text:
Open city

In war, an open city is a settlement which has announced it has abandoned all defensive efforts, generally in the event of the imminent capture of the city to avoid destruction. Once a city has declared itself open, the opposing military will be expected under international law to peacefully occupy the city rather than destroy it. According to the Protocol I of the Geneva Conventions, it is forbidden for the attacking party to "attack, by any means whatsoever, non-defended localities". The intent is to protect the city's civilians and cultural landmarks from a battle which may be futile.

Attacking forces do not always respect the declaration of an "open city". Defensive forces will occasionally use the designation as a political tactic as well. In some cases, the declaration of a city to be "open" is made by a side on the verge of defeat and surrender; in other cases, those making such a declaration are willing and able to fight on, but prefer that the specific city be spared. Often, resistance movements will be active in open cities, straining the temperate conduct of the occupying forces.

Examples
Numerous cities were declared open cities during World War II:

 * Kraków was left undefended (except for some small local units) after the Polish 6th Infantry Division marched by the city to the nearby Niepołomice Forest to set new defensive lines during the German invasion of Poland. This led the Mayor of Kraków to declare it an open city on 5 September 1939. The German Army entered the city the next day.
 * Brussels was declared an open city by the Belgian government on 17 May 1940 during the Battle of Belgium, and was occupied by the Germans.
 * Paris was declared an open city by the French government on 11 June 1940 during the Battle of France, as the government relocated to Bordeaux.
 * Belgrade was declared open on 5 April 1941 by the Kingdom of Yugoslavia, just before the German invasion of Yugoslavia. The Wehrmacht did not respect the open city status and heavily bombed the city.
 * Manila was declared an open city on 26 December 1941 by US general Douglas MacArthur during the Japanese invasion of the Philippines. However, the United States Armed Forces were still using the city for logistical purposes. The Imperial Japanese Army therefore ignored the declaration and bombed the city.
 * Batavia (now Jakarta) was declared an open city on 5 March 1942 after the remaining units of the Royal Netherlands East Indies Army were evacuated. The Japanese occupied the city the next day.
 * Rome was declared open on 14 August 1943 by the Italian government following the cessation of Allied bombing. Subsequently, Allied forces entered Rome in June 1944 and retreating German forces also declared Florence and Chieti on 24 March 1944 open cities.
 * Athens was declared an open city by the Germans on 11 October 1944.
 * Hamburg was declared open on 3 May 1945 by the Germans and was immediately occupied by the British Army.

Post-World War II Japan
In 1977, a far-left group in Japan—called the "National Open City Declaration Movement Network"—began organizing activists to make cities preemptively declare themselves "defenseless" under the Geneva Convention, so that in the event of war, they would be legally forced to welcome any invasion. This was rejected by nearly all of Japan's political parties and the ruling government as inherently absurd, since Japan was not in a war, and in the event of war such a decision would have to be approved by the national government. However, the Social Democratic Party—which was the junior party of the ruling coalition from 1994 to 1996—supported it.

Nevertheless, four wards of Tokyo and Kagoshima City, Japan's southernmost port, among many other cities considered{{when|Date not clear in cite}|date=January 2015}} legislation to be declared "open cities".

title: Open city


text:
Talk:Fritz Fischer (medical doctor)

Fritz Fischer (medical doctor)
copied the below from Reference desk

Is Fritz Fischer, the Nazi doctor still alive ? He was sentenced to life imprisonment for war crimes, but was released in 1954. What happened after that ? Jay 12:04, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

 * According to this Word document (see School of History at the University of Kent):
 * ...fing eine zweite Karriere bei dem Chemiekonzern Böhringer in Ingelheim an.43 Im Jahre 1998 lebte er schwerhörig und 85 Jahre alt, in Ockenheim.
 * "...began a second career [after his release from prison in 1954] at the chemical company Böhringer in Ingelheim. In 1998 he lived in Ockenheim, 85 years old and hard of hearing."

 * According to :
 * Er [Fritz Fischer] gibt nach der Haftentlassung seine Approbation (staatliche Zulassung als Arzt) zurück, nimmt eine Arbeitsstelle an, die ihm von amerikanischen Behörden vermittelt wird, die weit unter seiner Qualifikation liegt und verläßt sie nicht bis zum Ende seines Arbeitslebens.
 * "He returns his license to practice medicine after his release from prison and accepts a new job (found with the help of the U.S. authorities) far below his qualifications, which he won't leave until his retirement."
 * Source given for this statement: Freya Klier: Die Kaninchen von Ravensbrück. Medizinische Versuche an Frauen in der NS-Zeit. Droemer Verlag, München 1994, ISBN 3426771624.

 * Whatever happened to him after 1998, I do not know. Lupo 09:03, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one article was rated and this bot brought all the other ratings up to at least that level. BetacommandBot 11:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Ravensbruck
This camp is also where the components of the German V-2 rockets were assembled. Ykerzner (talk) 04:48, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fritz Fischer (medical doctor). 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/20080528193131/http://edocs.tu-berlin.de/diss/2002/schaefer_silke.pdf to http://edocs.tu-berlin.de/diss/2002/schaefer_silke.pdf

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) 07:12, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fritz Fischer (medical doctor). 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/20050312033946/http://www.kent.ac.uk/history/staff/material/schmidt/ to http://www.kent.ac.uk/history/staff/material/schmidt/

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 06:01, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

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

title: Talk:Fritz Fischer (medical doctor)


text:
Talk:Open city

Comments
There was no article here, so i put down the little knowledge i have on this subject, feel free to add or change.

- there is no mention of allied bombing of Rome _after_ it being declared an open city.. I dont have the time right now to find sources for this but i know it as fact so if someone cares to bother feel free to balance this Allied biased perspective on the concept of >open cities< -  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.178.171.134 (talk) 18:49, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

rules of war
alright then an open city can not be attacked as it is presumably just "march on". So if the attacker bomb the city in a "we're-just-checking" campaign before marching on, or march on running with flamethrowers burning the hell out of everything and screaming "we're the champions" it would BREAK the rules, but if the army just march on and guerrilla fighters from resistence movements attack them, are they breaking rules? sure yes, but then, who should take the blame, if the city is open and the invaded country has nothing to do with it anymore? the acts commited by the guerrilla are held on the state or are just marked as "impolite oh-jee-you're-beaking-the-rules"? if there is the confirmation of guerrila fighters infiltrated in the city the attackers can wash it way from the world without disrespect rules then? someone could explain that? it's kinda weird. i mean 'cause it's obvious you will not just walk in and be the nice guy if you know you will be shot dead by hidden bad dressed people. ps: guerrilla is a coward thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.25.43.243 (talk • contribs)

What an idiotic prose. What are you trying to say!?! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.40.139.109 (talk) 11:02, 9 December 2008 (UTC)

Oslo?
There's no citation, but Oslo is reported as being declared an open city during the German invasion of Norway in 1940.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.165.220.12 (talk) 17:13, 21 January 2018 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on Open city. 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/20061002165549/http://bletchleypark.net/ww2/ww2-1944.html to http://www.bletchleypark.net/ww2/ww2-1944.html

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 11:16, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

title: Talk:Open city


text:
Matatā

Matatā is a town in the Bay of Plenty in the North Island of New Zealand, 24 km to the north-west of Whakatāne. Much of the town was relocated between the years 2006 and 2021 due to increased natural threats arising from climate change. As an example of forced retreat, Matatā is seen as providing lessons for future actions elsewhere.

Recent history
In 2005 the town was inundated by two debris flows from the Awatarariki and Waitepuru Streams that devastated a number of buildings, but did not cause any casualties. The debris flows were caused by a band of intense rain, at a rate of over 2 mm per minute, that fell into the catchments southwest of Matatā, dislodging a huge amount of debris that had built up behind a temporary dam.

From January 2005 the area was subject to hundreds of shallow, low intensity earthquakes, with the most intense swarms occurring in 2005 and 2007, but continuing to at least February 2009. The largest event was of magnitude 4.2 in May 2007.

In 2016, scientists discovered a large amount of volcanic activity, including "an inflating magma" buildup, 10 km below the surface of the town.

In 2019, the name of the town was officially gazetted as "Matatā".

Forced retreat under climate change
As a result of the 2005 landslides, Whakatāne District Council began to plan for a managed retreat over the next decade. The vast majority of residents accepted the need to relocate and did so with council assistance and compensation but one resident has rejected both the process and the need to move and is now the township's sole remaining occupant. NIWA coastal hazards expert, Rob Bell, says the general issue of forced retreat is primarily sociopolitical rather than technocratic.

Marae
Matatā has four marae:

 * Iramoko Marae and Te Paetata meeting house, affiliated with the Ngāti Awa hapū of Te Tāwera.
 * Ngāti Umutahi Marae and Umutahi meeting house, affiliated with the Ngāti Tūwharetoa hapū of Ngāti Iramoko, Ngāti Umutahi and Te Tāwera.
 * Ōniao Marae and Tūwharetoa meeting house, affiliated with the Ngāti Tūwharetoa hapū of Ngāi Tamarangi, Ngāti Umutahi and Ngāti Manuwhare.
 * Rangitihi Marae and Rangiaohia meeting house is affiliated with Ngāti Rangitihi.

In October 2020, the Government committed $1,646,820 from the Provincial Growth Fund to upgrade Rangitihi Marae and five other local marae, creating 10 jobs.

Demographics
Matatā is described by Statistics New Zealand as a rural settlement, and covers 0.78 km2 and had an estimated population of as of  with a population density of  people per km2. Matatā is part of the larger Matatā-Otakiri statistical area.

Matatā had a population of 678 at the 2018 New Zealand census, an increase of 30 people (4.6%) since the 2013 census, and an increase of 39 people (6.1%) since the 2006 census. There were 249 households, comprising 333 males and 348 females, giving a sex ratio of 0.96 males per female, with 138 people (20.4%) aged under 15 years, 99 (14.6%) aged 15 to 29, 294 (43.4%) aged 30 to 64, and 147 (21.7%) aged 65 or older.

Ethnicities were 62.4% European/Pākehā, 56.6% Māori, 3.5% Pacific peoples, 3.5% Asian, and 0.9% other ethnicities. People may identify with more than one ethnicity.

Although some people chose not to answer the census's question about religious affiliation, 46.9% had no religion, 40.7% were Christian, 3.1% had Māori religious beliefs, 0.4% were Muslim, 0.4% were Buddhist and 1.3% had other religions.

Of those at least 15 years old, 63 (11.7%) people had a bachelor's or higher degree, and 144 (26.7%) people had no formal qualifications. 72 people (13.3%) earned over $70,000 compared to 17.2% nationally. The employment status of those at least 15 was that 234 (43.3%) people were employed full-time, 72 (13.3%) were part-time, and 27 (5.0%) were unemployed.

Matatā-Otakiri statistical area
Matatā-Otakiri statistical area, which also includes the settlement of Otakiri, covers 87.44 km2 and had an estimated population of as of  with a population density of  people per km2.

Matatā-Otakiri had a population of 1,737 at the 2018 New Zealand census, an increase of 66 people (3.9%) since the 2013 census, and an increase of 129 people (8.0%) since the 2006 census. There were 618 households, comprising 861 males and 876 females, giving a sex ratio of 0.98 males per female. The median age was 41.3 years (compared with 37.4 years nationally), with 378 people (21.8%) aged under 15 years, 279 (16.1%) aged 15 to 29, 801 (46.1%) aged 30 to 64, and 279 (16.1%) aged 65 or older.

Ethnicities were 74.8% European/Pākehā, 35.4% Māori, 1.7% Pacific peoples, 4.0% Asian, and 1.4% other ethnicities. People may identify with more than one ethnicity.

The percentage of people born overseas was 11.4, compared with 27.1% nationally.

Although some people chose not to answer the census's question about religious affiliation, 53.7% had no religion, 34.4% were Christian, 2.4% had Māori religious beliefs, 0.2% were Hindu, 0.2% were Muslim, 0.2% were Buddhist and 1.6% had other religions.

Of those at least 15 years old, 174 (12.8%) people had a bachelor's or higher degree, and 291 (21.4%) people had no formal qualifications. The median income was $31,100, compared with $31,800 nationally. 213 people (15.7%) earned over $70,000 compared to 17.2% nationally. The employment status of those at least 15 was that 666 (49.0%) people were employed full-time, 234 (17.2%) were part-time, and 60 (4.4%) were unemployed.

Education
Matata School is a decile 5 state primary school with a roll of students. St Joseph's Catholic School is a decile 2 integrated primary school with a roll of students. Both schools are coeducational and cater for years 1–8. Rolls are as of

title: Matatā


text:
Shared appreciation mortgage

A shared appreciation mortgage often abbreviated as "SAM" is a mortgage in which the purchaser of a home shared a percentage of the appreciation in the home's value with the lender. In return, the lender agrees to charge an interest rate that is lower than the prevailing market interest rate. The lender agrees to receive some or all of the repayment of the loan in the form of a share of the increase in value (the appreciation) of the property.

In the UK
A shared appreciation mortgage is a mortgage arranged as a form of equity release. The lender loans the borrowers a capital sum in return for a share of the future increase in the value of the property. The borrowers retain the right to live in the property until death.

Shared appreciation mortgages sold between 1996–1998 have not always turned out to be products beneficial to the borrowers who took them out.

Sales and marketing
About 12,000 shared appreciation mortgages were sold by Bank of Scotland between November 1996 and February 1998, and about 3,000 were sold by Barclays Bank between May and August 1998. They were sold by Bank of Scotland through financial advisers and mortgage brokers, and by Barclays directly to the borrowers. Barclays Bank loaned a total of £100m of shared appreciation mortgages, and so the average size of each of their loans would have been about £33,333.

Barclays' booklet on shared appreciation mortgages says that they were "specially designed for the needs and lifestyles of the mature homeowner... aged 45 or over and... property worth over £60,000." They were mostly aimed at people aged 65 and over, and marketed as ideal for people who had paid off their mortgage, allowing them to release cash tied up in their home without having to sell up.

In 2014, nearly half of the shared appreciation mortgages were still active.

The loan and the repayment
The lender of a shared appreciation mortgage lent a sum of money up to a maximum of 25% of the value of the property. The borrower retained ownership of the property and no repayments were made until the property was sold or the borrower died. At that time the repayment was the original amount borrowed plus a share of the increase in the value of the property. The lender's percentage share was three times the percentage of the value of the property that was originally borrowed. Therefore if the original loan was 25% of the value of the property, the share of the increase in the value would have been 75%. For the purpose of this calculation, the final value of the property was not the price at which the property was sold, but a valuation commissioned by the lender and paid for by the borrower. So if the property was sold for less than the valuation, the borrower's percentage share would be further reduced.

Barclays' booklet on shared appreciation mortgages gives an example of a property with an original valuation of £100,000 and a final valuation of £150,000. For a loan of £25,000, i.e. 25% of the original valuation, the repayment would be £25,000 + (75% × £50,000) = £62,500, i.e. 42% of the final valuation. Over a period of 20 years this would be equivalent to a compound interest rate of 4.7%.

However, the value of property has increased by a much greater amount than Barclays used in their example. The final valuation of the property in the example might now be £400,000. For a loan of £25,000, the repayment would be £25,000 + (75% × £300,000) = £250,000, i.e. 62.5% of the final valuation. Over a period of 20 years this would be equivalent to a compound interest rate of 12.2%, two and a half times the rate of the example. The borrower's share of the equity would be £150,000, less than half the final valuation of £400,000 of the property.

Bank of Scotland also sold shared-appreciation mortgages on which interest was charged at about 5.75% to 6% per annum. On these mortgages the maximum loan was 75% of the value of the property (compared with 25% for a zero-interest SAM), and the lender's percentage share of the appreciation was the same as the percentage of the loan to the original value of the property (compared with three times the percentage for a zero-interest SAM). Therefore if the loan was 75% of the original value of the property, the lender's share of the appreciation would also have been 75%. The interest was paid by monthly instalments, and the final repayment was the original amount borrowed plus the lender's share of the appreciation.

The large repayment amount of a shared appreciation mortgage and the small share of the equity remaining mean that the borrower might not have sufficient money to be able to downsize to a smaller property. The borrower would have less money to pay care home fees, which would require the local authority to make a greater contribution to those fees. And the borrower would have less money to leave to his or her children or grandchildren, some of whom might have been looking after the borrower for many years.

Conversely, in the unlikely event that the value of property had remained the same or reduced, the shared appreciation mortgage would have effectively been interest-free.

Interest rate formula
To calculate the equivalent compound interest rate of a "zero-interest" shared-appreciation mortgage, i.e. the rate of the interest that would have been charged once a month on the amount owing, and added to the amount owing, so that at the end of the term of the loan, the amount owing would be the same as the repayment owing on a shared-appreciation mortgage:

$$Equivalent \ compound \ interest \ rate = (\sqrt[12t] {\frac{R}{L}} - 1) \times 1200$$

which is the same as:

$$Equivalent \ compound \ interest \ rate = ((R/L)^{(1/12t)} - 1) \times 1200$$

where $R$ is the amount of the repayment, $L$ is the amount of the loan, and $t$ is the time in years (and part of a year) between the loan and the repayment. The formula gives the equivalent compound interest rate of the mortgage as a percentage.

Alternatively, if it was assumed that the interest would have been charged once a year on the amount owing, and added to the amount owing, the formula would be:

$$Equivalent \ compound \ interest \ rate = (\sqrt[t] {\frac{R}{L}} - 1) \times 100$$

which is the same as:

$$Equivalent \ compound \ interest \ rate = ((R/L)^{(1/t)} - 1) \times 100$$

For loans that were 25% of the value of the property, the repayment would normally be 75% of the difference between the initial and final values of the property, plus the amount of the initial loan.

The origin of shared appreciation mortgages
There is a detailed account of the origin of shared appreciation mortgages in chapter 23 of Dr Bettina von Stamm's book Managing Innovation, Design and Creativity, first edition published in 2003 and second edition published in 2008. Chapter 23 is titled "Innovation in Financial Services, Case Study 8: Shared Appreciation Mortgage – Bank of Scotland". This is a précis of the chapter:

The idea – rationale and getting buy-in
Craig Corn, a director in structured finance at Merrill Lynch, was looking for a way to give investors access to one of the largest asset pools, the housing market. This was dominated by owner-occupiers, most of whose wealth was tied up in their homes. Meanwhile, commercial investment in the much smaller private rental sector of the market was hampered by the cost of managing rental property and the difficulty of gaining repossession. Linking an investment to a mortgage would give investors access to the much larger owner-occupier sector of the housing market and enable the owner-occupiers to make financial use of their asset.

As Merrill Lynch's management did not feel that the product would fit into their existing product portfolio, Craig Corn approached other companies, and moved to the Swiss Bank Corporation (SBC). David Garner had joined SBC from a building society in Autumn 1995, and had knowledge of the UK mortgage and capital markets. Corn and Garner worked together on the project and obtained legal opinion. It soon emerged that homeowners could give up a share in the appreciation of their property in return for a fixed-term, low-interest mortgage, while investors could access the shared appreciation in return for their investment. (SBC bought S. G. Warburg & Co., a leading British investment banking firm, in 1995, and merged it with its own investment banking unit to create SBC Warburg.)

As well as having the support of SBC as an investment bank, Corn and Garner also needed a mortgage lender to market and manage the mortgages. Of the building societies and banks they approached, Bank of Scotland had a good reputation and were considered to be innovative. In February 1996, Craig Corn contacted Willie Donald, who had recently joined Bank of Scotland as Director of Sales. Willie Donald liked the idea and took it via George While, Head of Mortgages, to George Mitchell, Divisional Chief Executive of Personal Banking, both of whom also liked the idea. Mitchell put the idea to the main board, who approved it in principle in June 1996.

Getting started
SBC and Bank of Scotland quickly reached agreement to cooperate. George Mitchell selected Neil Forrest to work with Willie Donald on the product. Neil Forrest had been with the bank for seven or eight years and had expertise in securitization; Willie Donald had just introduced the Personal Choice Mortgage. According to Neil Forrest, Craig Corn and Willie Donald had the ideas while he and David Garner translated the ideas into something realizable.

The team spent four or five months working on the first version of the product, which did not involve securitization. This is the pooling of debt such as residential mortgages, and selling their cash flows as securities, also known as bonds. One reason that it had not initially been included was that it had a bad reputation: it was normally only used if direct financing could not be afforded. Another reason was that the proposed interest rate swaps would have been a substantial taxation risk for the bank. The second version of the product, which did involve securitization, was given the go-ahead.

The implementation team consisted of Willie Donald and Neil Forrest, responsible for the product, Ian Dickson and John Lloyd, for sales, John Trouten, for customer care, Dave Smith, for process area, and three people from systems. A second team was dedicated to develop the processes surrounding the shared appreciation mortgage. At the first implementation team meeting, on 25 September 1996, the launch date was set for 4 November 1996. Gary Gordon, Manager, Operations, joined the team in early October 1996.

Product and markets
The team focused on a choice for borrowers of two interest rates: a 0% mortgage where the borrower could borrow up to 25% of the value of property and give up appreciation worth three times the percentage borrowed, i.e. up to 75%, and a 5.75% mortgage where the borrower could borrow up to 75% of the value of property and give up appreciation at the same percentage as the percentage borrowed.

For the investor, the 5.75% SAMs would be securitized into fixed rate bonds with a fixed interest rate of about 55% of the 10-year gilt yield (a gilt is a UK government bond). The 0% SAMs would be securitized into floating rate bonds with a variable interest rate of about 60% of the three month Libor (London Inter-bank Offered Rate, an interest rate average calculated from estimates submitted by the leading banks in London). The interest would be paid quarterly, and would consist of the fixed or floating element plus an additional element from SAMs terminated in that quarter. The debt was amortized (reduced) each quarter as the number of homes with SAMs reduced. Therefore the ratio of the interest to the debt would gradually increase, and the benefit of this would compensate for the bonds not having a fixed term.

SAMs would be less risky for investment than equity (a share of ownership), they would be long term, and their earnings would be linked to house prices, which historically performed better than inflation but not as well as shares. Consequently, they were expected to appeal to pension funds, property funds and equity investors.

All of the debt and equity of the SAMs would go to the bondholders, with Bank of Scotland receiving a fee. Money from the mortgages coming into Bank of Scotland would be cleared monthly or weekly to SBC. To keep funds associated with SAMs separate from its other funds, Bank of Scotland set up an independent company for each SAM. BoS acted as an agent for each BoS SAM and legal charges were in the name of the BoS SAM rather than BoS. Separate companies had to be set up for interest-bearing and zero-interest Scottish SAMs: BoS SAM 3 and BoS SAM 4. One of the English companies securitized the assets.

Trials and tribulations
The implementation team attempted to anticipate any problems. At their second meeting in early October, they were alerted by the IT people to the fact that Unisys, one of the bank's IT systems, could only process loans of up to 50 years, whereas the SAM was open-ended, until the sale of the property or the death of the owner. Nor could Unisys process an interest rate of 0%. There was also concern that with a separate company for each SAM, overnight processing might overrun, especially at the end of the month. The processing capacity was therefore upgraded, with a separate system for mortgages to avoid affecting the other systems.

Property valuations were important because appreciation was calculated on the difference between the initial valuation and the final valuation of a property. Countrywide was appointed to administer the panel of valuers.

Market introduction and reaction
At the team meeting on 9 October 1996, it was decided to launch on 11 November, following an announcement in The Sunday Times on 4 November. There was also a press leak in a Sunday newspaper on 20 October. The product was launched before contracts with SBC Warburg had been finalised and before terms and conditions had been copy-written. By the launch date the bank was already receiving about 2,000 phone calls per day, with most of the callers interested in the 0% option, and 2,500 people had requested more information. Demand was much greater than expected: by the second week of December they had run out of brochures.

BoS SAM 1 and BoS SAM 2 were sold in England, with the first moneys drawn on 31 December 1996. For the BoS SAM 1, 5.75% option, bonds worth £27.2m were issued; for the BoS SAM 2, 0% option, bonds worth £105.6m were issued. Unexpectedly, investors did not include pension funds. Borrowers had been expected to be in their seventies, but most of them were in their fifties or sixties.

After the initial enthusiasm
SAMs 3 and 4, for Scotland, could not be launched until the securitization of SAMs 1 and 2 had been completed, and they were also delayed by the different legal system in Scotland. They were introduced in mid-February 1997 and took longer to place with investors than SAMs 1 and 2. During the preparations for SAMs 5 and 6, SBC Warburg merged with Union Bank of Switzerland. The merger was announced on 8 December 1997 and created UBS AG. Investors could not be found for SAMs 5 and 6, which had to be taken up by SBC Warburg itself. Bank of Scotland hoped that UBS/SBC Warburg would find new investors for the SAMs, but instead had to withdraw the product.

BoS SAMs 2, 4 and 6 were 0% interest mortgages, with the lender's percentage share of the appreciation being three times the percentage ratio of the loan to the initial value of the property (LTV).

Competitors' reaction
In March 1998, after Bank of Scotland had withdrawn their product, Barclays Bank launched their shared appreciation mortgage. Like Bank of Scotland's zero-interest mortgage, the maximum loan to property value ratio (LTV) was 25%, no interest was charged, and the lender's share of the appreciation was three times the LTV. Barclays sold 3,253 SAMs between May and July 1998. Barclays Capital securitized the mortgages in 1999 through Millshaw SAMS No 1 Ltd, a £97.84m triple-A rated zero coupon bond, which was a 55-year deal. The take-up by investors was slow, but institutions bought the bonds for their high returns.

On 11 July 1998 the Financial Times reported that shared appreciation mortgages were temporarily off the market after demand from borrowers had exceeded the supply of money from the bonds market. £750m worth of bonds had been sold by Bank of Scotland and Barclays Bank. Shared appreciation mortgages did not subsequently return to the market.

When house prices increased and the appreciation became much greater than the initial value of the properties, the borrowers owed the investors the majority of the value of their properties and were left with only a small proportion of the value for themselves.

Millennium Product
The Bank of Scotland shared-appreciation mortgage was selected as one of 1,012 Millennium Products by the Design Council. The Millennium Product concept was launched by Prime Minister Tony Blair in September 1997 and the full and final list was unveiled by him in December 1999. He hailed the Millennium Products companies as "the very best of British innovation, creativity and design." The Bank of Scotland shared-appreciation mortgage was described by the Design Council as "A mortgage which allows you to release cash tied up in your house for 0% interest payments, in return for a share in any appreciation in value from the sale of the home." The description does not state the size of the share in the appreciation in the value of the home. By the time the final list of Millennium Products was announced in December 1999, shared-appreciation mortgages were no longer being offered for sale by either Bank of Scotland or Barclays Bank.

SAM products and companies
"Appreciation share : loan" is the ratio of the lender's percentage share of the appreciation to the percentage of the initial value of the property that was borrowed.

Bank of Scotland ("as agent for BOS (SAM) No. 4 PLC") shared appreciation mortgage sales booklet
On page 10 of the BoS SAM No. 4 PLC sales booklet, there is an example of a shared appreciation mortgage based on a loan of £30,000, an initial house value of £120,000, repayment of the mortgage after 20 years, and fees totalling £1,890, and assuming average house price inflation of 4.5% per annum. The APR (annual percentage rate) of this mortgage is 8.7%. The quoted repayment, including the initial loan (£30,000), the shared appreciation (£127,054), the arrangement fee (£500), the legal fees (£600), the valuation fees on entry and exit (£490), and an administration fee (£300), is £158,944.

On page 5 of the same document there is another example of a shared appreciation mortgage. This is based on a loan of £20,000, an initial property value ("base value") of £100,000 and a final property value ("exit value") of £150,000. The quoted repayment, including the initial loan (£20,000) and the shared appreciation (£30,000), but not including the exit valuation fee and the administration fee (£300), is £50,000. This repayment is much less than the repayments that are actually being made. The example does not give the number of years of the mortgage, but if it is assumed to be 20 years, as in the example on page 10, the average house price inflation of the example is 2.0% and the APR is 4.7%. This example therefore assumes different average house price inflation from the example on page 10. The BoS SAM No. 6 PLC sales booklet is very similar to the BoS SAM No. 4 PLC sales booklet, but most of the example on page 5 has been removed.

Barclays Bank shared appreciation mortgages sales booklet
On page 5 of the Barclays Bank shared appreciation mortgages sales booklet there are three examples of shared appreciation mortgages. They are based on loans of £15,000, £20,000 and £25,000, an original property valuation of £100,000 and a final property valuation of £150,000. The quoted repayments, including the initial loan and the shared appreciation, but not including any legal fees or other costs, are £37,500, £50,000 and £62,500. These repayments are much less than the repayments that are actually being made.The examples do not give the number of years of the mortgage, but if it is assumed to be 20 years, the average house price inflation of the examples is 2.0% and the APR is 4.7%.

Barclays SAMS Limited agreement
The agreement between Barclays SAMS Limited (the "Lender") and the "Borrower" states that it is a credit agreement regulated by the Consumer Credit Act 1974.

The agreement gives an example of a shared appreciation mortgage, based on a total loan of £20,000, an original property valuation of £120,000, property valuation before redemption of £140,000, and repayment of the loan after just two years. The total loan is 16.6% of the original property valuation and the repayment would be (3 × 16.6% × £20,000) + £20,000 = £29,960 (Barclays' figures), i.e. 21.4% of the final valuation. The average house price inflation is 8.0% and the APR is 22.4%. The percentage ratio of the loan to the final valuation, the average house price inflation, and the APR are distorted by the unrealistically short two-year term of the loan. The repayment of £29,960 is much lower than the repayments that are actually being made.

Barclays used a checklist titled "Barclays Mortgage Service" when they were discussing a mortgage with prospective borrowers. "Y/N" was printed against 18 statements for "Y" or "N" to be circled by hand as appropriate. None of the statements included any recommendation to seek legal or other independent advice, or any recommendation to discuss the mortgage with their family.

UK House Price Index
In the 20 years before Bank of Scotland started selling Shared Appreciation Mortgages in November 1996, the UK House Price Index increased from £10,682 in October 1976 to £59,885 in October 1996, an increase of 460% (£49,203) and average house price inflation of 9.0% per annum. In the 20 years before Barclays Bank started selling Shared Appreciation Mortgages in May 1998, the UK House Price Index increased from £12,429 in April 1978 to £69,757 in April 1998, an increase of 461% (£57,328) and average house price inflation of 9.0% per annum.

It would have been reasonable to expect the value of property to continue to increase at a high rate. However Shared Appreciation Mortgages were marketed before the widespread use of the internet. Potential customers and their solicitors would not have had easy access to UK House Price Index information, but banks selling mortgages would have had this information.

Regulation
In the 1990s, mortgages were not fully regulated. Banks operated voluntarily under the Banking Code, and mortgage lenders operated voluntarily under the Mortgage Lenders Code. As a condition of operating under the Banking Code, banks had to sign up to the Financial Ombudsman Service, which has legal powers to put things right if customers have been treated unfairly.

Although Barclays Bank and the Bank of Scotland marketed Shared Appreciation Mortgages under their company branding, they set up separate companies to administer and issue the mortgages. These separate companies were not signatories to the Banking Code, and so the Financial Ombudsman Service was not able to investigate customers' complaints about Shared Appreciation Mortgages.

However Barclays' booklet on shared appreciation mortgages says on the back cover, under the heading "The Mortgage Code and the Banking Code", "Barclays is committed to the Mortgage Code and the Banking Code, both of which set out the commitments and standards of banks in dealing with their customers. As such, we ensure that our products and services comply with the terms of both Codes. The Mortgage Code relates specifically to the service we provide, the provision of information regarding our mortgage products and services and how they operate."

The Mortgage Code came into effect on 1 July 1997 for lenders and on 30 April 1998 for mortgage intermediaries. It remained in force until 31 October 2004, when the Financial Services Authority's Mortgage Conduct of Business Sourcebook (MCOB) came into force. The standards of the Code are encompassed in ten key commitments, which include helping customers to understand the financial implications of a mortgage.

The Financial Services Authority (FSA) did not start to regulate mortgage business until 31 October 2004. The FSA was replaced by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) on 1 April 2013.

Legislation
The Consumer Credit Act 1974 significantly reformed the law relating to consumer credit.

The Consumer Credit Act 2006 extended the scope of the Consumer Credit Act 1974, created the Financial Ombudsman scheme, and increased the powers of the Office of Fair Trading. It permits borrowers to challenge unfair debtor-creditor relationships in court. Some shared appreciation mortgage customers and their families consider that the arrangement whereby a loan which is 25% of the initial value of a property is repaid by 75% of the appreciation in the value of the property, plus the amount of the loan, could be an unfair debtor-creditor relationship.

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999, Regulation 7, states that a seller or supplier shall ensure that any written term of a contract is expressed in plain, intelligible language and that if there is doubt about the meaning of a written term, the interpretation which is most favourable to the consumer shall prevail. Regulation 8 provides that an unfair term "shall not be binding upon the consumer", where an unfair term is one which causes a significant imbalance in the parties' rights and obligations arising under the contract, to the detriment of the consumer.

Early dissension
In October 1997 Harold Fisher and his wife borrowed £90,000 from Bank of Scotland under its Shared Appreciation Mortgage Scheme. By year three of the loan, Mr Fisher realised that the large increase in house prices meant that their debt to Bank of Scotland had increased by a much greater amount. He wrote to the bank to express his fears but they said he had signed the contract.

Mr Fisher then took his claim to the Financial Ombudsman Service, which ruled against him. They said that in shared appreciation mortgage disputes, they usually ruled in favour of the banks.

Another couple who borrowed money from Bank of Scotland under its Shared Appreciation Mortgage Scheme, £72,000, were Geoffrey Cooke and his wife. Mr Cooke was planning to make an application to the High Court in September 2003 to have their mortgage contract dealt with under the Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1994 (and amendments). He thought there was evidence that the entry and exit procedures from the loan breached statute law and European Union law.

After The Times reported on Geoffrey Cooke's case in August 2003, they said they were inundated with letters, telephone calls and e-mails from readers who similarly ended up facing crippling debts.

Shared Appreciation Mortgage Victims Action Group (SAMVIC)
As the Financial Ombudsman Service was ineffective, shared-appreciation mortgage customers contacted their Members of Parliament and in 2003 created the Shared Appreciation Mortgage Victims Action Group (SAMVIC), a body of 500 homeowners who felt that they had been deceived by lenders into taking on debts that were now exorbitant, to coordinate legal action against the banks.

Parliament
The House of Commons Standard Note SN/BT/3414 "Shared Appreciation Mortgages", written by Timothy Edmonds and last updated on 12 December 2013, says, "There have been a significant number of debates in the House about equity release mortgages in general and SAMS in particular, as the consequences of policies taken out some years ago now come to be appreciated."

A pensions Green Paper, "Simplicity, Security and Choice: Working and Saving for Retirement", was published in December 2002. It stated that the Treasury would be "looking at options to create a level playing field for the regulation of equity release and home reversion plans to protect consumers and make the market work better".

There was a general debate on 14 January 2003 in an adjournment debate in Westminster Hall launched by Angela Browning. During the debate, a number of members specifically mentioned shared-appreciation mortgages, including Vince Cable, Stephen O'Brien and the then Financial Secretary to the Treasury, Ruth Kelly.

During her speech, Ruth Kelly said, "I am pleased to say that, when the FSA's mortgage regulation comes into force, the proposed advice and disclosure regime will enable borrowers to become fully aware of the implications of all equity release loans before they take a decision on the right one for them... In the meantime, if Hon. Members' constituents believe that they have been badly advised, or that their mortgage was missold, and, assuming that all internal complaints procedures have been completed, they may be able to seek redress from the Financial Ombudsman Service."

In June 2003 the then Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Paul Boateng, initiated a consultation and in the following month he announced in response to oral questions, "All mortgage-based equity release schemes will be regulated by the Financial Services Authority with effect from 31 October 2004."

He also said, "... he is right to point out that a mortgage is one of the biggest financial decisions that a consumer makes. Equity release falls into that category too. They are very significant financial decisions. It is absolutely essential to protect consumers adequately. Indeed, I should point out that the FSA is the only statutory regulator in the world, as far as we aware, that has consumer protection as one of its statutory objectives. As he knows, there will be better protection for consumers when the regulation of mortgages and mortgage advice comes into force on 31 October 2004. The new regime will give the borrower greater confidence in the decisions that he or she is making."

During a further debate held in December 2003 in Westminster Hall, the Financial Secretary said, "... the FSA will regulate the selling of mortgages by first legal charges on UK property where at least 40% is residential accommodation to be occupied by the borrower or their immediate family. That definition was derived following consultation and is designed to protect loans when a person's home may be at risk as a result of being sold an unsuitable product."

The outcome of the consultation initiated by the then Chief Secretary to the Treasury, Paul Boateng, was announced by the then Financial Secretary, Ruth Kelly, on 10 May 2004. It was that Home Reversion plans would be regulated by the FSA. Under Home Reversion plans, part of the house is sold to the lender and part of the ownership of the property passes to the lender, whereas under Shared Appreciation Mortgages, full ownership is retained by the borrower.

Hardship scheme
In June 2007 Barclays launched the Barclays Shared Appreciation Mortgage (SAM) Hardship Scheme. According to Barclays, it was designed to assist customers who were in a situation of substantial hardship due to a change in circumstances, and needed either to move to a more suitable property or to adapt their existing home to make it suitable to their needs, but were unable to do so due to their shared appreciation mortgage. It was aimed to help customers who were genuinely facing hardship and therefore not everyone would be eligible.

The Barclays Hardship Scheme would provide an interest-free loan to make up the difference between the amount of money the borrower would have after selling his or her existing home, and the amount of money the borrower would need to buy a new home, up to 50% of the value of the new home. The loan would be repayable on the sale of the new home, which would probably be on the death of the borrower.

The Bank of Scotland did not set up a formal hardship scheme, but said they would look at each individual case on application.

Class actions
The Shared Appreciation Mortgage Action Group (SAMAG) was set up in 2009 by Hilary Messer, who was then head of litigation at RWP Solicitors (Richard Wilson Pangbourne ), based in Reading, Berkshire. Over 300 shared-appreciation mortgage customers paid £5,000 each, a total of £1.5m, towards legal fees for a class action. Hilary Messer said that recent changes to the Consumer Credit Act made it possible to sue the banks over the mortgages. Under the act, the changes to which were retrospective, if a court determined that the relationship between a creditor and a debtor was unfair to the debtor, it had wide powers to vary the terms of the loan agreement. A legal letter before action was sent to the banks in January 2009. A group litigation order (GLO) was sought at a hearing on 14 July 2009 and it was made in the High Court on 5 October 2009, enabling the shared-appreciation mortgage customers to take legal action as a group against the banks.

The banks appealed against the decision that allowed the case to be heard and, with a different judge, won their appeal. The customers' solicitors needed more money, which the customers did not have, and so they had to withdraw their case. The customers then became liable for the banks' costs.

The banks agreed to waive their costs if the customers made legal agreements ("gagging orders" ) not to make any further complaints about their shared appreciation mortgages. The Shared Appreciation Mortgage Action Group (SAMAG) was dissolved and became part of the wider Struggle Against Financial Exploitation (SAFE) action group.

The solicitors Teacher Stern started claims in 2014 against Bank of Scotland and Barclays Bank for compensation relating to shared-appreciation mortgages that were sold between 1996 and 1998.

In June 2021 the solicitors Teacher Stern announced that they had successfully negotiated a settlement with Barclays Bank on behalf of 37 clients who took out shared-appreciation mortgages in the late 1990s. The details of the settlement are confidential.

Teacher Stern LLP represented 160 Shared Appreciation Mortgage Claimants in a case against the Bank of Scotland (part of the Lloyds Banking Group), with a trial that was due to start on 31 January 2024. On the day before the trial was due to start, Teacher Stern posted an agreed statement on their website, saying that the Claimants and Bank of Scotland (and the other Defendants) had agreed a commercial settlement, without any admission of liability, in the County Court action. It said that the terms of the settlement agreement are confidential, and that there are no changes to the mortgages, or their terms and conditions.

More claims against Barclays and Bank of Scotland are being planned by Teacher Stern LLP, Trowers and Hamlins LLP, Clarke Willmott LLP and Acuity Law LLP, except that Clarke Willmott will not be making claims against Bank of Scotland. Clarke Willmott and Acuity Law might offer clients a No Win No Fee arrangement.

Some of the Bank of Scotland shared appreciation mortgages sold between 1996 and 1998 had agreements which were "governed and interpreted in accordance with Scots law." At present, English solicitors are not prepared to make group claims on behalf of customers of Scottish shared appreciation mortgages or their families. When more people have joined the "Scottish SAM" Facebook group, it should be possible for a group claim to be made on their behalf, probably by Scottish solicitors.

Media coverage
As well as many reports concerning shared appreciation mortgages in the national newspapers, there were reports in the August 2003 edition of Which?, the magazine of the Consumers' Association, and in the September 2006 and August 2007 editions of Saga Magazine.

A BBC Inside Out South investigation into shared-appreciation mortgages, presented by Nick Wallis, was broadcast on BBC One on 8 September 2014. One of the people interviewed on the programme by Wallis was Dr Julian Lewis, Member of Parliament for New Forest East in Hampshire.

Christopher Philpot, Senior Associate in Teacher Stern's dispute resolution department, was interviewed on the BBC's The One Show on 3 April 2017 in relation to the claim being organised against the Bank of Scotland and Barclays. There were also reports concerning shared-appreciation mortgages on the BBC Radio 4 Money Box programme on 27 September 2008, 22 April 2017 and 23 September 2017.

There was an article written by Ali Hussain about shared appreciation mortgages and published in The Sunday Times on 26 September 2021. It said that there would be a preliminary hearing at the High Court in October 2021 for litigation brought by Teacher Stern, representing 150 Bank of Scotland SAM customers. The action alleges that SAMs were 'fundamentally unsuitable' for consumers and 'inherently unfair' under the Consumer Credit Act 1974. The lead lawyer was David Bowman.

On 4 February 2024 The Sunday Times published an article written by Ali Hussain: "Victory for families whose unfair loans cost them their homes". It says that the Bank of Scotland has backed down at the last minute from defending its sale of an "unfair"equity release scheme (shared appreciation mortgages) in court.

In commercial mortgages
A shared appreciation mortgage is a mortgage in which the lender agrees to an interest rate lower than the prevailing market rate, in exchange for a share of the appreciated value of the collateral property. The share of the appreciated value is known as the contingent interest, which is determined and due at the sale of the property or at the termination of the mortgage.

For instance, suppose the current prevailing interest rate is 6%, and the property was purchased for $500,000. The borrower puts down $100,000 and takes out a mortgage of $400,000 amortized over 30 years. The lender and the borrower agree to a lower interest rate of 5%, and to a contingent interest of 20% of appreciated value of the property. Because of the lower interest rate, the monthly payment is reduced from $2,398 to $2,147. However, this saving in monthly payments comes with a trade-off. Suppose the property is later sold for $700,000. Because of the agreement on the contingent interest, the borrower must pay the lender 20% of the profit, namely, $40,000.

By participating in the appreciation of the property, the lender takes an additional risk that is related to its value. Hence, whether this is a favorable trade-off depends on the conditions of the housing market. A shared appreciation mortgage differs from an equity-sharing agreement in that the principal of the loan is an unconditional obligation (to the extent collateralized by the property). Thus, if the property's value decreases, the borrower would still owe whatever principal is outstanding, and if the borrower sells the property for a loss, the contingent interest is simply zero.

Revenue Ruling 83-51 (1983) of the Internal Revenue Service specifies conditions under which the contingent interest in a shared appreciation mortgage may be considered tax-deductible mortgage interest. In particular, a shared appreciation mortgage must stipulate an unconditional obligation of payment of principal to avoid being recharacterized as an equity-sharing agreement, which may lead to different tax consequences. Because of the complexity of tax laws and terms tailored for individual situations, private, noncommercial mortgages involving shared appreciation should always be executed with the counsel of a real estate attorney.

In affordable housing (subsidized home ownership)
Shared appreciation clauses are also used by non-profits and local governmental agencies. These shared appreciation loans are structured as second mortgages, but are considered "silent" in that borrowers make no payments until they sell the home (or, in some cases, refinance the first mortgage). At the time of sale or refinance, the family is required to repay the full amount of the loan plus a portion of the home price appreciation. In this way, the amount returned to the subsidizing entity is based on increases in home prices, which helps to preserve the "buying power" of public subsidies.

One common approach to designing shared appreciation loan programs is to base the share of appreciation payable upon sale of the home on the share of the original purchase price that was subsidized.

For example, if a family received a $50,000 subsidy to buy a $250,000 home, the family would be required to give the community 20 percent ($50,000 divided by $250,000) of any home price appreciation at the time of sale, in addition to repaying the initial $50,000.

Additional limitations on the shared appreciation can be placed, such as a usury limitation of a maximum of 6% effective interest on the money lent, as is the case in the down payment assistance offered by the City of Seattle.

title: Shared appreciation mortgage


text:
Mount Saskatchewan (Yukon)

Mount Saskatchewan (3500 m) is a mountain in the extreme southwestern corner of Yukon in Kluane National Park and Reserve. The peak was named in 1967 for the province of Saskatchewan to mark Canada's centennial. As of 2012, the mountain is the only peak named after a Canadian province or territory – there are 11 others in the Yukon's Centennial Range – that remains unclimbed.

Attempted ascents
The first attempt to climb the mountain was made in 1967 as part of the centennial celebrations. A team from Saskatchewan made a second attempt in May 2005 to celebrate the centennial of the province. However, warmer than usual weather conditions and difficulties in finding a relatively safe route rebuffed the attempt, which was made after a 35-km glacial approach. A third unsuccessful attempt was made in 2007.

In 2012, a team from Saskatchewan composed of Steve Whittington, Jeff Dmytrowich, Sam Unger and Wren Rabut attempted to climb the peak with the same base camp as was used in 1967. Their attempt commenced on May 18, but the group was forced to turn back after climbing to about 3200 m. Numerous crevasse falls and weather conditions hampered the group's efforts to reach the summit.

In early spring 2013 the Swedish team of Benny Elofsson, Joel Johansson and Axel Palmcrantz tried to climb Mt. Saskatchewan from north via Chitina Glacier. They did not find a secure route and had to abandon their climb of the mountain. Two other, presumably unclimbed peaks nearby were summited instead.

title: Mount Saskatchewan (Yukon)


text:
Talk:Kushan Empire

The map
The map is wrong, you are showing Indian subcontinent, not covering all of north west Kushan Empire borders Aceditor00 (talk) 06:45, 3 March 2022 (UTC)
 * The map used in the infobox so far (File:Kushan_Empire_(highlighted).jpg) is not "wrong", it is directly scanned from a public-domain reliable source. On the contrary, the map you are inserting (File:Kushan.jpg) is less clear because of its over-cropping, less reliable because it was hand-made by a Wikipedian, and it is already present in the article anyway (File:Kushanmap.jpg), with detailed sources, explanations and caveats. पाटलिपुत्र  Pat  (talk) 07:04, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

When you are showing something on a map, it should be covering the entirety, you ar showing the Indian part of the the empire Aceditor00 (talk) 07:42, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

There is no detaile on your map the capital is not shown, nor the important cities. Aceditor00 (talk) 07:43, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

 * You made a bold change of a long-standing map, which has been reverted. Per WP:BRD, you must now obtain a consensus on the Talk Page to make the change. You can make an WP:RFC is necessary. पाटलिपुत्र  Pat  (talk) 04:40, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

'Territorial Expansion' section: outdated / untrue claim
Clearly the Ksatrapa-Mahaksatrapa governance system was in place before the Kushans. The Kṣaharāta rulers of Chuksa / Taxila (known c. 05 CE), Mathura Satraps, so-called Kardamaka line of Caṣṭaṇa (c. 78 CE) - are all styles satraps and great satraps.

On the contrary, Kujula Kadphises is described as a "yavuka" / "yabghu" (commonly thought to mean 'yuvaka' or young-prince of a collateral line). While they may serve the same purpose - there's no need to explicitly claim Kushans were the first to install the system.

103.117.193.251 (talk) 01:14, 4 March 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the. —Community Tech bot (talk) 06:39, 13 January 2023 (UTC)
 * ..Uttarakhand Flag(INDIA).png

Understanding india
The janapadas pronounced (c.1500_600 bce were the realms 117.98.108.1 (talk) 12:01, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Unknown Kushan script
Apparently, there is an unknown Kushan script that has been partially deciphered: Ancient 'unknown' script finally deciphered 70 years after first being discovered -- Error (talk) 10:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Kushan Empire in kashmir
After tha mauryas kashmir was occupied by the KUSHANAS. kalhans account of turushka kings, indicate without any doubt the KUSHANAS occupation of the valley. the three KUSHANAS ruler were HUSHKA, JUSHIKA AND KANISHKA. 2409:40D5:1009:690C:B8D4:44FF:FE14:B923 (talk) 12:59, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

 * Bamiyan Buddhas were built by Kushans
 * Buddhas of Bamiyan - Wikipedia 103.178.144.60 (talk) 08:09, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

title: Talk:Kushan Empire


text:
User:Dananderson

Hi. For information about me, see http://dan.drydog.com/

I work on articles about things I know: local history and politics of San Diego, California, and Sierra Nevada, including Yosemite National Park.

Here's some major websites I maintain:

 * Dan Anderson (me)
 * Sun Solaris Operating System on x86 hardware. Includes a FAQ
 * My weblog (blog) at work
 * Yosemite National Park, California. Includes several books online about Yosemite Valley and Sierra Nevada.
 * Carlsbad, California
 * San Diego Hotel reservations
 * California and Western U.S. Hotel reservations
 * Randy "Duke" Cunningham, U.S. Representative to Congress (CA-50). In prison for bribery, tax evasion, and influence peddling
 * Bill Jones, unrepentant spammer and politician

title: User:Dananderson


text:
1937 Memorial Day massacre

In the Memorial Day massacre of 1937, the Chicago Police Department shot and killed ten unarmed demonstrators in Chicago, on May 30, 1937. The incident took place during the Little Steel strike in the United States.

Background
The incident arose after U.S. Steel signed a union contract but smaller steel manufacturers (called 'Little Steel'), including Republic Steel, refused to do so. In protest, the Steel Workers Organizing Committee (SWOC) of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) called a strike.

Incident
On Memorial Day 1937, unionists, their families and sympathisers gathered at Sam's Place, a former tavern and dance hall at 113th Street and Green Bay Avenue, that served as the headquarters of the SWOC. There was an outdoor picnic lunch, speakers, and songs, and some estimate the crowd was between 1,500 to 2,500 including picketers and their families, strike sympathizers, and curious passersby. The crowd began to march across the prairie towards the Republic Steel mill to picket, but a line of roughly 300 Chicago policemen blocked their path. The foremost protestors argued their right to continue. The police fired on the crowd. As the crowd fled, police shot and killed ten people, four dying that day and six others subsequently from their injuries. Nine people were permanently disabled and another 28 had serious head injuries from police clubbing.

Dorothy Day, who was present, wrote: "On Memorial Day, May 30, 1937, police opened fire on a parade of striking steel workers and their families at the gate of the Republic Steel Company, in South Chicago. Fifty people were shot, of whom 10 later died; 100 others were beaten with clubs."

Fatalities
Ten union demonstrators were killed:
 * Hilding Anderson, 27, Burnham, Illinois (USW Local 65) (died as a result of his injuries June 3, 1937)
 * Alfred Causey, 43, Chicago, Illinois (USW Local 1010)
 * Leo Francisco, 17, Chicago, Illinois (Western Union) (died as a result of his injuries June 15, 1937)
 * Earl Handley, 37, East Chicago, Indiana (USW Local 1010)
 * Otis Jones, 33, Lincoln, Illinois (USW Local 1033) (died as a result of his injuries June 8, 1937)
 * Sam Popovich, 45, East Chicago, Indiana (USW Local 1010)
 * Kenneth Reed, 23, East Chicago, Indiana (USW Local 1010)
 * Joseph Rothmund, 48, Chicago, Illinois (WPA) (died as a result of his injuries May 31, 1937)
 * Anthony Tagliori, 26, Chicago, Illinois (USW Local 1033) (died as a result of his injuries June 1, 1937)
 * Lee Tisdale, 50, Chicago, Illinois (USW Local 1011) (died as a result of his injuries on June 19, 1937)

Media coverage
In the wake of the massacre, newsreel footage of the event was suppressed for fear of creating, in the words of an official at Paramount News agency, "mass hysteria." Initial news coverage of the event instead framed the crowd as a violent threat to social order, arguing that police merely acted in self-defense. Still photographs were published in major newspapers such as the Chicago Tribune along with captions such as: "At the Height of the Battle--Here are policemen using their nightsticks and tear gas to subdue the attackers." Paramount did release edited clips from the newsreel footage of the massacre that portray the crowd as threatening and riotous.

Legacy
Years later, one of the protesters, Mollie West, recalled a policeman yelling to her that day, "Get off the field or I'll put a bullet in your back." No policemen were ever prosecuted.

A Coroner's Jury declared the killings to be "justifiable homicide." The press often called it a labor or red riot. President Franklin Roosevelt responded to a union plea, "The majority of people are saying just one thing, ‘A plague on both your houses.’"

A memorial plaque at the base of a flagpole with the names of the 10 people who were killed is located at 11731 South Avenue O, the former United Steel Workers Local 1033 union hall, which is now occupied by the United Auto Workers Local 3212. Thirty years to the day of the massacre, it was dedicated on May 30, 1967. As of November of 2021, the flagpole base with plaque is still at the Avenue O location, but the flagpole is missing. The United Steel Workers/United Auto Workers building at the site is occupied by someone, but there was no signage anywhere.

The Republic Steel Memorial Day Massacre Sculpture, created by former Republic Steel employee Edward Blazak, was dedicated in 1981. Originally located near the main gate at 116th Street and Burley Avenue, it was rededicated in 2008 and relocated to 11659 South Avenue O, at the southwest corner of the grounds of a Chicago Fire Department station housing Engine #104.

title: 1937 Memorial Day massacre


text:
Zig and Zag (Australian performers)

Zig and Zag, were an entertainer clown duo from Melbourne consisting of Jack Asher Perry (31 December 1916 – 22 June 2006) and Douglas McKenzie (22 March 1918 – 4 August 2004), respectively. Both had been born in England and migrated to Australia. They appeared on Australian television from its inception in 1956 to 1999 beginning with Peters Fun Fair (1956–69). They featured on the annual Moomba parade (a community festival), and were regulars at annual charity events including the Good Friday Appeal for the Royal Children's Hospital. Perry was also an actor on television serials and presenter whilst McKenzie, was also a radio and television presenter, producer and former World War II soldier. In March 1999 the duo permanently parted company after it was revealed that Jack Perry had been convicted in 1994 of indecent assault on his granddaughter.

History
Zig and Zag were the clown duo of Jack Perry and Doug McKenzie; they began performing together in the 1950s in Melbourne. By 1952, McKenzie was voicing radio advertisements on 3XY dressed as a clown with a young Bert Newton. This led to Zig and Zag regularly appearing on a Saturday morning children's show hosted by Frank Thring, alongside Newton and disc jockey, Stan Rofe. The clown duo first worked on their own show on 3XY's Tye's Radio Revue on Sundays and Peters Town Hall Show on Thursdays. In March 1956 they drove a toy car at their first Moomba parade and were crowd favourites at the annual festival.

On 10 November 1956 local TV station HSV7 broadcast the first episode of Peters Fun Fair, with the duo as its stars in the first children's session televised in Australia. They dressed in costumes advertising Peters Ice Cream, with the slogan, "the health food of a nation", and used the catchphrase, "No-o-o trouble". Zig and Zag added their theme song, "You and Me", to their act in the late 1950s. It was written by Tommy Steele and was originally performed by Steele and Jimmy Edwards in the 1958 London pantomime production of Rodgers and Hammerstein's Cinderella. Peters Fun Fair also featured Roy Lyons as Cousin Roy, and continued for 13 years.

To the TV generation of impressionable children, they are remembered as the slightly naughty duo who broke the King Street Bridge: after a structural failure in July 1962 they filmed a segment for their show where they dropped a coconut and pretended to crack the bridge, albeit accidentally. Zig and Zag also appeared on the annual HSV7 Good Friday Appeal, a telethon for Royal Children's Hospital, for more than forty years.

In mid-February 1999, Zig and Zag were named as Moomba Monarchs, a festival that they had been associated with for 44 years, and crowned as Kings of Moomba at Melbourne Town Hall. They were stood down before the associated Moomba parade, in March. Revelations of Perry's indecent assaults on his granddaughter, from his 1994 trial, were broadcast on current affairs show Today Tonight. Since the duo's act was always aimed at children, it was irreparably ruined, and after the scandal, McKenzie never spoke to Perry again.

Jack Perry: Zig
Jack Perry (Zig) was born on 31 December 1916 in London, England. During World War II he worked for Sutton Tool & Gauge, Melbourne which was a company listed as an "essential service" and so he did not enlist in the armed forces. After the war he turned to radio and, for 20 weeks, worked on 3UZ's Are You an Artist?. He later worked as an adult comedian at coffee lounges. By May 1958 he was married with three children.

Perry made many TV appearances outside his clown character, including as an actor in drama series such as Homicide, Division 4 (1970), Matlock Police (1971) and Prisoner (in nine episodes from 1979 to 1985). He had a supporting role in the feature film Dimboola (1979). Perry appeared in the 1997 TV series State Coroner. In November 2006, it was reported that Perry had died in April, aged around 88–89, with furniture marked "Heritage" and "Once belonged to Zig the Clown" being sold by the Salvation Army's South Melbourne store. His vintage Peters Ice Cream cylindrical hat was held at Australian Centre for the Moving Image museum in Federation Square; it apparently dates back to the 1950s

Doug McKenzie: Zag
Douglas McKenzie (Zag) was born on 22 March 1918 in Gloucester, England. He later recalled that his father was "in heavy drama, graduated to producing, and finally wrote his own shows." His mother, Violet (née Viola Rene), was a soprano; the couple toured as a pantomime act and visited New Zealand before settling in Australia. Before 1939 McKenzie was a junior announcer on a Melbourne radio station known then as 3XY.

McKenzie enlisted in the Australian Army on 12 July 1940 during World War II and, seven months after the fall of Singapore, became a prisoner of war at Changi. As a corporal, McKenzie and another prisoner, Bill West, annually ran a mock version of the Melbourne Cup in the prison by using bull frogs. In 1942 his frog, Greenbottle, won the mock cup trophy: made of cardboard, which McKenzie cherished upon return to Australia in 1945 (see photo above). He was discharged on 17 January 1946.

Whilst appearing on-air as Zag, he also produced many programs for HSV7, including Club 7, Hold Everything and Junior Jamboree. In 2002 McKenzie was the inaugural recipient of Variety's Heart of Show Business Award. Doug Christie, chairman of Variety, the children's charity, said that McKenzie was awarded for his long service to "Melbourne's entertainment industry and his commitment to children's charity". McKenzie died on 4 August 2004, aged 86.

Child abuse scandal
In March 1999, Zig and Zag stood down from the Moomba festival after they had been announced as Moomba Monarchs. It was disclosed that, in 1994, at Heidelberg Magistrates' Court, Perry had "pleaded guilty to seven counts of unlawful indecent assault against his granddaughter" Debra Clark, which had occurred "from the age of 12, between 1979 and 1981, while she lived with her grandparents". In 1999, other allegations of indecent assault of children also surfaced. Clark revealed that she had been indecently assaulted by Perry, during an interview with Tracee Hutchison on television the current affairs show Today Tonight just before Perry (as Zig) with McKenzie (as Zag), were due to be crowned. The Moomba committee was devastated; they announced that there would be no replacement for the duo. Subsequent festivals had no monarch until 2010 when singer Kate Ceberano and music commentator Molly Meldrum were announced as Queen and King of Moomba, respectively.

title: Zig and Zag (Australian performers)


text:
Talk:The Berliner (magazine)

On May 20, this article was nominated for deletion. The discussion can be found at Votes for deletion/Exberliner. The result was keep. — Xezbeth 05:52, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Questions?
Does this magazine have a Job listing section (jobs for Expats?). --Dan|(talk) 09:55, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

title: Talk:The Berliner (magazine)


text: Talk:Mount Saskatchewan (Yukon)

title: Talk:Mount Saskatchewan (Yukon)


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jabroni

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was merge/redirect Job (professional wrestling) CDC   (talk)  18:24, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Jabroni
While it might deserve a blurb on the article for The Rock, it definitly can't stand as its own article. See WP:WIN. Article is no more than a definition, and any background information that was added about the word would probably not be all that encyclopedic. Also, being a derisive term, it is a potenital vandalism magnet. Lastly, the article is an orphan; the fact that no one cares enough to even link to it clearly shows that it isn't that notable.

Keep -Casito⇝Talk 05:54, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, slang dictionary definition. Megan1967 05:56, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I agree with Megan.  U$er 06:03, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect and merge to Job (professional wrestling), where the origin of the term is already discussed. Smerdis of Tlön 14:08, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge part of it with The Rock b/c there doesn't seem to be any mention of it atm and it is a pretty famous catchphrase of his however then delete b/c well it would be kind of offensive, he's no jabroni! -- Lochaber 14:12, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * merge and Delete. --W(t) 21:21, 2005 May 27 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to job (professional wrestling), for reasons that Smerdis of Tlön already gave. As a fairly regular contributor to pro wrestling articles, I think that it would make the most sense to redirect it there. That having been said, I do think that the article for The Rock should include at least a mention of his use of that term. Dale Arnett 22:07, 27 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, redirect, and piledrive those responsible. — Phil Welch 05:43, 28 May 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable. JamesBurns 10:54, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
 * This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.

title: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jabroni


text:
Anne Wheeler

Anne Wheeler, OC, (born September 23, 1946) is a Canadian film and television writer, producer, and director.

Biography
Graduating in Mathematics from the University of Alberta she was a computer programmer before traveling abroad. Her years of travels inspired her to become a storyteller and when she returned she joined a group of old friends to form a film collective. From 1975 to 1985 she worked for the NFB where she made her first feature film, A War Story (1981), which was about her father, Ben Wheeler and his time as a doctor in a P.O.W. camp during World War II. The war is a common theme in her work and she revisited it later in her films Bye Bye Blues (1989) and The War Between Us (1995). Her first non-NFB film was Loyalties in 1986.

In addition to her films, Wheeler has directed episodes of Anne with an E, Private Eyes, Strange Empire, The Romeo Section, The Guard, This Is Wonderland, Da Vinci's Inquest, and Cold Squad.

Awards and honors
Wheeler has been nominated four times for the Genie Award for Best Achievement in Direction for her films Loyalties (1986), Cowboys Don't Cry (1988), Bye Bye Blues (1989), and Suddenly Naked (2001). Her 1998 television miniseries, The Sleep Room, won Gemini awards for best television movie and best direction.

In 2017 Wheeler won a Leo Award for Best Direction (Television Film) for the Hallmark movie Stop the Wedding.

Wheeler was made an Officer of the Order of Canada in 1995. In 2012 she received the Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal. Wheeler has also been awarded seven honorary doctorates and is the first woman to be given a Lifetime Achievement Award from the Directors Guild of Canada.

title: Anne Wheeler


text:
Talk:Zig and Zag (Australian performers)

Theme song
Anyone remember how the song ends?

I think it was something like

pleasing you's the job I'm given pleasing you makes life worth living

- but that's as far as I can get ... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 144.132.28.166 (talk • contribs).

It went like this:

pleasing you's the job I'm given pleasing you makes life worth living When we're wrong we'll be forgiven As we roll along Together we belong

To be worked into the article at some stage
Direct from the House of Zig Suzanne Carbone and Lawrence Money The Age, November 15, 2006

WHATEVER happened to Zig, the disgraced half of the famous Melbourne clowns? Doug McKenzie, the better half, turned up his curly toes two years ago but Diary has not heard a word about Zig, Jack Perry, until now, although we're none the wiser if he's still with us. Diary had a call from South Melbourne: the Salvos store in Clarendon Street has been selling his stuff. Kitchen chairs, a bedroom dresser with mirror, two bedside cabinets, all optimistically marked: "heritage" and "Once belonged to Zig the Clown".

The lady at the counter said she had never heard of Zig and Zag but the "men who collected it said that was where it came from".

You remember the tragic saga: after four decades of frolicking with the kids, starring in Moomba and on ankle-biter television, Zig and Zag were finally made Moomba monarchs in 1999 but the reign was over before it began. Suddenly it was revealed that, years before, Zig had pleaded guilty to child molestation and he (and, hence, hapless Zag) was dethroned. Zig and Zag never spoke to each other again. If still alive, Zig would be 89 now.

Oalexander-En 06:07, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 one external links on Zig and Zag (Australian performers). 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20110817215801/http://hinch.net/hinch-says-2011/May/13-05-11.html to http://hinch.net/hinch-says-2011/May/13-05-11.html
 * Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110312055204/http://www.cv.vic.gov.au/stories/tv50-anniversary-of-television-in-australia/7168/zig-and-zag-hats/ to http://www.cv.vic.gov.au/stories/tv50-anniversary-of-television-in-australia/7168/zig-and-zag-hats
 * Added tag to http://www.coasit.com.au/dbtw-wpd/exec/dbtwpub.dll?BU=&TN=IHSnew&RF=Web%3EIHSfull&MR=&AC=QBE_QUERY&CS=2&QY=Number%3D+P-02060

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 19:26, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Zig and Zag (Australian performers). 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/20080720154510/http://screensound.gov.au/docs/collectionguide_oralhistory_radio.pdf to http://screensound.gov.au/docs/collectionguide_oralhistory_radio.pdf

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) 23:27, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Problems with categories
The duo don't have a birth year or a death year. The individuals were born in different years and died in different years. I will remove these categories.Ulterior aurum (talk) 12:07, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

June 2024 edits
I have reverted a series of three edits here by User:122.106.14.220, which effectively deleted all usage of the TV Week (May 1958), reference without any explanation beyond correct section. This is an important contemporaneous source for background on the activities of the clown duo and the individual members, hence I have returned it.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:58, 8 June 2024 (UTC)06:59, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Once again this user has removed content and the above reference (see here). I dispute the necessity of its removal. I ask the user to explain their edits, here, before removing it again.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 21:50, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Upon further examination, it seems that a ref tab was mis-named, which has now been fixed. I'm working on the article to bring it closer to the form the above user seemed to prefer. shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:32, 8 June 2024 (UTC)


text: User talk:69.133.53.166

title: User talk:69.133.53.166


text:
Talk:California bungalow

Opening comment
Suggest title change to California Bungalow, the standard term.

Picture
Added a picture I took to illustrate the article. It's not perfect so feel free to put something better in. --W.marsh 01:44, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Comment
I guess I have to question whether "ultimate bungalow" is a real term in general use in architectural history or commentary. For instance, a Google search on "ultimate bungalow" finds fewer than 700 online uses, including this article, and many uses where it is used to make a zippy title or description, rather than as an identifying term. In contrast, "craftsman bungalow" finds 77,000 online uses. That would be a good title for an article, in which this could be a component, explaining what seems to be essentially a related slang usage. - Kevin Matthews, editor in chief, ArchitectureWeek

Hi

I'm no great wiki expert, but it would be worth mentioning here that these are very common in Melbourne Australia. my understanding is they were adapted from Indian Bungalows - but the reason for the popularity is returning WW1 soldiers were able to get assistance building homes and the cal bung was they design offered offered - with many variations. I would not be surprised if in places like Preston (a suburb of Melbourne) in 1980, of 50%+ homes were cal bungs dating from the 1920-30s. I'm a real estate professijal here in Melbourne - they are spread all through suburbs developing post ww1 into the 1930s — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.181.141.103 (talk) 09:56, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

redirectify?
Can we make this a redirect to Bungalow? This article is essentially a watered-down version of that one, with many of the same images, sources and facts. The main article suggests this is a particular type of bungalow, but this article doesn't come anywhere near close to explaining this. Daniel Case (talk) 17:20, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

 * The article needs alot of work for sure. However, a California Bungalow is a highly notable and specific architectural style from the 1920s, especially in Australia which would warrant its own article at some stage. I don't know enough about both to sort it out, but might give it a go. Need to think on what goes where..but my first impression is that it'd not be a good move to merge.Casliber (talk · contribs) 19:52, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

 * Perhaps it would be best to trim this article of redundancy so that it doesn't step on the toes of the Bungalow article. I'm not in favor of merging. Binksternet (talk) 23:55, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

 * Keep the article but rework on the article to bring the article to a better state. Bidgee (talk) 01:23, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

After reading both articles and the above comments it seems to me it would be a logical action to merge the articles, but I do agree that the name would need a tweak. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rbnsbill (talk • contribs) 02:51, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Requested move

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 05:18, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

California Bungalow → Californian bungalow – Capitalisation not required. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:59, 1 July 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 2

 * 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. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Vegaswikian (talk) 02:05, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Californian bungalow → California bungalow – The n at the end is almost never used when referring to this style (at least in California). 70.36.134.93 (talk) 04:09, 9 July 2011 (UTC) Support Having done a quick search, it seems that the US use California bungalow while Californian bungalow is mostly used in Australia with the odd use of California bungalow. Bidgee (talk) 05:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

 * Support the removal of the 'n', speaking as a Californian.  Binksternet (talk) 13:01, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support: "Californian" is rarely used, "California" functions as an adjective. –CWenger ( ^ •  @ ) 18:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It looks like the addition of the 'n' was overlooked and came along for the ride with a capitalization change in the previous, successful move request. –CWenger ( ^ •  @ ) 18:34, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, that was my fault. I thought it would be more correct because you wouldn't have an "Australia bungalow" or a "Germany bungalow". Even though "Californian" sounds more correct to me, if common usage suggests otherwise than I have no problem with the move. OSX (talk • contributions) 13:43, 14 July 2011 (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. No further edits should be made to this section.

title: Talk:California bungalow


text:
Talk:Anchorage School District

The school lists at don't match up with the district's official school numbers. Not sure why this is, but this page will need a bit of tweaking because of it. Stellertony the Bookcrosser 06:01, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Bristol Palin & Sex Education
It should be mentioned that Bristol Palin transferred into the Anchorage School District after attending Wasilla High School. Official Anchorage School District documents indicate that the curriculum strongly stresses abstinence at all levels that discuss sex, although contraception is still mentioned at certain grade levels. In the sections that discuss contraception (condoms are the only ones explicitly mentioned), it is stressed that it should be taught abstinence is superior and the best option.

I get the impression that they don't distribute condoms, but it doesn't say that explicitly, unless I missed something. They do provide referrals to local organizations that provide advice and free condoms, such as Planned Parenthood. With issues like homosexuality and masturbation, they take a non-judgmental approach and when it comes to moral stances on them, it is stated that the students should be directed to their parents or another trusted adult for advice.

-Nathan J. Yoder (talk) 19:01, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

 * Just for the record: the above is not encyclopedic and does not need to be included in the article.--Kudpung (talk) 01:47, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * A section on sex education standards would not be unencyclopedic necessarily --137.229.171.94 (talk) 01:55, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

title: Talk:Anchorage School District


text:
Pierre Menard

Pierre Menard (7 October 1766 – 13 June 1844) was a Canadian-American fur trader and U.S. political figure who was elected the first lieutenant Governor of Illinois in 1818.

Early life
Menard was born at St. Antoine-sur-Richelieu, near Montreal, Canada, third in a family of ten children. His father was Jean Baptiste Ménard, a French soldier in the regiment of Guyenne.

After a short period of formal schooling in Montreal, Pierre, at about age fifteen, signed on with a trading expedition to the vast Illinois Country. By the early 1790s Menard had established a solid trading business of his own; his Kaskaskia business ledgers first recorded transactions, beginning in the spring of 1791. He was granted a St. Clair County commercial license in 1793 at the age of thirty, while already a respected entrepreneur.

Personal life
In 1792, Menard married Thérèse Godin, who died in 1804, leaving four children. Two years later, he married Angélique Saucier, granddaughter of François Saucier, Engineer General in the French army and construction supervisor of nearby Fort de Chartres. Eight children were born to Pierre and Angélique.

Politician
Menard was a member of the Indiana Territorial Legislature, 1803–1809, and president of the Illinois Territorial Council 1812–1818.

The Illinois Territory was a frontier region of the United States, formerly part of the Illinois Country, a portion of New France administered originally from Quebec and later transferred to Louisiana. Upon the admission of Illinois as a state in 1818, the population of the new state was divided between French-speaking and English-speaking citizens. To balance the ticket, Menard became the state's first Lieutenant Governor, serving from 1818 to 1822 with the first governor, Shadrach Bond.

Economic forces, however, were already leading people inland from the French-speaking areas along the Mississippi River, and largely to promote real estate interests, the first Illinois General Assembly decided in 1820 to move the state capital from Kaskaskia, Menard's home town, to Vandalia.

Menard left office in 1822 and returned to private life.

Fur trader
Along with his political career, Menard had a second career as a fur trader. In March 1809 he joined the Missouri Fur Company, and that spring, he set out with an expedition of 350 men to trap beaver on the upper Missouri River. After a stop at Fort Mandan in present-day North Dakota, the company wintered at Fort Raymond at the confluence of the Bighorn and Yellowstone rivers. In March 1810, along with fur trader Andrew Henry, Menard led thirty-three men to the headwaters of the Missouri where they established a post. The expedition, however, failed after a series of attacks by Blackfeet raiding parties that killed several trappers and stole their pelts and traps. Menard left the upper Missouri in May and returned home.

He died in 1844 and was buried at Fort Kaskaskia, near his house.

Legacy
Menard County, Illinois is named for the Lieutenant Governor. His house, near Chester, Illinois, is preserved as the Pierre Menard Home State Historic Site.

Bayou Manard, a branch of the Arkansas River, was named for Pierre Menard.

Menard was, until 2020, commemorated by a statue on the Illinois Statehouse grounds. His statue was the first installed, and is one of only three honoring previous state executives (along with Governors Yates and Palmer). On 19 August 2020, the Office of the Architect of the Capitol announced plans to remove the statues of both Menard and Stephen Douglas, as both had been slave owners. The statues were removed on 26 September 2020.

title: Pierre Menard


text:
Acid Horse

Acid Horse was a one-off collaborative side project between two industrial music pioneers, Ministry and Cabaret Voltaire. Only one single, "No Name, No Slogan", was released in 1989 on Wax Trax! Records. The band name combines the slang terms for LSD (acid) and heroin (horse), and plays on the title of the then-popular acid house movement.

As with many other Ministry side projects, such as PTP and Revolting Cocks, the band members' identities are masked by pseudonyms. The members are as follows:

 * Alien Dog Star — Al Jourgensen
 * Gallopin' Scorpiosaddlebutt — Chris Connelly
 * Biff — Stephen Mallinder
 * Tennessee King — Paul Barker
 * Harold Sandoz — Richard H. Kirk

Musically, Acid Horse resembles fellow Ministry side project PTP, in that it blends an upbeat electronic rhythm section with catchy guitar work. Option editor Sandy Masuo described it as "an unlikely collision of house-style mixing and spaghetti western ambience à la Ennio Morricone"; in the same article, Jourgensen said that despite being able to work with one of industrial's prominent acts, the collaboration was also disappointing: ""

Acid Horse was formed after Mallinder and Kirk, the "pioneers" Jourgensen was referring to, had come to Chicago to work with house producer Marshall Jefferson.

Goldmine author Jo-Ann Greene pointed out that "No Name, No Slogan" is "strangely reminiscent" of English synthpop duo Blancmange's 1983 single "Blind Vision". Evidence that "No Name, No Slogan" might have been written using "Blind Vision" as a reference track is available on Soundcloud.

title: Acid Horse


text:
User:Dymero

Welcome to my user page!

Dymero is a nickname I have long used across the internet, and although I use it less now than I have in the past, I do still use it in a few places.

Fast Facts

 * Real Name: Michael
 * Age: 27
 * Occupation: Video Editor
 * Education: Alumnus of Eastern Connecticut State University.

Interests

 * Computers and Internet
 * Wikipedia (duh) - Although I'm rather new so I haven't gotten into much editing as of yet.
 * Video Production
 * Reading

Contacting me
For Wikipedia related discussions, please use my talk page, as information discussed there may be beneficial to the entire community. For other matters, feel free to email me at michael at michaelmerritt dot org (with the proper substitutions).

Major contributions

 * Eastern Connecticut State University article re-write - This article used to be a mere list of facts copied from the university website. I was able to re-write this into something more coherent.

title: User:Dymero


text:
Youth Emergency Shelter

The YES Shelter For Youth and Families, formerly known as the Youth Emergency Shelter (YES), is located in the city of Peterborough, Ontario, Canada. It is a homeless shelter that provides three meals a day to clients and offers food boxes to those in need.

After over 40 years of planning, YES opened its doors on December 20, 2002. The official opening of the shelter occurred in February 2003 and was attended by both local and federal politicians including the Honourable Jane Stewart. While YES is a shelter for homeless youth and families, it is also an umbrella organization for other programs concerning this group of at-risk youth.

Emergency shelter for youth
YES is open and staffed 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The shelter provides homeless youth and families with shelter, food, and support with accessing community resources in order to break the cycle of homelessness.

The length of stay is determined on a case-by-case basis, but the facility is not designed to provide permanent or long-term housing. Youth who stay at the shelter are expected to develop and follow a personal service plan with concrete goals concerning housing, schooling, and employment. They are also encouraged to develop strategies to work on personal challenges, ranging from past abuse or traumatic experiences to various addictions.

Transition facilities
In 2003, YES started operating a second-stage youth housing facility in Peterborough, Ontario, known as Abbott House, which it formally opened the following year. It started as a 10-bed 'rooming house' style home available to youth in need, providing them with an opportunity to learn to become good tenants. Applicants were required to have a source of income to pay monthly rent, and an on-site 'mentor' was available to the residents of Abbott House for support in pursuing their independent living goals.

On-site classroom
Carriage House is an on-site classroom staffed by one full-time and two part-time secondary school teachers. Carriage House is available to residents of YES, Abbott House and members of the community who have problems succeeding in a traditional school environment.

Work experience
Street Job was a six-month-long group work experience for 10 'street youth' between the ages of 16 and 24 who are unemployed and out of school. It was meant as an alternative to pan-handling with Street Job participants working on a number of community development projects of benefit to others in the area, while gaining much needed first job experience.

title: Youth Emergency Shelter


text:
Category talk:Law of Australia

For article coordination, see the WikiProject Australian law.

I've cleaned up a lot of the articles which were straight in Australian Law. There's a few odd ones left over, many of which seem to relate to individual rights, such as human rights, equal opportunity or censorship.

Any ideas?VeryRusty (talk) 09:05, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

title: Category talk:Law of Australia