljak, 2006; Ingwersen, 2010)
 * Sensitivity analysis, uncertainty ( Laganis and Debeljak, 2006; Ingwersen, 2010)

 * Emergy and policy
 * Tools for decision makers (Giannetti et al., 2006; Almeida, et al. 2007; Giannetti et al., 2010)
 * Conservation and economic value (Lu et al.2007)
 * Conservation and economic value (Lu et al.2007)

 * "References for each of the citations in this table are given in a separate list at the end of this article"
 * }
 * }

Controversies
The concept of emergy has been controversial within academe including ecology, thermodynamics and economy. Emergy theory has been criticized for allegedly offering an energy theory of value to replace other theories of value. The stated goal of emergy evaluations is to provide an "ecocentric" valuation of systems, processes. Thus it does not purport to replace economic values but to provide additional information, from a different point of view.

The idea that a calorie of sunlight is not equivalent to a calorie of fossil fuel or electricity strikes many as absurd, based on the 1st Law definition of energy units as measures of heat (i.e. Joule's mechanical equivalent of heat). Others have rejected the concept as impractical since from their perspective it is impossible to objectively quantify the amount of sunlight that is required to produce a quantity of oil. In combining systems of humanity and nature and evaluating environmental input to economies, mainstream economists criticize the emergy methodology for disregarding market values.

title: Emergy


text:
Air Nigeria

Air Nigeria (originally Virgin Nigeria Airways, and then Nigerian Eagle Airlines) was the national flag carrier of Nigeria, which operated scheduled regional and domestic passenger services. The airline's base was Murtala Mohammed International Airport in Ikeja, its head office was in Lagos Island, Lagos, and its registered office was in Ikoyi, Lagos.

The airline, which effectively replaced the defunct Nigeria Airways, was founded in 2004 as a joint venture between Nigerian investors and the Virgin Group. Virgin withdrew from the business between 2008 and 2010. Following two name changes, Air Nigeria announced on 6 September 2012 that it had made its staff redundant and ceased operations on 10 September 2012.

Origins
Nigerian institutional investors owned 51% of the company and Virgin Atlantic the remaining 49%. The airline's inaugural flight was on 28 June 2005 from Lagos to London Heathrow, using an Airbus A340-300 aircraft. Virgin Nigeria quickly became one of Nigeria's largest airlines, carrying its 1,000,000th passenger and 4,000th ton of freight within two years of operation. The airline also received accolades including THISDAY Awards 2006 Airline of the year and a nomination for 2006 African Airline of the year by ASATA (Association of South African Travel Agents). Virgin Nigeria had plans to make Nnamdi Azikiwe International Airport in Abuja its second base, where, in addition to its Lagos base Murtala Muhammed International Airport, it would serve all countries in West Africa.

Sale of Virgin's stake and rebranding
On 19 August 2008, Virgin Atlantic announced that it was in talks to sell its 49 percent stake and reviewing whether it was appropriate that the Virgin brand should remain linked to Virgin Nigeria. This followed a dispute which arose after Virgin Nigeria's domestic operations were moved against its will by the Ministry of Transportation to Terminal 2. Virgin Nigeria had twice refused the directive to relocate its domestic operations from the international terminal, citing the Memorandum of Mutual Understanding it had signed with the previous (Olusegun Obasanjo) administration, and pending appeal in a Lagos High court, as reasons for not complying.

On 9 January 2009, Virgin Nigeria announced it would suspend all long haul flights to London Gatwick and Johannesburg, effective 27 January 2009.

On 17 September 2009, Virgin Nigeria announced on its website it had rebranded as Nigerian Eagle Airlines. Nigerian Eagle Airlines also stated that it planned to focus on domestic and regional flights with further expansion into Europe and eventually the United States of America. Virgin retained its 49% stake in the new Nigerian Eagle Airlines with the remaining 51% held by Kassy Olisakwe.

Rebranding as Air Nigeria, and cessation of operations
On 2 June 2010, following the acquisition of a majority share in the airline, Jimoh Ibrahim, the new Chairman, announced that the airline had undergone a further name change to Air Nigeria Development Limited, branded as Air Nigeria. On 13 June 2012, the carrier was grounded by regulators for safety checks.

On 6 September 2012 Air Nigeria announced that the management had fired its staff ‘for being disloyal' and the airline ceased all its local, regional, and international operations. Operations ceased on 10 September 2012.

On the 19 September 2018, the Nigerian government suspended the plans to launch Air Nigeria indefinitely. No concise reasons were given for the suspension.

Codeshare agreements

 * Delta Air Lines (SkyTeam)
 * Kenya Airways (SkyTeam)

Closing fleet
The Air Nigeria fleet consisted of the following aircraft shortly before it ceased operations (as of April 2012):

Historic fleet
Before rebranding, Virgin Nigeria had also operated the following aircraft:

title: Air Nigeria


text:
Resident Evil – Code: Veronica

Resident Evil – Code: Veronica is a survival horror video game developed and published by Capcom and originally released for the Dreamcast in 2000. It is the fourth main installment in the Resident Evil series and the first to debut on a separate platform from the PlayStation. The story takes place three months after the events of Resident Evil 2 (1998) and the concurrent destruction of Raccoon City as seen in Resident Evil 3: Nemesis (1999). It follows Claire Redfield and her brother Chris Redfield in their efforts to survive a viral outbreak at a remote prison island in the Southern Ocean and a research facility in Antarctica. The game retains the traditional survival horror controls and gameplay of previous installments; however, unlike the pre-rendered backgrounds of previous games, Code: Veronica uses real-time 3D environments and dynamic camera movement.

After producer Shinji Mikami and his team learned they would be unable to port Resident Evil 2 to the Sega Saturn, they began development on an original game, which became Code: Veronica. Although labeled a spin-off, it was designed as the true sequel to Resident Evil 2; the title "Resident Evil 3" was given to what was originally another spin-off game being developed in tandem for the PlayStation. Claire was designed with a tougher appearance than in Resident Evil 2, with the reason being her past experiences in Raccoon City built her toughness and confidence. Unlike the American horror themes and settings of previous games in the series, Code: Veronica employs a European gothic horror design and settings. This is achieved through the use of gothic architecture and gothic art in addition to the writing style and story presentation.

Capcom announced Code: Veronica in August 1998 and released it in February 2000 after delays and a reduction in sales expectations due to the struggling Dreamcast platform. Sales were weak compared to other Resident Evil games, but strong compared to other Dreamcast games. Code Veronica received critical acclaim and has been considered among both the best Resident Evil games and Dreamcast games. Capcom released an updated version on PlayStation 2, Code: Veronica X. The revised version included new cutscenes which revealed more details about the story, and it was ported to the GameCube in addition to other platforms in later years. In September 2011, Capcom released a high-definition remastered version of Code: Veronica X for the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Code: Veronica was adapted for Capcom's Gun Survivor series with Resident Evil Survivor 2 – Code: Veronica (2002) and also later adapted for Resident Evil: The Darkside Chronicles (2009).

Gameplay
Resident Evil – Code: Veronica features survival horror gameplay, similar to previous Resident Evil games. This includes the series signature controls, interface, puzzles, as well as zombies and monsters to battle. Unlike previous games in the series which used pre-rendered backgrounds, Code: Veronica uses real-time 3D environments. Because of this, the camera is more dynamic than in previous games. The camera will follow, pan, and zoom as the player navigates their character through the environment, similar to Capcom's own Dino Crisis (1999). The story is told through cinematic CGI sequences and real-time cutscenes.

One half of Code: Veronica places the player in control of Claire Redfield while the other half is spent with her brother, Chris. Basic character actions include running, attacking, as well as pushing and climbing objects. Items the player collects can be viewed on the status screen. From here, they can be examined to find clues to solve puzzles, and some can also be equipped. Also available in the status screen is a map and file menu. All notes found in the game are saved in game's files and may be essential to solve puzzles. The player can only hold a limited number of items at a given time; other items must be stored in storage boxes located throughout the game.

The player character may receive damage, which can be healed with restore items. Herbs, which restore character health, can be combined with other types of herbs to become more effective. Too much damage will result in a game over. At this point, the game must be continued from the last save point. A partner's death will also result in a game over. Some weapons are better suited for battling certain enemies, some of which have weaknesses to elements like fire or acid. Once the main game is cleared once, a "Battle Mode" is unlocked. This is a minigame in which the player character is given infinite ammo and places them in various locations from the main game with different enemies. In addition to the Redfield siblings, this mode allows the player to control supporting character Steve Burnside and antagonist Albert Wesker, as well as a version of Claire in a new wardrobe.

Plot
In December 1998, three months after escaping from Raccoon City (seen in Resident Evil 2) prior to its eventual destruction (seen in Resident Evil 3: Nemesis), Claire Redfield raids an Umbrella Corporation facility in Paris in search of her brother, Chris Redfield. Discovered by Umbrella's security forces and eventually captured, Claire is imprisoned on Rockfort Island, a prison complex owned by the corporation, situated in the Southern Ocean. She is knocked unconscious after arriving. Sometime after her imprisonment, Claire wakes up and finds herself released by the man who captured her, and discovers that an outbreak of the T-virus has occurred. In the resulting chaos, she finds herself teaming up with Steve Burnside, another inmate seeking to escape.

In their repeated efforts to explore the island and find the means to leave, the pair finds themselves confronting the island's commander, Alfred Ashford. Both Claire and Steve find him to be mentally unstable as a result of him switching between two personalities—his own, and that of his twin sister Alexia. Eventually, the pair manages to find a seaplane and use it to escape, only for Alfred to pursue them and switch their plane to autopilot, directing it towards another Umbrella facility in Antarctica. Upon their arrival, the pair finds that the facility had suffered an outbreak, and fight their way through the zombies and monsters within to seek a means of escape, battling with Alfred and fatally wounding him. Before he dies, Alfred frees his sister, Alexia, who had been in cryogenic sleep within the facility after injecting herself with the T-Veronica virus, an experimental virus that the Ashford family had developed 15 years ago. Awakened, Alexia manages to recapture Claire and Steve as they attempt to escape.

Meanwhile, Chris Redfield arrives on Rockfort Island in search of Claire, after receiving a message from her via Leon S. Kennedy. Upon learning that she had left, Chris focuses on determining where and begins searching the island. In the process of doing so, he comes across Albert Wesker, an independent agent since the Spencer mansion incident (the events of Resident Evil), who is seeking to retrieve a sample of the T-Veronica virus. After Chris learns of his sister's whereabouts, and Wesker discovers that Alexia is alive and carries what he needs, the two separately find their way to Antarctica. Once there, Chris frees his sister and helps her to search for Steve, only for them to find that he had been experimented with and injected with the T-Veronica virus. After mutating, Steve attempts to kill Claire, but fails, regaining control of himself to turn on Alexia, who then inflicts a mortal wound on him. Before Steve dies, he confesses his love for Claire. Meanwhile, Chris and Wesker confront Alexia. In the resulting conflict, Wesker escapes and manages to retrieve Steve's corpse for further experimentation, while Chris manages to defeat Alexia and escape with his sister, before the Antarctic facility self-destructs.

Development
With the success of Resident Evil 2 in 1998, Capcom began more Resident Evil projects across multiple consoles. Code: Veronica originated from an unsuccessful attempt to port Resident Evil 2 to the Sega Saturn. After producer Shinji Mikami and his team learned they would be unable to port the game without making a large sacrifice to quality, Mikami was asked by his leadership to create something else for Sega fans, and so development began on an original Saturn game. When Mikami asked for more time to develop the game, he was told it would need to have a better technical quality, making Sega's upcoming Dreamcast more appealing. Around the same time, a side-story game for the PlayStation starring Jill Valentine in the events leading up to Resident Evil 2 was being developed. This was originally intended to be a spin-off with the Dreamcast game as the true sequel. According to IGN, Sony bartered for limited exclusivity on the "Resident Evil 3" title, and thus the side-story was branded as Resident Evil 3 and the true sequel was labeled a spin-off and titled Code: Veronica. This notion is conflicted by interviews at the time, as producer Shinji Mikami and Flagship president Yoshiki Okamoto told journalists they wanted to keep the numbered chronology on the PlayStation systems, and give subtitles to Resident Evil games on all other systems. Regardless, the game content remained essentially unchanged.

Code: Veronica's story, setting, and artistic design strayed away from the series standard. While previous games are set in the United States and have a corresponding American feel to them, Code: Veronica is set in the Southern Ocean and Antarctica and carries a European gothic horror inspired design. This is made clear in the environments which feature gothic architecture and art in addition to central European carvings and German-style weaponry. In addition, the gothic feel is emphasized through the story. The horror in Code: Veronica is driven by this story which follows a crazed man and the fate of his noble bloodline. The story is told partly through a lullaby, and this method of storytelling is intended to bring out European operatic undertones. This contrasts to previous games in the series which were driven by the panic elements from American horror films, such as monsters and zombies. With regards to managing the art staff, Mikami split them up depending on their interests. Those interested in guns worked solely on gun designs while those interested in environments were sent to photograph houses and castles for research.

During in-game cutscenes, the polygon count is increased to nearly 2,500 polygons, especially on character faces. Capcom added detail to the zombie enemies unprecedented in the series, such as making their jaws move and eyes twitch. Claire was given a tougher appearance in Code: Veronica than in Resident Evil 2, the reason being her experiences in Resident Evil 2 built her toughness and confidence to handle any situation. This characterization is emphasized by her ability to dual wield sub-machine guns, and also by the opening cinematic which features her in a John Woo-inspired action scene. Mikami described Code: Veronica as 50 to 60% of his perfect vision for Resident Evil in February 2001, and he cited that future Resident Evil projects may make up the other half.

By the time Resident Evil 3 was released, development on Code: Veronica was nearing completion. Much of Code: Veronica's 70-person development staff was outsourced because Capcom resources had been tied up working on Resident Evil 3. Shinji Mikami and Yoshiki Okamoto's team at Flagship oversaw the game's scenario and direction, while XAX Entertainment assisted with environments and Nextech handled much of the technical development. Capcom Production Studio 4 still handled art direction and character design. By September 1999, Sega was sending some of its own developers to help add final touches to the game. Sega assisted Capcom with the game's programming to help keep a good framerate.

Release
Code: Veronica was confirmed to be in development as early as August 1998 and was promoted as the true sequel to Resident Evil 2. It was officially revealed on October 6, 1998, by Capcom R&D chief Yoshiki Okamoto. Capcom of Japan stated that they were hoping to sell the game to roughly one third of all Dreamcast users, which they estimated would total to around one million copies. In July 1999, Capcom of Japan announced their shipment expectations for the Japanese Dreamcast version were at 400,000 copies. Journalists were skeptical if this was only the initial shipment, or evidence that Capcom overestimated sales of the Dreamcast, given their initial sales estimate was one million. Capcom initially planned to have Code: Veronica released around the same time as Resident Evil 3 and, more importantly, the Dreamcast launch in North America on September 9, 1999. However, delays pushed the project back to early 2000. To make up for the game's absence, Capcom announced they would release a port of Resident Evil 2 for the Dreamcast that December. This release, called Biohazard 2: Value Plus, included a demo for Code: Veronica.

Code: Veronica was released in February 2000. Pre-ordered copies came with a unique numbered tag, special red packaging, and a unique title screen. Limited Dreamcast system bundles were also released to commemorate the game's release. The "Claire Version", limited to 1,800 copies, consisted of the Code: Veronica game, a pink system, pink controller, and a VMU. The other bundle, known as the "S.T.A.R.S. Version", has the items except the system is a dark transparent blue and features a "S.T.A.R.S." logo. This bundle was limited to 200 copies. Expecting high demand, Capcom set up a contest for fans to enter to win an opportunity to purchase the systems. A soundtrack was released in February 2000 as well.

Code: Veronica X
Because the Dreamcast had a much smaller user base than PlayStation platforms, Capcom knew the series could not survive on the platform. This led to an expanded version, titled Code: Veronica X in the West and Code: Veronica Kanzenban in Japan, on the PlayStation 2 in 2001. It was also released on the Dreamcast in Japan. The expanded version was announced in November 2000. It has approximately 10 minutes of new cinematic sequences that reveal more about Wesker's involvement with Umbrella. While the core game remained unchanged, several graphical alterations were also made, most notably in the character model for Steve Burnside (who was given a different hairstyle). Capcom printed a video DVD of an in-universe documentary, Wesker's Report, as a pre-order incentive. In North America, the Wesker's Report DVD was also sold on Capcom's website and given to customers who purchased the game at specialty retailers such as Electronics Boutique and GameStop. Code: Veronica X was later released on the GameCube along with several other Resident Evil games. It was included with the Biohazard Collector Box for the GameCube in Japan, a bundle of Resident Evil games which also included a copy of Wesker's Report.

A high-definition remastered version of Code: Veronica X was released in September 2011 for the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. An emulated version for the PlayStation 3 was released as a PS2 Classic in July 2012 in Japan and in May 2014 in Europe. Another emulated PS2 version was released for the PlayStation 4 in May 2017. The Xbox 360 version was added to the Xbox One backwards-compatible library in February 2019.

Reception
Code: Veronica received universal acclaim; many critics felt it was the best Resident Evil game at the time, and a "must-own" for the Dreamcast. Derek Williams of AllGame called it the best game for the system along with Soulcalibur (1999). A critic from Game Revolution found it to be the best of all the horror games on the Dreamcast, towering the likes of The House of the Dead 2 (1999), Zombie Revenge (1999), and Carrier (2000). Next Generation dubbed it "the best game yet for Dreamcast—in fact, one of the best games we've seen in the past couple of years."

The game's atmosphere and presentation received high praise. Critics at Edge called it "the closest the series has got to emulating a Hollywood action feature". Most reviewers found the graphics as being some of the very best on the Dreamcast and being a testament to the power of its hardware. Along with this, critics pointed out Code: Veronica's use of real-time backgrounds and a dynamic camera as an improvement from the pre-rendered backgrounds of previous series entries. The CGI sequences were also praised, especially the opening cinematic. The use of music and sound was called "top-notch" and "perfect". The story received positive reviews. Maura Sutton of Computer and Video Games praised the adult twist on the narrative. Some critics pointed out that despite improvements, the game is still a Resident Evil game, and therefore inherited the good and bad qualities of previous games. The controls were a negative point of criticism between some reviews.

Reviews for the PlayStation 2 release of Code: Veronica X were mostly positive. Critics shared similar opinions to the Dreamcast reviews, but some complaints were drawn from it being a mostly unmodified port of an 18-month-old Dreamcast game. GameSpot's Joe Fielder pointed out that Sony's Extermination (2001) and Capcom's own Onimusha: Warlords (2001) had been released during this gap with better controls. The GameCube version garnered average reviews, due to its unaltered, ported status. The high definition remaster was released over a decade after the original and was welcomed with mediocre reviews. Critics commonly cited the game's archaic design and controls as making it less appealing compared with contemporary offerings. The remaster did find some positive reception from Game Informer's Tim Turi who found enjoyment from playing what he called a "challenging classic survival horror game" and "a harrowing but memorable trek through the series' heyday."

Code: Veronica won GameSpot's annual "Best Adventure Game" award among console games, and was a runner-up for the publication's "Best Dreamcast Game", "Best Sound", "Best Graphics, Technical" and overall "Game of the Year" prizes. The editors argued that "Code Veronica is the culmination of everything the developers of the Resident Evil series seemed to be trying to accomplish." The following year, Veronica X was nominated for GameSpot's annual "Best Action/Adventure Game" prize among console games, which went to Grand Theft Auto III.

Sales
Code: Veronica outsold Shenmue (1999) within its first week on shelves in February 2000. In total, the Dreamcast version sold almost 450,000 units in the United States and 1.14 million copies worldwide. The sales were weak compared to series predecessors, but strong compared to other Dreamcast games. The PlayStation 2 version of Code: Veronica X had sold 900,000 copies and earned $27 million in the United States by July 2006, outselling Resident Evil 4. The PS2 version went on to sell 1.4 million copies worldwide, for a total of 2.54 million units sold worldwide for both the Dreamcast and PS2 versions.

Next Generation ranked it as the 63rd-highest-selling game launched for the PlayStation 2, Xbox or GameCube between January 2000 and July 2006 in the United States. Combined console sales of Resident Evil franchise released in the 2000s reached 3 million units in the United States by July 2006.

Legacy
Game Informer ranked Code: Veronica as 69th in their "Top 100 Games of All Time" in 2001. GamesRadar named it the 14th-best Dreamcast game of all time.

The story in Code: Veronica has been adapted into other works. Resident Evil Survivor 2 – Code: Veronica (2001) for Naomi-based arcades and PlayStation 2 follows the story of Code: Veronica from a first-person view with light gun shooter-style gameplay. Similarly, another light gun game, Resident Evil: The Darkside Chronicles (2009) was released for the Wii and features sequences set in Code: Veronica along with Resident Evil 2. As with previous Resident Evil games, the story was adapted into a novel written by S. D. Perry. Also, a miniseries comic was published by DC Comics. A demo version of a fan remake of the game was released in 2021. The project was shut down by Capcom in 2022.

title: Resident Evil – Code: Veronica


text:
Talk:Salisbury

More notable residents
There seems to be a serious regrowth of so called notable residents with little description about their connection with Salisbury. I propose a further pruning, indeed extermination, of this endless and largely irrelevent list. Comments please. Richard Avery (talk) 22:41, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

What about Sergei Skripal? He settled down in the town in 2011, wasn't he?--Porbóllett (talk) 15:19, 10 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Apparently he only became notable on March 10. The reason seems to be because he was the subject of a possible assassination attempt. If this is true then why isn't his daughter, Yulia, also notable. The idea of so-called notable people associated with towns, cities or villages is unnecessary and absurd. There are citations of authors referring to Salisbury or people just visiting Salisbury. Where does it end? Richard Avery (talk) 09:04, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

 * I agree they themselves do not belong in the notable residents part, but the assassination attempt is itself an internationally notable event that does deserve a mention. Polyamorph (talk) 09:10, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * A wikilink to Poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal should certainly be made from this article. Perhaps under a new section "notable events"? Polyamorph (talk) 09:23, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Done Polyamorph (talk) 15:14, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

A link to the wiki article has been added.NEDOCHAN (talk) 08:11, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
 * That's not how you add links to wikipedia articles, the existing wikilink I had created already did the job.Polyamorph (talk) 08:14, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

Sorry- didn't spot that you had hyperlinked- my mistake.NEDOCHAN (talk) 09:32, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

 * No problem . Best Polyamorph (talk) 10:25, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

New / In the headlines
The title given matters not a jot: the content still falls foul of WP:NOTNEWS. William Avery (talk) 09:13, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

No prob- changed to make it more relevant. My mistake calling it news. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Coldroses (talk • contribs) 09:21, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

 * No, please stop. you have been reverted a number of times by a number of different editors. You are in the wrong, your section does not belong in this article. 1) There is an existing article on the Nerve agent poisoning HERE, and 2) wikipedia is not the news, READ THIS!.Polyamorph (talk) 10:20, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Suspected Sockpuppetry
Please see Administrators%27_noticeboard/Edit_warring and Sockpuppet investigations/Coldroses, relating to the discussion above and new reverts made to the article. Polyamorph (talk) 12:24, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Pronunciation
Just want to double-check, the pronunciation should have an /l/ in it right? It should be /ˈsɔːlz.bɹi/ or /ˈsɒlz.bɹi/. 2WR1 (talk) 01:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
 * No most locals probably wouldn’t pronounce the l Staruge (talk) 06:30, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, there can be both local pronunciations and standard pronunciations, but they should be marked as such and the standards should be given first. 2WR1 (talk) 17:51, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Speaking as someone unfamiliar with the local accent, I would like to check if it is normal to drop the U in the "bury" suffix locally. If so, I do not think the schwa should be included in the second syllable of the local pronunciation but I need to check. Tk420 (talk) 21:24, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

 * Living in Wiltshire (not Salisbury) I hear it both ways. Same goes for Amesbury, Malmesbury, Westbury, etc. Elision in general is common, e.g. Chippenham is often "Chipnam". -- Wire723 (talk) 14:10, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Park and ride costs and routes
An IP editor has restored this information: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Salisbury&diff=927104729&oldid=926978497, which I don't think should be here. For a start, the pricing will change and is not the sort of info one would find in an encyclopaedia. It also seems like advertising. Additionally, the level of detail seems of very limited interest. It would seem that simply mentioning the scheme (as it now does) is sufficient. The user hasn't explained their edit so I invite them to so so here.NEDOCHAN (talk) 10:57, 20 November 2019 (UTC)

Salisbury does not lie at the confluence of 5 rivers
Salisbury does not lie at the confluence of 5 rivers. This is a long held myth based on people not taking the trouble to look at the facts.

The River Ebble commences at the head of the Ebble Valley somewhere near Ebbesbourne Wake. It flows south of Salisbury through the villages of Coombe Bisset and Odstock and well outside the city limits. The River Ebble joins the River Avon in the hamlet of Bodenham.

The River Wylye originates south of Warminster and flows from Warminster through Wilton where it joins the River Nadder in the tiny village of Netherhampton. It does not flow within Salisbury City limits. Richard Avery (talk) 22:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

title: Talk:Salisbury


text:
Shoe polish

Shoe polish, also known as boot polish and shoeshine, is a waxy paste, cream, or liquid that is used to polish, shine, and waterproof leather shoes or boots to extend the footwear's life and restore its appearance. Shoe polishes are distinguished by their textures, which range from liquids to hard waxes. Solvent, waxes, and colorants comprise most shoe polishes. Shoe polish has been around since medieval times, originally made with dubbin. Originally, it was not used to shine shoes; the popularity of shoeshining that rose during the early 1900s led to many shoe polish formulas being incorporated with a shining agent.

Types
Shoe polish can be classified into three types: wax, cream-emulsion, and liquid. Each differs in detailed composition, but all consist of a mixture of waxes and solvents. They often include dyes.

Wax-based shoe polish
Waxes, organic solvents, and colorant (either soluble dyes or pigment) compose this type of polish. Waxes are 20–40% of the material. Natural waxes used for the polish include carnauba and montan as well as synthetic waxes. The composition determines the hardness and polishing properties after solvent has evaporated. Solvents are selected to match the waxes. About 70% of shoe polish is solvent. A variety of solvents are used, including naphtha. Turpentine, although more expensive, is favored for its "shoe polish odor". Dyes make up the final 2–3% of the polish. A traditional dye is nigrosine, but other dyes (including azo dyes) and pigments are used for oxblood, cordovan, and brown polishes.

Owing to its high content of volatile solvents, wax-based shoe polish hardens after application, while retaining its gloss. Poorly blended polishes are known to suffer from blooming, evidenced by the appearance of a white coating of stearin on the polish surface.

Cream-Emulsion shoe polish
These polishes may have a gelatinous consistency. They are composed of the usual three components: waxes, liquid vehicle, and dyes. Unlike wax-based shoe polishes, cream-emulsions contain water and/or oil plus a solvent (either naphtha, turpentine or Stoddard Solution), so the liquid content is high. Emulsifiers and surfactants are required. These include ammonia, morpholine, and various ethoxylated surfactants such as polysorbate 80. The waxes are often some mixture of carnauba wax, beeswax, montan wax and its oxidized derivatives, and paraffin waxes.

Liquid shoe polish
Liquid shoe polish is sold in a squeezable plastic bottle, with a small sponge applicator at the end. To decrease its viscosity, bottled polish usually has a very low wax content. Liquid shoe polish is a complex mixture. Polyethylene wax emulsion is a major component. Various polymers, typically acrylates, are the next major component, conferring gloss and holding the dyes in suspension. Resins and casein are selected to ensure adhesion to the leather. Fatty phosphate esters, emulsifiers, and glycols are also used. Pigments include titanium dioxide for whites and iron oxides for browns. Although liquid polish can put a fast shine on shoes, many experts warn against its long-term use because it can cause the leather to dry out and crack.

Manufacture
The process for producing shoe polish is very straightforward and the required equipment is relatively easy to acquire. The cost of establishing shoe polish manufacturing facilities has been estimated at $600,000 (as of 2005).

Shoe polish is manufactured in large, thermostated, stirred reactors. Steps are taken to ensure that volatile solvents do not evaporate. Typically, low-melting paraffin wax is melted, followed by the higher melting waxes, and finally the colorant-stearate mixture. The molten mass is added to warm solvent before being dispensed. Wax-based shoe polish is traditionally packaged in flat, round, 60-gram (2-ounce) tins, usually with an easy-open facility. The traditional flat, round tins have since become synonymous with shoe polishes. When dried due to solvent loss or other reasons, the hardened wax pulls away from the walls of the container, giving what is known as a "rattler".

Before the twentieth century
From medieval times, dubbin, a product of wax, was used to soften and waterproof leather; but it did not impart shine. It was made from natural wax, oil, soda ash, and tallow. As leather with a high natural veneer became popular in the 18th century, a high glossy finish became important, particularly on shoes and boots. In most cases, homemade polishes were used to provide this finish, often with lanolin or beeswax as a base. In the late 18th and early 19th century, many forms of shoe polish became available, yet were rarely referred to as shoe polish or boot polish. Instead, they were often called blacking, especially when mixed with lampblack, or still were referred to as dubbin. Tallow, an animal by-product, was used to manufacture a simple form of shoe polish at this time. Chicago, where 82% of the processed meat consumed in the United States was processed in the stockyards, became a major shoe polish producing area.

In London, the Warren brothers, Thomas and Jonathan, started making blacking around 1795–98, initially in partnership and then with competing companies. Jonathan Warren's Blacking company is noted as the first employer of the young Charles Dickens aged 12 in 1823. The competitor to the Warren companies in London is the Day & Martin company formed in 1801.

Details of the operation of Day & Martin in 1842 reveal that the blacking they produced was in two forms, bottled liquid, and a thick paste which was available in either small wide-mouthed stone tubs, slabs wrapped in oiled paper, or in "circular tin-boxes, about three inches in diameter, and half or three-quarters of an inch thick.". Tinned blacking paste was at this time exclusively for army use: "[…] a bottle of liquid blacking would be rather a burden […] yet, as the soldier’s boots or shoes must to some extent emulate the brightness and glitter of the boots of those who pay for battles instead of fighting them, a portable blacking apparatus is provided.".

In 1832, James S. Mason of Philadelphia began the commercial production of shoe blacking and inks. In 1851, James S. Mason & Co. constructed a building at 138/140 Front St. where ultimately ten million boxes were produced annually, to hold tins of blacking produced by two hundred employees. Later, tins of blacking were labeled as Mason Shoe Polish. This business ceased operation in 1919 and the building was razed in 1973.

Other early leather preserving products included the Irish brand Punch, which was first made in 1851. In 1889, an English man by the name of William Edward Wren, started making shoe polishes and dubbin under the brand name Wren's. In just 3 years, he won the “First in the Field – First Award Leather Trades Exhibition 1892″ award which was awarded by the Leather Trades Exhibition held in Northampton, the centre of Britain’s boot making industry. This signified the importance and prestige of the exhibition in the trade and was a recognition of Wren's quality. In 1890 the Kroner Brothers established EOS, a shoe polish factory in Berlin, which serviced the Prussian military. It finally closed in 1934 when the Nazis forbade Jews to operate a business. The German brand, Erdal, went on sale in 1901.

Prior to 1906, shoe polish was not well known as a purchasable product, nor was it particularly sophisticated. While sales were not especially high, a few brands, like Nugget, were available in the UK during the 19th century. The practice of shining people’s shoes gradually caught on and soon many shoeshine boys in city streets were offering shoe shines using a basic form of shoe polish along with a polishing cloth.

Modern polish
The first shoe polish to resemble the modern varieties (aimed primarily at inducing shine) were the British and British Commonwealth brands like Cherry Blossom, Kiwi, and Wren's. An advertisement published in March 1947 by Wren's claimed that William Wren originated the first wax polish in 1889. As the advertisement was endorsed with the Royal Warrant, its claim would be deemed creditable. However, the most well known brand was Kiwi; Scottish expatriates William Ramsay and Hamilton McKellan began making "boot polish" in a small factory in 1904 in Melbourne, Australia. Their formula was a major improvement on previous brands. It preserved shoe leather, made it shine, and restored colour. By the time Kiwi Dark Tan was released in 1908, it incorporated agents that added suppleness and water resistance. Black and a range of colors became available, and exports to Britain, continental Europe, and New Zealand began, although the polish is now made in the Far East. Previously owned by the Sara Lee Corporation since 1984, Kiwi was sold in 2011 to SC Johnson.

Ramsay named the shoe polish after the kiwi, the national bird of New Zealand; Ramsay's wife, Annie Elizabeth Meek Ramsay, was a native of Oamaru, New Zealand. It has been suggested that, at a time when several symbols were weakly associated with New Zealand, the eventual spread of Kiwi shoe polish around the world enhanced the kiwi's popular appeal and promoted it at the expense of the others.

A rival brand in the early years was Cobra Boot Polish, based in Sydney. Cobra was noted for a series of cartoon advertisements in The Sydney Bulletin, starting in 1909, using a character called "Chunder Loo of Akim Foo." Chunder is Australian slang for vomit, and possibly originated through the rhyming slang of Chunder Loo and spew (another slang word for vomit).

Surge in popularity
At the end of the 19th century, leather shoes and boots became affordable to the masses, and with the outbreak of World War I in 1914, the demand for large numbers of polished army boots led to a need in the market for a product that would allow boots to be polished quickly, efficiently and easily. The polish was also used to shine leather belts, handgun holsters, and horse tack. This demand led to a rapid increase in the sales of shoe and boot polish. The popularity of Kiwi shoe polish spread throughout the British Commonwealth and the United States. Rival brands began to emerge, including Shinola and Cavalier (United States), Cherry Blossom (United Kingdom), Parwa (India), Jean Bart (France), and many others. Advertising became more prominent; many shoe polish brands used fictional figures or historical characters to spread awareness of their products. In the German documentary of 1927 Berlin: Symphony of a Metropolis, a scene focuses on shoe shining with a polish called Nigrin sporting the face of a black person.

Shoe manufacturing improvements in the mid-19th century allowed for factories to produce large numbers of shoes made of leather, and later synthetic materials. This increase in leather shoe production continued well into the 20th century and led to a surge in the number of retail shoe stores in the industrialized world, and subsequently a call for shoe polish by footwear consumers.

Shoe polish was to be found just about everywhere Allied troops ventured. American war correspondent Walter Graeber wrote for TIME magazine from the Tobruk trenches in 1942 that "old tins of British-made Kiwi polish lay side by side with empty bottles of Chianti." A story indicative of the rise in global significance of shoe polish is told by Jean (Gertrude) Williams, a New Zealander who lived in Japan during the Allied occupation straight after World War II. American soldiers were then finding the dullness of their boots and shoes to be a handicap when trying to win the affections of Japanese women. U.S. military footwear of the time was produced in brown leather with the rough side out.

"When the British Commonwealth Occupation Forces arrived in Japan—all with boots polished to a degree not known in the U.S. forces—the G.I.s were more conscious than ever of their feet. The secret was found to rest not only in spit and polish, but in the superior Australian boot polish, a commodity which was soon exchanged with the Americans on a fluctuating basis of so many packets of cigarettes for one can of Kiwi boot polish."

Soldiers returning from the war continued to use the product, leading to a further surge in its popularity. While Kiwi shoe polish was what business historian Alfred D. Chandler, Jr. would call a "first mover", Kiwi did not open a manufacturing plant in the US until after World War II. Prior to this, Cavalier Shoe Polish, founded by James Lobell, had operated in the US since 1913. The sales paradigm of Cavalier polish was to have footwear professionals sell Cavalier's high-end shoe polish to the shoe-buying public. A few years after World War II, Kiwi opened a manufacturing plant in Philadelphia, making only black, brown, and neutral shoe polish in tins. Kiwi purchased Cavalier in 1961, and continued to manufacture products under the name until the year 2000.

Modern day
Shoe polish products are low-value items that are infrequently purchased, as a single can might last several months for even the most frequent user. Consumer demand is inelastic and largely insensitive to price change, while sales volumes are generally low. In the shoe polish market as a whole, some 26% of turnover is accounted for by pastes, 24% by creams, 23% by aerosols, and 13% by liquids. In recent years, the demand for shoe polish products has either been static or declined; one reason is the gradual replacement of formal footwear with sneakers for everyday use.

There are numerous branded products available, as well as generic store brands. There are two chief areas of shoe polish sales: to the public, and to specialists and trade, such as shoe repairers, and cobblers. The sales percentages between the two outlets are roughly comparable. The best-selling, low-cost brands are produced by these companies: Kiwi, Griffin, Tana, and Johnson, and Reckitt & Colman. Approximately 60 million units are sold annually. Other leading brands include Kelly's, Shinola, Lincoln Shoe Polish, Meltonian, Angelus, Woly, Salamander, Collonil and Cherry Blossom.

Kiwi was acquired by the American company Sara Lee following its purchase of Reckitt and Colman in 1991 and Knomark with its brand Esquire Shoe Polish in 1987. The Federal Trade Commission ruled that Sara Lee had to divest its ownership of these companies in 1994 to prevent it from becoming a monopoly. Since this ruling, Sara Lee has been prevented from acquiring any further assets or firms associated with chemical shoe care products in the United States without prior approval. The Competition Commission in the United Kingdom investigated the potential monopoly of Sara Lee in the shoe care industry.

In recent years, there has been a rise in popularity of high-end shoe polishes, such as Saphir made by Avel and Boot Black made by Columbus.

Usage
Shoe polish is applied to the shoe using a rag, cloth, brush, or with bare fingers. Shoe polish is not a cleaning product: it is suited for clean and dry shoes. A vigorous rubbing action to apply the polish evenly to the boot, followed by further buffing with a clean dry cloth or brush, usually provides good results. Another technique, known as spit-polishing or bull polishing, involves gently rubbing polish into the leather with a cloth and a drop of water or spit. This action achieves the mirror-like, high-gloss finish sometimes known as a spit shine or bull which is especially valued in military organizations. Despite the term, saliva is less commonly used as the vehicle or diluent with polish than is water. Polishes containing carnauba wax can be used as a protective coating to extend the life and look of a leather shoe.

Shoe polish may be purchased pre-soaked into a hard sponge, which can be used to buff leather without needing to apply any additional polish to either the leather or the sponge. This is usually known as an applicator.

Related products
Many products are closely related to shoe polish, but not strictly considered as such. Other chemical products may be used to clean and shine shoes—in particular whiteners for white shoes, and a variety of sprays and aerosols for cleaning and waterproofing suede shoes. A banana peel can also be used to effectively shine shoes, but it is not recommended.

Although shoe polish is primarily intended for leather shoes, some brands specify that it may be used on non-porous materials, such as vinyl. The polish is generally the same colour as the shoes it will be used upon, or it may be neutral, lacking any colouring agents.

Safety and environmental considerations
Shoe polish is such a niche market that its environmental impact is negligible. Solvent evaporation is one issue. Dyes and pigments with "severe carcinogenic profiles" have been removed from most formulations. Shoe polish often contains unhealthy products, they can among some affect feet themselves.

title: Shoe polish