text:
English relative clauses

Relative clauses in the English language are formed principally by means of relative words. The basic relative pronouns are who, which, and that; who also has the derived forms whom and whose. Various grammatical rules and style guides determine which relative pronouns may be suitable in various situations, especially for formal settings. In some cases the relative pronoun may be omitted and merely implied ("This is the man [that] I saw", or "This is the putter he wins with").

English also uses free relative clauses, which have no antecedent and can be formed with the pronouns such as what ("I like what you've done"), and who and whoever.

Modern guides to English say that the relative pronoun should take the case (subject or object) which is appropriate to the relative clause, not the function performed by that clause within an external clause.

Overview
The basic grammatical rules for the formation of relative clauses in English are given here. More details can be found in the sections below, and in the article on who.

 * 1) The basic relative pronouns are considered to be who, which and that, but see an alternative analysis of that below.
 * 2) The relative pronoun comes at the very start of the relative clause unless it is preceded by a fronted preposition: "The bed on which I was lying". (It is normal to slide the preposition to the end of the clause and leave it stranded, or dangling: "The bed which I was lying on"). The relative clause may start with a larger phrase containing the relative pronoun after a preposition: "The bed, the owner of which we had seen previously, ...", or "The bed, lying on which was a small cat, ..."
 * 3) who is used only with its antecedent referring to a person ("The man who ..."); which, referring to a thing ("The flowers which ..."); that, referring to either a person or thing ("The woman that ...", or "The flowers that ...").
 * 4) that is used only in restrictive relative clauses, and is not preceded by a comma ("The teacher that looks worn-out", or "The car that looks worn-out"); but who and which may be used in both restrictive and non-restrictive clauses, and may or may not take a comma ("The teacher who looks worn-out", or "My teacher, who ..."), and ("The car which looks worn-out", or "My car, which ..."). In some styles of formal English, particularly American, using which in restrictive clauses is avoided where possible (see that or which below).
 * 5) whom is used only when its antecedent is the object of the relative clause, but not when its antecedent is the subject of the relative clause ("The officer nabbed the thief whom I saw")—antecedent thief is the object of the relative clause; but not (*The officer nabbed the thief whom saw me)—here the antecedent thief is the subject of the relative clause ("... the thief _ saw me"); who is correct here.
 * 6) When a preposition in the relative clause is placed in front (fronted), only whom or which is used ("The waiter to whom I spoke", or "The putter with which she wins"); it would never be acceptable to use who (*The waiter to who I spoke) or that (*The putter with that she wins). With informal style, the preposition is often dangled (or stranded), not fronted, so who and that may also be used (“The mailman who I spoke to”, “The mailman that I spoke to”, as well as “The mailman whom ...”); and (“The putter that she wins with”, or “The putter which ...”), or the zero relative pronoun is frequently used (“The putter she wins with”). (See Zero relative pronoun).
 * 7) When that is used in a restrictive relative clause and it is not the subject of the relative clause, it may be omitted entirely. For example: ("The dentist that I saw" or "The dentist that I spoke to") may be rendered simply ("The dentist I saw" or "The dentist I spoke to"). But any relative pronoun when used in a non-restrictive relative clause must not be omitted ("My dentist, whom I saw", or "My dentist, who spoke to me"); nor when its preposition is fronted ("The dentist to whom I spoke"); nor when its antecedent is the subject of the relative clause ("The dentist that saw me”, or “The dentist who saw me").
 * 8) The verb in a relative clause takes the same person (first, second, or third) and number (singular or plural) as that of the antecedent of the relative pronoun. In ("The people who were present ...") the antecedent of who is people (third person, plural), so the verb to be takes its form (were) for third person and plural number; in ("I, who am normally very tolerant, ...") who‘s antecedent is the pronoun I (first person, singular), so the verb to be takes its form (am) for first person and singular number.
 * 9) whose indicates that the antecedent has a possessive role in the relative clause ("The man whose daughter I married"). Unlike who, it can refer to things as well as persons ("I found a car whose battery was dead"). Though there is some reluctance to use whose with a non-personal antecedent, such use is not uncommon and is perfectly grammatical. Whose is used in both restrictive and non-restrictive clauses (“The woman whose brother was recently married ...”, or "Sally, whose brother ...") and with both fronted and stranded prepositions ("The student in whose car we arrived ...", "The student whose car we arrived in ...") or larger phrases with a preposition ("My tutor, some of whose lessons...").
 * 10) A relative clause whose antecedent is a whole proposition—that is, a matter (or person or thing) to be dealt with—is formed with which ("The cake was burnt, which made me angry"); here which refers to the whole circumstance of the cake's being burnt.
 * 11) A formal, though uncommon, use of which is its being a relative determiner in non-restrictive clauses ("He painted a picture of the house, which painting I later destroyed"). Here, which may refer to persons as well as things (“Yesterday, I met three men with long beards, which men I remember vividly”). Which can also refer to the whole clause, followed by a word that represents the ideas of the clause ("Yesterday, I met three men with long beards, which meetings I remember vividly"). A preposition may be fronted in front of the relative determiner which ("Every day, he visits me at the arcade, from which fact I derive much pleasure"), as may a larger phrase containing a preposition ("He went to the park and the shopping center, both of which places ...").
 * 12) A free relative clause has no antecedent and takes the role of an argument in the main clause. When referring to people, it is formed with the pronouns who, whom or whoever, whomever ("I'll take who you choose", or "I'll take whom you choose", or "I'll take whoever (or whomever) you choose"). When referring to things, it is formed with the pronouns what or whatever ("What I said annoyed her") where what stands for "the thing which ..." or "that which ...". Whichever is used when referring to people or things from a known set. (These are all called compound relative pronouns.) Also, there are the determiner (adjectival) equivalents which or what, or more usually, whichever or whatever ("I'll take whichever dish you choose", or "I'll take whatever dish you choose").

The words used as relative pronouns have other uses in English grammar: that can be a demonstrative or a conjunction, while which, what, who, whom and whose can be interrogatives. For other uses of whoever etc., see -ever.

Human or non-human antecedents
The choice of relative pronoun typically depends on whether the antecedent is human or non-human: for example, who and its derivatives (whom, whoever, etc.—apart from whose) are generally restricted to human antecedents, while which and what and their derivatives refer in most cases to things, including animals.

The relative pronoun that is used with both human and non-human antecedents. Some writers and style guides recommend reserving that for non-human cases only, but this view does not reflect general use. Counter-examples can be found in literature: Shakespeare (the man that hath no music in himself, in The Merchant of Venice), Mark Twain (The Man that Corrupted Hadleyburg), and Ira Gershwin (The Man that Got Away); and informal English, especially speech, follows an actual practice (in using that and which) that is more natural than prescriptivist.

The possessive form whose is necessarily used with non-human as well as human antecedents because no possessive forms exist for which or that. Otherwise, to avoid, for example, using whose in "...the car whose engine blew up.." would require a periphrastic phrasing, such as "...the car the engine of which blew up", or "...the car of which the engine blew up".

English also makes the distinction between human vs. thing in personal pronouns (he, she vs. it) and certain other pronouns (such as someone, somebody vs. something); but some particular things—such a navy ships and marine vessels—are described with female pronouns, and pets and other animals are frequently addressed in terms of their gender or their (anthropomorphic) ‘personhood’. Typically, it is when these things-as-human become antecedents to relative clauses that their relative pronouns tend to revert to that or which—for things—rather than taking the regular who, whom, etc., for human referents. See Gender in English.

Restrictive or non-restrictive relative clauses
The distinction between restrictive, or integrated, relative clauses and non-restrictive, or supplementary, relative clauses in English is made both in speaking (through prosody), and in writing (through punctuation): a non-restrictive relative clause is surrounded by pauses in speech and usually by commas in writing, whereas a restrictive clause is not. Compare the following sentences, which have quite different meanings and intonation, depending on whether the commas are inserted:

 * (1) The builder, who erects very fine houses, will make a large profit. (non-restrictive)
 * (2) The builder who erects very fine houses will make a large profit. (restrictive)

The first expression refers to an individual builder (and it implies that we know, or know of, the builder, which is the referent). It says that he builds "very fine" houses, and that he will make a large profit. It conveys these meanings by deploying a non-restrictive relative clause and three short intonation curves, usually marked-off by commas. The second expression refers not to a single builder but to a certain category, also called a set, of builders who meet a particular qualification, or distinguishing property: the one explained by the restrictive relative clause. Now the sentence means: it is the builder who builds "very fine" houses who will make a large profit. It conveys this very different meaning by providing a restrictive relative clause and only one intonation curve, and no commas. Commas are, however, often used erroneously, probably because the rule is taught based on logic and most people are not aware that they can trust their ear in deciding whether to use a comma. (English uses commas in some other cases based on grammar, not prosody.)

Thus, in speaking or writing English prose, a restrictive rather than non-restrictive meaning (or vice versa) requires the correct syntax by choosing the appropriate relative clause (i.e., restrictive or non-restrictive) and the appropriate intonation and punctuation.

To determine whether a relative clause is restrictive or non-restrictive a simple test can be applied. If the basic meaning of the sentence (the thought) is not changed by removing the relative clause, the relative clause is not essential to the basic thought and is non-restrictive. Alternatively, if the essential meaning of the thought is disturbed, the relative clause is restrictive.

Restrictive relative clauses are also called integrated relative clauses, defining relative clauses, or identifying relative clauses. Conversely, non-restrictive relative clauses are called supplementary, appositive, non-defining, or non-identifying relative clauses.

Also, some integrated clauses may not be truly restrictive; see integrated clauses, and for more information see restrictiveness.

Integrated clauses that are not restrictive
Although the term "restrictive" has become established as joined with integrated clauses, there are integrated clauses that do not necessarily express a distinguishing property of the referent. Such a (so-called) restrictive clause, actually a non-restrictive clause, is so completely integrated into the narrative and the intonation of the main sentence that it falsely appears to be restrictive.

These examples of integrated relative clauses in that sense are not truly restrictive:

 * "The father who had planned my life to the point of my unsought arrival in Brighton took it for granted that in the last three weeks of his legal guardianship I would still act as he directed."
 * "He sounded like the clergyman [that] he was."
 * (The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language)

When the "restrictive" relative clause is removed from either of the above sentences, the antecedent ("the father" and "the clergyman") is not placed in question. In the first example, for instance, there is no suggestion that the narrator has two fathers because the relative clause does not express a distinguishing property of the subject. Instead, the relative clause is integrated but is not truly restrictive.

That or which for non-human antecedents
The distinction between the relative pronouns that and which to introduce restrictive relative clauses with non-human antecedents is a frequent point of dispute.

For clarity, we can look at the case of non-human antecedents using the previous example:
 * 1) The building company, which erects very fine houses, will make a large profit. (non-restrictive)
 * 2) The building company that (or which) erects very fine houses will make a large profit. (restrictive)

Of the two, it is consensus that only which is commonly used in non-restrictive clauses.

Equivalently, the two cases would be applied where the statements are logically:
 * 1) "which", non-restrictive: (The building company erects very fine houses) AND (The building company will make a large profit).
 * 2) "that", restrictive: (The building company erects very fine houses) IMPLIES (The building company will make a large profit).

The dispute concerns restrictive clauses. Both that and which are commonly used. However, for "polished" prose, many American style guides, such as the 16th edition of The Chicago Manual of Style, recommend generally avoiding which in restrictive relative clauses. This prescriptive "rule" was proposed as early as 1851 by Goold Brown. It was championed in 1926 by H. W. Fowler, who said: "If writers would agree to regard that as the defining [restrictive] relative pronoun, and which as the non-defining, there would be much gain both in lucidity and in ease. There are some who follow this principle now, but it would be idle to pretend that it is the practice either of most or of the best writers." Linguists, according to Stanford linguist Arnold Zwicky, generally regard the proposed rule on not using which in restrictive relative clauses as "a really silly idea".

Which cannot correctly be replaced by that in a restrictive relative clause when the relative pronoun is the object of a non-stranded (or non-dangling) preposition. In this case which is used, as in "We admired the skill with which she handled the situation." (The example is taken from The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language.)

Zero relative pronoun
English, unlike other West Germanic languages, has a zero relative pronoun (denoted below as Ø)—that is, the relative pronoun is implied and not explicitly written or spoken; it is "unvoiced". This measure is used in restrictive relative clauses (only) as an alternative to voicing that, which or who, whom, etc. in these clauses:

 * Jack built the house that I was born in;
 * Jack built the house Ø I was born in;

 * He is the person whom I saw;
 * He is the person Ø I saw.

In other words, the word "that" (or "who" or "which", etc.) as a relative clause connector is optional when it would not be the subject of the relative clause; even when it would be required in other languages.

The zero relative pronoun cannot be the subject of the verb in the relative clause; that is, that or who, etc., cannot be omitted (unvoiced) if the zero pronoun would be a subject. Thus one may say:

 * Jack built the house that sits on the hill;
 * She is the one who encouraged me;

but never (except in some varieties of colloquial English):
 * *Jack built the house Ø sits on the hill;
 * *She is the one Ø encouraged me.

Neither the unvoiced zero pronoun nor that can be used in non-restrictive relative clauses (that is, yes: "Jack, who builds houses, built the house she lives in", but never: "Jack, that builds houses, built … "), nor in any relative clause with a fronted preposition (yes: "Jack built the house in which we live", but never: "Jack built the house in that we live"). But either can be used when the preposition is stranded, or dangled, ("Jack built the house that we live in," or "Jack built the house we live in.")

Relative clauses headed by zeros are frequently called contact clauses in TEFL contexts, and may also be called "zero clauses".

(If that is analyzed as a complementizer rather than as a relative pronoun the above sentences would be represented differently: Jack built the house that I was born in Ø; Jack built the house I was born in Ø; He is the person I saw Ø.

'What' relative pronoun
Some varieties of English use what as a relative pronoun. For example, in Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, a Ravager says, "For it is a name what strikes fear into the hearts of anyone what hears it."

What as a relative pronoun appeared on the front-page of United Kingdom newspaper The Sun on 11 April 1992 in the headline "It's The Sun Wot Won It."

Standard Englishes proscribe the use of what as a relative pronoun, preferring who or that.

Relative pronoun as the object of a preposition
A relative pronoun often appears as the object of a preposition, both in restrictive and non-restrictive clauses, as in
 * "Jack is the boy with whom Jenny fell in love."

or
 * "Yesterday, Jenny met Jack, for whom she no longer has any feelings."

It is not unusual to place the preposition at the end of the relative clause, while the relative pronoun that it governs is placed at the beginning of the clause or omitted, so
 * "Jack is the boy that Jenny fell in love with."

is also possible. A preposition is never placed in front of the relative pronoun that, but preposition stranding is possible when there is an explicit that, or when the relative pronoun representing the object of the clause is omitted. So
 * "Jack is the boy that Jenny fell in love with."

and
 * "Jack is the boy Jenny fell in love with."

are possible but
 * *"Jack is the boy with that Jenny fell in love."

is ungrammatical.

Such preposition-stranding is perfectly grammatical and has been used by the best writers for centuries, though it was, in the past, criticized by prescriptivist grammarians as being either ungrammatical or informal.

The grammatical case of a relative pronoun governed by a preposition is the same as when it is the direct object of a verb: typically the objective case. When the relative pronoun follows the preposition, the objective case is required, as in
 * "Jack is the boy with whom Jenny fell in love."

while
 * *"Jack is the boy with who Jenny fell in love"

is ungrammatical. In the case of the construction with a stranded preposition, however, the subjective form (e.g. "who") is commonly used, as in
 * "Jack is the boy who Jenny fell in love with."

especially in informal style. Use of the objective case with a stranded preposition, as in
 * "Jack is the boy whom Jenny fell in love with."

is somewhat rare, but occasionally found, even in informal style.

Summary
Variations may be encountered in the spoken and informal English, but the most common distribution of the forms of pronouns in relative clauses follows:

That as relativizer instead of relative pronoun
The word that, when used in the way described above, has been classified as a relative pronoun; however, according to some linguists it ought to be analyzed instead as a subordinating conjunction or relativizer. This is consistent with that used as a conjunction in (I said that I was tired), or implied in (I said I was tired).

According to Rodney Huddleston and Geoffrey Pullum, that is not a relative pronoun but a subordinator, and its analysis requires a relativized symbol R as in (The film that I needed [R] is not obtainable). Here R is the covert direct object of the verb "needed" and has "the film" as an antecedent. A similar analysis is required when that is omitted and implied, as in (The film I needed is not obtainable).

There are some grammatical differences between that and the (other) relative pronouns: that is limited to restrictive relative clauses, and it cannot be preceded with a preposition. There are also similarities between the (purported) relative pronoun that and the ordinary conjunction that: the weak pronunciation is (almost invariably) used in both cases, and both of them are frequently omitted as implied.

Fused relative constructions
English allows what is called a free, fused or nominal relative construction. This kind of relative construction consists of a relative clause that instead of attaching to an external antecedent—and modifying it as an external noun phrase—is "fused" with it; and thus a nominal function is "fused" into the resultant 'construction'. For example:

 * What he did was clearly impossible.

Here "What he did" has the same sense as "the things that he did", or "the thing that he did". Thus the noun phrase the thing and the relative pronoun that are 'fused' into what; and the resulting relative construction "What he did" functions as the subject of the verb was. Free relative constructions are inherently restrictive.

English has a number of "fusible" relative pronouns that initiate relative constructions, including what, whatever and whoever. But these pronouns introduce other clauses as well; what can introduce interrogative content clauses ("I do not know what he did") and both whatever and whoever can introduce adverbials ("Whatever he did, he does not deserve this"). See -ever.

Nonfinite relative clauses
Some non-finite clauses, including infinitive and participial clauses, may also function as relative clauses. These include:
 * infinitive clauses containing an 'explicit' relative pronoun (argument)—generally, but not always, fronted with a preposition—that takes an antecedent to that 'explicit' argument: She is a woman whom to beat; He is the man on whom to rely. (The infinitive verbs are 'to beat' and 'to rely'; the antecedents are 'woman' and 'man', respectively.)
 * infinitive clauses presenting an 'implied' (and unvoiced) relative pronoun, or zero object argument, that takes an antecedent to that 'implied' argument: She is a woman to beat Ø; He is the man to rely on Ø.
 * infinitive clauses modifying the subject of the infinitive verb: She is the person to save the company.
 * present participle clauses having an unvoiced zero subject argument that takes an antecedent to the argument: The man Ø sitting on the bank was fishing. (These clauses are the least likely to be recognized as relative clauses.)
 * past participle clauses having an unvoiced zero object argument that takes an antecedent to the argument: The body found Ø here yesterday has now been identified. (This is the "reduced object passive relative clause"; see.

For further examples see.

Adverbials
Some adverbial clauses can function as relative clauses, including:
 * clauses modifying a noun, with the adverb explicit or implied (and normally replaceable by a relative clause ): Here's the place  I live, that is, Here's the place [where] I live ("Here's the place in which I live "). Or: This is the reason we did it, that is, This is the reason [why] we did it ("This is the reason for which we did it ").
 * clauses functioning analogously to free relative clauses, but in an adverbial role: I won't hide where you hide. Or: I'll do it how you do it, or I'll do it however you do it. Additionally, in a structure more related to the normal free relative clause, examples such as I see how you do it. Or: I saw where he went.

Gapless relative clauses
Relative clauses in English usually have gapping. For example, in the sentence "This is the man that I saw", there is a gap after the word saw. The shared noun phrase the man is understood to fill that gap ("I saw [the man]"). However, gapless relative clauses occur in non-standard English. One form of gapless relatives uses a resumptive pronoun. In a 1990 article, Ellen Prince observed that such constructions were common in spoken English but are officially ungrammatical. For example:

 * They were just towed across the Midway onto the bridle path, where they were just sitting there peacefully

In this case, removing the underlined resumptive pronoun results in an acceptable gapped relative clause:

 * They were just towed across the Midway onto the bridle path, where they were just sitting ___ peacefully

In other cases, the resumptive pronoun is used to work around a syntactic constraint:

 * They have a billion dollars of inventory that they don't know where it is.

In this example, the word it occurs as part of a wh-island. Attempting to extract it gives an unacceptable result:

 * *They have a billion dollars of inventory that they don't know where ___ is.

Gapless relative clauses may also occur without a resumptive pronoun:

 * a book that you wish the author was a terrific friend of yours

title: English relative clauses


text:
Palo Duro Records

Palo Duro Records is an independent record label established in 2001 to focus primarily on Texas-based singer-songwriters and bands. The label specializes in musical styles from the Americana, country music, alternative country and Texas music genres.

Artists featured on the roster include The Derailers, Jon Christopher Davis, Trent Summar & The New Row Mob, Ed Burleson, Brian Burns, Eleven Hundred Springs, Morrison-Williams, Two Tons of Steel, Walt Wilkins, Tommy Alverson and Dale Watson. The label has also launched a music series, Texas Unplugged, which features original acoustic recordings by a variety of artists.

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

title: Palo Duro Records


text:
Talk:Nassau, Bahamas

Comments
This article, Nassau, should be Nassau, Bahamas.

Nassau (state) should be Nassau as it is the oldest origin of all Nassau references, with a link to Nassau (disambiguation).

No, policy says it should be the most commonly used name - so Nassau, Bahamas should get this name. Guettarda 21:09, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thats not NPOV. It may be common where you are, if I say "Nassau" where I am, 100% of the people (about 15 000 000) will think of the House of Orange-Nassau, not of Nassau, Bahamas. If I say the same in Germany, even more people will think of Nassau (state) first. 217.121.144.89 21:08, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * Policy says that most common use of the name in English should get the name, or, if you have some conflict about what the most commonly used name is, then you make it the disambiguation page. The overwhelming majority of links to Nassau are for Nassau, Bahamas. And 15 million isn't that much. Even on the German Wikipedia it's a disambiguation page. Guettarda 13:19, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 * I reverted this back to a redirect to Nassau, Bahamas. I think that article should eventually be moved here. If you still disagree, let me know and I will list this page at RfC.
 * From Naming convention: Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize, with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature. Guettarda 21:14, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I know this issue was officially settled in favor of disambiguation, but when you search "Nassau" in English-language Google, the Wikipedia entry for Nassau, Bahamas is the first result. Isn't this a very strong indicator that Nassau, Bahamas is what most English speakers associate with Nassau?

My two unsolicited cents not intended to invoke any WP policy: I'm American and for me "Nassau" has always held an association with Bahamas. It's also very silly to me that a direct link to Nassau, Bahamas, was assaulted for being Amerocentric in the same argument suggesting that a search for "Nassau" gives Nassau, Bahamas and House of Nassau equal weight. "Amerocentric" -- or "America-centric," as per the discussion -- is a pretty coded term insofar as it implies a certain hegemonic bias. Nassau, Bahamas is over 90 percent black, a population with ancestral routes to freed slaves; the House of Nassau is a white German dynasty and indeed the colony of Nassau's namesake. I'm no P.C. Principal raging against a pervasive conspiracy to whitewash Wikipedia or whatever all those thinkpieces a while back were on about, but I can't be the only one who sees strong irony and a pseudoacademic tango around the history of colonialism in the argument for disambiguation. EmDoubleEweEl (talk) 18:01, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

I was reviewing the "In Popular Culture" section to try to find citations for the three statements in need of citations in reference to the book, Blood and Fire by John Marquis. I wasn't able to verify the existence of any of the reviews mentioned in this section and I suspect they don't exist. They only appear as quotes on the author's personal website. I would suggest that this section be removed. Skheraj (talk) 9:04pm, 17 January 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 2005

 * The following discussion is closed. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The capital city of present-day independent nation should get primary topic disambiguation; nothing on the disambiguation page (currently, Nassau) comes close. The related move Nassau → Nassau (disambiguation) would also be necessary. –Hajor 01:21, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * This discussion is really not necessary. Even if the current Nassau was moved to Nassau (disambiguation), no one would ever type such a search. Already based on technicalities, "Nassau" would ultimately have to lead to "Nassau (disambiguation)". Gryffindor  13:00, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Add *Support or *Oppose followed by an optional one sentence explanation, then sign your vote with ~

 * Propose and support. –Hajor 01:21, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I oppose this move. I do not believe that Nassau, Bahamas predominates over either Hesse-Nassau or Nassau County, New York, much less both of them, for most English-speakers. Leave the dab where it is. Septentrionalis 01:18, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Support - it most definitely does predominate over the other uses in English. Guettarda 02:50, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose, Nassau is best as a disambig page, as it is now. --Angr/undefined 08:27, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Nassau, Bahamas is further down the list when I personally think of "Nassau". Support current disambig. Olessi 19:33, 13 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Sorry no offence but this is utterly unnecessary. When I hear "Nassau" I certainly don't think of Bahamas first. It would be like renaming Paris, Texas → Paris. Gryffindor  01:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Support It's the capital of the Bahamas. --Revolución (talk) 04:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Support what Revolución said. No Account 17:09, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The Duchy of Nassau would be my first association with the name. Eugene van der Pijll 23:40, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter what your first "association" with the name would be. Nassau is the capital of the Bahamas and thus has more importance than any province, county, duchy, or whatever. --Revolución (talk) 00:00, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * It matters what a majority of people expect to see on the page. I'm just one data point. I disagree that the capital city of any country is more important than any historical state. When many people disagree on which subject is the most important, the best idea is to have a disambiguation page here. If I was the only one opposing, my opinion would, indeed, not matter. Eugene van der Pijll 16:10, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * I completely agree with User:Eugene van der Pijll. To rename this into Nassau is america-centric thinking. So what if it's the capital, there are plenty of other "Nassau" to oppose this move. Gryffindor  18:20, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Support Nassau is the capital of the independent state and as such it's more important than the other uses.  Grue   11:36, 21 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose the disambig page is perfect as it is - renaming would be America-centric as well as a-historic. And as there are different opinons, a disambig page is a very good way to get around without having to decide what "the real Nassau" is, aka NPOV. --Reinhard 16:21, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually to rename this would not be America-centric, but Anglo-centric (Anglo meaning in this sense English language). Nassau to most English speakers would mean the capital of the Bahamas, and this is English Wiki after all, not German or Dutch Wiki. Note: this is not a view to support move. Mark
 * Oppose. AFAIC, both the Bahama and German-related articles are roughly equal in significance and hence neither should get primary topic designation. older≠wiser 17:03, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. – Axman ( ☏ ) 05:39, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Leave as is. Mark 11:00, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Even German Wikipedia doesn't prioritise German Nassau - it's a disambig page. And Nassau/Bahamas' prominence in English is enough to prioritise it. Rd232 talk 14:33, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Discussion
One comment: from the discussion above (and perhaps Guettarda can confirm) the Bahamian capital appears to have been here at Nassau in the not-so-distant past.

And one query: Septentrionalis brings up both Hesse-Nassau or Nassau County, New York. According to our article naming policies, neither of those would be eligible for the coveted undisambiguated Nassau; at the most, they might get a redirect, like San Francisco redirects to San Francisco, California. The query is something that occurred to me in the recent discussion over moving Windsor to Windsor, Berkshire, and it goes something like this: "In deciding primary topic disambiguation, does the fact that an article's natural location, per naming conventions, would place it at the undisambigged location give it any degree of precedence over rivals that, per conventions, would not normally get that location?" –Hajor 01:37, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Nassau, Bahamas was at Nassau for a long time - and anon moved it, saying that the German state of Nassau (historical state) was older, so should have the dominant name. I changed it to a redirect back to the the Bahamian capital. Someone later changed it to a dab page.  Guettarda 02:50, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Is this all in one request then, along with the old september entry for switching Nassau and Nassau (disambiguation)? Ryan Norton T 03:19, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Note that the page Nassau, Bahamas was moved to Nassau using a cut&paste move. Regardless of whether the move is justified by the vote above, the page should only be moved by the proper procedure (which can only be done by an admin). I've reverted three pages to the version before this move (Nassau, Bahamas, Nassau, and Nassau (disambiguation)). I believe this has corrected the situation. Edits after October 14 to any of these pages have been lost, unfortunately. Eugene van der Pijll 23:39, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

 * This is ridiculous. I just looked at what German town are you talking about and it has the population of (drum roll) 5000! To suggest it has the same importance as the capital of the independent nation is extreme POV. This is as stupid as Georgia (country) not being at Georgia.  Grue   06:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

 * You're right, the German town isn't all that important. It is the historical state of Nassau that has at least the same importance as Nassau, Bahamas. Eugene van der Pijll 11:07, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

 * Yes but I don't quite understand your point then. I totally agree with you that the country of Georgia should be named "Georgia", while the U.S. state should be renamed into something different. But then you want the Bahamas Nassau, which is actually named after the dynasty or a person from there, who in turn are named after the county/duchy, which in turn is named after the castle and the original town in Germany, to have precedence over all the other ones? Sorry, that just makes no sense, based on what criterias are you making your point? Gryffindor  09:42, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Based on the importance to the world as a whole. How anything is named is irrelevant. Dollar is named after some obscure German coin as well, but it is much more important.  Grue   10:06, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Based on the importance in the world? That's completely a POV, Wikipedia should try to remain neutral. ps: btw, the dollar comes from Taler, which was anything but "obscure". Gryffindor  23:16, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Revert
Anyone else notice how this article shrank insanely? Pilotguy I think needs to explain his reverting here... I can see that the article pre revert could be considered an advert/not notable, but I want to hear it from Pilotguy on what was wrong with the article so maybe we can fix it. Galactor213 16:29, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

From comparing PilotGuy's version with the previous version, it looks to me like he removed a lot of content he considered commercial. Lots of it does read like advertising copy. However, some of that info could certainly be rewritten so that it doesn't have that bias. Karen Joslin 13:08, 31 August 2006

"The city has a population of 365,9284 (2005 census), nearly 70 percent of the entire population of the Bahamas (303,611). " This math doesn't work out right on my calculator.

A picture of the central portion of the Atlantis resort is NOT representative of the Nassau skyline. Nassau has a beautiful skyline without lying and cheating. The old Colonial Hilton is spectacular. Atlantis is on the old island called Goat Island until the developers ruined it and renamed it. And don't ever forget, The Bahamas are NOT in the Caribbean!

"The" Bahamas
Should the title read "Nassau, The Bahamas"? The The Bahamas page is titled "The Bahamas" and the CIA World Factbook titles its page "Bahamas, The"  I think the "the" is part of the name. What does anyone else think? link title

That is correct. The official name of the country is "The Commonwealth of The Bahamas", aka "Islands of The Bahamas", "The Bahama Islands", (note, no "s" on Bahama in this use) or "The Bahamas". Use of the term "Bahamas" without the "The" is actually incorrect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.75.121.18 (talk) 19:53, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Also, the picture is actually of Paradise Island, not New Providence which is the location of Nassau. Although connected to Nassau by a bridge, Paradise Island is a separate island and the image should probably be of Nassau or New Providence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.75.121.18 (talk) 19:56, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Also, I am going to make a revision of the last sentence in the opening paragraph. --Gree6021 05:17, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

New Providence links to New Jersey, not New Providence Island in the Bahamas
You might want to fix that. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.14.248.62 (talk) 15:57, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Travel Info
Here are a few tips for those traveling to Nassau Bahamas. Nassau has the most unbelievably beautiful ocean I have ever seen. First of all if your not rich stay away from Paradise Island when it comes to eating or sleeping. I suggest Orange Hill Beach Inn, it's out of the way of the Americanized area of Paradise Island. Pick one of the many hotels on Nassau. Be sure to eat at the fish fry under the bridge connecting Paradise Island and Nassau. There are many little stands that sell food, don't be afraid to try the food, it's great. Also be sure to go to Twin Brothers restaurant and have a daiquiri, there the best. The people of the Bahamas are extremely nice, talk to them. If you need help with something or need info ask them but be sure to say hello before asking for something. On the weekends the locals hang out on the beech in Nassau,not paradise island, and party: Join in.If you like to gamble but know your not going to win then try one of the two casinos. One of which is in Atlantis, on Paradise Island, and the other smaller casino on the main island of Nassau. Remember in the Bahamas they don't have the gaming and gambling laws that most industrialised countries have. Just like any where else there are people you should be wary of. Be cautious of the taxis you get into and the people your exchanging money with. The people of the Bahamas work hard and need your money to survive. The straw market is a good example of this. If you can't handle people trying to get you to buy something then don't go in, it can be very frustrating. Most of the things in the markets are the same at each vendor and some are not authentic items of the Bahamas so be sure you know what your buying. Bargain, bargain, bargain, don't take the first offer from the markets or from taxis. Don't get into a taxi unless you already set a price for your destination. If your not in a hurry take the bus system. The fairly quick contractors of the public transportation will save you lots of money. They charge a dollar to anywhere, but run on routes. (If your going to Orange Hill Beach Inn it may be a bit more). Find the guy's renting jet ski's and para-sailing and do it, it's awesome. Do anything with Stuarts Cove. Let me suggest snorkeling with sharks, trust me it's safe and unforgettable. Last but not least take the Fast Ferry for a day trip to Harbour Island and rent a golf cart and explore this true paradise. When your at the beach in Harbour Island give your eyes a second to adjust as you realize the sand is pink. Harbour Island has the most extraordinary sand. I've been to my share of relaxing beach destinations and so far Nassau Bahamas is the top of the cake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.9.243.48 (talk • contribs) 04:22, 16 September 2008
 * Please read WP:NOT and WP:NOTADVERTISING: "Bear in mind that talk pages exist for the purpose of discussing how to improve articles; they are not mere general discussion pages about the subject of the article". "Those promoting causes or events, or issuing public service announcements, even if noncommercial, should use a forum other than Wikipedia to do so." Afv2006 (talk) 08:03, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Demographics
I came to this page to find out the demographics of Nassau, but found very little. In particular, what is the percentage breakdown between the white and black populations? Anybody know? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.43.30 (talk) 16:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

Square Kilometers
I know there is no local government, but how large is the federal district of New Providence in square kilometers of which the city would be municipaly coterminus with? --Criticalthinker (talk) 05:12, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

History
"Lord Dunmore governed the colony from 1787 to 1796 and oversaw the construction of Fort Charlotte in Nassau.

Ardastra Gardens, Zoo and Conservation Centre was opened in 1982 and was the first zoo in The Bahamas. It had previously been a botanical garden since 1937."

Is there really no history between 1796 and 1982?

(Will Hambling 20:39, 23 May 2010 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Will.hambling (talk • contribs)

Copied content?
The contents of the paragraph titled "Over-The-Hill" is basically identical to the article Bain town - Its early history by Gail Saunders, The Nassau Guardian, May 05, 2005. It was added here on this edit (omitting the last few lines of the original for unknown reason). I suppose this may be considered a breach of copyrights and should be checked carefully. Amnon s (talk) 12:48, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Skyline photo
I think the photo of the skyline is a bit misleading as it's just a picture of the Atlantis Resort, which is actually across the bay on Paradise Island. I will be there next month and try to get a better picture of the city from the bay looking in toward Bay Street.199.76.171.153 (talk) 18:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I also feel that the Atlantis Resort photo is inappropriate for use as the lead image for this article, which clearly states that Nassau lies on the island of New Providence. The Atlantis Resort lies not on the island of New Providence, but on Paradise Island.  The two islands are distinctly separate, linked only by an elevated roadway which spans the harbor between the two.  Nassau was a vibrant city long before Atlantis showed up. A photo of the downtown area and/or the buildings therein would be a better lead image.  - TampAGS (talk) 10:34, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Official link doesn't work
The Official link is broken. LOL-117 (talk) 19:38, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't know what the problem is. Let's give it a day or two to see if the problem is fixed. -- Donald Albury 21:17, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

The infobox
The infobox on this page is just appearing as text at the top of the page. I'm new so I don't feel qualified trying to fix it myself. Ialangford (talk) 21:03, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Requested move 2014

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

The result of the move request was: Page not moved: no consensus for this move Ground Zero | t 12:35, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

– Obvious primary topic. There is nothing of note on the disambiguation page that is anything but a partial title match except for the historic German city/duchy/area (population: 5,209; pageviews: 529 a month; historical impact: minimal - stats for the duchy are not much different) or the capital of the Bahamas (population: 248,948; pageviews: 28,476 a month; historical impact: highly significant). I daresay that if a capital city in a country full of white people had a quarter of a million people and was far more commonly referred to in academic sources (as compared to just about anything else), it would get primary topic over a smaller if very historic area in an island country. But the Bahamian city currently doesn't, and I'm forced to wonder why. Let's fix this problem of WP:SYSTEMICBIAS, Wikipedia. Over 2,000 people a month are delayed from finding out information by getting to this disambiguation page instead of the page that both common sense and pageview statistics tell us that they want. Red Slash 18:41, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Nassau, Bahamas → Nassau
 * Nassau → Nassau (disambiguation)
 * Support. Would be constructive to see page views from all the other articles on the disambig page, but I'm confident this is the WP:PRIMARYTOPIC. Zarcadia (talk) 03:26, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support - Seems to be the primary topic. IJA (talk) 11:10, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose. "Nassau rhineland" is a bizarre search string that suggests you don't know what you're doing. The original Nassau, and its dynasty, are quite important in European history. I could possibly be convinced to support this move, but not by what the nominator presents. Srnec (talk) 12:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Do you have a better suggestion? Red Slash 00:11, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Better suggestion for what? Srnec (talk) 00:23, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * What to search for? Red Slash 03:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment @Srnec - The article about the very small town of 5,000 people "Nassau, Rhineland-Palatinate" will not be affected by this move, nor will the articles "Duchy of Nassau" and "House of Nassau". When one simply talks about "Nassau", it is most often about the city in the Bahamas. As a historian, I've never come across someone refer to the Dynasty or the Duchy as just "Nassau"; when one talks about the Duchy and Dynasty, one would use the full name "Duchy of Nassau" and "House of Nassau". When one talks about "Nassau" on its own, in the vast majority of cases it is referring to the capital city of the Bahamas. "Nassau" on its own is the primary topic for the capital of the Bahamas. IJA (talk) 13:14, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. There are lots of things named Nassau. A county in New York, a city in the Bahamas, a town in the Rhineland, a US Navy ship, a Dutch ruling dynasty, a medieval and early modern German state, and all the famous people called "of Nassau". Does the Bahamian city predominate over all of these? Maybe on the internet. But I suspect there only. Srnec (talk) 00:23, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Everything you just named besides the cities (and possibly the state) would be a partial title match. Red Slash 03:40, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support I agree the the modern capital city is the primary meaning for "Nassau", and that it does not need "Bahamas" added to know what we are talking about. --MelanieN (talk) 00:13, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Weak Oppose per Smec, the House of Nassau is prominent, and historical antecedant namesake to the New England locations. -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 06:05, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. The issue here is the primary meaning of the word "Nassua", not what titles it is contained in when other words are added. bd2412  T 14:38, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Clearly everyone knows that Nassau is the primary topic and not the city in the Bahamas. In any case, this proposal claims a primary topic without really showing that it is the primary topic when compared to all of the other Nassaus. The partial title match is nothing but a red herring since most of the topics ignored by this claim are better know only as Nassau.  In fact, this claim rules out Nassau, Bahamas from consideration as the primary topic. Vegaswikian (talk) 21:05, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Is this meant as sarcasm? The county?? Red Slash 13:51, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment @ Vegaswikian - The County in New York is called "Nassau County" not "Nassau". IJA (talk) 18:23, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * The common name is Nassau. Thinking that everything listed on the dab page is by common name is patently false. As a result any arguments based on that are simply void. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:02, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * @ User:Vegaswikian - Have you any evidence that that the county's common name is soley "Nassau" on its own and not "Nassau County"? Because on google books I get 108 results for "Nassau New York" and 805,000 for "Nassau County". IJA (talk) 10:39, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Yea, we can do the digging. Books tend to be formal.  When people in NYC say they are going to Nassau, they generally mean the county.  They don't say Nassau County.  In fact if you take a survey you will find this through out the US.  Do you say you are going to San Fransisco or San Fransisco County? Vegaswikian (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

 * Weak Oppose. Nassau County has been viewed 12000 times last month and has a much larger population.  If it was just that in opposition, I'd agree with the move (or at least changing the redirect), but the historic house of Europe seems relevant as well.  I will say that I'm in favor of rigging the current Nassau Disambiguation page to have the most important & frequent usages on top rather than forcing users to browse through the 'directory', so Nassau, Bahamas; Nassau County; & the House of Nassau should be the first 3 links, followed by everything else. SnowFire (talk) 22:17, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment @ User:SnowFire - Your examples for opposition are all null and void per Partial Title Match. None of the examples you have given, go soley by the name "Nassau" unlike the capital city of the Bahamas. IJA (talk) 10:39, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * This was already discussed above. I don't find the argument convincing.  Specifically, PTM is about entries that don't deserve to be on a disambiguation page despite partially matching the title, e.g. specific Zoos at Zoo (disambiguation).  Are you seriously claiming that you think Nassau County / House of Nassau / etc. should all be removed from the disambiguation page (wherever it ends up)?  If not, then PTM is irrelevant, since you agree they're all entities a reader who typed "Nassau" might be interested in... SnowFire (talk) 14:32, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

 * But anyone who looks for (say) the county would type in Nassau County. Most people looking for the big city called "Nassau" would indeed search for it through Nassau. Red Slash 13:53, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

 * Oppose - There is no clear primary topic right now. For historical significance, "Nassau" is German and has always been, and House of Nassau has been historically significant. For popularity, Bahamas? New York? Currently, no one realizes German connections and ancestry to "Nassau", and were Germans in Bahamas? --George Ho (talk) 16:37, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It's named after William III, Prince of Nassau. —innotata 01:57, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose Definitely no clear primary topic, and if anything I would say it was the German region based on historical significance. It's silly to claim systemic bias when we're talking about a high-income North American country that's a popular tourist destination, and when there's no evidence for anything of the sort. —innotata 01:57, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The German state and royal houses are just as significant historically. They would certainly be my first thought if the name Nassau was mentioned. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:43, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Nassau, Bahamas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20130506135259/http://www.populstat.info/Americas/bahamasp.htm/IMG/pdf/ENG_CR_rencontre_debat.pdf to http://www.populstat.info/Americas/bahamasp.htm/IMG/pdf/ENG_CR_rencontre_debat.pdf

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

Cheers. —cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 07:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Nassau, Bahamas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100629070907/http://www.detroitmi.gov/DepartmentsandAgencies/SisterCitiesProgram/tabid/710/Default.aspx to http://www.detroitmi.gov/DepartmentsandAgencies/SisterCitiesProgram/tabid/710/Default.aspx

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 00:27, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Nassau, Bahamas. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170610051823/http://thebahamasguide.com/islands/new-providence/history-of-new-providence/ to http://thebahamasguide.com/islands/new-providence/history-of-new-providence/
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20170610051823/http://thebahamasguide.com/islands/new-providence/history-of-new-providence/ to http://thebahamasguide.com/islands/new-providence/history-of-new-providence/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:07, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

Public Security, crime, corruption, and appearance of the city
I discovered that major parts article are simply unsourced marketing ... after I visited, and found the reality to deviate dramatically from the portrayal here. Good sources for the conditions and problems of real-life Nassau are plentiful, and so I've begun improving this article with a new Public Securty section under demographics.

I plan to continue by replacing unsourced marketing material with well sourced information.

Dogweather (talk) 09:13, 1 March 2018 (UTC)

Could use a map showing Nassau's location in the Carribean
The map of the Bahamas is too close up, while the map of North America is too far out. Thanks.CountMacula (talk) 15:39, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Local government
It should probably be mentioned at least under a "Government" section that Nassau doesn't have an associated local government, and is administered by the national government. It should also be mentioned, too, that if there is some organ/department of the national government that administers the city, which on that is. Of course, these need sources, and I trust the Bahamians or others who add this information to properly source their information. --Criticalthinker (talk) 23:51, 5 September 2019 (UTC)

History section revision - a question
I've word-smithed some of the History section to make it read a little better. I am puzzled by this phrase renamed to Nassau in honour of the Dutch Stadtholder (stadhouder in Dutch) - perhaps someone can edit to make it clearer what is happening here. Bdushaw (talk) 20:27, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Without digging into whatever source was used for that statement, I though it was a reference to William III of England, who was stadtholder of Holland, Zeeland, Utrecht, Guelders and Overijssel, and a member of the House of Orange-Nassau, but William did not become King of England until 1689, five years before this article says the settlement name was changed. Unfortunately, I have loaned my copies of histories of the Bahamas to my sister, and can't check them on this. - Donald Albury 22:14, 21 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes, I misinterpreted what was written before. I've looked through the sundry articles on William II, Nassau, the stadtholder, etc. and revised the text of this article to correct my error in interpretation.  Its hopefully OK now. Bdushaw (talk) 14:12, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

frequent wars with the Spanish?
The article uses this phrase, "frequent wars with the Spanish", to describe the situation in the 1680s. But the article on Raid on Charles Town describes a different situation, viz. Charles Town had authorized privateering, as perhaps required for defense, even though England and Spain were not at war. Charles Town had in essence brought the Raid upon themselves...but the article is missing these nuances. "frequent wars with the Spanish" is missing the mark... Bdushaw (talk) 11:16, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * There were indeed "frequent wars" between England and Spain (and France) in the late 17th and early 18th centuries. The Spanish, sometimes in league with the French, attacked settlements in the Bahamas several times. See History of the Bahamas. - Donald Albury 13:19, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Sister cities
Three of the sister cities listed in the article do not appear to be sister cities. Either the agreement finished or this has been added erroneously. Wanganui's own website does not list Nassau, nor does Acapulco, and sistercity.info appears to contradict it. Is it safe to remove these?

Asimoth (talk) 04:23, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

 * If there is no currently valid reliable source cited in the article for a sister city relationaship, and you have made a good faith search and not found reliable sources for the relationship, then you can remove them. I might add that I find this sort of thing every once in a while, and remove cities from lists of sister cities if the relationship cannot be verified. - Donald Albury 13:09, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 25 February 2022
<div class="boilerplate" style="background-color: #efe; margin: 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px dotted #aaa;">
 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) 🐶 EpicPupper (he/him | talk) 18:47, 11 March 2022 (UTC)

Nassau, Bahamas → Nassau, The Bahamas – The name of the country is undoubtedly "The Bahamas", with the definite article. This does not seem to have been discussed before: the previous RMs focuses on whether the city is the primary topic for "Nassau". There was no consensus for that move, but if we have "Bahamas" in the article title, we should have "The". StAnselm (talk) 05:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. – I would like to see more participation, as this would also lead to more RMs on other Bahamas articles. Skarmory  (talk •   contribs)  06:34, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

 * Comment – There's a bunch of other pages that are titled "[X], Bahamas" that should also probably be included in this requested move. Paintspot Infez (talk) 05:51, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose per WP:COMMONNAME. The Google Ngrams show that the current title is the most common usage in English sources. Rreagan007 (talk) 18:20, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * It makes no sense to refer it as the common name here if it isn’t in the primary page of the country article. Just my thoughts here. I think we need a consistent title for all the pages at least. Jhenderson  7 7 7  04:06, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Well I disagree. There is nothing contradictory with "The Bahamas" being the most common way to refer to the island nation, but "Nassau, Bahamas" being the most common way to refer to the city. Rreagan007 (talk) 18:48, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Meh! I need more proof that that really is the common name to drop the “the” to make a verdict myself than just a Google Ngram. But that could be applied for the main page having the “The” on there probably even more so. Since adding adding that seems to be frowned on.  Jhenderson  7 7 7  19:01, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Okay well if you're not convinced by the Google Ngrams that's fine, but I find it to be convincing evidence. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:21, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

<div style="padding-left: 1.6em; font-style: italic; border-top: 1px solid #a2a9b1; margin: 0.5em 0; padding-top: 0.5em">The discussion above is closed. <b style="color: #FF0000;">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
 * Oppose per Rreagan007. --User:Khajidha (talk) (contributions) 16:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * While "The" belongs in the main article like with the Beatles songs I think we can drop it with disambiguators to be more concise, see Category:The Beatles songs.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:47, 4 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose per others in Category:Populated places in the Bahamas unless we have a mass nom for all of them but as noted I think we're OK to drop "The" from qualifiers.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:23, 6 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Oppose per Rreagan007 and Crouch, Swale. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:04, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

(Land) Area in Infobox
Given that there is not municipal government for the settlement, what is the source for the area (207 sq km) given in the infobox? If it's some kind of official statistical measurement, then a source needs to be cited. If none can be found, then the "area" is not relevant to be listed in the infobox. Criticalthinker (talk) 01:38, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

 * Britannica gives the same area and population figures for Nassau and for New Providence, which are the same as the figures in our Nassau article. The article should indicate that Nassau, as defined in the article, is coterminous with New Providence. An official source for the area of New Providence is here (page v}. I'll add that to the inforbox. The same source (page 11) names 25 "supervisory districts" for New Providence, none of which is named "Nassau". Donald Albury 16:34, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Boundaries of Nassau
I have been unable to find an source on the boundaries of the city of Nassau, or for the existance of a municipal government for the city. It appears that the island of New Providence, on which Nassau is located, is governed directly by the national government. As I noted above, the official report of the 2010 census of the Bahamas lists 25 "supervisory districts" for New Providence, with populations ranging from 7,682 to 13,762, which add up to 246,329, the figure that is given for the population of Nassau and of New Providence in secondary sources and in the WP article. As none of those "supervisory districts" are called "Nassau", we have to either accept that Nassau is conterminous with New Providence, or forego listing a population (and area) for Nassau. - Donald Albury 23:41, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

 * The problem is this statement in the lead: "Today the city dominates the entire island and its satellite, Paradise Island." This implies Nassau includes both islands. Very confusing, but that's what happens when people (not you in this case) add content to articles without verifying a source for it. But we do need to make sure that what we add isn't contradicted elsewhere in the article. BilCat (talk) 23:50, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The official tourism website for the Bahamas describes "Nassau and Paradise Island" as consisting of New Providence and Paradise Island. The "islands of Bahamas" information page for New Providence (at www . bahamas . gov . bs) lists Paradise Island as a settlement "on" New Providence.[https://www.bahamas.gov.bs/wps/portal/public/About%20The%20Bahamas/The%20Islands/NEW%20PROVIDENCE/!ut/p/b1/vVfZkqJIFP2W_oBqMxMSkscUkH1PUHgxUJQSC9wQxK8f7eiJ6erpseahSjJ4IOJcDvfclVE2mo2yJu82Zd5udk3-dn_OhDkHNIdSnjgaBgIwYt-mvqgjD-IbIL0BwH9cFDyyJxM8mo5mLEUXZWf0mhGu90Fbxf0waWVH1srFWLO88WV9DWg1RWZiSuvN6cy6QjrHZ6-1WFtlXRGau9J3I3GKcndL0slubWPXtdkqM3cLab6S3CNZSsfsDfjrS5jWwFYIPs8GKnskceJEj-dwvxxsa3M2Oty-vqnGOa-ioxQfgrCi-SXSmtpZFun4YCvTrDAadQiN3nvzV0va6qem4Wm-NoNT8O3bTz0eOPxITws9tr8D_lc8_gvAg4_sp6Pso098DLhT_AA8yAlX39WrUXqDib-8hyUAGBDQMIIBICEesdEM8POoGvbGdXsNK9APJ4Uit1pCGIPB2XKxy7Rr64Yus0MD3jLHodMN9sLYcBW_SMJ4TJW-nkrL38k8xKQbmQwFK8Yg0tBXkmnYIzeFROZTjACQn0oGv4JM85xAvsvIxncZOV2ngs0RwD-TTPhUMnOUbRb1935ZfwffkQQwgYQTkAgIwqOkSvmLcjJ6lUbz7Sl984oCSMqV7lV1dgHbE2Ki7a3sfsXzRmg4KsyxdpCmtFx2TmNIlgXhcTED6yloQyFCWitvCrmHlkIqQ3oZ4nbPUjPNzvblrMTsGK10eNkv4DaK-fy1pcRJDlMDX5anFps12iRhFkKV4wYZLwtlwBUfcgzRaNDMoz_xeXbM8ZqcB6vW0kOl6gMsiw6HXUXfoNaU5KUKWL243YeLluoge_UzsurtaKLce9jDwtSsf2fUNUBM7ZGj9ldYJS5T_MCNt4NbWDBSjAHYiRGxtHfuMbka16i1f2pPX50oWjwuTnmCv5rwt5qh4pMJA_7ZhMKzCb9K0mAMgsiWOAooxsDQb4UoajEHMPdsD5-dpcKzYyh8fpa-a7qcJIkEYsLfOi-CkIwSM60lZUv7iZqtw3QlnpsVivaVmp7opqUgmsdNYWkvXcqOzXo8R552dbqSyptKr1-QOQjBNVgEWKRdU05MOV-tFno-KHtb62xPx4MzzyhLWhcviCKmzVioWbE_-vksbxzpRb7InSqPGzDnPuyKxP3DnB0ujqIid0EBWMSAxcfbNJq4ThHdxDFtyBLbEdM-Yt6F2SmICvb3RDqQJvE_WFn-NGs_l_B9-DUPPpuQe6qkmu-BL_fwXdLwwefH8F1FEUmAWCS8RATA80S87zEC_rHHqOHcTKF9Ooj7oCyNTXwyynwyrgkztrOrOSsr4gdpPqZc0rl1we80Wg72EJD05s_pRUQH5hK-X1d-Hp4yaSlzlR3aERd3moYKc7qzKxnxatnpk7wxDhy31s6YjYdtuDAX3v4sZPVsL_l2ved2qwFr1kQu56rUgKnbbuHbdIWu0jSHNY-OWdKM1ziXjpY7czahK_bWK2vqfVEUvKKVG11Btz80hkRVIbKh8CpVLmYud-TFGBNlM9uWt-rd13FnWbYQ6j0k_xyu7v5wyK-Q_ttfWgLc6A!!/dl4/d5/L2dBISEvZ0FBIS9nQSEh/] The census of the Bahamas reports population for New Providence and 19 other districts, what used to be called the "out islands" and more recently "family islands". Neither Nassau nor Paradise Island are listed in any of the population tables in the census (the "supervisory districts" on Nassau for which there are population figures do not coincide with the "settlements" on New Providence listed on the New Providence information page). All of the secondary sources for the population of Nassau use the official reported population for New Providence. (My apologies for the ungainly urls linked above, but accessing the Bahamas government website has been very difficult this evening, and I haven't found any way of shortening the urls that works.)
 * I have found no source that defines the extent of Nassau. The census of the Bahamas does not report anything for "Nassau". The figures for the area and population of Nassau that we have taken from secondary sources are exactly the same as those reported for New Providence in the Bahamas census. So, how do we accurately reflect this in the WP article? Donald Albury 01:36, 6 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I have edited the infobox and lead to reflect what is supported (or not supported) by sources I could find. The only sources I can find for the administrative status of Nassau indicate that is under the direct rule of the national government, but those sources are not the best, so I didn't use them. As I mentioned above, Nassau is not named either in any list of administrative divisions of the Bahamas, or in the census results, so I tried to make it clear that the area and population are for New Providence, rather than for Nassau. It also appears that Paradise Island is administratively part of New Providence, and in fact is part of a supervisory district that also includes part of the island of New Providence (see the Map of Districts of New Providence, Bahamas), so I just removed the comment about Paradise Island being a satellite of New Providence. I have also added the preliminary population figure for New Providence from the 2022 census. - Donald Albury 17:21, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

title: Talk:Nassau, Bahamas


text:
Category:Cities in Inner Mongolia

Cities in Inner Mongolia province include:

title: Category:Cities in Inner Mongolia


text:
W. B. Maxwell

William Babington Maxwell (1866–1938) was a British novelist and playwright.

Early life
Born on 4 June 1866, William Babington Maxwell was the son of novelist Mary Elizabeth Braddon and Irish businessman John Maxwell. The family lived at Lichfield House, Richmond, spending holidays in the New Forest. Maxwell's formal education ended at the age of 14 as his mother had a fear of 'over-education'.

Career
Originally training as an artist, Maxwell turned his back on art and began to write short stories to help cope with depression. His first story was published in The World by Edmund Yates for £5. He also wrote stories for Truth and Temple Bar. On his coming of age, his father gave him control of the failing magazine Mistletoe Bough which he tried unsuccessfully to turn around. He wrote The Last Man In, a drama, produced 14 March 1910, at the Royalty Theatre, Glasgow, by the Scottish Repertory Company; and, with George Paston (i.e. Emily Morse Symonds), a farce, The Naked Truth, which was first played at Wyndham's Theatre, London in April 1910, and in which Charles Hawtrey played Bernard Darrell. His 1913 novel The Devil's Garden was banned by the Libraries Association.

He was a friend of Edward VII whom he described as "the biggest swell in Europe".

First World War
Though nearly 50 years old at the outbreak of the First World War, Maxwell was accepted as a lieutenant in the Royal Fusiliers and served in France until 1917. His military career began at a recruitment station in a building under Govett and Sons in Throgmorton Street, London. He was tasked with recruiting 1000 men but was successful in recruiting 1300. From there onwards, the battalion he helped form was sent to Colchester for training. Maxwell was given care of the battalion funds which related to officers, rations and weights. In his notebook dated 1916, he noted a list of rations and weights for soldiers and animals. Maxwell was promoted to Lieutenant on 3 September 1914. From Colchester, Maxwell continued training, moving to Andover and Salisbury Plain before being sent to the front line in 1915. In his autobiography, Time Gathered, under the chapter ‘Wasted Years’, Maxwell talks about his time as a Regimental Transport Officer, transporting men, equipment, bombs and machine guns to the front line, alongside food and water. He was stationed at Berles-Aux-Bois, a mile from the front line and fought in the Battle of the Somme.

Later, Maxwell was promoted to Honorary Captain for his duties to crown and country. He then moved to Mametz Wood which he nicknames ‘Death Valley’. In a routine transportation of equipment, a shell exploded a bomb pile which had previously been dropped off at the front line by Maxwell. Luckily, he reported being uninjured in the blast, without a scratch to his uniform. This was his first brush with death. His second brush with death happened in the trenches with his commanding officer. They hit the floor as the shell hit the trench, and the two men landed down in the dirt. Maxwell discusses in his autobiography how he was sure he had a hole in his back, although yet again escaped unscathed.

In 1917, Maxwell’s military career came to an end when he was ordered home by his commander and friend, Reggie Barnes, on the grounds of health; as Barnes was concerned that Maxwell would not survive another winter on the western front. In 1918, Maxwell was officially out of the army.

He served from August 1914 to 1915 in training; shortly after being sent to the western front in 1915–1917 without a break or a return to home.

Later life
Maxwell was the chairman of the Society of Authors until 1928 and later chairman of the National Book Council. He had strong views on modern novelists, believing that they lacked any understanding of the motivations of men and women. He described their portrayal of love-making as having "no more charm and enticement than cattle-farming". Maxwell liked to collect 'detail' on his subjects and was particularly interested in the prevailing conditions of English shop-life and employment of girls in towns.

Maxwell was taken ill at a committee meeting of the Royal Literary Fund and died three week later at his home in Ashley Gardens, Westminster, London on the 4 August 1938.

Novels
{{columns-list|colwidth=30em|
 * The Countess of Maybury (1901)
 * The Ragged Messenger (1904) (filmed in 1917, 1924, and 1930)
 * Vivien (1905)
 * The Guarded Flame (1906)
 * Hill Rise (1907)
 * Seymour Charlton (1909)
 * The Rest Cure; a novel (1910)
 * Honour in Pawn (1911) (filmed in 1916)
 * Mrs. Thompson (1911) (filmed in 1919)
 * In Cotton Wool (1912)
 * The Devil’s Garden (1913) (later a 1920 silent film The Devil's Garden)
 * General Mallock’s Shadow (1913)
 * The Mirror and the Lamp (1918)
 * A Man and His Lesson (1919)
 * Glamour (1919)
 * A Remedy Against Sin, a novel (1920)
 * For Better, For Worse (1920)
 * A Little More (1922) (filmed in 1926 as The Gilded Highway)
 * Spinster of This Parish (1922)
 * The Day’s Journey (1923)
 * Elaine at the Gates (1924)
 * Fernande (1925)
 * Children of the Night (1925)
 * Life; a study of self (1925)
 * Gabrielle (1926)
 * The Case of Bevan Yorke (1927)
 * We Forget Because We Must, A Story of Decades and Lustres (1928)
 * Himself and Mr. Raikes (1929)
 * The Man Who Pretended (1929)
 * To what green altar? (1930)
 * The concave mirror (1931)
 * Amos the Wanderer (1932)
 * This Is My Man (1933)
 * And Mr. Wyke Bond (1934)
 * The People of a House (1934)
 * Tudor Green (1935)
 * The Emotional Journey (1936)
 * Everslade; Men and Women III (1938)

Plays

 * The Last Man In (1910)
 * The Naked Truth (1910)

Short stories

 * 'There is a Tide' Belgravia (June 1885)
 * 'The Good St. Anthony' Belgravia (Apr 1886)
 * 'Poor Mrs. Carrington' Temple Bar (May 1890)
 * 'The Pretenders' The Badminton magazine (May 1899)
 * 'The Princess – a recollection' The Badminton magazine (Oct 1899)
 * Fabulous Fancies (1903)
 * Grange and Son Strand magazine (Dec 1906)
 * Odd Lengths (1907)
 * 'The Cousins' 'Strand Magazine' (1908)
 * 'The Devil's Luck' 'Strand Magazine' (1910)
 * 'An Impossible Person' 'Strand Magazine' (1912)
 * 'The Longest Day of Her Life' 'Strand Magazine' (1913)
 * 'The Widow' 'Strand Magazine' (1918)
 * 'Joan of Arc' 'Strand Magazine' (1919)
 * Life Can Never Be The Same (1919)
 * 'Would You Believe It?' 'Strand Magazine' (1921)
 * 'Their Last Quarrel' 'Strand Magazine' (1921)
 * 'Jacob's Ladder' 'Strand Magazine' (1923)
 * 'What Cured Him' 'Strand Magazine' (1923)
 * 'The First Man' 'Strand Magazine' (1923)
 * 'Suspicion' 'Strand Magazine' (1923)
 * '"Mine Eyes Have Seen the Glory"' 'Strand Magazine' (1924)
 * 'Can a Mother's Tender Care?' 'Strand Magazine' (1930)
 * 'Three Generations' 'Strand Magazine' (1933)
 * 'Cleaning the Slate' 'Strand Magazine' (1933)
 * 'Joyce and the Unexpected' 'Strand Magazine' (1934)
 * 'The Dice-Throwers' 'Strand Magazine' (1936)

Other works
}}
 * Time Gathered: autobiography (1938)

title: W. B. Maxwell


text:
Talk:Von (album)

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

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

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 11:32, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 15:54, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Translation
Sorry, but what exactly is the meaning of the 12th track? ssenkraD? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.181.83.208 (talk) 21:26, 22 December 2008 (UTC) It's "Darkness", backwards. (The Icelandic title 'Rukrym' is 'Myrkur' spelt backwards, because it contains a portion of that track played backwards.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.12.41.23 (talk) 17:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

title: Talk:Von (album)


text:
East Malling railway station

East Malling railway station serves the village of East Malling in Kent, and is close to Ditton and Larkfield. It is 35 mi down the line from London Victoria.

The station, and most trains serving it, are operated by Southeastern.

History
East Malling Halt opened in 1913. The station is at high level, adjacent to the railway bridge over the High Street, and the platforms are accessed by steps from street level: there are no lifts. Originally built of sleepers, the halt was rebuilt in concrete in the late 1950s. About a mile (1.6 km) east of the station, a siding served a small quarry in the 1930s. Further east still, were the two Preston Hall Tunnels, of 33 yd and 54 yd length. These had been removed by 1995.

The ticket office here closed by 1988; it was located in a wooden building on the up (London-bound) platform, where the part retained as a shelter continues in use. A PERTIS 'permit to travel' machine, located at road level at the foot of the steep staircase to the up platform, suffices. There is a metal shelter on the down platform, where extensive underpinning of the concrete platform took place in 2006. The platforms were extended in the late 1980s to take 8-car trains, having previously been of 6-car length only.

Services
All services at East Malling are operated by Southeastern using and  EMUs.

The typical off-peak service in trains per hour is:

 * 1 tph to London Victoria
 * 1 tph to Ashford International

During the peak hours, the station is served by an additional hourly service between London Victoria and Ashford International, increasing the service to 2 tph in each direction.

title: East Malling railway station


text:
West Malling railway station

West Malling railway station (sometimes shown as West Malling for Kings Hill) lies to the east of West Malling, Kent, England, and is close to Kings Hill, Larkfield and Leybourne. It is 34 mi down the line from London Victoria.

The station, and all trains serving it, is operated by Southeastern.

History
Malling station opened on 1 June 1874, as part of the Maidstone Line from Swanley to Maidstone. It was renamed West Malling on 23 May 1949. The goods yard had four sidings, one of which served a goods shed. Freight facilities were withdrawn on 19 May 1964. The signal box closed on 9 December 1983.

The ticket office at the station is staffed for most of the day. There are self-service Scheidt and Bachmann ticket machines on both platforms. A PERTIS passenger-operated ticket machine was once located on Platform 1 for the issue of 'Permit to Travel' tickets (which are exchanged on-train or at staffed stations for travel tickets) but this was withdrawn some years ago.

Nu-Venture bus 123 provides a regular link to/from Kings Hill (some journeys via West Malling) on Mondays to Fridays (not late evening). Through road-rail ticketing using Bus 123 is available to 'KINGS HILL BUS' from rail stations in SE England.

Services
All services at West Malling are operated by Southeastern using and  EMUs.

The typical off-peak service in trains per hour is:
 * 1 tph to London Victoria
 * 1 tph to London Charing Cross
 * 1 tph to Maidstone East (non-stop)
 * 1 tph to Ashford International (all stations)

During the peak hours, the station is served by an additional hourly service between London Victoria and Ashford International.

On Sundays, the services between London Charing Cross and Maidstone East do not run.

title: West Malling railway station


text:
Crozet, Ain

Crozet is a commune in the Ain department in eastern France.

Crozet is nestled at the foot of the Jura mountains in eastern France some 15 km from the centre of the Swiss city of Geneva and approximately 150 km from the French city of Lyon. It is also near Geneva International Airport, at a distance of some 10 km.

Its chief attraction is a cable car which carries hikers to the top of the Jura during the summer and serves a small ski resort during the winter. It has several sporting clubs: the St-Genis-Ferney-Crozet sporting association (soccer), a tennis club, and a ski club. Other places of interest include the remains of the château de Rossillon, a church (reconstructed around 1830), the Crozet forest, and the Monts-Jura ski area, which runs between Crozet and the town of Lélex in the adjacent valley.

Religious history
Saint Peter Chanel, later to die as a missionary in the Pacific and be declared a martyr and eventually canonised, was parish priest of Crozet between 1827 and 1830, and Church histories credit him with having at a short time revitalized this then run down parish.

title: Crozet, Ain


text: Talk:Oireachtas

title: Talk:Oireachtas


text:
Fortnum & Mason

Fortnum & Mason plc (colloquially often shortened to just Fortnum's) is an upmarket department store in London, England. The main store is located at 181 Piccadilly in the St James's area of London, where it was established in 1707 by William Fortnum and Hugh Mason. There are additional stores at The Royal Exchange, St Pancras railway station and Heathrow Airport in Greater London, at K11 Musea in Hong Kong, as well as various stockists worldwide. Fortnum & Mason is privately owned by Wittington Investments Limited.

Founded as a grocery store, Fortnum's reputation was built on supplying quality food, and it saw rapid growth throughout the Victorian era. Although Fortnum's developed into a department store, it continues to focus on stocking a variety of exotic and speciality food along with 'basic' provisions. It is known for its food hampers.

The main store has since opened several other departments, such as the gentlemen's department on the first floor. It also contains a tea shop and several restaurants.

History
William Fortnum was a footman in the household of Queen Anne. The royal family's insistence on having new candles every night resulted in large amounts of half-used wax, which Fortnum promptly resold. Fortnum also had a side business as a grocer. He convinced his landlord, Hugh Mason, to be his associate, and they founded the first Fortnum & Mason store in Mason's small shop at St James's Market in 1707. In 1761, William Fortnum's grandson Charles went into the service of Queen Charlotte, and the connection with the royal court led to an increase in business. Fortnum & Mason claims to have invented the Scotch egg, in 1738. The store began to stock speciality items, namely ready-to-eat luxury meals such as poultry or game served in aspic jelly.

During the Napoleonic Wars, the emporium supplied dried fruit, spices and other preserves to British officers. In the Victorian era, it was frequently called upon to provide food for prestigious court functions. Queen Victoria sent shipments of Fortnum & Mason's concentrated beef tea to Florence Nightingale's hospitals during the Crimean War.

Charles Drury Edward Fortnum (1820–1899), of the family, was a distinguished art collector and a Trustee of the British Museum, to which he donated his collection of Islamic ceramics.

In 1886, after having bought the entire stock of five cases of a new product made by H. J. Heinz, Fortnum & Mason became the first store in Britain to stock tins of baked beans.

The shop at 181–184 Piccadilly was rebuilt between 1926 and 1927 to a Neo-Georgian design by the architects Wimperis, Simpson and Guthrie. The building also incorporates 22–27 Duke Street and 42–45 Jermyn Street.

In April 1951, the Canadian businessman W. Garfield Weston acquired the store and became its chairman following a boardroom coup. In 1964, he commissioned a four-ton clock to be installed above the main entrance of the store as a tribute to its founders. Every hour, 4 ft models of William Fortnum and Hugh Mason emerge and bow to each other, with chimes and 18th-century style music playing in the background. The chimes were incorporated into Jonathan Dove's orchestral adaptation of Zeb Soanes' children's book Gaspard's Foxtrot, which depicts the clock and its figures as illustrated by James Mayhew. Since Garfield Weston's death in 1978, the store has been run by two of his granddaughters, Jana Khayat and Kate Hobhouse. The Chief Executive Officer is Tom Athron, who joined the business in December 2020.

The store underwent a £24 million refurbishment in 2007 as part of its tercentenary celebrations.

In March 2012, Queen Elizabeth II, Camilla (then Duchess of Cornwall) and Catherine (then Duchess of Cambridge) made their first official joint visit to Fortnum & Mason. During this visit, they were each presented with their own personalised hampers. The Queen opened the Diamond Jubilee Tea Salon on the fourth floor.

In November 2013, the company's first additional store was opened at St Pancras International station. The retailer has since opened stores and restaurants at Heathrow Terminal 5 (in 2014) and at The Royal Exchange (in 2018).

Fortnum & Mason opened its first standalone store outside Britain in Dubai on 21 March 2014.

On 4 April 2019, it was announced that Fortnum & Mason would open a Hong Kong store at K11 Musea in September 2019. The 7,000 square-foot space features a retail store and restaurant.

Fortnum & Mason Food and Drink Awards
Fortnum & Mason runs an annual food and drinks awards scheme. According to the company's former CEO Ewan Venters, the awards recognise ‘the pinnacle of high achievement in food and drink across the media’. The awards celebrate writers, publishers, presenters, image-makers and personalities working in the food and drink industry.

The 2018 awards ceremony was hosted by Claudia Winkleman and winners included Nadiya Hussain, Nigel Slater and Jay Rayner.

Royal warrants
Fortnum & Mason holds three royal warrants, granted by Queen Elizabeth II, King Charles III and Queen Camilla

Their first royal warrant was granted in 1910 by Queen Alexandra. Later Royal Warrants were granted to Fortnum & Mason by King George V, though Fortnum & Mason temporarily lost their warrant for his son, King George VI, in 1948, due to post war rationing of the time. The warrant for King George VI was restored in 1951.

Later, King George VI and his consort Queen Elizabeth, known as The Queen Mother after the death of King George VI in 1952, both granted Fortnum & Mason Royal Warrants.

Platinum Jubilee
In 2022, Fortnum & Mason was a sponsor of the Platinum Pudding Competition, as part of the official celebrations of the Platinum Jubilee of Elizabeth II.

Fortnum & Mason was also one of sixteen partners of the Platinum Jubilee Pageant, held on 5 June 2022.

Controversies
In November 2010, animal rights group PETA UK began a campaign against Fortnum & Mason's sale of foie gras, citing the cruelty in the production process. The group regularly held demonstrations involving celebrities, activists and volunteers outside the store. Celebrities supporting the campaign included Geezer Butler, Sir Roger Moore, Owain Yeoman, Tamara Ecclestone, Bill Oddie, Twiggy and Morrissey. In 2011, Fortnum & Mason was reprimanded by Westminster Trading Standards for misleading customers about its animal welfare standards. As a result, the grocer changed its corporate social responsibility document to state that only UK suppliers are required to adhere to its welfare standards. In December 2020, Fortnum & Mason ceased sale of foie gras in favour of an alternative seen as more ethical, foie royale.

On 26 March 2011, Fortnum & Mason was targeted by the group UK Uncut, who broke off from the main 2011 anti-cuts protest march to target the tax avoidance policies of Associated British Foods, which, like Fortnum & Mason, is owned by Wittington Investments. This took the form of a mass sit-in, with some 138 UK Uncut protesters arrested.

In popular culture
Fortnum's history of offering a wide variety of foodstuffs is referenced in the 1960 Hammer Studios film, The Two Faces of Dr. Jekyll. Set in 1870s London, Mr Hyde quips regarding a lively and risqué London nightspot, "Rather like Fortnum & Mason ... you can buy anything here."

In Alan Bennett's play The Madness of George III (also made into a 1994 film), set in the late 1780s, a footman named Fortnum leaves in a huff to start a "provision merchant's in Piccadilly." This is an anachronistic reference to the founding of the store, as William Fortnum's position as a footman in the royal household was many decades earlier, in the reign of Queen Anne.

In Anthony Trollope's novel "The Claverings," Sir Hugh Clavering disdains to trust Fortnum and Mason to provision his yachting trip to Norway. "He was not a man to trust any Fortnum or any Mason as to the excellence of the article to be supplied, or as to the price."

title: Fortnum & Mason


text:
Der Doppelgänger

"Der Doppelgänger" is one of the six songs from Franz Schubert's Schwanengesang that sets words by Heinrich Heine for piano and tenor voice. It was written in 1828, the year of Schubert's death.

Text
The title "Der Doppelgänger" is Schubert's; in Heine's Buch der Lieder (1827) the poem is untitled, making the ending a surprise. Heine used the spelling "Doppeltgänger".

Still ist die Nacht, es ruhen die Gassen, In diesem Hause wohnte mein Schatz; Sie hat schon längst die Stadt verlassen, Doch steht noch das Haus auf demselben Platz.

Da steht auch ein Mensch und starrt in die Höhe, Und ringt die Hände, vor Schmerzensgewalt; Mir graust es, wenn ich sein Antlitz sehe, - Der Mond zeigt mir meine eigne Gestalt.

Du Doppelgänger! du bleicher Geselle! Was äffst du nach mein Liebesleid, Das mich gequält auf dieser Stelle, So manche Nacht, in alter Zeit? The night is quiet, the streets are calm, In this house my beloved once lived: A long time ago she left the town, But the house still stands, here in the same place.

A man stands there also and looks to the sky, And wrings his hands, overwhelmed by pain: I am terrified – when I see his face, The moon shows me my own form!

O you Doppelgänger! you pale comrade! Why do you ape the pain of my love Which tormented me upon this spot So many a night, so long ago?

Context
Heine's Buch der Lieder is divided into five sections; all the poems set in Schwanengesang are from the third, Die Heimkehr (The Homecoming). In Schwanengesang, this song stands at the end of the Heine songs, although Heine's order is different and it has been argued that the sequence works better dramatically when the songs are performed in their order of appearance in the Buch der Lieder.

This song's context requires some background in the Doppelgänger mythology to parse. Seeing one's own Doppelgänger in this mythology implies that you are dead, so the middle of the piece reaches a peak as the singer realizes that the stranger is their Doppelgänger. Immediately afterwards the piece becomes very quiet as the singer internally comes to terms with the reality that they did not, in fact, return from the war.

Music
"Der Doppelgänger" is through-composed; each stanza's setting is different, but not altogether different: the song is a kind of passacaglia on the theme of the first four bars of the piano part. This ambiguous harmonic progression is made of chords that lack one note, leaving it unclear what the harmony is. The first chord lacks a third, so could be B major or B minor. The second has only the interval of a third, so it is unclear whether it is the first inversion of a D-sharp minor chord or the second inversion of F-sharp major. This ambiguity is only resolved with the entry of the voice, when the harmony of B minor with its dominant, F-sharp major, is established.

The piano part, consisting almost entirely of block chords that gradually become denser, dominates the song and does much to give it its feeling of inexorability, and its brief abandonment (displaced by a succession of increasingly dissonant chords) at the climax of the song signals the frantic horror of the poet. At this point, the initially ambiguous harmony returns with a modulation to D-sharp minor on the words Was äffst du nach mein Liebesleid (bar 47).

The song is 63 bars long, and in a typical performance lasts between 4 and 5 minutes. It is in the key of B minor, the same as Schubert's Unfinished Symphony.

title: Der Doppelgänger